Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.
By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.
No errors or warnings except for the usual missing business file. This hasn't always been a problem, and I think it started when I updated MCX to the latest build. The .mdl file loaded into MCX shows material colors correctly, but the MCX generated .gltf file displays all materials as white in MCX. Is there a material setting in MCX that I have overlooked?Hi,
Do you get any warnings when processing the objects with the package tool?
No errors or warnings except for the usual missing business file. This hasn't always been a problem, and I think it started when I updated MCX to the latest build. The .mdl file loaded into MCX shows material colors correctly, but the MCX generated .gltf file displays all materials as white in MCX. Is there a material setting in MCX that I have overlooked?
Edit: The .gltf file displays colors correctly in MCX (although lighter than the .mdl file). It is only in MSFS that the materials are all bright white.
MCX uses PBR rendering with glTF files, while MDL files use a different shader. That will explain the color difference.
I would need to double check in MSFS if I also have the issue of colors not showing. But since it is a while ago I started MSFS, I am afraid I first have to downloads many GBs of updates before I can test anything
I have been spinning my wheels with this MSFS SDK unreliable "wheel-of-Fortune" nonsense for more than a year now.
Many of us here are sick and tired of "Blender mania", and want to use Sketchup instead, with a reliable work-flow via MCX to import / export various 3D model export formats, including a PBR format already implemented via a Sketchup plugin and glTF viewer:
The cost of the bandwidth is no issue at all. It is just that I don't spend that much time flying and spend most time making tools. So it is many once a month or so that I fire up MSFS to test something. And that usually means I missed a couple of updates and have to download a lot of stuff again. Which usually takes a whole evening, just to test a small stupid thing.Do you need us to "pass the hat" to help defray the costs of the bandwidth so you can get MSFS updated ASAP ?
I am not sure how SketchUp does PBR and have that would be stored then in an exported file. The plugins you mention seem to be mainly to add PBR rendering in SketchUp itself. Although it looks like they export glTF as well. In that case MCX should most likely to able to import most of it already.Many of us here are sick and tired of "Blender mania", and want to use Sketchup instead, with a reliable work-flow via MCX to import / export various 3D model export formats, including a PBR format already implemented via a Sketchup plugin and glTF viewer:
If I can see a few samples I can probably see how big the differences are.PBR from Sketchup is not the same PBR as MSFS, I believe. I don't know if MCX can translate this.
It seems the plugins Gary mentioned do allow exporting to glTF as well. That should indeed help for a workflow.Does Sketchup have a glTF export? That would simplify MCX' workflow. Just export as glTF and import to MCX, then export as MSFS gltf.
The MSFS plugin for Blender is as much compliant with MSFS as MCX I would say. We both tried to implement all attributes the SDK and I have had discussions with Vitus on certain features.I would still process glTF files via MCX to ensure all PBR attributes required / desired / exported ...are fully MSFS SDK compliant.
And to vent some of my MSFS frustration, when I start the sim now it says I need to install a mandatory update from the Microsoft Store, but in the store no update is shown of course. Looks like I might need to do a clean install and waste even more time on downloading and installing MSFS. I think I prefer the situation with FSX where we just have a service pack once or twice.
I'd had the same condition and by following other advice posted, I simply left the MS Store window open, maybe one minute and the update commenced automatically.And to vent some of my MSFS frustration, when I start the sim now it says I need to install a mandatory update from the Microsoft Store, but in the store no update is shown of course.
Very informative, except it makes my brain hurt.Sorry for the brief sub-topic digression,
The question contains a contradiction, in that "materials," are textures; "material" being the industry term and "texture" being the MS flight sim specific term. "Polygons" are the objects that color, or materials are applied to, MSFS will render all colored polygons as white, or light blue, the only distinction being face orientation.Why do colors of untextured materials not display on objects in MSFS as designated and shown in MCX? All untextured materials are showing as bright white. This is on .gltf objects converted from .mdl objects using MCX.
In FSDS, materials are colors (with other characteristics) and textures are applied images. Asobo wants objects to have no textures in the final LOD. Should I ignore that requirement? My objects converted prior to the latest MCX build show the "material" color properly instead of the bright white when texture is eliminated.The question contains a contradiction, in that "materials," are textures; "material" being the industry term and "texture" being the MS flight sim specific term.
An "image" can be of the color "green," in which case, the "textured" polygons, are the exact same color as would be colored polygons, with the added caveat of allowing PBR enhancement.In FSDS, materials are colors (with other characteristics) and textures are applied images.
Can you show us your source for this information? Because I do not follow that convention, I create all my LOD models using the MCX automatic algorithm, occasionally textures are removed from lower detail models, because those polygons do not exist in the reduced geometry models, but my final, most simple LOD, always has textures.Asobo wants objects to have no textures in the final LOD.
Remove textures you may not need at a distance, such as a normal map, and try very hard to avoid creating extra textures at a smaller resolution, this will just increase total memory usage. Prefer simply removing textures whenever possible.
Please endeavor to communicate as clearly and plainly as possible, it may been redundant, since you know your situation very well, but we do not. You did not inform where your objects showed the polygon color, that you refer to as "material" color, if it had been in the MCX viewport, or if it had been within MSFS.My objects converted prior to the latest MCX build show the "material" color properly instead of the bright white when texture is eliminated.