Mach3DS

It appears that they misspelled the object name for the external Pilot model when viewing the pilot model only on Model Viewer: {"pilot_F16_hmd_getails", DIFFUSE , "pilot_f16_helmet_details", false}; {"pilot_F16_hmd_getails", NORMAL_MAP , "pilot_f16_helmet_details_normal", false}; {"pilot_F16_hmd_getails", SPECULAR , "pilot_f16_helmet_details_roughmet", false};

They must have changed the description.lua code object names....I don't understand why they do this constantly across different modules....but I don't have time to fix this ATM. I'll have to revisit it when I get a chance.

Thank you sir.

Post the lua code. This can be solved easily. Then post a pic of your file folder contents so we can see the names of the files.

Are you using someone else's work as a basis for yours? This looks like you took someone's texture set to start from. Including the description.lua which likely contains those elements as custom textures. If so, that's your problem. You have lua callouts for textures you don't have in your folder. I point this one first because it's the easiest thing that could happen. A missing texture is only caused by 3 things: 1. Missing the physical texture file from your folder. 2. Calling out a texture in the lua file with a different name than the one in your folder or the default file. 3. Calling out a texture in the lua that does exist in your folder with a different name than the default file but using the "true" or "false" command incorrectly.

I mean, why not just make the launching of model viewer with it's ability to view encrypted models, limited to launching from inside DCS or better yet, the DCS launcher, the way the updates are started. You can check DRM etc etc. then on launch, it shuts down DCS and we can simply use the new Model Viewer which can view encrypted models. But please, as mentioned, the files themselves need to be unencrypted and viewable. I don't understand this decision? I also, find the similar phrase of "We made skins before model viewer" to be gas lighting and extremely condescending. We're not children. We're mostly grown men. I can't speak for others, but I know like many of us, we're professionals. Working in many cases along side the real world counter parts to many of the things in DCS. Please, we do all of this for free for the community and as hobby. Help us help you make the best decision that won't hand tie us, and that won't put you into a corner in the future because of what could be a myopic stance in the short term.

Not just rotate. But actually move the model off axis. Like you can with the MV. This lets you get views of areas that are not centered in the FOV. In addition, currently with Shift+Mouse Click+Drag you can also rotate the model around it's own axis which is very helpful in conjunction with ALL the other aforementioned things. None of this matters at all, if all the textures are hidden/inaccessible and encrypted. Encrypting the model is one thing. Hiding all the textures and file paths via texture encryption negates all this effort anyway. We don't know the names of files, can't use any files as a base to start from. If you don't have the ability to create UV meshes, then you can't really even recreate textures from scratch. SO this whole thing is academic. The model encryption was never the biggest issue.

Let's hope this isn't a bait a switch situation. Hold Livery Competition. Get Liveries. Fully Encrypt after the fact. That would be supremely Underhanded. I'm hopeful that this is not this situation. It's a good sign.

This is a great idea.

That's my questions as well. Like, is it in actuality easier, and less time, work and resource intensive to add all these features into the core game, rather than just have people load model viewer with a login like you do for DCS anyway? I mean, it just seems counter-intuitive.

I believe you mean "...replacement for the powerful [Model Viewer]...". But Yes. It's not just about refreshing the textures, although that waste of time is without a doubt a big problem. Without the ability to manipulate the model in 3D space with the same functionality as Model Viewer, then it's little good for alignment purposes. Yes, it cuts the time down to see the changes but you can't get close enough or the right angles to see fine details if it remains as it currently is. You can't change the lighting to see how it looks in various lighting conditions. You also can't see, All the other file types or Channels. ROUGHMETS (AO, CAVITY, ROUGHNESS, METALLIC etc.), NORMALS, MATERIAL ERRORS. You can't export LUA code for livery files. Show attach points. Load additional models for things like drop tanks etc. when creating custom paints for those. Pilot models, Argument related texture changes. The whole host of items that currently provide a unparalleled experience for creating content for DCS. Going away from this is truly going back to the stone ages in time and MASSIVE REGRESSION in capability. I don't frankly care what's planned, for some future unknown date. This is a 100% HERE & NOW issue. The other massive elephant in the room now, is that we have to have the FULL GAME running while we're trying to work in apps like Photoshop, GIMP etc. Good luck with that. RAM is a huge issue. This will cause major performance problems and running out of memory. Which leads to Photoshop crashing, losing work, and corruption of PSD files with a big chance of making them unusable. It will 100% make work slower to save etc etc. This is s full stop terrible idea IMHO. I wish Nick Grey would read these threads from the major art content creators and step in with a edict from on high. This is one of those ideas that if it were in my board room, I would have shut down. Immediately. Alas, it's not. So, please, read this with the sincerity it's written with. I'm not slinging insults. I actually care about this hobby and this sim. This is actually a bad idea. You can't make it a good one. Hopefully, mods don't just delete my post. Again, wouldn't just making MV have the ability to check your account be WAY easier than trying to add all the abilities of MV to DCS? The entire point of having a Model viewer is to Not to have to load the FULL game while working, so that you don't have to compete for resources of a game while needing them for the dev tools! Of course none of this matters when you encrypt the actual textures along with the model files. You can't access the textures to know the names, or use them as a basis for any improvements. So, without being able to even see the files on my drive, there's little point. This is an even bigger issue than than encrypting a model. Without providing all the files as paint templates, there's no way to use them, know their names or make any LUA entry edits anyway. I don't think this one was thought through all the way. No offense is intended in that statement, just seems like a knee jerk reaction, with a big pendulum swing consequence. And as stated many many times in the past, will not solve the issue they think it will, and only hurts the very community they are looking to buy their products. Respectfully, Mach3DS

I don't use any of the default stuff anyway. So, for the most part all the "missing" stuff is not missing anymore. So much work has been done that it's basically that way.

Be careful what you wish for. If they were to update the model and the textures, they would almost certainly encrypt them both. Which would make the Viper essentially inaccessible for community textures and liveries for the most part. Let's hope they never update it.

Try looking at an image that has a real heat signature greater than ambient. The images are essentially blobs. I believe it's being caused by too much bloom in the shader. At 5.7nm I CANNOT resolve that I'm looking at an F-16 in flight without it being at 90 deg profile image. I believe that it is less sharp an image than were used to but I also believe that the shader bloom is washing out more details than perhaps it should in DCS for a balance of realism vs playability since the MFD screens and images we're using can't display images greater than 1024 resolution as set in the settings (as I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong)? So it may be a way to achieveing a more "realistic" effect being able to go from an unresolved blurry image to one that has good detail in XR, but because we're using lower resolution already it's hard to make that a effect compelling without making it more blurry to begin with? I could be way off base but seems like it could be part of what's happening.