It’s not whether or not you use a controller - it’s support for the use of the controller and the highlighting feature added in support that’s causing it.
1 Like
That’s because you can’t see what happens behind the scenes in the Beta Forum and the amount of beta builds that they release to the team. Sometimes there’s more than one beta build per week. And yes, the tablet is functional. Be patient. It’s a small team and they have limited resources.
It is less damaging for the company to not release an unready product and accept the criticism than to release a product that isn’t finished and suffer the consequences.
7 Likes
Small team, very big profits.
They created great fame and I don’t know why, but if that’s the case they created great fame and went to sleep
Why does the 737 render full quality cabin when in external view, but low quality flight deck?
surely it would help performance to also render the cabin low quality in external view.
Also, does this mean it also draws every other players cabin in full detail?
the 737 cabin has already had issues with performance in the past, so is it done this way because of SDK limitations, or what?
a different question since im making a post;
there are some small “+” icons around the mcp and other places, anyknow know what they are for?
2 Likes
Regarding cabin rendering externally, this is speculation but it is likely because the cabin is inaccessible from the cockpit view and only accessible externally via drone camera. There are cases where people want to look through the cabin, so it is rendered in external view so that it can be seen when desired with a simulated walkthrough. I have no idea about rendering for other players.
1 Like
tldr; the pmdg 737 and many other aircraft uses high complexity models of the cabin (and sometimes cockpit) in external view, which makes your computer render your and other aircraft high complexity in the vicinity as well
@Iconogr4phy
well i think you can access the cabin from the cockpit now anyway, and it is as far as i understand always rendered. the cockpit seems to be the only one that doesnt render as soon as you leave it.
no wonder there is stuttering and low fps if creators starts to have full complexity cabins(and cockpits) in external views for all aircraft in the vicinity.
Just so I am not confused, when i say external view - I mean view from the outside, either with external view/chase view or drone view. I can understand having the cabin high quality/complexity when you use custom camera or drone inside the cabin, but just like with the flight deck - it should be low quality/complexity as soon as you leave the cabin.
Im honestly surprised this havent been brought up more, especially with everybody concerned about performance. I dont really use the other airliners than the pmdg B738 so I dont really know how the others manage it. But I really worry for performance if all 737s (and maybe other airliners too) renders full complexity cabins for everybody in the vicinity.
I’ll do a test in the sim to see if it renders full complexity also for other 737s in the vicinity.
Will be back with the answer.. brb (testing eu west server at ENGM airport)
answers:
1: Yep, my own and all other 737s cabins nearby is rendered high complexity in external view.
2: It seems to be the case with other airliners too, the same is happening with the Fenix A320 cabin.
3: The A310 somehow does it the oposite way around, it keeps full complexity cockpit but simplifies the cabin just a tiny bit in external view. (the 310 for whatever reason tanks my fps drastically).
4: Default A320N keeps full cockpit, doesnt have a complex cabin at all but uses a parallax interior cubemap for external view cabin (which is what everybody should do).
5: FBW A320 keeps full cockpit and has no cabin and uses parralax interior texture, similar to the default A320N
6: Aerosoft CRJ keeps a high quality cockpit but keeps a low quality cabin both internal and external view.
7: Leonardo MD82 seems to keep a medium quality cabin at all times, but simplify the cabin just a tiny bit in external view.
8: JustFlight Bae146 keeps mediumquality cabin both external and internal view, but simplifies the cockpit in external view.
9: ATR 72 Keeps high quality cockpit and cabin in both external and internal view.
10: Concorde changes both cockpit and cabin to a very low quality model in external view! (which is what should be done imo)
I could keep testing more but I think its fair to say that there doesnt seem to be one standard being used to keep performance decent. I would think the best way to go about it would to keep high quality as long as you have your view inside the aircraft, but outside the aircraft you either swap out the cockpit and cabin with low quality, or uses something like the parallax interior cubemap for the cabin. The Concorde is the only example I found in my testing that changes both cockpit AND cabin to low qualiy in the external view.
In other words, you would be able to be parked next to 20 concordes at an airport without your frames turning into a slideshow.
No one is making any progress in this unbearable humid heat. I am happy to get out of bed in the morning without feeling like an overrun possum, and the greatest progress of the day is not breaking out in sweat only from standing in the bathroom and brushing the teeth and still have fully dry hair when coming back to the perfectly ventilated computer room… 
That 700€ budget PC standing next to the bed runs the Flight Simulator with all DLC planes perfectly fine.
The graphics card is even not getting hotter than 60°C and my good old Polish Ryzen 5 CPU … well I don´t even hear it´s fan.
Why should I be upset? I take perfect graphics and wonderful visual quality that runs on every cheap PC with 45FPS or so every day over optimization to hell and back and having PS3 visuals and half of the ingame (or simulator world) graphics popping up 30 yards in front of me but 999999999999 FPS
So you think your budget computer would run msfs fine if all aircraft were loaded in with full complexity cockpit and cabin at all times?
Do you also feel the same with with terrain, objects, scenery with trees, grass and bushes too? So we Should just do away with the entire LOD concept completely?
The only reason your budget computer isnt on fire, is because most things are optimized in the sim.
Not sure why you are asking me why you should be upset.
It seems to me that your “problem” is not your plane showing high quality cabin in external view, but other planes around yours showing high-quality models.
Other planes (AI traffic & multiplay) should use “generic” low detail models, not the same high quality models you fly. Check your traffic settings, search for the word “generic” there, and set both “on”.
That your plane have high quality cabin at external view is not really a problem. That other planes have is the problem.
well yes and no, i dont see why we need the interior to be of high complexity in external view unless I am missing a reason (looking IN through the windows up close from the outside?). But yes, this becomes a really big issue when also other peoples complex aircraft are fully modelled in the vicinity as well.
I was honestly surprised when I discovered this, as I assumed that with all the focus on performance in this sim that this issue wasnt even a thing.
Then again, I might be wrong about how much system resources a fully complex cockpit and cabin costs.
I just figured that it might be high, as I know it has been a topic for many creators - trying to get complexity low without looking bad, and thats only with your own aircraft in mind, not every other one nearby too.
Or maybe those high quality cabins switch LOD at some point far away. I really dont know, which is why Im asking here. I fear this is one thing that is impacting multiplayer performance/stuttering. Which I guess why we have the option to use generic models for those.
I’m not a fan of obsessive details in interior modeling, for aircraft & airports either.
I prefer to keep the cabin interior OFF for my Fenix A320.
So I think I fairly understand your concern.
But, with all due respect,
The problem with other planes displayed with high quality models as yours, is far overwhelming compared to what you are worrying about. Your concern, which is certainly not trivial, becomes relatively trivial when it is compared to that.
I can’t imagine how the sim would run if every 320s around me had same Fenix or PMDG quality model. I’m rather surprised that it didn’t not trigger immediate CTD.
exactly what I mean.
I dont care if only my own aircraft is fully modelled at all times. (not that I need it in external view.)
The problem is as you say that this becomes a problem when other players aircraft in the vicinity are displayed fully too, which as far as I understand is exactly what is happening in many cases based on all the testing above - where I used the drone camera to other aircraft around me, peeking in, seeing it fully rendered.
Im hoping I have overlooked something or something is weird on my system, because other players aircraft interiors in the vicinity are fully rendered to some extent. (as tested 1->10 above)
And this is of course mostly a issue if you are playing multiplayer and also have most of the other complex aircraft installed yourself. In the cases where you dont own those aircraft or dealing with AI traffic and such - there shouldnt be a problem since then they should be using generic lowpoly models.
Have you checked the traffic settings?
This will change other aircraft to generic ones, to the infamous “pointy nose” A330 & A380.
Or try using traffic packages from FSLTL or AIG.
Models in those packages are more detailed than the MSFS generics, but still a lot simpler than PMDG, Fenix, JustFlight etc.
Hope this might help you.
1 Like
Why do you even discuss high complexity cabin in this thread? PMDG737 has very low quality cabin, a lot worse than Fenix A320 and iniBuilds A310. High quality cabin will be added later, hopefully.
Are there formal airline SOP’s with regard to the use of the Navigation Display (APP, VOR, PLAN, MAP)? Or is the format used simply at the pilot’s discretion?
You definitely don’t need an FMC to dispatch a 737; the plane flies just fine without one. Obviously no LNAV / VNAV or oceanic, but other than that no problems. We have a supplemental procedure for it in our CFM; in 10 years on this fleet I’ve done it exactly once. So certainly not common, but not difficult either.
I definitely agree with you about the PMDG EFB though. I can’t even understand why the kerfuffle. It’ll be here when it is, and until then… heck, there are plenty of real life 73s flying with nothing but paper in the cockpit. There’s a reason jeppesen still prints that stuff! 
8 Likes
Good luck using paper prints in VR.
LOL, pretty sure @Stearmandriver2 is talking about flying the real thing.
3 Likes
I’m very grateful that PMDG 737 is released with working FMC 
2 Likes
LOL, pretty sure Stearmandriver2 is talking about people complaining about lack of EFB in PMDG737 and is using this real life example to say we don’t need it.
2 Likes