Jump to content

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Ken Terry said:

FlyBlueSkies, thanks for posting the pictures around the city of Sydney and YSSY.

Absolutely terrible rendition of the airport and the city.

Not one tall building and no harbour bridge.

The Airport buildings are flat, all the vacant land around the city is a joke.

How could anybody enjoy flying into this offering.

Xplane has lots to do to interest most of us flying FSX or P3D.

Regards

Ken

 

Yep, some obvious opportunities to improve...it would be great if Orbx takes this on...

 

8 hours ago, Geezer said:

 

So how can you guarantee it will look soooo much better that it's worth buying the products all over again?

 

Obviously, we all know the answer to this...having said that, if Orbx offers XPlane products, I will be purchasing (again)...for me, it's about the LOD. While I cannot know until it's available, I believe XPlane LOD will display Orbx products further into the distance. I believe this will be particular noticeable in mountainous regions...

Edited by FlyBlueSkies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, FlyBlueSkies said:

 

for me, it's about the LOD. While I cannot know until it's available, I believe XPlane LOD will display Orbx products further into the distance. I believe this will be particular noticeable in mountainous regions...

 

You make it sound as if Orbx can easily port their FSX/P3D scenery into XP and then you will get the same kind of scenery but with a higher LOD. Well, (afaik) XP doesn't work with a LOD like FSX/P3D. It's totally different engine that's behind it all. And nobody wants FSX/P3D tech in XP. Well, I for sure don't and most regular users of XP won't. Orbx will have to do things the XP way or no XP users will buy it. It might well be Orbx is thinking about addons we even haven't thought about.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, J van E said:

 

You make it sound as if Orbx can easily port their FSX/P3D scenery into XP and then you will get the same kind of scenery but with a higher LOD. Well, (afaik) XP doesn't work with a LOD like FSX/P3D. It's totally different engine that's behind it all. And nobody wants FSX/P3D tech in XP. Well, I for sure don't and most regular users of XP won't. Orbx will have to do things the XP way or no XP users will buy it. It might well be Orbx is thinking about addons we even haven't thought about.

 

 

I have no idea how easy it is, I only know that if it is offered, I will purchase...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, FlyBlueSkies said:

 

 

I have no idea how easy it is, I only know that if it is offered, I will purchase...

 

Haha, fair enough. ;) I thought about posting a screenshot with a comparison between P3D and XP11 and how things look from a distance and close by but that would be against the forum rules. I did however just do a flight through valleys with mountains everywhere around me and not a single piece of mesh or texture popped up. Ever. It is a WORLD of difference with FSX/P3D! The world in XP is solid and that makes things a lot more real and believable.

Edited by J van E
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, J van E said:

 

Haha, fair enough. ;) I thought about posting a screenshot with a comparison between P3D and XP11 and how things look from a distance and close by but that would be against the forum rules. I did however just do a flight through valleys with mountains everywhere around me and not a single piece of mesh or texture popped up. Ever. It is a WORLD of difference with FSX/P3D!

 

Exactly! Well said!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FlyBlueSkies said:

 

Exactly! Well said!

 

I, too, have been playing with XP11 and some add-on Carenado planes and will admit that there are many good things about it - but in terms of "pop in" I have been disappointed by the draw distance of large buildings.

 

I would think I should see the NYC skyline from Newark airport, or at least a glimpse of downtown Seattle on takeoff from Renton?

 

But at least with my installation, these skyscrapers gradually materialize (not just textures, the whole thing) while I'm very close.

 

Still, while its nowhere near the gloriousness that is Orbx/P3D, it does seem like a nice platorm with 64 bit potential and if Orbx "regionized" it and created nice airports - and we got real AI traffic instead of Alitalia MD80s - and Larry Robinson ported his ferries over - THEN we'd really have something.

 

The future holds surprises, I'm sure...and I'm very excited about them.

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just changed from x-plane 10 to Prepar3d v3.4 recently. For a VFR or a bush pilot x-plane is a lovely tool. But if you are stuck to Airbus A320 Family like me, X-Plane is Hell. The available birds either lack a 3D cockpit or a reliable MCDU /FMGS. In many ways I regard the Airbusses in X-Plane 2016 as being stuck in the condition that FSX was left in 2010.

But what I want to say with it is, X-Plane can be nice when you are Boeing style or VFR Rookie, but for the rest of the IFR aviators it can be a dark, dull place.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have been away for a week and come back to THIS!!!! Oh. My. God!!!!!

 

:lol::blink::D

 

AWESOME AWESOME AWESOME AWESOME

 

*bounces round room like a crazy fool*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2016 at 7:33 PM, Geezer said:

hmmm, I don't see that xplane looks any better than fsxse with Orbx.

 

I'd suggest actually trying the demo. That'll give you an idea of exactly where XP's engine is superior (and where it's not).

I can tell you that if you put your biases aside, there's a ton about XP's engine that is better than anything that's possible within FSX, specifically from a ground scenery and lighting standpoint.

 

Edited by bonchie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bonchie said:

 

I'd suggest actually trying the demo. That'll give you an idea of exactly where XP's engine is superior (and where it's not).

I can tell you that if you put your biases aside, there's a ton about XP's engine that is better than anything that's possible within FSX, specifically from a ground scenery and lighting standpoint.

 

 

My bias doesn't matter.  My pocketbook matters.  I'm not buying any sim where I'll have to purchase all my Orbx sceneries all over again.  It's expensive enough the first time.  If you and others are wealthy and want to so it, I'm happy for you.  Go for it. 

 

If Orbx makes my current sceneries compatible with the new 64 bit xplane then I'll likely do it.  However, the word a few months ago is it will not happen and nobody from Orbx has joined this discussion to dispute that so I'm thinking it's still a no go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Geezer said:

 

My bias doesn't matter.  My pocketbook matters.  I'm not buying any sim where I'll have to purchase all my Orbx sceneries all over again.  It's expensive enough the first time.  If you and others are wealthy and want to so it, I'm happy for you.  Go for it. 

 

If Orbx makes my current sceneries compatible with the new 64 bit xplane then I'll likely do it.  However, the word a few months ago is it will not happen and nobody from Orbx has joined this discussion to dispute that so I'm thinking it's still a no go.

 

Well at least you are honest about the real reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bonchie said:

Well at least you are honest about the real reason.

I am quite sure, Geezer is not alone with that feeling. Some will admit it, some will not.

 

Kind regards, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing all these great plans with us!  You guys are nothing short of AWESOME !!! Thanks for all the great products, thus far.  I cannot believe how ORBX has virtually improved and made amazing my own personal flight sim experience!  Phew!!! You guys are GOLD!  Happy Holidays & Merry Christmas to all !  I cannot wait for 2017 - and beyond! Blessings and safety!

 

Eric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any plans for Asia eg. FTX Malaysia and Singapore? :)

 

Others than that the road map sounds awesome. Can't await Germany to be completed. 

 

Kind regards. 

 

Stefan 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XP11 seems to be very good and they are improving very fast.

Is Prepar3d ready to compete with those projects ?

I am  a supporter of ORBX  since the beginning by the way.

 

Claudio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait to see whats coming up. Got a lot of money to save for next year. My boss had better give me lots of overtime :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Project A: 
1/3 X-Plane 11
1/3 P3D 64 bit
1/3 Dovetail FS


Project D, will be specific projects for Dovetail FS... I guess this means they will be giving their customers "The D" as it were :P

Project P, will be specific projects for P3D 64-Bit

Project X, will be specific projects for X-Plane 11 (which is obviously 64-bit)


Think about it, Project A would equate to improvements in tools across all 3 major platforms, it would be wise from a business standpoint to support all 3 major platforms to maximize profit, and the learning curve and tools plus development cycles can be lowered once they have an established protocol for development, after that its just a matter of porting to each individual simulator.

Edited by Spartan0536

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Spartan0536 said:

Project A: 
1/3 X-Plane 11
1/3 P3D 64 bit
1/3 Dovetail FS

 

Not sure about that, with JV's "Project A" preview that he posted today:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XP's flight modelling, lighting, 64 bit and autogen placement on photoreal scenery all very enticing, but why oh why has XPlane still no convincing Wx engine! Clouds and water even in good old FSX (2006!!) look sooo much better. And the Orbx scenery made my FS world so rich by now! No, I think I'll be hangin round P3D till OOMs force me out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you John for the update.

 

It seems you will once again raise our simulator environment to an upper level. Happy to learn that your projects will cover Europe again. This is very exciting.

 

Merry christmas to all of you and all my best wishes for the year to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, The Flying Sailor said:

XP's flight modelling, lighting, 64 bit and autogen placement on photoreal scenery all very enticing, but why oh why has XPlane still no convincing Wx engine! Clouds and water even in good old FSX (2006!!) look sooo much better. And the Orbx scenery made my FS world so rich by now! No, I think I'll be hangin round P3D till OOMs force me out.

 

Haven't heard of X-Enviro yet? Opinions are still a bit mixed but most (and more) users say it rocks. It has been updated (with a few users requests included) within no time so the future looks bright. Some say it is on par with ASN and whatever cloud addon you have. In some aspects it is even better, like the sky colors can actually change depending on circumstances. Yes, ASCA sort of does that too but it has to load a different texture to make that change: in XP things can actually change on the go in all kind of ways. The lighting system alone in XP11 is way above what any other sim offers.

 

On 23-12-2016 at 9:58 AM, MartinM said:

I am looking forward to see ORBX Airports coming for X-Plane 11. Beti-X showed already with Stewart that ORBX quality is doable.

 

I am fed up with P3D v3.4 which does not start up after an update or multiple retries until I get it to work ...

 

I am more than willing to buy any ORBX scenery I already own to get it into X-Plane 11. Specially loooking forward for Britisch Columbia ;-)

 

 

 

 

 

I do do hope though that Orbx will bring those airports on XP level first. I don't think many XP users want FSX tech in XP. The XP world is a lot more detailed and living than P3D so those airports would need a big upgrade to bring it on the same level. Small example: in XP every light along the road is a 3D object that actually shines light. Afaik in P3D those lights are floating bulbs with baked in 'light' in the texture underneath it. It is a totally different system. If Orbx manages to create XP-like scenery, without for example the obvious loading of really everything, I am definitely in though! Looking forward to what they come up with!

Edited by J van E
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello JV,

 

2016 was certainly a big year in terms of new airports and new development. I just want to say thank you to the entire team for making our sim world so much more realistic. I have supported ORBX from the first day I seen the FTX AU video. Back in 2011 when ORBX was at Avalon air Show, I got to met JV and some of the team and have been hooked ever since. Best advice from Team was go to Intel from AMD. WOW what a big difference.

Have a great Christmas Team and thanks again for all your hard work in 2016. Bring on 2017.

 

Regards

 

Sam Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very exciting news! I've returned to flight simming after a 10 year break. I've invested quite a bit in many ORBX products in the past 10 months to enhance my VMC flight simming experience. Great work!

 

Edited by Wrap23
Clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little late for the party, but better being a bit late than never, so:

Great news for 2017!

It is superb to have ORBX releasing sceneries for various flightsimplatforms in the future - really fantastic!

I will very much focus on XPlane 11 i guess for now and in the near future ahead and see how it evolves, because i (also) think that since the release of version 11 this platform has certainly turned into a very reliable, promising, open and convincing flightsimplatform.

But sure i will also very much be looking forward to all the other "projects" on the table and eventually also purchase some add-ons for other platforms as well as it is super great to have so many choices these days now!

:)

 

Edited by moonman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Four 64-bit flight simulators competing for limited time of developers and limited wallets of customers? Is it the beginning of a golden era or the end of it? I wish for 2017 that it'll be the first alternative...

Edited by sbs9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, sbs9 said:

Four 64-bit flight simulators competing for limited time of developers and limited wallets of customers? Is it the beginning of a golden era or the end of it? I wish for 2017 that it'll be the first alternative...

 

I think it will be the first alternative - I'm willing to bet that a good percentage of the 3D work etc. can port from sim to sim (which will help total sales) and the presence on Steam of a high FPS game/sim like Aerofly with VR capability can only help attract people to our hobby.

 

I bought X-plane 11 recently and while it is not P3D it is quite nice and it's nice knowing that you won't OOM - and I bought some Carenado planes on sale for it and they work great in the new 64 bit world without modification.

 

And I like the moving trains and out of scale power lines :) 

 

Have not tried Aerofly FS 2 yet but am very tempted especially if Orbx or others can add some autogen to the thing...which I'm sure Orbx can help with.

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these different new sims are not the same.  P3D and X-Plane do not use Photoreal scenery as their main ground texture, just like FSX never did.  If you want to use photoreal with any of them, you buy and install it as a third-party addon.

 

Aerofly FS 2's ENTIRE world ground texture base appears to be photoreal scenery...in different resolutions. The current U.S. southwest and northeast, and the Switzerland areas, are much higher resolutions than the "default" rest of the world.  If you want to see just how much different the resolutions are, go to the new New York area on the "Navigation" section and zoom way out.  You can see that the close to New York area is very high resolution, but there IS a "better than default" resolution that extends all the way to the Great Lakes area almost as far as Cleveland.  But west of that?  Totally blurry even at relatively higher flying elevations.

 

So, where is our flight simming world headed?  Choices, as usual.  Aerofly FS 2 can produce fantastic "frame rates" with a base of photoreal scenery.  And being 64-bit, it can load a whole lot more of that photoreal scenery into memory.  But, ORBX has been using photoreal scenery as it's "base texture" in many regions already.  The entire Los Angeles basin in Southern California, for instance.  Yes, you can then throw TONS of buildings and autogen and other "stuff" on top of it.  But here's the kicker....

 

The 64-bit flight sim running on a 64-bit Operating System may not "OOM" on you anymore (or as much as it used to).  But if you don't spend the money to get the HARDWARE to run all this new, great flight sim stuff, it all isn't gonna do you one bit of good.

 

People are STILL posting stuff in forums like, "My sim stutters and I have to turn down a bunch of the graphics with my Rift.  Hey!  I'm using a GTX 980!  Fix the darn sim!!!"

 

If you insist on using the MINIMUM hardware requirements for the MAXIMUM flight sim technology available, it isn't the developer's fault.  Last time I looked, the RECOMMENDED GPU is a 1070 or 1080 for Rift and Vive VR use.

 

But back on topic....

 

No one should expect a developer like ORBX to start providing addons that will "port over" to 4 completely new and different flight simulators.  That simply isn't a reasonable expectation (although they have done it in the past...and eventually discovered it is not "cost sustainable" as a business model).

 

My gut feeling is you are gonna have to pick which flight sim you want, then go with it.  Different flying types for different users.  Or pay the price for addons designed for each sim type.   'Cos if Aerofly ends up throwing everything including the kitchen sink into Aerofly FS 2 like we all got used to doing with FSX and P3D, we are just gonna end up with new 64-bit flight sims that choke the crap out of current top of the line computers again.  Not to mention, if you haven't done the math on how much hard drive storage space you would need to cover the entire world in DECENT photoreal scenery..... :lol::D

 

Edit - I did buy Aerofly FS 2 and both the sceneries for it.  Why?  It is going to be my "go to" flight sim from now on simply because the VR interface for my Rift works so darn easy in it.  The VR cockpits are superb with mouse-click and mouse wheel scrolling capability.  FlyInside doesn't come anywhere near it in my P3D VR cockpits.  I just recently spent over $2500 for a new computer build, $600 for the Rift, and am going to use the flight sim that works best with all of it for now.  And that means I WON'T be spending any money on addons I have to "guess" about as far as compatibility in the future.

 

THAT is what I don't like about the way ORBX is "telling us" about the future in 2017.  In my opinion, ORBX needs to be more open about the plans for all this stuff.  Plan A...Plan B...Plan X....QUIT making me GUESS on what the heck is going to happen.  TELL me what your plans are for the new sims, so I can PLAN MY purchases in a responsible way.  Please?   

Edited by FalconAF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a simple reason for me talking in project letters rather than actual product names - we are are doing a lot of proof-of-concept work right now and we may narrow our commitment to expand to only a few new platforms, not four. When we make the final decisions we will be much more overt about our plans.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, John Venema said:

There is a simple reason for me talking in project letters rather than actual product names - we are are doing a lot of proof-of-concept work right now and we may narrow our commitment to expand to only a few new platforms, not four. When we make the final decisions we will be much more overt about our plans.

 

I understand that concept, JV.  But if that is what ORBX is doing at THIS time, then ORBX really HASN'T decided what it's "road map" for 2017 really is yet.  But ORBX has everybody thinking, "Wow!  My (insert sim of choice here) is gonna get the FULL ORBX FTX treatment!  I can't wait!" 

 

If I wanted to be "teased", I'd be taking my hard earned money someplace else (especially living here in Las Vegas).  Or as in the case of many of ORBX's customers...our hard earned but possibly "fixed" retirement incomes. 

 

Hell, I'm actually AFRAID to purchase any ORBX products right now that I don't own.  I don't know where the flight sim "future" is headed.  And ORBX "The Future in 2017" posts aren't helping any.  There are currently only TWO 64-bit flight sims...Aerofly and X-Plane.  Despite people saying P3D is going to be 64-bit, NOBODY in a position of "inside information" has confirmed that.  So given the choice between starting to build my future flight simulator, I have no choice but to assume the 64-bit way to go is either Aerofly or X-Plane.  And right now, Aerofly is the leading contender when it comes to using VR like Rift and Vive.  But I fear we are just going to turn the 64-bit flight sims into the same "over-stressed, addon polluted" flight sims that choked our FSX and P3D computers.  Why do so many people think that a 64-bit flight simulator is the "Cure All" for all the things we complain about NOW?  Reading many posts in many different forums (including this one), it is obvious people think that a company like ORBX could just turn out mega-CPU and mega-GPU intensive addon scenery to throw onto a 64-bit flight sim with NO consequences whatsoever.  But I'm sure YOU know that is not how it works either.

 

Thank you for you "clarification" reply.  But it doesn't help me, and it doesn't make your first "2017" post any clearer.  As of now (still), all I can really "know" is that there will be (at least) 4 flight sims in 2017, TWO of them (at this time) will be 64-bit (maybe 3 of them...maybe not), and ORBX is going to be doing something "new" with Aerofly FS 2 (there is no indication of WHAT ORBX will/will not be doing with the other 3 sims...at least anything "earth-shaking" new...despite the "excitement" in the posts).  And it seems a distinct risk right now for me to spend any more money on ORBX products at this time until I know which flight sims are going to be "really" supported, to what capacity, and if there will be any "porting without additional costs" if I purchase an addon now.  Note:  I'm NOT saying I EXPECT a "free porting" of any addon from one sim to another.  I'm just not willing to spend good money on an ORBX product for say P3D right now (because it isn't available for Aerofly or X-Plane), then have to pay again for the Aerfly or X-Plane version.  IF P3D does NOT go 64-bit, and Aerofly or X-Plane does get ORBX support, P3D will NOT be on my computer in the future.  So I'm not going to risk spending any more "addon money" on my P3D anymore for now.

Edited by FalconAF
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What surprises me is speculation.

The truth: we all have to wait and see

then we react: buy into the new

 

or

 

stay with what we have.

 

You can change only yourself

and

remember

life in itself is simple, we choose the complexities (addons) in how we live it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, Brian.  Everything can be speculation.  But is it wise for a company to CAUSE the speculation that may/will result in it's customer base ending up scratching their heads, NOT buying their products anymore NOW, because of thinking, "Well heck...sounds like they MIGHT be planning something for this new state of the art simulator, so why should I spend any more money on the CURRENT non-state of the art simulators until I see what is REALLY gonna happen?"

 

Don't tease me...don't confuse me...and especially don't IMPLY something that you haven't YET actually decided to do.  If you DO have a DEFINITE plan you are going to proceed with, THEN tell me what it is so I can decide how to spend my money.  DON'T tell me "Great things are going to happen SOMETIME in 2017, so hang in there and keep buying our products NOW...even though they may not work for you in as little as 3 months or so from now."

Edited by FalconAF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.... take a chill pill dude.

 

The BEST sim platform NOW clearly is P3Dv3. I have already said it is our PREMIERE platform and we'll release ALL new Orbx releases for it first. If you want a clear direction for 2017 then stick with P3Dv3.

 

If you don't want uncertainty then stop speculating.

 

Do you really think we are going to offer all our products for 4 sim platforms from January 1st or within a few months? That is just wishful thinking; porting to new sims takes time, people and money. You will have PLENTY of time to see how the landscape evolves. There is no screaming rush to make your decision NOW is there?

 

I am astonished by the impatience being shown. Life goes on, the hobby will evolve, the sun will come up tomorrow. If it took a decade for FSX to evolve to P3Dv3 it will take about the same time for the next dominant sim platform to be established.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually out of simming for about a year to 18 months due to personal circumstances; I can see things being very exciting and expensive when I return as I will need to almost completely re-invest. There will be some great tech out though, I imagine.

 

Top all those in a panic about the future; just wait guys; the various sims will get developed, or not. ORBX will join the fray and publicly say so, or not. If that means you hold off your purchases then so be it, that is your choice. If JV's posts have caused you to make that call, then so be it, that was his decision [to post]. Its his business and he decided to let us all know they are exploring opportunities and the future will be exciting. Building hype and building 'pre-sales excitement', no doubt - its a valid strategy used by many businesses, sometimes to gauge customer levels of interest in a particular option, sometimes to assist with procuring external finance. JV has stated that P3D will be their premium platform so those on that should feel a level of comfort. Yes, it is not 64-bit right now, but, again: just wait. LM may surprise us.

 

Wait, research, decide. Many things in the world change and faster or slower rates; think IT equipment, cars, TVs and electronics, etc. Make your choice at the time with the information you have to hand. The only people being frustrated and confused by the speculation are yourselves. Sure, JV has been a little cryptic, but subsequent posts have either confirmed directly or 'confirmed' by allusion that what ORBX are doing is investigating and evaluating other platforms; wait and see. I'm sure JV will tell us in due course. Given the timescales involves in testing and then (decision made) porting or creating new, I don't think you need to make a decision on platform right now.

 

If you are in the process of building a new sim, as I was thinking before my circumstances changed, then just wait for now is my advice (for what it is worth!). Frankly, I'm not bothered about the software side as I know there will be a good sim, backed by ORBX with other good add-ons regardless. No idea which one. But it will be there. I'm just wondering what I will need to do in respect of hardware; full refresh I would imagine, especially if I want to go VR. Not sure where my Saitek gear fits in, but hey, when the time comes I'll take my own advice and research, then make a decision at the time, with the information available, at the time.

 

Either way, looks like we will have several sims to choose from, with greater or lesser degrees of realism (for me, it is realism) and by the time I return to simming I hope a patch will be clear. For now, if I still had my rig (its in pieces in the garage), then I would stick with P3D. For now. AF2, XP and Dovetail may be contenders but I wouldn't follow any of those until a clear 'winner' for my use case stands head and shoulders above the rest. Then ... research, decide, pursue. 'Easy'! :)

 

Right now; back to painting all the exterior doors and windows; I've got two weeks to get done before the photographer comes, 5 days away and NZ weather to contend with!

 

Merry New Year to all, and happy simming. I sure miss it and I still loosely follow this forum in the interim.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Venema said:

Wow.... take a chill pill dude.

 

The BEST sim platform NOW clearly is P3Dv3. I have already said it is our PREMIERE platform and we'll release ALL new Orbx releases for it first. If you want a clear direction for 2017 then stick with P3Dv3.

 

If you don't want uncertainty then stop speculating.

 

Do you really think we are going to offer all our products for 4 sim platforms from January 1st or within a few months? That is just wishful thinking; porting to new sims takes time, people and money. You will have PLENTY of time to see how the landscape evolves. There is no screaming rush to make your decision NOW is there?

 

I am astonished by the impatience being shown. Life goes on, the hobby will evolve, the sun will come up tomorrow. If it took a decade for FSX to evolve to P3Dv3 it will take about the same time for the next dominant sim platform to be established.

 

Please keep up the "teasers" and keep us informed, John.

 

I'm VERY excited about what's to come and teasers are FUN, for me at least.

 

I think P3D will remain my favorite, but I enjoy any well-done sim.

 

For example, I just finished flying in X-Plane 11 from Skagit to Anacortes using nice freeware scenery for both airports including a moving crane at the refinery - not Orbx quality, but very nice - and makes me wonder how Orbx could transform that 64 bit world.

 

But now I'm going to fly my Citation II in P3D from Anchorage to my newly purchased Valdez (I always check out my new airports by flying to them - fun!)

 

By the time I finish that, my download of Aerofly FS 2 will be done and I can try that!

 

And I'm already dreaming of creating my OWN freeware version of the lovely Blakely Island airport in X-plane 11 using an "orthofile"...but also looking forward to when your payware Santa Barbara will be done.

 

A bit scattergunned perhaps but oh so much fun!  And your announcement that a portion of the costs of current items can be applied to emerging platform versions was great news - I would buy all of the San Juan Island airports over again in 2 platforms, maybe 3.

 

This is by far my favorite hobby, costs little in terms of entertainment value and cost per hour of fun, and Orbx is a huge part of that enjoyment.

 

Keep it up, and how about a few more shots of Aerofly 2? ;)

 

Steve

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Late to this party, somehow it got unfollowed.

 

What I'd like to know, as a P3D user is IF they have a major announcement at LM soon that they will indeed go 64 bit, I know Orbx can update their scenery to 64 bit.  But what about all my planes?  I'd have a nice OOM free sim but terribly wretched default LM planes and a hangar full of broken aircraft I spent a small fortune on.  And what's worse a lot are out of business or won't upgrade thir aircraft.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...