Sign in to follow this  
Guest Logan826

LevelD 757 only for FS10

Recommended Posts

>OY,>>As others have said, the issue is not plainly FSX users vs FS9>users, but the simple truth that in fsx it is basically>impossible to have acceptable performance flying complex>airliners into complex airports with realistic traffic and>weather. Which is what the airliner enthusiasts like to do! So>that's why they have stuck with fs9, which they've already>furnished with tons of add on airports. Even a quad core and>an 8800 won't keep a satisfying (as opposed to "satisfactory",>like a C letter grade) frame rate in fsx under the above>conditions. >>On the other hand, airlinerxp and airsimmer appear to have>developed gauge programming which doesn't rely on GDI+, so>that might change the story somewhat, making fsx performance a>little more acceptable. But I wonder if Level D-and PMDG-are>now pursuing those same technologies. And regardless, I bet>that the enthusiasts would rather use such an opportunity to>crank the add on detail (again, many add ons already>purchased) in fs9 to obscene levels, while enjoying especially>smooth movement. >>Furthermore, in terms of visual realism, tons of custom>autogen and airport scenery, night lights, and tons of traffic>just beats 1m textures (assuming they are not blurry) and>shiny, or generally unrealistic, water. That opinion is made>certain to most enthusiasts because from an airliner>perspective you're either flying above 5,000 ft or>concentrating on your taxi, take off or approach, i.e. from or>to the dense add on airport. And there's mesh, much of it>free, for fs9. I would add that you can use those beautiful>ASX and FEX clouds in fs9 as well, if you export them in the>right format. > >Sooo, I can't understand Level D's decision at all. They are>ignoring the vast majority (at least a huge chunk if you're>not completely delusional) of airliner enthusiasts who>obviously prefer fs9, in which they have also invested lots of>money; plus the fsx 757 will not work in fs11, so what's the>point? Unless they plan to rely on the charity of their fans,>or the smaller number of new simmers interested in airliners>and exposed to the add on market; but therefore by now>probably aware of the benefits of fs9.>>It's really silly that there's even an argument about this,>because a quick look at any forum will tell you what's what. >This is the thing that gets me! It's the Generalization statements, that just aren't true! Check out my videos on youtube (Especially the ones with the CS-757, and LDS767) and then come back and tell me it's impossible to fly complex aircraft into busy airports with weather, and 100% traffic in FSX.http://youtube.com/user/tf51d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>>This is the thing that gets me! It's the Generalization>statements, that just aren't true! Check out my videos on>youtube (Especially the ones with the CS-757, and LDS767) and>then come back and tell me it's impossible to fly complex>aircraft into busy airports with weather, and 100% traffic in>FSX.>>http://youtube.com/user/tf51d >I'm a bit skeptical here. What AI package are you using? I noticed you're using the CS 757 with a merged LDS 767 panel. Are you getting the full functionality of that panel with the CS 757 model? Would you mind posting a video of the LDS 767 with no modifications under the same conditions as your CS 757 videos? Are you using any video editing software to alter the playback speed of your videos?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>>>>This is the thing that gets me! It's the Generalization>>statements, that just aren't true! Check out my videos on>>youtube (Especially the ones with the CS-757, and LDS767)>and>>then come back and tell me it's impossible to fly complex>>aircraft into busy airports with weather, and 100% traffic>in>>FSX.>>>>http://youtube.com/user/tf51d >>>>I'm a bit skeptical here. >>What AI package are you using? I noticed you're using the CS>757 with a merged LDS 767 panel. Are you getting the full>functionality of that panel with the CS 757 model? Would you>mind posting a video of the LDS 767 with no modifications>under the same conditions as your CS 757 videos? Are you>using any video editing software to alter the playback speed>of your videos? Yes, I get full functionality from the merge, although the vref numbers are a little off naturally. I do have a LDS767 video posted (actually a 3 part video) but if you would like another one I'm happy to ablige you. Last there are no editing tricks. I record with GameCam and save it with moviemaker. (To keep the size below Youtube's max 100MB)Edit: Oh and I use WOAI for my AI as well as a couple manually installed from here. Airlines I have full flightplans for are Aer Lingus, Air Wisconson, Alitalia, CanJet, Continental, EasyJet, Emirites, EOS, EVA, Jal, JALWays, JAL Express, Japan Air Commuter, JAL Cargo, Japan Asia, Japan Transocean, KLM, Qantas, Royal Air Moroc, Singapore, Thomsonfly, TSA, American, American Eagle, British Jet, Frontier Jet Express, NWA, NWA Cargo, UPS, Hapaq Lloyd Express, Spirit, American, KLM Cargo, RyanAir, AirTran, Arkefly, TUI, TED, Luftansa, Air India, GB Airways, Aor Nippon Cargo, British Mediterranean, Virgin Niagra, British Airways, FedEx, USA 3000, IcelandAir, SpanAir, Swiss, MaxJet, Delta, Midwest, Monarch, WestJet, SunWing, Hawaiian Air, Ethad Air, LTU, Starflyer Japan, Allegiant, Korean, Southwest, Iberia, Skybus, TUIfly, Air France, Air Finland, Air Italy, TUIfly Nordic, China Eastern, Royal Brunei, Big Sky, China Airlines, Virgin Blue, All Nippon, Aor Nippon, Thomas Cook Belgium, Aor India Express, Virgin America, Air Europa, Thomas Cook UK, Scandinavian Air, Condor, Condor Berlin, BMIBsby, Malaysia, Air New Zealand, Luftansa Regional partners, LAN, Qatar, Air Transat, Virgin Atlantic, Nationwide Air, DragonAir, Cathay Pacific, Mexicana, United, Ethiopian, JetBlue, Fiiair, Qantas Jet Connect, Southwest, United Express, NWA Airlink, Delta Connection, US Airways. There I think that's all of them!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's another possibility-Perhaps the 757 is being coded for FSX/XI !AR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not expert when it comes to economics but here is one i knowdevelop FS9 products = more salesdevelop FSX products = less sales I would like to see any dev dispute that. If the devs at HiFi can argue that then they must fall in the 1/3 category. Which means 2/3 devs would argue in my favor i guess. I have spent countless dollars on my computer and flight sim. If i took a photo of my rooms of all the boxes i kept from components, addons, etc you would fall over and die. And STILL i have not migrated to FSX. Like I said before here are my specs:QX96508800 UltraGa-x38-dq6 moboPatriot Extreme pc2-9600Many of you might wonder why I would not migrate with a system like that. Easy. FS9 runs flawlessly. Sure even I have heard that statement before. This time it is the real truth. EVERY slider maxxed (that is read EVERY slider). Visibility distances beyond what you would see with your real eye. EVERY addon you can think of that would try and bring my system to its knees. All this equals 60 FPS (locked at 60). FSX would still have stutters here and there and crummy fps. Sorry THAT is not enjoyable. It was stated why would someone wait a year to upgrade their system and buy FSX addons only to see FS11 come out 6 months later. And to Daryl I would just like to say IF the 757 was created for fs9 I guaratee your sales would at least double FSX sales. Because MOST FSX users still have FS9 running. THEY would buy 757 for their FS9. But people like me arent going to buy the 757. In my personal opinion you are depriving LDS of huge sales by the decision being made but hey it's not my decision and I guess I will have to respect yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh no need to record another. Looks like I'll have to dump MyTraffic X because anything above 30% traffic at big airports brings my PC to it's knees in FSX. And my system specs are about yours with the exception of my processor being over clocked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is, I won't be switching to FSX at all, and and I will miss the 757 from Level-D. And no, I'm not buying some other 757, and I'd appreciate it if those of you who mention the other models would stop talking about them. It's actually pretty d*mn offensive to tell us FS9 users to use the CS 757, or any other out there right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To monsoon: You're right, it's not your decision. Build your own 757 for FS9 and make money!Most of the responses to my follow-up are choosing to disregard the fact that Wade & Laurent are the principals of Level-D Simulations, and they have made a choice to move on from FS9.It's not personal - no offence intended to the end-users who choose to use FS9 - this is a decision made by two guys who want to concentrate their efforts on ONE PLATFORM. Whether you agree or not, whether you will purchase the 757 or not, is immaterial.Finally, this thread - which began because a user chose to take one of my posts from the Level-D forum to make a point (which I feel was inappropriate) - has veered off into "FS9 is better and let me tell you why" neverland.FS9 is still here, will continue to be here, just like FS5, 6, 7 & 8...To Orlaam: I never said to buy anything, I said there were two 757 products out there for FS9 already.The fact that users want a Level-D 757 for FS9 is flattering, and we appreciate that we are held in such high esteem, but the developers and the 757 have moved on. Time for you - and everyone else - to move on, too.Daryl ShuttleworthLevel-D SimulationsSupport & Documentation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Ahh no need to record another. Looks like I'll have to dump>MyTraffic X because anything above 30% traffic at big airports>brings my PC to it's knees in FSX. And my system specs are>about yours with the exception of my processor being over>clocked. Too late! Already did one! Here it is if you still want to see.

(No Music)Looks like your system should be faster than mine! I would definitely try WOAI! I've always was sceptical about OC'ing, but Dell doesn't allow it in the BIOS anyway, so it's really a non starter for me. I know there is NTune, but I heard some bad things about it, so I'm hesitant to try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for you - and>everyone else - to move on, too.>If you come up with a computer that will enable me to do this, i will.. till then, i would rather stay behind and play crysis at settings FSX cannot even imagine running on...Though you might have something correct there, I will move on, from your company. There is a very fine line between stating a business position and belittling people constantly. You seem to have obliterated it long ago. People take your posts off the ld forums because many of them are sacrastic in nature when it comes to the 2 issues (release date and system compatability) 99% of customers care about. I am not sure why you are surprised this thread ended up with your quotes all over it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, take a quote and misconstrue it. Shape what someone posts and twist it.There is really no point in trying to answer questions in these forums. I have posted here because my name was used in the post when it shouldn't have been.Not sure how you come up with my quotes all over this thread, gyrate. I have posted 4 times in this thread to respond to posts made by other users and to explain the reason for the Level-D decision, just like I am posting a response to yours. It's called courtesy.I have belittled noone during my posts in this or any threads.Finally, release dates are rarely given... but (here's some sarcasm for you) you need't worry about that, you won't be buying anything from Level-D anyway, so release dates shouldn't matter.Daryl ShuttleworthLevel-D SimulationsSupport & Documentation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for you - and>everyone else - to move on, too.Yes that was not too well put....my answer is a resounding No!I know a lot of developers end up having no time left to fly the sim.....and thereby lose what it's all about.I am not one of them ....my priority is to fly airliners. Consequently I have untold addon sceneries, AI etc etc and need great fps.....and 2D cockpits...and a PT-TU154...and a RFP 742 and an Aerosim L-10...and.. :-hah Can FSX match it? .... NoIs there enough in FS9 and coming in the future to keep me interested until FS11?Hel* yes! :-jumpyBon chance with your 757 and thankyou for your FS9 767 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some time ago Daryl clearly elucidated just how LDS works. Basically a coupla guys working in their off hours. Despite that LDS is at the top of the addon airliner heap with few others (hence eons to produce the quality we know and love). Add to that we all know by now how vastly different FSX and fs9 are.That all tells me that those coupla guys are faced with a choice as to how to best apply their off-hours - fsx or fs9, not both. I can't say I blame them for striving toward the bleeding edge, lost profit or not. Daryl has said that money is not the object so that's that.And finally, I'm sure that if Laurent and Wade had chosen differently then Daryl would defend that decision just as firmly, so I'd cut him some slack. The man's just doing what he must ultimately do as LDS' headbanging front man - if you take issue with his vocals well...Sorry for sounding fanboyish but that's basically what it boils down to imho. It's hard to put the ubiquitous 757 out of mind, but I choose to focus on other very good short/med range airliners available (or will be) for fs9.regards,Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Is there enough in FS9 and coming in the future to keep me>interested until FS11?>>Hel* yes! :-jumpy>I completely agree. We FS9 users have plenty of things to enjoy, apart from all the money we have spent in addons, and if we are wise we should all not consider FSX at all and wait until FS11 is out!Otherwise I'm sure we spend a lot of money now for FSX and then, after one year or two, we'll have to spend more money to upgrade the system to FS11 and to purchase the 757-767 that will be upgraded only for FS11...Move on? Yes, but using the head...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the payware dev, I can see it is like cars -- if you were an addon maker and put together carb rejetting kits, or modified manifolds but then found out the manufacturers have gone to injection with ECUs. Do you still spend your time and effort working on carb jetting, or learn how to reprogram ECUs if you want to have a business in the future?scott s..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I completely agree. We FS9 users have plenty of things to>enjoy, apart from all the money we have spent in addons, and>if we are wise we should all not consider FSX at all and wait>until FS11 is out!I still run FS9, and still purchase addons for the sim. However, FSX is graphically superior regarding scenery and cockpit depictions. It's so much better, that I often now feel a bit of a let down when using FS9. But it's okay; as FS9 is just kind of "old stuff". However, I still keep FS9 for numerous scenery, aircraft, and maximum headroom. Perhaps I'll just have to pick up a Level D for FSX, as I never bought one for FS9.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im very suprised people are berrating Daryl and Lelvel D so much. Level D and daryl are hands down top notch people, who believe it or not, care about their user base. Look at the work, care and love that went into the 767. They released three service packs and built an almost flawless piece of Software for our enjoyment. The out cry actually speaks volumes for the quality of the company. Most people wouldnt be so upset if Level D was crap; however the fact they are so awesome at what they do has sent some off the deep end because the dont fly the platform the 757 will be on.FYI, I dont have FSX either Im to lazy quite frankly to try and tweak a new sim to what I like :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

L.Adamson, you did not pick the LVLD 767 for FS9 because you are a GA pilot.No offense, but this is a post for airline pilots. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"No offense, but this is a post for airline pilots. :)"Really? I thoght these forums/threads are open to all.Anyway, don't you really mean "wannabe" airline pilots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"No offense, but this is a post for airline pilots.>:)">>Really? I thoght these forums/threads are open to all.>>Anyway, don't you really mean "wannabe" airline pilots?Yes these forums are open to all...yes I mean "wannabe" airline pilots.If you do not get my point I will happily explain it to you. I have a feeling you do. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>L.Adamson, you did not pick the LVLD 767 for FS9 because you>are a GA pilot.>>No offense, but this is a post for airline pilots. :)>

>regards>>Ed>L.Adamson did make the point he was considering the LDS767, and besides just because he doesn't have the LDS doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't fly any heavy medal. He may have the PMDG 744 or 737.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are totally missing Capt. Picasso's main points; FS9 is clearly the sim for airliners and the notion that level d is thinking forward by going fsx only is bs, because fs11 will require them to start over anyway. Plus any discussion not about complex airliners and just general fsx product sales is irrelevant.Meanwhile we get nonsense like the following:Daryl said on the same page,"Finally, this thread - which began because a user chose to take one of my posts from the Level-D forum to make a point (which I feel was inappropriate) - has veered off into "FS9 is better and let me tell you why" neverland.""I have belittled noone during my posts in this or any threads."Personally I think the first sentence was very belittling. Level d is not only ignoring their fs9 user fan base-which will bite into their profits ultimately-but also not taking them seriously.Capt. Picasso is citing the obvious that fs9 is the premier airliner platform and if people don't understand that, even after all the forum posts and polls indicating this fact then they are not in a position to make a sound judgment as to whats going on here. Level d thinks it's best to "move on" but the majority do not agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"--the notion that level d is thinking forward by going fsx only is bs, because fs11 will require them to start over anyway"----------------- The LDS developers are pretty smart cookies. I would be very surprised that their decision for FSX "only" was not based on some good insight into FS11- both content and timing.Alex Reid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would I belittle anyone associated with this thread? I have taken the time to explain the Level-D decision. I didn't start this "debate". I don't normally do this, but from now on I will put a smily face at the end of every sentence that I post here so you will know I'm joking and not trying to put anyone down... ;) :) ;) :) :) :)>Level d is not only ignoring their fs9 user fan base-which will bite into their profits ultimately-but also not taking them seriously.Level-D is NOT ignoring anyone, let alone the fans of the 767 for FS9, to which we have released 3 SP's. Ask end-users if the FREE Level-D SDK is useful? Is that not taking our customers seriously?Groan. ;) :)Everything must come to an end, and so must my participation in this thread. :)Thanks for the support. See you all in the simulated skies.Daryl ShuttleworthLevel-D SimulationsSupport & Documentation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Again, take a quote and misconstrue it. Shape what someone>posts and twist it.>Then make it impossible to miscontrue a statement. I could think of 10 different ways you can say most of the things you do say. >There is really no point in trying to answer questions in>these forums. I have posted here because my name was used in>the post when it shouldn't have been.>Then why are you here if we are not up to your level? I know what sackriding goes on in your forums and i do not participate in it. But when you do venture out, do refrain from using "no point" "these" "that" because i take it you are pretty much saying you people, aren't you? Reality check in english composition might be due when you are formally representing a company. >Not sure how you come up with my quotes all over this thread,>gyrate. I have posted 4 times in this thread to respond to>posts made by other users and to explain the reason for the>Level-D decision, just like I am posting a response to yours.>It's called courtesy.Do not even attempt to insinuate you are doing anybody a favor blessing us with your presence. You are here for the same reason everybody else is; discuss events and offer opinions. Thing is you can't do that without belittling somebody. You don't even realize it anymore. This is not about you. You did not explain anything. All you have said is "you are all obsolete so move on because we don't care". That's how it sounds and then you wonder why people keep bringing up your name and quotes. Explaining a business decision should be done in a business manner. Dry and technical. Don't tell people to move on, don't tell people excuses for why you've chosen to develop for x platform. Like i already said, it doesn't matter what you've chosen because there is no product yet. Only when it comes out will we all know if it was the right choice. >I have belittled noone during my posts in this or any>threads.>Perhaps not intentional.....>Finally, release dates are rarely given... but (here's some>sarcasm for you) you need't worry about that, you won't be>buying anything from Level-D anyway, so release dates>shouldn't matter.Thanks to you, correct. I won't be buying anything else that is. I started with the first version of erics panel for fs98 and will end it with the 767 for fs9. not a bad run>Daryl Shuttleworth>Level-D Simulations>Support & Documentationmeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this