We will not dilute our standards and make a "lite" version

Actually, John, would it REALLY be 'diluting Orbx standards'?We all know what (top) standards you are able to apply, so if dropping some options is the only way to make a decent addon for YSSY, then why not?If you mean stuff like very high res textures, volumetric grass, nature flow, etc, I guess we could live without them just to have a quality Kingsford Smith airport.I have no doubts it would get you a lot of customers (one is here). On the other hand I am not a developer, so I may simply be wrong. Just thinking aloud...

I wish anyone who attempts YSSY good luck and deep pockets. We actually have digital pristine 7cm ground imagery and the airport management want us to make it so they have given us access-all-areas to the airport for photos. However, it is one of the most complex and ambitious heavy airports any company could tackle, and I am afraid there would be very little profit in it for Orbx, or most likely, we'll make a loss. The amount of modelling and geometry involved is immense, probably eighteen months or more of work. It's also in a really poorly performing area in FSX so downtown Sydney and Darling Harbour would need an overhaul to replace default models as well. We will not dilute our standards and make a "lite" version, so it's on the back burner for now.

I think that the community would be happy to wait. I think most will be happy to contribute a little more for the extra effort. I also think that a slim version would be much better, especially when I know ORBX will do everything they can to improve it.The best way to find out is with a poll. Count me in!

I thought OZx had a rendition of YSSY? If Orbx wants to pass the ball on this one I'd say give it to FSDreamteam or FlyTampa. They'll do the airport justice (and perhaps the city).

and maybe the sea wall fixed

would there be a way to do this?

I didn't think it was good

Turns out everyone was right.. it is CRAP.

Seriously though, EGLL is about 10 times bigger than YSSY, and there are at least five different scenery options (and thats just freeware). Why has NOONE bothered?

Download Ray Smiths AFCAD in the FSX section on Avsim.

 

Then use ultimate traffic or something with correct liveries.

 

With UT2 and the AFCAD gates and crosswind runway, all the traffic and activity really makes Sydney for me. Virgin, Rex, Jetstar, Tiger airways, Singapore they are all their doing their thing all at once.

 

If you can buy ORBX then the overrall region is better too of course. The AFCAD works with Orbx

 

Oh I forgot Qantas, if they are still around by the time this post is read :(

I wish anyone who attempts YSSY good luck and deep pockets. We actually have digital pristine 7cm ground imagery and the airport management want us to make it so they have given us access-all-areas to the airport for photos. However, it is one of the most complex and ambitious heavy airports any company could tackle, and I am afraid there would be very little profit in it for Orbx, or most likely, we'll make a loss. The amount of modelling and geometry involved is immense, probably eighteen months or more of work. It's also in a really poorly performing area in FSX so downtown Sydney and Darling Harbour would need an overhaul to replace default models as well. We will not dilute our standards and make a "lite" version, so it's on the back burner for now.

 

Just to add to and old thread being bumped up but this struck me as odd.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love ORBX stuff and its completely their prerogative to make whatever airports they feel suit their business model, but I don't see how YSSY could really be that hard on FPS or require a 'lite' version when there are much much larger airports that have all been modeled wonderfully with great frames. KLAX and DFW by FSDT, EGLL by UK2000, there are heaps. Surely its doable??

I think John covered it in a sticky on the Orbx forums that they prefer to make smaller airports (eg. what they're doing in the US) - easier to model, turnaround and sell.

 

I love flying into/out of YSSY (I'm in YBBN btw) and would dearly love a payware YSSY however, from a commercial standpoint (per what John said), you have to do a cost/benefit analysis and if it doesn't stack up (I'm assuming they've already done this), then they won't (and prob shouldn't) do it.

 

Dreams are free...... :P

Just to add to and old thread being bumped up but this struck me as odd.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love ORBX stuff and its completely their prerogative to make whatever airports they feel suit their business model, but I don't see how YSSY could really be that hard on FPS or require a 'lite' version when there are much much larger airports that have all been modeled wonderfully with great frames. KLAX and DFW by FSDT, EGLL by UK2000, there are heaps. Surely its doable??

 

I agree that a developer like FSdreamteam or Gary Summons could make YSSY with great frames - no question!

 

However, I don't think ORBX would be capable of that - their development techniques result in nice looking, but relatively poor performing airports. They've copped a fair bit of criticism over that, and I think this is one of the main reasons why they ditched the large airport market.

I agree that a developer like FSdreamteam or Gary Summons could make YSSY with great frames - no question!

 

However, I don't think ORBX would be capable of that - their development techniques result in nice looking, but relatively poor performing airports. They've copped a fair bit of criticism over that, and I think this is one of the main reasons why they ditched the large airport market.

I agree. Canberra (YSCB) is one resource hungry airport. I can fly YMML to YBBN and back again, no problem. But if I go to YSCB, I get an OOM warning after landing. Regardless if I trim it down in the control panel or not. Great looking airport, and it is not a big airport by any means. Not their finest work. So, I think they should stick to small airports, and leave the biggies for companies like FB, FSDT etc. It is their forte' after all.

Don't get me wrong, I love ORBX stuff and its completely their prerogative to make whatever airports they feel suit their business model, but I don't see how YSSY could really be that hard on FPS or require a 'lite' version when there are much much larger airports that have all been modeled wonderfully with great frames. KLAX and DFW by FSDT, EGLL by UK2000, there are heaps. Surely its doable??

 

Yeah but on the ORBX forum they once essentially said that FSDT or FlyTampa standards weren't the same as ORBX standards just due to the fact that their airports use some textures that are repetitive. Frankly I dont care at all if there are a few repetitive textures if it means the airport still looks as good as what FSDT or FT put out and it gets great performance. I mean I have never flown to a lot of the major airports that are on the market and wouldn't be able to tell if the lines painted on the ground are not exactly the same as what it is in real life or if one of the terminals has some window or building textures that are the same all the way around.

 

That's the one gripe I have with the large ORBX airports in AU, is that unless you lower or turn off a good amount of the details, the airports don't perform that well in a complex a/c and a lot of AI, yet FSDT large airports like LAX and DFW allow you to run high levels of detail and AI, and still get performance that on my rig is actually better than the default version. The only caveat is that some of the ground and terminal markings are repetitive. That's ok by me since FSDT's airports are still a work of art in my opinion and perform exceptionally well.

Its realistic mate, not even the Sim wants to go to Canberra!!! LOL!!

I agree. Canberra (YSCB) is one resource hungry airport. I can fly YMML to YBBN and back again, no problem. But if I go to YSCB, I get an OOM warning after landing. Regardless if I trim it down in the control panel or not. Great looking airport, and it is not a big airport by any means. Not their finest work.

 

I dont get OOM's there but I do agree that for a small airport the performance is horrible, even after the patch. I did some of my own texture mods for that airport that improved performance a little but I still rarely ever use that airport at all. I think the only fairly large hub they did that performs pretty well is Cairns. YMML and YBBN can suck the life out of FPS and one of them, can't remember which, really drains performance at night. Plus if you turn off the custom ground polys and just use the photoreal ground it looks horrible, although it performs better, but looks bad when your on the ground.

 

I remember not too long ago Anthony from OZx released a freeware version of either YMML or YBBN that looks almost as good as the ORBX rendition as gets twice as many FPS. It would be cool if he would take on Sydney.

Its realistic mate, not even the Sim wants to go to Canberra!!! LOL!!

LOL!!

 

I remember not too long ago Anthony from OZx released a freeware version of either YMML or YBBN that looks almost as good as the ORBX rendition as gets twice as many FPS. It would be cool if he would take on Sydney

Sean, you just reminded me about Anthony's airports. They are great. Especially Ballina which he released recently. If anybody can do YSSY, he can.

Sean, you just reminded me about Anthony's airports. They are great. Especially Ballina which he released recently. If anybody can do YSSY, he can.

 

Didn't know that he did another airport. I'll have to check it out. He and Max Kraus do some awesome freeware FSX airports.