July 7, 201213 yr I am sure it's purely a business decision - but there's nothing wrong with that. If it works for Carenado and provides us with some additional choices then it's win-win... The reality is that nobody could have predicted that FS9 had the potential for further development back in 2005-6 or that FSX would not completely replace earlier versions of FS as had always happened before. I don't think there's any bad motives involved. I think it's a realistic response to the unexpected fact that FS9 is still a viable platform after ten years from its initial release. Let's hope that some other developers will follow suit and provide products for both markets and put the pointless debates of the past (FSX vs. VS9) where they belong - in the past.... If it's profitable for them and fun for us, then there are no losers Cheers :drinks: Ian
July 7, 201213 yr This is great news. Thanks Carenado. I certainly hope the Cessna 337 and the Caravan are on the 'to do' list. Pete.
July 7, 201213 yr Wonderful news and BIG thanks to Carenado for taking this decision. I am not a lover of Beech aircraft but I will buy the F33 because I think that Carenado need to be supported in their decision and we would all like to see some more new aircraft for FS9. David
July 7, 201213 yr Wonderful news and BIG thanks to Carenado for taking this decision. I am not a lover of Beech aircraft but I will buy the F33 because I think that Carenado need to be supported in their decision and we would all like to see some more new aircraft for FS9. David I agree! I already have the Carenado classic V-tail Bonanza V35 for FS9, which is very good but not quite up to the standard of their last FS9 releases such as the Seneca so hopefully the F33 will be a significant improvement on that. I guess a straight-tailed one would be nice to have too and satisfies my addiction to quality new addons as well as supporting Carenado in this decision! Sure, we all accept that this is being done for commercial purposes but any company needs profitability to survive and develop. As Ian says, it is a win-win situation for them and us and deserves our support. We need to demonstrate to Carenado and other that FS9 is still a commercially viable market in 2012. Bill
July 7, 201213 yr Always nice to see a company respond to feedback from its customers. Guess FS9 isn't is dead as some seem to think. :good: John G.
July 7, 201213 yr Strikes me as a sensible move, especially if there's not too much pain involved in the migration. (By which I mean for the developer: work involved; as well as the end user: not too much compromise; either in detail or performance) The FS9 freeware market is very much alive, I always use the Duxford scenery as a marker, currently only 55:45 in favour of FSX. That's a considerable FS9 user group. If the models are carefully picked ( =C337!) I'm sure the payware split wouldn't be too different.
July 7, 201213 yr Perhaps this is a stupid question and quite off-topic: At this moment I study Aerosoft's sceneries; even the 2012 releases are often for FSX and FS2004. Is there a huge difference between scenery and aircraft modelling, so that this practice could be a positive example? Harald Geyer Gründer der Messerschmitt Freunde Dresden v. V.
July 8, 201213 yr Perhaps this is a stupid question and quite off-topic: At this moment I study Aerosoft's sceneries; even the 2012 releases are often for FSX and FS2004. Is there a huge difference between scenery and aircraft modelling, so that this practice could be a positive example? From what I understand, scenery is easier to produce for both FS9 and FSX but that is not the case with aircraft, although I am not sure why! Bill
July 8, 201213 yr Asking my question, I had PMDG DC-6 for FSX in my mind, but I was said "no FS2004 version due to limitations" in the FSX forum. At the other side, I can stay with superb Calclassic DC-6 still many years. Harald Geyer Gründer der Messerschmitt Freunde Dresden v. V.
Create an account or sign in to comment