Picking up on Ron's post above (which btw seems reasonable to me too) there are demo download versions of each of the VFR airfield packages here http://www.uk2000sce...elds/index.html so you can check out these fields against the ones included in the FTX England when it arrives. A nice feature is that you can decide which fields you want to install. For instance the demo includes Denham which I already have as an add-on so I was able to de-select that field.

 

IMHO UK2000 would be shooting themselves in the foot if they didn't try to make their fields compatible with FTX, either as a patch or different version?

 

I'm a little amazed at some posts here based on so little evidence? :huh: .....so far. When I (you?) buy a car I compare the features of the makes/models available for my/our need. I compare the pro's and cons of each model and choose accordingly ....unless you're a badge/brand loyalist I'm sure you do the same? We've had a really awful basic UK with FSX for years so why not wait to see the pro's and cons now we have a choice of sceneries?

There you go again, being sensible. What have I told you? :mad:

IMHO UK2000 would be shooting themselves in the foot if they didn't try to make their fields compatible with FTX, either as a patch or different version?

 

Why can't Orbx try to make their fields compatible with UK2000?

 

I pray God every day, asking him not to let anything bad happen to Orbx as it will be the end of the world as we know it for some of you here.....I'm not pointing finger at you Geof, I just used your post.

Why can't Orbx try to make their fields compatible with UK2000?

 

I pray God every day, asking him not to let anything bad happen to Orbx as it will be the end of the world as we know it for some of you here.....I'm not pointing finger at you Geof, I just used your post.

 

probably because ORBX is the bigger of the two .

 

imagine if avsim came to an end . some people would have nowhere left to snipe

 

:LMAO:

Hi Alain,

Unless there are some horrendous mesh discrepancies I'd have thought the only real issue would be colour matching. Whoever's base scenery the simmer chooses it would not be rocket science to do some colour matching? After all the photoscenery has been with us for a while now and whatever "base" scenery the simmer prefers there are undoubted criticisms of both already as far as colour is concerned. Somewhat premature in view of how little we've seen of ORBX's version I'd suggest?

 

Bottom line is that so far FTX has 3 detailed airfields in the pipeline and UK2000 has 3 REGIONS worth of UK VFR fields already released. The simmer will find themselves in the unprecedented position of having up to 4 versions of some UK fields to choose from including the "Generic/out of the box" FTX fields that come with the scenery, UK VFR fields by UK2000, a couple of "Real Scenery Airfields from Just Flight, Aerosoft Mega Airports, Team SDB RAF fields, UK Extreme Airports, Earth Simulations Channel and Scilly Isles, Alfs UK airfields plus this lot of freeware http://www.freewarescenery.com/fsx/uk.html.

 

If the mesh works fine then the only problem will be colour matching or seasonal differences? If I were selling an airport add-on I'd put the effort into issuing a patch for colour matching to the FTX scenery because it represents a little work in exchange for some excellent feedback and more sales? On the one hand JV's stance on this might seem off hand but in reality it would be almost impossible for them to ensure compatibility with such a wide range of previously existing add-ons from so many different sources.

 

My take is that we'll have to wait and see what each looks like within the scenery. Airfields tend to be regularly mowed for a start and that usually causes a colour difference with surrounding fields anyway. Seasonal variations might be more of an issue? Time will tell.

 

The good news is that the imminent arrival of FTX England has spurred a lot of sales of the photoreal scenery at 50% discount so as far as I can see it's a win/win situation?

 

Geoff

 

imagine if avsim came to an end . some people would have nowhere left to snipe

 

:LMAO:

 

Please, lets pray for that not to happen......I'm hooked and can't live without Avsim....

 

@Geof,

 

Quote "it would be almost impossible for them to ensure compatibility with such a wide range of previously existing add-ons from so many different sources." end of quote.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but Orbx do not follow the SDK to the letter and that's probably why compatibility may be a problem for other 3PD, we (you, as I can't ask over there) may ask them if they build their scenery following the SDK like it was intended to be used for (be carefull asking questions like that over there though), if not we will have the answer to the compatibility problem.

Hi Alain,

having regained access over there I feel I'm pushing things already by asking any questions amidst the endless streams of "awesomes" :wink: .

I'm not au fait with the intracacies of the SDK so that discussion would be better from someone who was. My point was simpler than that. I doubt any two of the add-ons have the same colour or textures and that this would be very difficult to overcome.

 

Geoff

removed.....bad link

 

Will find the utility I am looking for & post. It assists greatly in softening the difference in colour differences. Where their are major contrasts. Not a fix but it does make the view more acceptable.....watch this space.

http://download.cnet.com/Gamma-Panel/3000-2094_4-10703615.html

Hi Alain,

having regained access over there I feel I'm pushing things already by asking any questions amidst the endless streams of "awesomes" :wink: .

I'm not au fait with the intracacies of the SDK so that discussion would be better from someone who was. My point was simpler than that. I doubt any two of the add-ons have the same colour or textures and that this would be very difficult to overcome.

 

Geoff

 

I understand....

JV has just put up three new England screen shots. Apparently early beta and with a bunch of stuff to be fixed, they look good.

While I'm not yet in 'fanboi' mode, I am getting good vibes about Inger-land!

I could, I suppose, put the screenies up over here, but I'm not sure about the legalities so I'll chicken out.

I could, I suppose, put the screenies up over here, but I'm not sure about the legalities so I'll chicken out.

 

I can see them without being signed in so you can save the risk of being struck down by lightning.

I can see them without being signed in so you can save the risk of being struck down by lightning.

Phew!

I'm somewhat bemused by the "Political" as opposed to equal sized regional (divided by Lat 7 Lon or both?) division of the 4 part package. One assumes they'll be equally priced but the discrepancy in area is vast? I doubt many will buy just 1 region but even so seems an odd way to do it?

 

Geoff

 

BTW those areas in the new screen shots don't mean anything to me. Anyone hazard a guess? ....and I don't understand why folk (on the FTX forum) are asking for shots of specific inland areas of noted countryside because without towns or coasts or other significant landmarks why would they look much different to what we've seen so far. What we need is Metropolitan areas and their suburbs to see how the autogen looks.

Hummmm! can somebody here ask them overthere if these shots are taken in DX10 mode......I know for a fact that a lot of 3PD do use DX10 for promotional screenshots and vid, are they taken with the V key only or are they altered.