Why is FTX quality not what it was?

[StormVR6 30]

Before I get to my point, let me just say: I'm not here trying to instigate a flame war or some other pointless act against Orbx. The FTX stuff is excellent and I fly over Orbx scenery exclusively. My views below are based on the EU Regions, not new releases (regions and airports) of other parts of the world. 

 

But, after more time spent flying around FTX ENG and WLS, I'm becoming more and more disappointed with the lack of overall polish they both exhibit compared to the previously released FTX regions. Yes, I understand that SIM720 are new to FTX, but that can only excuse the end result so far. Ultimately - I don't own Scotland or Northern Ireland, but I've seen them in action - it's hard to believe that the EU regions are the latest creations from Orbx. What with lower quality textures, sloppy autogen placement and average colour representation, it would be an easy mistake to make if you thought they were the debut regions from Orbx.

 

So why the drop in quality? Is it simply down to Orbx HQ releasing software that is known to be of a lesser quality but good enough? Is it a business decision made in an attempt to keep prices fixed in a world of rising costs?

 

The former can be attributed to SIM720 being new on the scene. In my opinion none of SIM720's work is in the same league as the NA, NZ, US and AUS stuff. And, I know, England as a country isn't as beautifully diverse as the PNW, but I'm not talking scenic splendour here, nor am I talking accuracy, I'm talking about texture quality, attention to detail and workmanship. Even the SIM720 airfields lack the polish of the older FTX offerings, but this general drop in quality may not be because SIM720 can't achieve the heights of PNW or SAK, it may be due to something else. The cost of living is rising but does Orbx want to risk increasing it's prices to match? Or does it keep them fixed? Surely something has to give if the latter is the case, doesn't it?

 

Maybe the cost of setting up SIM720 forced Orbx to knock out as many regions and airfields as possible within a set date? Again, causing quality to take a hit. Maybe this, maybe that. As a customer, all I care about is, am I buying the same quality product that I've come to appreciate from the guys at Orbx? After buying my first Orbx region I never hesitated to continue buying more Orbx regions in their respective areas, but after ENG and WLS I'm actually hesitant to buy any further EU regions.

 

Like many here, I don't mind paying more money for a better quality product. So if the extra time needed to polish things up is being cancelled, just to keep each new region at the typical FTX region price, then I for one am happy to pay more for that polishing time to be reinstated. If I'm alone on that one then I'm OK with that.      

 

Of course, this is all simply my opinion and there may be some of you thinking I'm crazy and that the FTX EU regions are great. Don't get me wrong, I love flying over FTX England and Wales, but every time I look outside my Waco or Cub I find it hard not to think, "it does look a bit messy down there".

[ryanbatc 12,836]

Money.

 

People know the Orbx name and Orbx knows this.

[tttocs 301]

I guess "drop in quality" depends on what and where.  The most recent region I purchased, Southern Alaska, is Orbx' best NA region yet.  As far as airports go, "best" is a bit hard to pin down as each is more an individual developer's interpretation, but my last three - Bonners Ferry, Juneau and Bozeman have been all been superb.

 

I can't speak for the non-NA releases, but I see no drop in quality for the North American products.  None.

 

Scott

[StormVR6 30]

I guess "drop in quality" depends on what and where.  The most recent region I purchased, Southern Alaska, is Orbx' best NA region yet.  As far as airports go, "best" is a bit hard to pin down as each is more an individual developer's interpretation, but my last three - Bonners Ferry, Juneau and Bozeman have been all been superb.

 

I can't speak for the non-NA releases, but I see no drop in quality for the North American products.  None.

 

Scott

 

I agree with you regarding the NA stuff, my original post has been edited to make it clearer; I'm talking about the EU Regions, developed by SIM720.

[JSkorna 137]

Only one group of people know for sure and that would be ORBX. Anything else is just speculation on the community's part.

[StormVR6 30]

Only one group of people know for sure and that would be ORBX. Anything else is just speculation on the community's part.

 

Good point. But I doubt the quality of future EU regions will improve unless Orbx are made fully aware that customers are not completely happy. Considering it's virtually impossible to post anything but praise for FTX on the Orbx forums - without it being deleted or the poster being slammed - and thereby quashing even the idea of honest feedback and discussion, speculation is pretty much all we have.

[ZKOKQ 984]

As Orbx have ended the contact with Sim 720, and I believe they have gone on there own, Orbx have announced that South Norway will be the last project with Sim720 involvement.

As the chances of the whole of Norway being completed this century looks very remote. So would anybody buy Orbx South Norway when released, probably not. Not when you only get half of it.

 

I agree with the OP in regards to quality, if you look at NZQN which released a few weeks back is great on the eye candy, but lacks winter textures. The prominent Remarkable s  mountain range looks nothing like that in real life, especially in the winter.

Read Sept 14th news item here warning against purchase http://www.flightsim.co.nz/

[TheFamilyMan 280]

Just to ride on this, the texture quality in NZSI goes from magnificent to dreadful.  Amazing what deadlines can do for a product (though just speculating).

[N1G 88]

I believe the best thing ORBX can do moving forward (in their spare time if they have any) is to optimize what they already have. As an example, the lights that are in global have a FR hit that is negligible if any at all. There is always room for optimization, ALWAYS! Turning the lights on in NA Blue as you know is an FPS hit big time. It very well could be too that the architecture, or approach utilized at that time, may or may not allow for a reasonable cost effective effort to convert it to what is being used by the global release. It would be nice if they decided to tackle it though as I do miss the lights in NA Blue. I do not believe the visual quality has decreased at all with current sceneries, but that is just my eyes speaking (which are old). There are some airport sceneries that are hard on frames but do not appear to have more or less visual eye candy than other sceneries which offer a more fluid experience. Maybe this is due to the author, I do not know. I think it would take a miracle if there happen to be a new king of the scenery hill appear anytime soon.

 

Bob

[ZKOKQ 984]

They have the illusion that if you buy Orbx, you will buy nothing else. Of course that is utter nonsense. But that is there illusion, not the end user.

For one, their installers do not create back ups of fsx core files, eg terrain cfg etc. To remove a region takes a degree in computer programming. Try and remove PNW, and look at the hoops you have to jump through.

[ShawnG 1,823]

they announced a few days ago that they are retrofitting the global lights to the older regions, AU first.  

 

I don't think they announced that southern norway would be the last Sim720 region, they just said it's the last one they have under contract.  I would be surprised if there are any after that, honestly, but it was left open that there may still be some after that.

 

as for EU, I am generally happy with my purchases, I own ENG WALES and SCO.  Scotland is by far the best, and I will buy both Ireland packages once ROI is available.  It isn't as good as the NA regions, or AU, so that criticism is valid,  I just don't think the packages are really all that bad.  

 

It may be just as simple as there is less involvement by Holger on the EU stuff.  Holger has been doing these amazing sceneries well before ORBX was on the scene.  He is a real artist, and that may be hard to pass on, after all, no one else has been able to replicate this level of quality either

[Boeing or not going 578]

If Orbx really wanted to make money properly they would have released a big airport with each region. YSSY, KSEA, KPDX. Why would I spend 200 dollars on all your scenery for an area and still have default main international airports nearby? With no high quality payware options either. And still those airports are not done.

[fakeflyer737 991]

If Orbx really wanted to make money properly they would have released a big airport with each region. YSSY, KSEA, KPDX. Why would I spend 200 dollars on all your scenery for an area and still have default main international airports nearby? With no high quality payware options either. And still those airports are not done.

 

 

BINGO!

 

John said awhile ago that they stopped making larger airports because they take too long to develop and cost to much to make. Yet, why did they cancel more than half of the small VFR fields in England that they planned on doing. They need to get away from the grass strips, small airfields that no ones ever heard of and do bigger fields which they have started doing again, which makes me think they are moving in the right direction. I just dont care about how the grass looks along the fence next to the old wooden chair that is somewhere in the middle of the field that Im never going to go too unless I walk around with bob. They seem to focus in the wrong spots

 

Sorry English is not my first language, I from Canada.

[StormVR6 30]

If Orbx really wanted to make money properly they would have released a big airport with each region. YSSY, KSEA, KPDX. Why would I spend 200 dollars on all your scenery for an area and still have default main international airports nearby? With no high quality payware options either. And still those airports are not done.

 

Your statement, although not strictly on topic, does involve an element of quality, albeit performance quality. Many of the smaller Orbx airports cause customers to be disappointed when their, usually solid, 30fps are almost halved whilst flying in and around them. Considering some of these are basic airfields, the chances of Orbx creating the likes of Heathrow airport, without having serious performance issues, are little to none. Surely the main reason Orbx stopped developing the large airports was due to bad performance, which is understandable, but that doesn't explain why some of the small English airfields cause a unreasonable drop in frame rate.

 

Am I right though, when I say most people just want good quality at a good price? I believe the main reason most of the England airfields didn't sell was purely down to cost. Charging full Orbx airport money for a field is ludicrous! Many Englishmen would like a few English airfields in their collection, but not ones that cost £20, are the size of a postage stamp and look their best when you "walk" around them. The recent England airfield discount will help sales, but I think it's too little, too late.  

[fakeflyer737 991]

Your statement, although not strictly on topic, does involve an element of quality, albeit performance quality. Many of the smaller Orbx airports cause customers to be disappointed when their, usually solid, 30fps are almost halved whilst flying in and around them. Considering some of these are basic airfields, the chances of Orbx creating the likes of Heathrow airport, without having serious performance issues, are little to none. Surely the main reason Orbx stopped developing the large airports was due to bad performance, which is understandable, but that doesn't explain why some of the small English airfields cause a unreasonable drop in frame rate.

 

Am I right though, when I say most people just want good quality at a good price? I believe the main reason most of the England airfields didn't sell was purely down to cost. Charging full Orbx airport money for a field is ludicrous! Many Englishman would like a few English airfields in their collection, but not ones that cost £20, are the size of a postage stamp and look their best when you "walk" around them. The recent England airfield discount will help sales, but I think it's too little, too late.

 

If fs dream team, fly Tampa, flightbeam, uk2000 and latinvfr can make massive airports with little performance penalty than why can't ORBX? I've never understood that argument.