Why is FTX quality not what it was?

[ShawnG 1,823]

The point of the ORBX regions was originally for VFR GA flying, not heavy Iron.  They did do Melbourne and Brisbane,  which were good,  but very heavy on frames.  they sold a ton of smaller airfields for PNW and AU,  but less for EU,  probably due to the fact that many EU fliers already had UK2000 etc...   they do tend to be making a lot of medium sized regional airports now,  which is probably a great sweet spot.

 

The other point on not doing large internationals is that they are largely already done by someone else,  some exceptions notwithstanding.  I don't think you are going to see a KSEA by anyone since the surrounding area (even in default) is really heavy on frames.  that's why FlyTampa passed on it as well

[zmak 331]

The point of the ORBX regions was originally for VFR GA flying, not heavy Iron.  They did do Melbourne and Brisbane,  which were good,  but very heavy on frames.  they sold a ton of smaller airfields for PNW and AU,  but less for EU,  probably due to the fact that many EU fliers already had UK2000 etc...   they do tend to be making a lot of medium sized regional airports now,  which is probably a great sweet spot.

 

The other point on not doing large internationals is that they are largely already done by someone else,  some exceptions notwithstanding.  I don't think you are going to see a KSEA by anyone since the surrounding area (even in default) is really heavy on frames.  that's why FlyTampa passed on it as well

 

"they do tend to be making a lot of medium sized regional airports now,  which is probably a great sweet spot."

 

I would like to see them make the smallest fields that would take a 737, this way they may be still able to include daisy's in the parking areas and provide for a larger range of fliers from a cub to heavy iron, all within a reasonable frame cost

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

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.

Can you imagine how bad the FPS would be if they did KSEA given how bad some of their other large hubs perform. No thanks, leave those to people like FSDT, Flightbeam or FlyTampa who can optimize performance at these type of airports.

 

If ORBX had done Dubai in the same fashion FlyTampa did it, we would be lucky to get 10 FSX I would bet.

[mhlarsen 2]

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".

 

Examples would be nice...

[ShawnG 1,823]

No,  Dubai is in the desert.  there's no trees in the desert, so not a lot of autogen to slow your system down.  You would have to try really hard to make a frame rate heavy dubai.  similarly, ORBX Alice Springs (also in the desert) has amazing frames.  Fly Tampa themselves bailed on KSEA in FSX since it was unfeasible in the performance sense.  It's an enormously popular airport that would sell tons. and nobody's done it.  should tell you everything.

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

No, Dubai is in the desert. there's no trees in the desert, so not a lot of autogen to slow your system down. You would have to try really hard to make a frame rate heavy dubai. similarly, ORBX Alice Springs (also in the desert) has amazing frames. Fly Tampa themselves bailed on KSEA in FSX since it was unfeasible in the performance sense. It's an enormously popular airport that would sell tons. and nobody's done it. should tell you everything.

I dont know, FT packed Dubai with a ton of trees, small and large buildings, probably one of the most packed scenery packages out there, more so than Alice Springs. If ORBX cant make Melbourne or Brisbane without chewing up FPS and RAM, theres no way they could have done Dubai in the same detail as FT did it and not killed your performance. Just the way it is.

[JimmiG 244]

Look at the official OrbX forums. Looks like OrbX are considering not extending their partnership with Sim720. Sim720 also recently released a new airport under their own name rather than with the OrbX branding.

[gandy 18]

Look at the official OrbX forums. Looks like OrbX are considering not extending their partnership with Sim720. Sim720 also recently released a new airport under their own name rather than with the OrbX branding.

 

Thats easy to explain, contracts.. when a contract ends it ends as some of the companys they have contracts with whish to go in other directions its fine and normal and part of the way the world works even in the sim developer community.

 

@ Storm,

 

What i find is that any uk scenery i tend to rate harder than i would for scenery for any other part of the world and i guess you are the same but we have that right as its our home. eng does have a rushed feel to it, even more so with the enhanced airports but i dont use them so its not a big deal for me but when you look at all the scenery options for the uk there is not much and the amount of airports availble to buy has been quite small in the past or they are really low quality due to their age.

 

Sometimes i think we should be thankful that a developer wishes to pay so much attention to the uk and its airports.

[DarkstarF16 72]

Imagine, you listen to all the positive comments regarding ORBX, you research, and for sure it looks really good. Because you don't own anything from them, you download the free trial. For sure it looks like a purchase worth making.

 

ORBX release England. Wow that's where I live. I purchase it on the day of release. It Is installed, I fire up FSX in anticipation. What!

 

It is a huge disappointment. If a company is putting their name to a product, then they have a responsibility to at least ensure it meets their standards. It should at least, be similar to the free trial region that you can download from them. Otherwise, what's the point.

 

I'm sure that ORBX would say, well each region has its own custom textures to best match that region. The developers decided that the textures they used, matched.

 

The problem is, theirs nowhere to go with this. It's all very subjective.

[JimmiG 244]

Thats easy to explain, contracts.. when a contract ends it ends as some of the companys they have contracts with whish to go in other directions its fine and normal and part of the way the world works even in the sim developer community.

 

True, but if everyone was super-happy with FTX EU and it generated huge sales, they would surely have chosen to extend the contract..

[ZKOKQ 984]

The only large airport they are producing at the moment is NZAA. After this, there will be no more additions to NZSI & NZNI, due to low sales. That is not what they said when I purchased the two islands.

 

More interesting is NZ is the same size geographically as England, yet the quality is lower ( maybe Scotland is the exception ) yet it is broken up into four parts to purchase.

So when you break it down, Orbx EU is a very expensive addon

 

Maybe we are waking up, and want better quality for our money, and there is nothing wrong with that, as Orbx products are not cheap.

Holger, come back, we need you..

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

Very valuable contributions to this topic, thanks all. (No, I'm not the OP ...)

 

I was actually considering to buy NZQN, now I'm ... still considering what to do.

 

It's kind of awkward that their only little disputed European release so far is SCO - a single region, slightly remote from the airports of greater interest, won't sell as successfully as regions 'surrounded' by equally attractive areas.

 

Let's see what people like the developers of 29Palms will add to ORBX products and whether/how ORBX will fill the SIM720 gap.

[dogtrack 18]

In the pipeline for Orbx Scotland users, see here :-

 

http://www.scotflightscenery.com/forum/index.php?topic=308.0

[StormVR6 30]

Examples would be nice...

 

Funny you ask that, and it's a fair request. I did actually have some examples to post, but there was no point. The difference in overall quality and polish between the NA and EU regions (airports included) is so significant I didn't feel a visual example was necessary. If you don't see the clear drop in quality then there is nothing more to say.   

[simmerhead 885]

There has been plenty of posts about this in the AVSIM ORBX sub forum already. I think the general consensus is that the FTX EU Regions are of lesser quality than their North American counterparts. So why is it so?

It is evident that Sim720 couldn't produce scenery up to the standards of the more experience team that made Australia and North America. The guys doing the latter addons have been at it for a long time and created some amazing stuff for FS2004 (VOZ Vistas Australis & FSAddon Tongass+Misty Fjords for those who remember). But there are definitely parts of the FTX EU Regions that are very good and there is no doubt that the Sim720 team has plenty of talent.

Someone in the ORBX sub forum touched upon a point which I think was a good one. FTX Regions are landclass products, and as such lend themselves to scenery with vast wilderness areas. Flying VFR in England is a very different thing to flying low and slow in PNW and Alaska. In England one is actively using a lot of man-made landmarks for VFR naviagtion. The landscape has been shaped by people for 1000+ years, while the American West is still mostly virgin land in comparison.

Most people still seem to have little knowledge of the FSX terrain and scenery system, and any comparison to the geographic accuracy of photoscenery is pointless. A landclass product can at best be accurate within squares of 1,2 x 1,2 km. That square can be assigned just 122 different land classifications (ground textures + autogen). As a result, both resolution and variety of textures is too small to really depict a country in detail. It will always be an abstraction. When done good it can be like a Picasso, when done bad like an average child's drawing.

There is definitely room for improvement in the FTX EU Regions, but I think we should give the creators the benefit of the doubt. They have improved things considerably with several patches. There is a lot of negativity in this community and it is easy to criticize all kinds of things without thinking about the people who actually have put a lot of time and effort into making the sim a better overall product for us, most of them for very little money.

That said there are other scenery products out there that make it clear that ORBX isn’t perfect. VFR France and Ultimate Alaska X are two products that come to mind. These are able to improve accuracy and realism in their scenery with out of the box thinking. VFR France has found a good blend of photo realism and autogen use in some of their latest French regions. Ultimate Alaska X makes villages and cities look a lot more real by not using generic photo textures as landclass in their cities. Those who can blend the best of all these techs will have the winning combo in the end. If for instance the Ultimate Alaska tech had been used by ORBX in FTX EU Scotland for the Northern coastal areas and isles they would have made the towns look more realistic. Now they use generic landclass that has too many trees between the houses, making the villages ruin an otherwise faitful landscape.

 

But FSX/ESP/P3D isn’t dead just yet, so let’s focus on encouraging those very few that are willing to create these goodies for us!