Aerosoft Brussels EBBR

[HaraldG 559]

 

 

just do a fast post count on the FSX and FS9 forums and then look at activity. I've seen a couple of days go by without a new post on this forum. According to sources across the web, the FS9 user base is less than 25% of the FS market and that's why most developers have left the FS9 market.

 

DJ, I totally agree. What disturbed me was the fact that Aerosoft takes a sale including the oldest FS9 software as indicator. I'm quite sure that a sale including the Mega airports, German Airports X (including FS9 versions) and other modern products would have shown much better results. 20 % of the FS market - this is probably still more then X-Plane.

 

I also agree that there is such a huge choice of sceneries, both payware and freeware, for FS9 that my FS9 install will never bore me.

[ubersu 78]

Hi, Harald

 

I expect that they are actually looking at sales over an extended period rather than just the sale that Mathis referenced.  As you've noticed, their FS9 products are becoming increasingly thin on the ground.  I suspect their infatuation with X-Plane is due to the hope that the market share there will increase while FS9's continues to diminish.  I have no idea how that will turn out. On the other hand, looking at my flight list in FS9, I find that I still have over 20,000 airports to visit!

 

Regards,

DJ

[ctiger 49]

I thought aerosoft still had the old version for fs9: I still try to buy scenery that supports FS9/FSX for one price similar to some at Aerosoft.

 

http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/us/iboshop.cgi?showd,7166683960,10440

[edetroit 933]

 

 

Well, I can, for example compile aerial images for any airport.

 

That is something I am very interested in. I will be contacting you as soon as I am back from my hols!.......if not before.

[meesterlijk 25]

Its sad developers stopped making sceneries for fs9.

 

My fs9 runs so smooth with lots of traffic, sceneries, every maxxed, no ctd's, no oom's, with perfect frame rates.

 

Why move to fsx or p3d?

 

I think there is enough to explore. I hope the traffic files and the AI traffic will be updated for fs9 in the future.

[out 769]

Why move to fsx or p3d?

 

Definitely not for performance. Nothing beats FS2004 here, well, maybe FS98. :wink:

It's for the great addons made for FSX (/P3D) only that most people move, including me.

My FS2004 years were very happy, no doubt about it. Nothing but good memories.

But I cannot any more imagine my simming without NGX, PMDG777, MJSQ400, ASNext, and lots of awesome new airports.

 

BTW, I must tell you those legends about terrible FSX performance are strongly exaggerated.

You won't get the FS9 levels, true, but with today's hardware and rational settings, flying in FSX is fun.

 

Why am I sometimes writing in the FS9 forums? Mostly because as a guy who flew FS2004 for ten years (!) I still feel at home here. :smile:

[meesterlijk 25]

These sceneries are better looking indeed. But the sceneries I have on my fs9 are also very beautiful and I still love the way ORD, LAX, DFW, TPA, BUF and many other sceneries look.

 

Why would I change to fsx when I invested so much in fs9. Not only in money but also in time.

 

I love to fly my fs9, cant imagine that it stops within a view years. We will see what happens in the future.

[out 769]

Why would I change to fsx when I invested so much in fs9

 

I think similarly every time I change my car!

[Joseph29 225]

Getting back to EBBR becoming vaporware. What is wrong with the current version? Is it out of date? (By out of date I mean has there been new runway or terminals built)

[Augustin320214 4]

Getting back to EBBR becoming vaporware. What is wrong with the current version? Is it out of date? (By out of date I mean has there been new runway or terminals built)

 

The problem with the old scenery is that it is laggy as hell and it doesn't look very well in P3D. (It was made in 2007!). In that time a new terminal has been built and the numbers of the runways have changed.

[vesalius 153]

The problem with the old scenery is that it is laggy as hell and it doesn't look very well in P3D. (It was made in 2007!). In that time a new terminal has been built and the numbers of the runways have changed.

And a major fire destroyed Hangar 40 (Sabena Technics):

https://www.google.be/search?q=brussels+airport+hangar+40+fire&rls=com.microsoft:nl-BE:IE-Address&biw=1670&bih=810&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0CAUQ_AUoAGoVChMI_6iQvPS5xwIVAtkaCh1xNQy-&dpr=1.15

 

Jetairfly (Tui Group) build a new hangar on that same location.

http://www.luchtzak.be/forums/viewtopic.php?t=51483

[gwillmot 31]

The problem with the old scenery is that it is laggy as hell and it doesn't look very well in P3D. (It was made in 2007!).

 

..... and your point doesn't really carry much weight here in the FS2004 forum.  Sorry.

[edetroit 933]

 

 

But I cannot any more imagine my simming without NGX, PMDG777, MJSQ400, ASNext, and lots of awesome new airports

 

I cannot imagine swimming without my 747classics, L-1011, DC-10, TU-154, IL-76, AN-12....the list goes on and more to come.

 

Everybody's tastes are different....and IMO no-one's reason for choosing one sim over another are more valid.

[kiwiflyer45 123]

Rafal - you are VERY welcome here. We've missed you my friend

Ian

[out 769]

My spirit is here all the time, Ian. Doesn't matter which skinny cover (FS9/FSX/FS-SE/P3D) it adopts. :wink:  All the best to you, mate!

And not to become an offtopicer here, I would read Mathijs' words as 'rather forget about the new FS9 Brussels' for the reasons he was clear about.