I don't think much is going to change with freeware.

FSX never had a real freeware scene, nor did it have the cult following (a good thing) and workable tools for freeware developers to use like XP does. You've got lots of freeware developers that do it because they love the sim, not for a future profit motive and they aren't going anywhere.

 

I'm not going to trash JV over his 2013 comments (even though he probably deserves it) because frankly, I felt the same way at the time. Even though I owned XP10, it felt like Austin simply didn't care to add or improve even basic features that XP was missing and it frustrated me. There were some things that eventually got added or announced in 2015/2016 that many thought weren't even going to be touched several years back.

 

Let's be honest. In the beginning of XP10, the plausible scenery sucked and Austin's comments on it at the time weren't exactly comforting to those who didn't like it. He gave me the impression that improving it just wasn't that important compared to other things. And if you lived in the US, there was basically very little OSM data to improve it. It's come a long, long way to being viable now.

 

And as for P3D becoming the next big platform, that was true. It did become the mainstream option and probably the best business decision for them at the time.

It wasn't until I played XP 10.40 and saw the roadmap for XP11 that I really finally saw that LR was putting the sim into a place to take the crown. And I've been singing it's praises ever since in the face of many FSX/P3D diehards who can't seem to admit that XP's engine holds way more potential (we'll see what P3Dv4 brings I guess).

 

Frankly, for a lot of years, I felt like many in the XP user base were just as big a jerks as JV was in his comments. You'd ask when XP was going to add a feature or if something could be improved and many would basically tell you that you were stupid for even caring about that feature and that XP wasn't the kind of sim for people that cared about that.

 

So there's a lot of blame to go around for the animosity that was so prevalent. I feel like that's finally subsiding, that LR's development path has really opened up to be more welcoming to all types of simmers, and that everyone is coming together and I like that.

 

A surge of new users and payware developers doesn't just benefit the end user. It should expand LR's piggy bank to the point where they can hopefully speed up production on some much needed final touches on the sim that it needs.

I'm all for better add-ons as long as they don't cripple fps or cause CTDs.

It's funny really, there really isn't a huge difference between XP10 and 11, but XP11 has so far attracted a lot of new users and it hasn't even been released yet. The change between 9 and 10 I think was much more substantial and it failed at the time to attract the disappointed MS Flight crowd. I'm curious what has actually changed for people recently. 

With the news that ORBX will be entering the X-Plane platform which will be supported by a large R&D investment from ORBX, I would love to hear what X-Plane users might think would be a good direction for ORBX to take. 

 

 

Below are my predictions:

 

Regions

• ORBX would start with Pacific Northwest (most popular region)
• Product would align with XP tech and not FSX/P3D tech. (Not a tile-based product with painted and annotated autogen) 
• Upgraded Ground Textures (downtown, urban, suburban, rural, farmland, mountains, etc.)
• Upgraded and more variety of regional X-Plane-style autogen (houses/row houses, industrial buildings, urban buildings, taller Central Business District autogen buildings and trees)
• Seasonal ground textures and trees would be available.
• Regional landmarks including downtown buildings and other points of interest would be available
• All airports in the region would be populated, likely with ORBX's utilization of WED and additional tech.

Regional Airports

• These would be made available using X-Plane tech.
• Sloping runways, incredible lighting, and possible implementation of X-Plane flow tech.

Global 

• Once Orbx cracks the code on how to create regions, a Global product could be created that contains ground textures and autogen (houses, buildings, vegetation)
• Possible vector-type product

Other

• HD Trees (easy win and really needed)
• Light Configurator (This would be great to configure coloring, size, and who knows what else)

I don't think they'll do regions. I think it'll be airports and some Global improvement projects (new autogen, trees, new ground textures but not city textures as XP doesn't operate that way).

No offense to your post, but is there a reason why we need now THREE threads on this topic?

I think it will start out with an airport, if it sells well, they'll make more and possibly then move into regions.

 

The other thing to remember as well is that it will be competing with DTG and P3D 64-bit, and the "A" project, so it will be interesting to see how it all plays out. 

I dont think many people noticed but ORBX already justified themselves indirectly by labeling xp as the dark horse which means a "candidate or competitor about whom little is known but who unexpectedly wins or succeeds." Where are the rest Fly tampa, PMDG...even IXEG what is your next plane IXEG 737 800 ng upgrade of default xp?

It's funny really, there really isn't a huge difference between XP10 and 11, but XP11 has so far attracted a lot of new users and it hasn't even been released yet. The change between 9 and 10 I think was much more substantial and it failed at the time to attract the disappointed MS Flight crowd. I'm curious what has actually changed for people recently. 

 

XP11's user interface is a ton better. And the atmospherics/coloring make it so much more palatable IMO. I hated the way XP10's horizon looked and how I'd get crawling everywhere with even the highest AA settings.

 

Just as much, it's a fresh start for something new. XP10.1 was terrible compared to 10.50. But it's hard to get people to jump in at a final version. Rebooting to XP11 (Even though the changes aren't as great) allowed LR to market everything as a new package.

I agree. There's way too much good background scenery out there already including the default stuff. They'll do an airport or two to get started with XP.

 

I think it also depends on how quickly DTG and LM release their 64 bit versions.

It's funny really, there really isn't a huge difference between XP10 and 11, but XP11 has so far attracted a lot of new users and it hasn't even been released yet. The change between 9 and 10 I think was much more substantial and it failed at the time to attract the disappointed MS Flight crowd. I'm curious what has actually changed for people recently. 

I got into XP10 because of the XP11 announcement, more specifically, the demo at the flighsimcon.  My curiosity got the best of me and I had to ask myself "why not give it a shot again and see what all the fuss is about".  I'm glad I did, because LR sold me on it.  As for differences I have seen between 10 and 11, yeah, not much of a differences aside from the visuals.  Maybe it's a lot more under the hood than what we experience, though the UI change is a welcome sight.  The beta is improving so I am happy to be on board to witness all the new things being integrated into 11.

Topics merged. There is no need to have two separate topics about the same thing :-)

It's funny really, there really isn't a huge difference between XP10 and 11, but XP11 has so far attracted a lot of new users and it hasn't even been released yet. The change between 9 and 10 I think was much more substantial and it failed at the time to attract the disappointed MS Flight crowd. I'm curious what has actually changed for people recently. 

Well ... maybe Laminar just worked hard on a lot of basic things in the first years of Xp10. They were not shiny or glorious, but paved the way where we are now. Maybe 64bit would be one of the best examples of that work (it needed immense investments ... and they needed to keep cool, do their work  without always jumping at all nagging user wishes).

 

My understanding is (and of course, I am biased :smile: ) that even though some things take long (yes, because Laminar is small ... we all know that), but their decisions might pay off in the long run (even if they do not implement all user wishes at the same time).

Since you merged them and we are talking what Orbx should do as well, I think a worldwide landmarks and autogen package that at least fills in the gaps FSX filled in (the landmark quality basically sucked, but they were there), would sell like hotcakes.

It's the one area that the freeware scene hasn't really been able to satisfy. Some airports include them and there's a few smaller packages, but nothing substantial.

It's funny really, there really isn't a huge difference between XP10 and 11, but XP11 has so far attracted a lot of new users and it hasn't even been released yet. The change between 9 and 10 I think was much more substantial and it failed at the time to attract the disappointed MS Flight crowd. I'm curious what has actually changed for people recently.

Tony,

 

In my case, it's the 4k resolution. P3d has too many glitches at 4k because it's still 32 bit and expectadly CTDs.

I went from from FSX to XP10 to P3d to XP11 as my career flightsim "road map".

 

Jay