January 3, 20179 yr When I saw Austin trolling him on Facebook and then Orbx removed the X-plane preview shot from their website, I figured this would happen. His excuses make no sense. He admits in his post that the airports ported to XP just fine. But he wants to instead release products for AF2, which has a tiny user base, no even real airplanes to fly yet, and has a scenery engine dependent on photo scenery. While some people like that, it limits what you can do with autogen and lighting to fill out the world. He should just admit he's doing this for personal reasons and move on.
January 3, 20179 yr Author Much ado about nothing, so it turns out. I'd judge there's a mixture of reasons. Performance / Frame Rates, perceived attitude, personal. Hard to judge, and I'll bet we never hear all the story - especially if it does actually come down to performance. No company is going to want to admit that they can't make something work acceptably. Performance might be a reason why they would want to shift weight behind Aerofly - Nothing but frame-rate friendly scenery for miles around likely gives a very blank canvas to work with. It's all speculation, I guess. Gosh, we are good at that. :smile: John, did mention that they love all the FPS horsepower and headroom of the AeroFly graphics engine. Honestly, they could load moving traffic, boats, A.I. ATC...blah, blah...and I probably would see a 30 FPS total reduction 'hit' in FPS. That would still have me with a full blown feature set of P3D/FSX at 90 FPS, features full out! That has to be playing out in this decision as well. They are happy with the FPS head room going into R and D, with AeroFly FS2. With X Plane 11 full out, as I like it...I get between 17-33 FPS, max! If an Orbx product took even 10 FPS away from my max top out......it would be fatal on my system. I get 120 FPS in AeroFly, right now. As stated, I could lose 30 FPS in further processes, and my present system not even to yawn....
January 3, 20179 yr When I saw Austin trolling him on Facebook, I figured this would happen. Game of trolls :smile: Life time flight sim enthusiast, current airplane owner 172P (past C182F). FAA CP/IR ASEL/AMEL, FI ASELMy System: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D , MSI X870 GAMING PLUS, 64G RAM, ASUS RTX5090, 4T SSDPut my hands on (pic/dual/given)7GCAA, 8KCAB, BE24, BE76, BE35-C33, BE35, C150, C152, C172B/N/P/R/SP, 182F, M20E,M20C, M20J, AT6(SNJ4), PA28-140,PA28-151, PA28-161,PA28-181,PA28RT-201,PA28R-180/201T, PA24-250, PA32-300R, PA44, AC114, YAK-18T, YAK-52, SR22
January 3, 20179 yr AeroFly seriously.... Now now, don't mock. Over the past 30 days, it has had an average of 31 players. An all-time peak of 79 and a glacial influx of new players. http://steamcharts.com/app/434030 It's like a vein of gold, waiting to be mined. [MSI MPG X870E Carbon | 9800X3D (PBO +200Mhz / -20 Offset) | Corsair 64GB DDR5 (Custom Timings) | RTX 4090 Founders Edition (Undervolted) | WD SNX 850X 4TB + 4TB | Antec Flux Pro]
January 3, 20179 yr Dont forget Orbx's is fairly easy to convert , with FSX2XPLANE i7 4777k 4.6mhz, 32gddr3, GTX 760 4g sci ,Saitek x52,yoke and quadrant, 60 Led . SSD
January 3, 20179 yr Much ado about nothing, so it turns out. I'd judge there's a mixture of reasons. Performance / Frame Rates, perceived attitude, personal. Hard to judge, and I'll bet we never hear all the story - especially if it does actually come down to performance. No company is going to want to admit that they can't make something work acceptably. Performance might be a reason why they would want to shift weight behind Aerofly - Nothing but frame-rate friendly scenery for miles around likely gives a very blank canvas to work with. It's all speculation, I guess. Gosh, we are good at that. :smile: If it were just about performance, they could eventually fix that. Plenty of other airports in XP use high quality models and orthos. There's nothing about Orbx's stuff that should of been remarkably different in the XP engine performance wise. It's personal and the fact that just two weeks ago they were putting up preview shots on their website with coming soon banners proves it IMO. They had full plans to release a product and then pulled the plug suddenly. This wasn't just a proof on concept all along like he claims. John, did mention that they love all the FPS horsepower and headroom of the AeroFly graphics engine. Honestly, they could load moving traffic, boats, A.I. ATC...blah, blah...and I probably would see a 30 FPS total reduction 'hit' in FPS. That would still have me with a full blown feature set of P3D/FSX at 90 FPS, features full out! That has to be playing out in this decision as well. They are happy with the FPS head room going into R and D, with AeroFly FS2. With X Plane 11 full out, as I like it...I get between 17-33 FPS, max! If an Orbx product took even 10 FPS away from my max top out......it would be fatal on my system. I get 120 FPS in AeroFly, right now. As stated, I could lose 30 FPS in further processes, and my present system not even to yawn.... Except AF2 has nowhere near the full blown feature set of P3D. It still feels like a proof of concept simulator. You can't even adjust the mixture on the piston aircraft.
January 3, 20179 yr Author If it were just about performance, they could eventually fix that. Plenty of other airports in XP use high quality models and orthos. There's nothing about Orbx's stuff that should of been remarkably different in the XP engine performance wise. It's personal and the fact that just two weeks ago they were putting up preview shots on their website with coming soon banners proves it IMO. They had full plans to release a product and then pulled the plug suddenly. This wasn't just a proof on concept all along like he claims. Except AF2 has nowhere near the full blown feature set of P3D. It still feels like a proof of concept simulator. You can't even adjust the mixture on the piston aircraft. I totally agree with you...but with the comment that AF2 is still a beta release. What you lament, will be there, not 'possibly will be there'....
January 3, 20179 yr I totally agree with you...but with the comment that AF2 is still a beta release. What you lament, will be there, not 'possibly will be there'.... Not to sure about that. They already said they won't implement start up and shutdown options in every plane... but to get back on topic: I also think it is a personal thing. JV is like that.
January 3, 20179 yr Whether a full feature set will ever make it into that game is still very much up in the air.
January 3, 20179 yr No need to watch a soapopera when you hang around AVSIM... Simmerhead - Making the virtual skies unsafe since 1987!
January 3, 20179 yr No need to watch a soapopera when you hang around AVSIM... LOL I actually spend more time here than I do flying!
January 3, 20179 yr The last thread seemed like it lasted forever. Maybe, this one will end before it takes-off. :smile: ORBX doesn't need anymore publicity and not worth the 15sec it took me to write this post. MSFS
January 3, 20179 yr Personally, I'm glad to hear this. I've never been a fan of X-Plane - the scenery just looks unrealistic and strange in my opinion, not to mention the fact that it lacks a lot of features that FSX has, and I'm glad ORBX won't be wasting time developing for this platform. The future of flight simulation lies with P3D and DTG simulation platforms. Dave Simulator: P3Dv6.1 System Specs: Intel i7 13700K CPU, MSI Mag Z790 Tomahawk Motherboard, 32GB DDR5 6000MHz RAM, Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Video Card, 3x 1TB Samsung 980 Pro M.2 2280 SSDs, Windows 11 Home OS My website for P3D stuff: https://sites.google.com/view/thep3dfiles/home
January 3, 20179 yr Whatever the reason, I could care less, wasn't planning on buying anyway. Windows 11 - Samsung 990 Pro M.2 | Asus Prime Z690 | i7 12700KF HT | DeepCool LS520 SE | MSI 5070 Ti Ventus OC | 64GB G.Skill XMP II | Lian Li 216 LANCOOL RGB | TrackIr v5 | Honeycomb Alfa - Bravo - Charlie | MSFS 2024 - Samsung 990 Pro M.2 | Curved 27" MSI | JBL Quantum 810
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.