Thing is...

 

I don't really need to make a 'I'm not gonna spend any more money with Orbx' type decision. The reason why is simple - I have money to spend, but since I only fly X-Plane these days, it only stands to reason that it's only developers who develop for X-Plane that are possibly going to see any of it.

 

It is, however, very easy to read into JV's statement in a negative way - as in, 'this is what we had accomplished, but now you won't see any of it, so long'.

 

Ah well, to celebrate this thread, I think I'll spend approx. $40 tonight on two very nice looking aircraft from a very respectable X-Plane aircraft developer whose name may or may not begin with 'V', and then spend another $30 or so on a really nice looking X-Plane airport from a developer whose name may or may not begin with 'B'. :smile:

 

 

Is that a fact?, enlighten me then.



What world are you living in?

 

He is correct,

Xplane does lack a few features at the moment, to suggest otherwise is just plain wrong and you know it.

Oh well. I would have liked them to come to XP, because they have some really nice airports and I also love their regions. It might also have brought more users to XP. But then again I think it is not important for me. If I want to use OrbX I start P3D anyway already. No need to use just one sim.

No need to watch a soapopera when you hang around AVSIM...

 

I was actually just thinking that.......

Anyway, we can all agree this is not a technical issue and likely some problems between John and Austin

 

While it's fun to do armchair psychiatric analysis, I'm not jumping so quickly to that conclusion. If there was a technical problem, something like working with X-Plane's far greater LOD distance, or having to coordinate with ever-changing default mesh and OSM updates, then we're not likely to hear about it.

 

I think the choice to develop for Aerofly (and DTG's sim if it's ever released) suggests JV just wanted more of a blank slate to work with.

This decision will trigger other big players decisions as well in the following weeks/months, for sure.

Cheers, Ed

 

 

The market is here, itching to spend money on a good worldwide winter add-on. So I think we'll see something like this very soon.

 

I've been itching for a good seasons add-on since I first got XP 10 4 years ago. Still itching.

This decision will trigger other big players decisions as well in the following weeks/months, for sure.

Cheers, Ed

 

Care to elaborate on that? Why would anyone change anything based on this?

Austin was right to stick it to him imo and he can well afford to. X-Plane has stood on its own for some time now and will continue to do so without JV. No great loss!

This decision will trigger other big players decisions as well in the following weeks/months, for sure.

 

What are the other big players? I don't think scenery is such an attractive market here, considering what's already available with free and payware airports, and where the scenery model is headed in the future.

 

We already have great GA planes and helicopters and a few more complex fast movers from independent designers and the likes of Carenado/Alabeo. If PMDG starts releasing modern tubeliners for X-Plane after their DC-6 test bed, then I don't see that we need much else to keep moving forward.

 

I don't quite see Carenado and PMDG leaping onto the Aerofly platform just because Orbx is doing scenery there. 

You'll have to go and read the verbatim post, but he did say that they are going to load the DTG SDK, and see what's up with it....and also will be loaded upon release, the P3D '4' SDK.

Mitch, I think that you have that backwards. The DTG SDK is not yet available to developers, the P3d V4 SDK is available to the LM "partners" and ORBX is a partner:

 

 We WILL install the P3D 4.x SDK and see what it has in store for us. We WILL install the Dovetail SDK when it becomes available and explore options there as well.

Care to elaborate on that? Why would anyone change anything based on this?

 

Simply because if it was a logic behind ORBX's decision, which I think it had a logic, other big players will re-think their developing strategies as well and take a similar decision, probably not all of them, but for sure some others will follow. Judging ORBX's decision by saying it's a matter of ego of its CEO, is to look at the facts in a very simple way, and business decisions are not that simple, they cost money.

Cheers, Ed

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

I agree Dave, never been a fan of X-Plane either, it's always had that strange unrealistic look about it, for me I believe the future lies with Aerofly FS2.

Simply because if it was a logic behind ORBX's decision, which I think it had a logic, other big players will re-think their developing strategies as well and take a similar decision, probably not all of them, but for sure some others will follow. Judging ORBX's decision by saying it's a matter of ego of its CEO, is to look at the facts in a very simple way, and business decisions are not that simple, they cost money.

Cheers, Ed

 

Yeah, I'm not really following you. Who exactly had X-Plane in their view and would now decide not to develop for it, based on this? Which of the current developers would suddenly back out, based on this? And if this was all logic driven, based on money, why are they investing so much money, so much effort into a platform that has an average of 30 players a day, and has seen a peak of 79 players? Why would the drop an even bigger platform, a platform they claim was easy to port to? Nothing in OrbX's statement follows any sort of logic. What it does reek of is hurt egos, nothing else. The fact that they dance around the issue and don't give us a concrete reason is an even bigger tell-tale sign. 

 

 

What are the other big players? I don't think scenery is such an attractive market here, considering what's already available with free and payware airports, and where the scenery model is headed in the future.

 

If we look at the improvement made by ORBX FTX Global, Vector, etc. to P3D, it's evident that P3D became a more attractive platform for everyone, including both the users and the developers - of all type of addons, not only scenery- . Once a player like ORBX decides not to move into X-Plane it will for sure make X-P less attractive to a lot of people... and of course to some developers as well.

We see this happening in all business areas and would not be something new if it happens to X-P.

Cheers, Ed

Yeah, I'm not really following you. Who exactly had X-Plane in their view and would now decide not to develop for it, based on this? Which of the current developers would suddenly back out, based on this? And if this was all logic driven, based on money, why are they investing so much money, so much effort into a platform that has an average of 30 players a day, and has seen a peak of 79 players? Why would the drop an even bigger platform, a platform they claim was easy to port to? Nothing in OrbX's statement follows any sort of logic. What it does reek of is hurt egos, nothing else. The fact that they dance around the issue and don't give us a concrete reason is an even bigger tell-tale sign. 

 

I'm afraid we'll probably never know the reasons behind ORBX's decision. When it comes to business decisions they are secret and belongs to each company.

Cheers, Ed