Given the very complex add ons that have already been converted to V4, I'm pretty amazed that we're still waiting for our precious and much loved Orbx payware airports to be compatible.

Yes I am aware of JV's forum post on July 11 concerning the final beta testing of the new Objectflow, yet here we are with even the Flight 1 750 and 650 converted and still not a single payware conversion, save for the two recent new airports.

While I appreciate that things can take time, I'd have put money on Orbx being one of the Day One companies to have converted everything to V4. Yet here we are two months into V4 and still no legacy airports converted.

It's surprising and maybe a little concerning how quiet this has all become. Every post asking for an update on the Orbx forums quickly gets closed.

What do you all think? I made a substantial top up of airports I didn't have in the May sale and I never expected to wait this long for the 64 bit versions, though I accept there were no time estimates given.

 

 

 

Yeah I know...

I own almost all of them, however, I am not in a glass-half-empty mood. I just downloaded and installed South American mesh and Open LC.

Tonight I am more impressed than usual with ORBX workmanship and value, and that is really saying something. Have always been, and still are the cream of the crop.

The rest of the airports will come when they come, and my guess many will be sooner rather than later. Have faith!

Kind regards,

Instead of pumping out 3 or 4 titles since P3Dv4 was released they should be focused on updating current offerings first. 

2 minutes ago, YukonPete said:

Instead of pumping out 3 or 4 titles since P3Dv4 was released they should be focused on updating current offerings first. 

I'm not too sure that this is the way that Orbx developers work -- they may be a bit more autonomous. Spending a month or two on updates might have to fit in with some full schedules.

As I've discovered, the small changes to v4 mean that there's a lot that needs to be tweaked, including the installation methods. Orbx is probably the most complex system, with the least 'preparedness' for the new techniques, given that they've mainly relied on just bulk-overwriting default files in the past. Some developers who just made the necessary changes to their installers might find that down the track things get a little complicated.

My Guess is that Object Flow is being a bit harder to convert to 64bit. Frustrating I know but I'm really enjoying the released regions in crystal clear textures, something I didn't have in P3Dv3.

 

IM

1 hour ago, YukonPete said:

Instead of pumping out 3 or 4 titles since P3Dv4 was released they should be focused on updating current offerings first. 

Yeah, you would thing everyone works on the same thing, huh...?   </sarcasm>

1 hour ago, toprob said:

I'm not too sure that this is the way that Orbx developers work -- they may be a bit more autonomous. Spending a month or two on updates might have to fit in with some full schedules.

As I've discovered, the small changes to v4 mean that there's a lot that needs to be tweaked, including the installation methods. Orbx is probably the most complex system, with the least 'preparedness' for the new techniques, given that they've mainly relied on just bulk-overwriting default files in the past. Some developers who just made the necessary changes to their installers might find that down the track things get a little complicated.

Not only but probably they guys that work on product "X" have nothing to do with objectflow, so why would they stop working if they have no effect whatsoever on that...?  Some people (not talking about you) just don't think for a second it seems...

 

I'm sure it will be worth the wait.

I'm really looking forward to having my Orbx airports in V4.

you can use the Orbx airports in V4 without objectflow...If you have V3 install you can copy over the airports you want... Just make sure you follow the same dir structure... and don't forget the script files for the relevant airports...

If object flow irequires a lot of work in 64, why not release the airports for 64 without it until it is finally fixed, but then perhaps things are not as simple as that.

It's only been two months! Yes, I'm eager for the airports.  Yes, I was hoping for sooner.  But acting entitled to these airports is a bit selfish.  We bought the airports as P3Dv1/2/3, FSX compatible only.  P3D v4 for free is not a requirement for Orbx and I appreciate that they are even doing this.  Considering the months to years it takes to make a payware airport from the ground up, I'm not so upset about a few months. 

29 minutes ago, ideoplastic said:

If object flow irequires a lot of work in 64, why not release the airports for 64 without it until it is finally fixed, but then perhaps things are not as simple as that.

Probably not. There may be some airports where it's mainly butterflies and walking people. However there are others like ESSA where complete buildings are absent without objectflow (don't ask me why).

Kind regards, Michael

31 minutes ago, ESzczesniak said:

But acting entitled to these airports is a bit selfish.  We bought the airports as P3Dv1/2/3, FSX compatible only.  P3D v4 for free is not a requirement for Orbx and I appreciate that they are even doing this.  Considering the months to years it takes to make a payware airport from the ground up, I'm not so upset about a few months. 

In fairness, anyone who bought airports after they announced free support for P3D V4, self included in the last sale where I topped up massively in the prospect of zero OOMs in future, has some reason to feel "entitled" although I personally think that's an inappropriate term and I would also say that I fully expect that Orbx are even keener than we are to make the move. As I've said on here before in terms of other developers' conversions to V4, it's essential to carry them over to 64 bit, if you want to continue to sell them. So while it is indeed great and praiseworthy that we are getting stuff converted, often without cost, there are some big advantages for developers in doing this.

The purpose of the post was to gauge how everyone felt about Orbx being really the last company you'd expect to be slow to a new platform. It's pretty clear they've had/still have some issues to resolve.

17 hours ago, toprob said:

Orbx is probably the most complex system, with the least 'preparedness' for the new techniques, given that they've mainly relied on just bulk-overwriting default files in the past. Some developers who just made the necessary changes to their installers might find that down the track things get a little complicated.

Most of us have experience of how elements of the Orbx install can mess with, for example, other airport elevations, due to what appears to be overwrite coding. My guess is that you've identified the probable reason for the delay here.

18 hours ago, SpiritFlyer said:

Have always been, and still are the cream of the crop.
 

Totally agree.