Orbx recruiting......Xplane developers

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Susu986 said:

Your scenery won't sell more.

Statement?  If so, I assume you have details to back that up?

12 minutes ago, Susu986 said:

JV had said some negative things about X-plane years ago, and when Austin heard that ORBX is coming to X-plane is December, he bought it up.

In a business setting or a personal setting?

13 minutes ago, Susu986 said:

I highly doubt than any PAYWARE product (let it be scenery or aircraft) require you to install any additional stuff.

Unfortunately this is not correct.  I'm not going name names (more than a few) but payware products ranging from $30 to $60+ have required additional downloads and steps and no hands free installers.

 

16 minutes ago, Susu986 said:

Dumbing down X-plane even more (where the users won't even need to copy files from one location to the other, which is an absolutely basic level of computer usage, you cannot really get more basic than that) just invites more people who should be using Aerofly FS2 or FSW instead. X-plane is a serious simulator, and people should be expected to be able to use their computer at a minimum level (and don't complain if they need to read 3 lines of instructions every now and then), if they want to use it.

And that's part of the problem ... establishing exclusivity which reduces market potential, why?  How would such exclusivity benefit Xplane and attract more developers?  Do you think ALL real world airline pilots are computer savvy?  If you do, then I would challenge such an assumption.  Reducing end user interaction with the mechanics of installation and updates and file manipulation has nothing to do with "serious" flight simulation and isn't dumbing down anything ... that's fairly insulting to smart people who don't need to know anything about a computers but want to know about flight.  

In fact, most real world flight simulators (RedBird, etc.) don't require the user to know anything about the simulator (as it should be).  These people are learning to fly, not how to use a computer.

Cheers, Rob.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

So the question here is twofold, I think. First, is Orbx ready and willing to support X-Plane's open file system, maybe using DRM only for the initial unpacking of files? Or are they planning something more DRM-intensive to protect their products, like the way FSX/P3D works?

I've never run into any DRM issues with Orbx.  IXEG is perhaps the most DRM intensive and that is working much better than it was before with a simple login to x-aviation now.  Why is DRM a concern?  It's never been an issue for me on any platform?  Anyway, don't want to get into a DRM debate as it's not something that has ever bothered me.

It's a PC or Mac, so technically everything is open regardless so long as the user has admin rights.  The benefit of having installers/uninstallers is that they manage their specific files ... it's pretty rare I remember every single file I manually copied over to XPlane11 folder so I know how to manually delete all those files without messing up ... when the products start to add up this becomes an increasing problem not having installer/uninstallers.  This problem is only going to get worse as more products hit the market.

Sure there is free content on all platforms, some good, some not so good ... but there are users who want quality products, with support, and hassle free installers and uninstallers.

Cheers, Rob.

[Susu986 76]

25 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Statement?  If so, I assume you have details to back that up?

I mean to say YOUR scenery. You cannot work on your OWN scenery, if your work for a company, like ORBX. They will tell you what they want you to develop. So working for them won't maximize YOUR sales, it will maximize ORBX's sales. That's what I've meant.

25 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

In a business setting or a personal setting?

As I remember (but don't take my word for it), JV publicly stated back then (years ago), that 'X-plane has no future'. I guess he meant the small user base, and the relatively low market share (plus the fact the due it's small development team, X-plane used to be really behind FSX, which was or course backed by Microsoft) . Things have changed since then, but Austin remembered the comment, and bought it up again on Facebook. The post has been deleted since then.

25 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Unfortunately this is not correct.  I'm not going name names (more than a few) but payware products ranging from $30 to $60+ have required additional downloads and steps and no hands free installers.

In that case, sorry. The addons I've purchased so far (both scenery and aircraft, plus environmental addons) did not require any additional downloads, but if you had seen some that did, then it's my bad.

25 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

And that's part of the problem ... establishing exclusivity which reduces market potential, why?  How would such exclusivity benefit Xplane and attract more developers?

From a monetary standpoint, I totally agree- every sale is a sale, and every company wants to sell as many of their products as possible. However many have reflected on how does this making X-plane less. Microsoft Flight Simulator used to be a serious sim, back in the days. Nova days? Go on Youtube, check FSX multiplayer... young kids are using it to fool around, like they would be playing an arcade game on Playstation. Yes, it means more sales, but again, haven't we lost something? Since it's so easy to use the sims, everyone is invited to the table, and the whole culture of the sim suffers as a result.

25 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Sthat's fairly insulting to smart people who don't need to know anything about a computers but want to know about flight.  

Again, I agree with the base assumption. However, in order to appreciate what you have, you need to 'work for it'. And nor X-plane, neither it's addons require such a high level of computer savvyness, that shouldn't be expected from an everyday user who wants to get into serious flight simming (this doubles up for real world pilot's, who are probably the most serious users of all). I believe that people who are serious about their hobby, should put some effort into it. Not much , but some, yes. Being an armchair pilot means, that you do have a medium between you, and your plane - the PC. And learning more about your own computer will only benefit you in the long run. I guess it's the age old debate between manual and automatic transmission in cars. If automatics would clearly be better, then no one would use manuals. Yes, you need to learn more about driving to control a manual, but you also get out more, too. This is my point. However, from a sales perspective, I totally agree with you.

[sd_flyer 6,023]

Even when I use P3D. Orbx central was awkward working for me.  Not looking forward for that in x-plane 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Susu986 said:

However many have reflected on how does this making X-plane less. Microsoft Flight Simulator used to be a serious sim, back in the days.

I'm not going to enter into a debate about "serious sim" and start comparing across platforms as that triggers nothing but my X is better than your Y.  I'm interested in making XPlane11 better for a wider audience of end users and that can't be done alone with just the LR development team.  As all other platforms have recognized, it requires a much larger developer community. 

Ironically I was very disappointed when LR remove my ability to fine tune graphics settings into their more "simplified" graphics settings ... clearly this was an attempt to make XP11 more user friendly, just as their control assignments.  So it would appear LR's vision doesn't fall in line with your vision of requiring end users to know the mechanics of their computer.

8 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Orbx central was awkward working for me.

Have you used a more recent FTX Central?  It couldn't be easier to install/uninstall products and buy products and it currently supports AF2, P3D, FSX, FSX-SE and I'm going to guess will support XP11 soon ... all in one easy to use package.  Turbulent have a similar tool as do other developers like FlightBeam ... it's becoming a common method of purchase and distribution/deployment and also acts as an advertising tool for new product releases.

Cheers, Rob.

[ms2 184]

When I change from XP10 to p3d that was because orbx sceneries are very attractive with a large covering.

Now I'm happy to listen the interrest of orbx for xplane, a come back to xp is possible for me because the lost of boring time in installations, upgrades, and corrections in fsx-p3d are... uncredible. How many fsx-p3d planes bugged and never corrected are on the market... a few.

There are more liners in XP well done with very fine and more realistic flight-moddel.

Old addons from fsx with bad textures just renewed by a new installer and sold expensive for their qualities are poisons in sim.

The reason for me to stay now in p3d is the heavy invest I do. 

[sd_flyer 6,023]

Just now, Rob Ainscough said:

Have you used a more recent FTX Central?  It couldn't be easier to install/uninstall products and buy products and it currently supports AF2, P3D, FSX, FSX-SE and I'm going to guess will support XP11 soon ... all in one easy to use package.  Turbulent have a similar tool as do other developers like FlightBeam ... it's becoming a common method of purchase and distribution/deployment and also acts as an advertising tool for new product releases.

Cheers, Rob.

Yes just before I deleted P3D and moved to XP11 last year

[Susu986 76]

29 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Ironically I was very disappointed when LR remove my ability to fine tune graphics settings into their more "simplified" graphics settings ... clearly this was an attempt to make XP11 more user friendly, just as their control assignments. 

And that have happened because many people had trouble setting up X-plane properly. If the average user would be a bit more computer savvy, then people would have had no problem setting up X-plane to perform well in the first place, and we would still have our advanced menus. So even you can feel the negative effects of this trend. More of this to come in the future, probably. I love a clean UI (who wouldn't? faster to use it, too), but not on the expense of giving up control over certain parts.

29 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

So it would appear LR's vision doesn't fall in line with your vision of requiring end users to know the mechanics of their computer.

Of course it won't, and it probably never will :) They are looking at it from a business perspective: sell as many copies as possible, we don't care who buys it as long as they pay for it!

Personally I look at it from a different perspective, and I believe we have already reached a level when things won't need to be easier for the average user. I would love to see a mature, computer literate user base preserved (not PHD level, you don't need to know all the itsy-bitsy parts, just a baseline knowledge where you have no problem moving files in-and-out of folders, and you have a basic idea of what your X-plane installation entails, and what takes up all that room on your hard drive. If you are willing to fork out hundreds (thousands?) of dollars on a computer, is this too much to ask?). As it was pointed out earlier, having an open file structure makes it so much easier and better for a lot of people. You can have multiple installations, reinstalling stuff is easy, etc. As a developer (who sometimes also flies for fun as well), this is a Godsend. Paradoxically, even uninstalling is easier, as generic uninstallers can leave leftover files behind which can make trouble later - whilst if you do it yourself, you know it has been done properly. But the 'easy installers' are robbing you from the control over your own machine. That is not something I like to see, but unfortunately (for me) this is the direction the industry is taking. But just because something makes sense from a monetary perspective, doesn't mean it's a good thing for the common folk, too. Anyway, I'm happy that we can have a civilized debate about this.

[Ebs 114]

4 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

XPlane NEEDS more developers, central location for assets/resources and sharing across developers (to provide products more quickly), and more polished products that don't require end users to read a bunch to text files on how to install something because there is no installer, or how to go to web site XYZ to download this, then copy that, then and then ... come on.  One assumes that having a simple unified environment similar to Orbx FTX Central is a good thing for XPlane ... it will raise the bar.

I only recently picked up X-Plane 11, so I don't have a ton of experience but I have purchased a couple of addons in the form of GA stuff and experimented with Ortho. As others have pointed out in this thread, I'm a big fan of the 'encapsulated folder' structure. Installing the addons basically meant extracting a zip to the correct location and entering a key on startup. That's it. no %appdata% local and roaming, c:\ProgramData, no registry shenanigans. As for the freeware libraries, you download them once and that's it. Of course, some rudimentary knowledge of how the scenery_packs.ini works with regards to loading order and that's about it. You can even just make a complete copy of your X-Plane 11 folder for a backup and revert to it whenever you like. Let's be honest here, it's a breath of fresh air compared to P3D. I upgraded my PC last weekend which meant a full reinstall of P3D and all the addons. It took hours (and I'm still not completely finished!)

I agree that a high profile dev like Orbx coming to Xplane is a great thing, I'm a big fan of theirs and I have a lot of their products. But, they'd have to offer something amazing for X-Plane. Better than the completely free ortho. Better than my current install of "w2xp europe mix". Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to seeing what they have to offer but the bar is already raised a lot higher than it was in ESP.

I kind of have the feeling that some of the big names in FSX/P3D have really left it too late with regards to X-Plane. Nobody wanted a DC-6 in XPlane. They wanted a 737 NG. The freeware Zibo mod is well on it's way to becoming that.

 

4 hours ago, Susu986 said:

Simple, unified environments more likely lower the bar instead of raising it, and we would get even more panicky people who have zero clue about how to use X-plane, but unwilling to sit down and learn.

Attracting more users of X-Plane could only be a good thing but I agree that full-fat installers aren't really required. Software can always be made more user-friendly though. I bought X-Plane 10 through Steam a couple of years ago and even though I gave it a shot I couldn't get past that UI. It was really terrible. They've completely overhauled it for 11 and now it's fantastic. One could argue that that was 'dumbing down' but it got me back into X-Plane.

X-Plane doesn't have the weather or the seasons of P3D but once the Flightfactor A320 releases, I think we'll see a lot more people moving from P3D. I really believe X-Plane is the future^TM  and it looks like Orbx do too.

[tonywob 4,768]

Almost all X-Plane payware scenery that I have bought is so simple to install (drag & drop) that making an installer for it would be overkill and would probably make it harder to install than it needs to be. I've never used a payware scenery addon where I've been forced to hunt down libraries, download extra tools etc. The same can be said about some aircraft (apart from the ones that require a serial key), but in my experience installing addons into X-Plane is so much easier than in P3D and FSX that I'm amazed people say it's more difficult. Backing up and restoring installed scenery and aircraft is such a breeze in comparison, when in P3D/FSX it could a take a day out of your life just reinstalling addons.

Freeware of course is a different story, with a mess of libraries, version conflicts, etc... When I see a freeware airport that requires me to hunt down 10 different libraries I generally move on and stick with the gateway version. I'm not against freeware devs using libraries and it's understandable why they do, but I can't help feeling that it's off-putting for a new user who is new to X-Plane. Tom Knudsen's Library Installer was a good attempt to get around this, but some devs didn't agree to host their files, and the author found it too much effort constantly keeping it updated. I hope another project comes along to rectify this, or some of the libraries join together to make things easier, but it seems not many actually want to work together.

Regarding FTX Central, the advantage of such a tool is that it can be used to easily find, track and install updates and software, required libraries etc, and I was very happy that when I installed P3D again after some time on X-Plane, I could install all of my old ORBX addons with really no effort at all (and I didn't have to buy all my FSX addons again at a premium "pro" price ). However, ORBX will likely need to make a Mac OS and possibly a Linux version as well, so that will be interesting how they approach that.

Living in a dream world, imagine how good it would be if X-Plane.org could make such a utility, it would make getting freeware and payware so easy, and it would download libraries and dependencies automatically.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ebs said:

Installing the addons basically meant extracting a zip to the correct location and entering a key on startup.

How is this better than clicking a button that says "Install" or a button that says "Uninstall"?  Maybe you don't have enough add-ons, but I'd much rather have the installer take care of what it installed than rely on my aging memory, especially when my add-ons start hitting the 100 mark ... are you really going to remember all the files you need to edit/remove from an add-on you copied over 1-2 years ago and want to remove it?  

Agree with you that multiple directories and registry entries can be problematic, but for the most part those should be insulated from end users ... it's all the same to me be it Xplane or some other sim, just directory structures I need to know exist but would rather not know.  But again, I know many end users that have NO clue and/or don't want to be involved in the OS file structure system at all nor understand how to use Notepad or some other editor ... it's just more work for them and less flying. 

And then we have the users that do get involved in the file structure and end up really making a mess of it and eventually just give up on flight simulators because they've accidentally screwed up their flight sim because of lack of knowledge about their OS of choice ... they ultimately just want to fly not understand the OS.  And this is not specific to Xplane.  Heck, do you think I like writing guides and/or tutorials on how to edit files, fix problems, etc. etc. ... no I really don't, I've got better things to do with my life.  But look at YouTube, full of tutorials (I've done a few also) on how to install XYZ or tweak XYZ.  I don't see how insulating end users from tweaking and/or the file system is a bad thing?  Like you say, be it "programdata" or "XPlane11\Resources", why should an end user even care about those folder names, they come to fly, not to copy files around.  Humans are far more prone to mistakes than a well tested Install/Uninstall application.

I like XPlane11's auto updating process, it works very well, but it also breaks add-ons very frequently 11.10b6 was yet another example of that, fortunately quickly fixed with 11.10b7.  

Have you installed WT3 (Payware World Traffic 3 for XP11)?  The results are great once you download all the other files it needs and copy them over, but getting to those results is time consuming ... I really hope that's not the future for AI traffic in XP11 because I can guarantee you it will not bring over P3D, FSW, AF2, etc. users (to stay) when they have to manually build traffic for every single airport (a process that can take hours in some cases).  Sorry, but WT3 is not easy relative to UTLive.  Heck, WT3 took several support request for me to get it working correctly after installation ... thought I was loosing my mind and followed the manual instructions to the letter.

But if the objective is to NOT reach more users and be "exclusive", then I don't see how that's going to "be the future", it's going to be yet another niche of exclusivity.

Like I said, I'm not here to engage in an X vs. Y as I just don't care since I use them both.  I'm here to support Orbx's decision to expand into XP11 and I'm also here to support the idea around ease of install/uninstall because it is a problem on both XP11 and P3D.  I'm here to support unified approaches that Orbx have, Turbulent have, FlightBeam have, and others ... it's a good approach to expand user base which is good for everyone ... I'll always support making it easier because that reaches more people.

Cheers, Rob.

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, tonywob said:

However, ORBX will likely need to make a Mac OS and possibly a Linux version as well, so that will be interesting how they approach that.

I think JV said they are going to be Windows only, no Linux/OSX support "for now". 

Cheers, Rob.

[tonywob 4,768]

3 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I like XPlane11's auto updating process, it works very well, but it also breaks add-ons very frequently 11.10b6 was yet another example of that, fortunately quickly fixed with 11.10b7.  

Well in general, most casual users shouldn't be installing betas unless they actually intend to test and report bugs. If an addon breaks between non-beta versions (and one could argue that X-Plane is constantly in beta ), then that would be worrying and I do believe LR have made a good effort over the years not to break compatibility (A lot of my 10 addons still work fine in v11), but of course it does happen (even between minor releases)

1 hour ago, Ebs said:

I bought X-Plane 10 through Steam a couple of years ago and even though I gave it a shot I couldn't get past that UI. It was really terrible

Shows how people can like vastly different things. I really dislike the XP11 UI, and prefer XP10's. It was efficient and didn't get in the way (I believe Austin himself even felt the same way). However the new UI has attracted many new users, and that's a good thing for X-Plane and users alike.

1 hour ago, Ebs said:

I agree that a high profile dev like Orbx coming to Xplane is a great thing, I'm a big fan of theirs and I have a lot of their products. But, they'd have to offer something amazing for X-Plane. Better than the completely free ortho.

Their airports would be a good start (and JV mentioned that this is what they're looking at). One thing that it could bring is an overall increase in the quality of payware scenery addons, and I'm sure nobody will complain about that. At the moment, there really isn't that much competition in X-Plane, and some payware addons have been lacking in many areas. Conversions are often poor quality, and apart from a few exceptions, the P3D versions of these addons are often much better quality and value for money. The quality of addons though has really gone up over the last year or so, and love them or hate them, ORBX and others will force other developers to up their game as well.

 

 

 

[Oscar Pilote 22]

Who's looking for a partner, someone who gets things fixed ?

(only for the smile, enjoy the FMOD sound, HDR lighting and Vulkan compositing, 30 years ahead of time :-)

[Asheroo 22]

X-Plane needs more payware addons. As good as the freeware community is, only a small well-known portion of it is of great quality, but I guess depends on how content you are. Personally I'm not content with the bland non-regional W2XP autogen, mixed-quality orthoimagery and half-filled cup quality freeware airports from most freeware. Plus it all takes time, especially if you're an Australian like me and your internet is using paper cup and string technology. Freeware developers have lives to live - a job, family to look after in their free time - whereas payware developers can dedicate themselves more and commit more strongly to it. I sometimes wonder what amazing products would come out if high-quality developers like Tonywob and MisterX6 were full or even part time payware developers. There are many people out there who I'm sure would throw their money at payware developers for top quality products for X-Plane.

I wonder just how many of us would fly more and invest more into XP11 if there were more payware developers putting out more higher quality works for the platform. I certainly would. But the current X-Plane community seems too content. I guess because a lot of the addons are free and XP11's rendering system makes anything look good. I wonder though how many opinions would be changed once they see higher quality sceneries in XP11.