Simobjects through fog-Aerosoft addons-Please reply at them

[Skywolf 992]

@Rob_Ainscough lets make some epic sceneries together.  You make the sceneries and put them on Orbx Direct platform for release.  Makes it easy for all.  I will test them for you and make sure that everything gets installed outside the sim root etc 😜 (b/c by now all you know what my major sim pet peeve is), and works well in VR etc.  I will push you to use all of new bells of whistles of P3Dv5 SDK to the max.  If the SDK feature is new and shiny, your product will use it.

You can do it, lead the way and hopefully others will succumb to competition and improve cuz you da man 🤣

 

Edited November 13, 2020 by Skywolf

[Skywolf 992]

54 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Sure, you write the $6000 check for SpeedTree license and I'm in.  What I prefer about SpeedTrees is that they don't grow out of the ground like MSFS trees and there can be considerably more variants, especially seasonal.

Cheers, Rob.

I seriously may take you up on that offer.

😉

[SAS443 1,714]

5 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Please no debates about "out of the box" ... my simulator experience is NOT limited to "out of the box" so it's just not relevant to me ... it's core potential is far more important to me.

As paying customer, my concern is very much about how it performs today. Core potential, theoretical results, "would've" "could've" is not where I will be spending my hard earned money. I might be alone with that reasoning but it is my opinion.

As I see it, LM has had 5 years to market their speedtree (or just hire someone to correct the colors, surely that is possible) but they haven't bothered. Maybe they should consult Microsoft who used speedtrees in MS Flight (2012, RIP) how to get it right without relying on 3PD to spend 6000$ and correct LM's underwhelming implementation.

Sorry for being grumpy.

[kevinfirth 1,392]

14 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

EDIT: I must admit, it is disappointing to see so many end users not aware of what "could have been" in P3D if implemented by 3rd party developers

LM dont exactly showcase what the platform is capable of very well....

[SAS443 1,714]

26 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

MS don't have a fully functional SDK (not even close), so not really sure why LM would want to consult with them, maybe you mean the other way around?

No, I meant that speedtrees looked okay on MS flight which was a 2012 release. Which I did my best to emphasize. But you went on a tirade towards MSFS, in fact I did not mention MSFS at all. 

[SAS443 1,714]

Are you arguing just for the sake?
I will help you

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Flight ( released in 2012, had speedtrees that did not look like word not allowed)

vs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Flight_Simulator (your cryptonite)

[kevinfirth 1,392]

3 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Agree, but the idea is to provide the means for 3rd party developers to do the showcase

perhaps they need to change the promotion subtlely then, so end users start to demand those features from 3PDs?

[flycln 435]

8 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

The challenges are:

1.  Getting users to pay for the product they’re using in the first place

2.  Getting a users to pay for new features, many feel lifetime of free upgrades is “expected”

Cheers, Rob

You forgot 3) Developers not even using state-of-the-art features when they initially develop a new scenery. 

[kevinfirth 1,392]

39 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

The challenges are:

1.  Getting users to pay for the product they’re using in the first place

2.  Getting a users to pay for new features, many feel lifetime of free upgrades is “expected”

1. easier to get me to part with my money if the Devs have used cutting edge features...

2. hard agree, in this split niche market we are just going to have to adapt and accept that the moving targets of both MSFS and P3D require users to open their wallets for feature upgrades.

[Mace 1,902]

4 hours ago, SAS443 said:

Are you arguing just for the sake?
I will help you

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Flight ( released in 2012, had speedtrees that did not look like word not allowed)

vs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Flight_Simulator (your cryptonite)

Considering how he's developing a tree mod for MSFS right now, I'd say your "cryptonite" statement is a bit inaccurate.

[exeodus 78]

On 11/12/2020 at 6:17 PM, Chapstick said:

I'm confused RE: what's being argued about over Speedtree... you turn it on in P3D, and it looks like radioactive garbage. It's terrible. When they implemented it, was there some expectation that a 3PD would come in and clean up LM's mess? I guess that makes sense, given their track record. 

Or could it be that LM are giving the third parties a money making avenue by providing the support for the feature, but only including a basic implementation with the purchase of the sim?  The automotive aftermarket has a similar model that nets them collectively billions of dollars a year.  No matter how good it is from the factory there is always room for improvement.

[mikeymike 357]

8 hours ago, exeodus said:

Or could it be that LM are giving the third parties a money making avenue by providing the support for the feature, but only including a basic implementation with the purchase of the sim?  The automotive aftermarket has a similar model that nets them collectively billions of dollars a year.  No matter how good it is from the factory there is always room for improvement.

That is exactly what is happening.

cheers

mike

[aguiar 22]

10 hours ago, exeodus said:

Or could it be that LM are giving the third parties a money making avenue by providing the support for the feature, but only including a basic implementation with the purchase of the sim?  The automotive aftermarket has a similar model that nets them collectively billions of dollars a year.  No matter how good it is from the factory there is always room for improvement.

I think you might have nailed it. But It seems 3PD's haven't, the forums are full of messages of users (myself included) stating They wouldn't mind paying for an update with all the bells and whistles, what we see are half baked port overs from FSX and FS9, of course there are a few exceptions 

[flycln 435]

I just find so many sceneries disappointing tbh.

 

I just got Aerosoft’s London Heathrow during the CTP sale. And you know what, it’s just thoroughly mediocre. 
Nothing about it is genuinely great. Textures are quite a letdown in fact. 
 

I’m so glad I didn’t pay €35 for this. 

[F737MAX 5,530]

7 minutes ago, flycln said:

I just got Aerosoft’s London Heathrow during the CTP sale. And you know what, it’s just thoroughly mediocre. 

Nothing about it is genuinely great. Textures are quite a letdown in fact.

As a Public Service Announcement: people really should ask for opinions on these forums before buying more often.

EGLL 'Pro' is a 2017 re-make of EGLL Xtended, a 2014 product that worked for P3D, FSX and FS9.
There have been lots of comments around its release and subsequent re-release for P3Dv4.
Like many sceneries of that vintage, they are showing their age. Stuff that looked acceptable to good then looks quite dated now.

We can only hope that someone decides that some of the old mega hub sceneries such as KJFK, KEWR, EGLL get new versions. EDDM and CYVR had new versions released recently, so fingers crossed there are new scenery projects being started for P3D.