2 hours ago, steve310002 said:

I for one hope they don't do any more quick ports of old airports like their recent Stapleford release which looks straight from the FSX days with it's low resolution textures. 

If they are going to release new stuff at least make it high resolution and taking advantage of the latest graphics tech otherwise with so much good freeware out there, I see no point in purchasing ported scenery.

You are right.

• No quick ports ...and from what we observe, those are not feasible in most cases anyway.
• On the other side "quick improvements" to MSFS native scenery are quite feasible and that is driving the community forward.  Also new scenery from scratch.

AHS712D Alvaro Escorcia KSGR

AirHispania Virtual Airline 

4 hours ago, sal9000 said:

I also think there will be a storm of resictance, when it comes to the cost.

No-I don´t wonna say that there it are not worth, but when you look Jackson Hole or also Diamond Point, there are good Freeware outside-so why to get money on that ?

Just my 2 cent!

Ah.. I missed this awesome freeware KJAC. I just downloaded and it looks very good. 

Thank you. 🙂

Manny

For those who thought asking ORBX wasn't a good choice LOL

https://orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/206666-what-were-working-on-orbx-2021-roadmap/

ORBX is always a good choice with some past titles that I re-purchased already there.  Looking forward to KAVX which is on the docket.  I already have an excellent free KAVX title but will buy the ORBX one also.

Cheers

bs

Great!  Looking forward to the Canary Islands and the Optica aircraft.

I notice the forum soon filled up with the usual suspects though.  They publish the roadmap and some people immediately start saying 'but how about this' and 'I wanted this airport' etc.  I really don't know how they put up with it. 

I would hope they would not rely on doing straight up ports. 

As a previous poster stated. It would be nice to enhance what's presently available with up to date textures and development techniques for minor projects. Major projects should be all new from the ground up if possible unless there is absolutely nothing new to learn and it would be obviously stupid not to copy parts of the core coding.

Disappointing that EGPH is not on that list. It looks. I know direct ports (i.e. simply dropping an existing version into MSFS without having to adapt it) aren't possible, but if they were, I'd settle for that until a 'ground-up' model could be produced as the screenshots look very good. There is a freeware fix of sorts but it's really only a few tweaks, and the biggest improvement was closing the old runway, which World Update 3 finally did later. The tower, though improved is still very much generic.

 

Interested in the Optica though. I used to enjoy flying it in FSX. There is was (seemingly deleted now) a freeware version for MSFS (ported from FSX) which the developer admits is very basic. Still fun though.

Edited April 7, 20215 yr by 109Sqn
typo

1 hour ago, bobcat999 said:

Great!  Looking forward to the Canary Islands and the Optica aircraft.

I notice the forum soon filled up with the usual suspects though.  They publish the roadmap and some people immediately start saying 'but how about this' and 'I wanted this airport' etc.  I really don't know how they put up with it. 

Not sure what customers are supposed to say, if you don't ask then you don't get. If none of their products interest you then why wouldn't you ask about ones that you do want... isn't that what the forum is for?

Someone on the Orbx Forum had the audacity to point out that the .to freeware Samedan is PDG, so Orbx's forthcoming version better be too!

Their post has since disappeared.😃

& talking of disappearing, anyone know what has happened to Jarrad Marshall of LOWI fame?

T45

 

Regards to to just port over vs using all the new tech thats available in MSFS.

whelp! It al depends on the pricing. If its cheaply priced, I'll take a simple port over.. After all P3D versions were pretty good. Just like the LOWI. What is wrong with P3D version of LOWI? I got that in MSFS and I was happy. But if they want to charge more then yeah, I understand they need to use the new technology available in MSFS. I leave that option to the add on vendors. I am agnostic to which way they go.  They can do a port over and charge less and then charge for the additional work. That would be fine with  me for paying for the additional work. Just like a fixer upper.

I'll be totally happy with PMDG porting over their 747, 777, the 737 and their DC9s. I don't care for  the eye candy of the MSFS.  but if they want to charge me more for the additions of MSFS features and eye candy...sure go ahead. I ain't complaining.

Recently Latin VFR ported over their San Juan Airport and I was miffed cause they charged like it was a MSFS built airport. It was not.  I liked their KMIA and other airport ..no complaints. But they slipped us a ducie with their Puerto Rico Airport that was simply horrible. I said so.

Edited April 7, 20215 yr by Manny

I'm actually waiting for them to port some more over before I start buying new stuff.

...from ORBX i'm missing  PAJN  Juneau...

i m missing KMRY, KRDD, NSTU. loved those 3 airports back then 

20 minutes ago, jeff974cd said:

i m missing KMRY, KRDD, NSTU. loved those 3 airports back then 

Kmry 

https://orbxdirect.com/product/bmw-kmry-msfs

5 hours ago, micstatic said:

Kmry 

https://orbxdirect.com/product/bmw-kmry-msfs

Unfortunately very far from the quality of the scene crafted by Jarrad Marshall back then