Carenado's FSX/DX10 Stationair 6 II - Comparison?

[Guest Revenant]

Hi all,While I would like to vent (in verbose) my disapproval and disappointment at Carenado's seemingly short-sighted approach to selling their FSX/DX10 Certified aircraft at non-discounted rates to previous customers, I shall move quickly on...If anyone has bought the new FSX/DX10 Stationair 6 II from Carenado and owns the original FS2004(FSX patched) version, would they care to comment on whether the new version performs better (e.g. fps) under DX9, thus justifying another purchase at full price? I'm loathe to part with money for the same aircraft to be honest because the gain just doesn't seem worth it based purely on Carenado's sales spiel.Any thoughts?

[bkeske 0]

Did you originally purchase the FS9 model?

[BobP 56]

I own the FS9 version and purchased the FSX model. I wish I had kept my money. There is zero increase in functionality, plus the FSX model comes with an annoying prop sound bug. The only benefit is eye candy which is a poor value for $29.00 US. The lack of a discount for FS9 owners is a big disappointment and I won't purchase from them again.Bob..

[bkeske 0]

I have purchased most all the FSX models of the FS9 models I had previously purchased from other manufacturers/designers, so buying them twice is not abnormal. Some I an extremely unhappy with, but Carenado is not one of them thus far. Aerosoft, Eaglesoft, Real Air, Digital Aviation, to name a couple besides Carenado.In regards the the 206, I will probably pass for a while, but have bought the 182RG, and am extremely happy with it. The frame rates are significantly better, and everything works as it should in FSX SP2, as the ported version did not prior. I also plan on purchasing the Piper Cherokee very soon, and will also purchase the 182Q and Mentor when they become available without hesitation.Again, I would not expect to get a discount, nor a free upgrade, when going from an old FS9 model to a 'true' FSX *certified* model.

[Guest Revenant]

Yes, I did purchase the FS9 version, along with two other aircraft - all three of which I would like FSX/DX10 certified versions of.However, Bob's response has confirmed what I suspected and that is that there is little difference in the certified versions that justify a full price re-purchase. Carenado's claim that they are all built using a 'new technique' is very lame, considering that they will not have rebuilt the meshes and flight models from scratch and will have just saved the aircraft in the latest FSX version (which is what all good developers *should* and *are* doing) - plus adding a few textures for bump and specular mapping.The aircraft are basically the same product and alienating their existing customer base by making them pay through the nose again is not a good commercial move.Thanks Bob - and like you, I don't think I will be buying from Carenado again either.

[barryward12345 0]

I think this is really funny - where else in the real world do people expect to get upgrades to a purchase for next to nothing. I am sure that the 2008 Ford **** was a slight incremental improvement ( maybe?) over the 2007 model, but you are going to PAY quite a bit to go from the 2007 model to the 2008 model.Barry

[LAdamson 240]

>The aircraft are basically the same product and alienating>their existing customer base by making them pay through the>nose again is not a good commercial move.>>Thanks Bob - and like you, I don't think I will be buying from>Carenado again either.I've been doing this for around 20 years; have been involved in numerous beta testings; and know what it takes to design, program, support customers, advertise, and finance the web sites. The developers have to make and maintain a living too!And then I see simmers "still" expecting a continuation of the product for free, or near so...:-roll And if they don't get their way, then it's the usual "I won't buy from this vendor anymore..............no matter how "great" the product was, and all the enjoyment I got from it." How sad......;( L.Adamson

[bkeske 0]

>Yes, I did purchase the FS9 version, along with two other>aircraft - all three of which I would like FSX/DX10 certified>versions of.>>However, Bob's response has confirmed what I suspected and>that is that there is little difference in the certified>versions that justify a full price re-purchase. Carenado's>claim that they are all built using a 'new technique' is very>lame, considering that they will not have rebuilt the meshes>and flight models from scratch and will have just saved the>aircraft in the latest FSX version (which is what all good>developers *should* and *are* doing) - plus adding a few>textures for bump and specular mapping.>>The aircraft are basically the same product and alienating>their existing customer base by making them pay through the>nose again is not a good commercial move.>>Thanks Bob - and like you, I don't think I will be buying from>Carenado again either.I think your assumption is wrong. These Carenado models *are* completely rebuilt. That does not mean the textures have significantly changed (why should they be?), but the model is brand new. Believe me, the increase in frame rates of the 182RG is worth the price alone. That has been achieved by building a new model.Lame? I would say your comments are lame for not doing some research before making such claims.You want a rip-off? Go buy the DA Dornier Do "for FSX". It is practically 'unflyable' in FSX, and they have done nothing to improve it since I bought it many months ago. At least I could fly my FS9 ported aircraft from Carenado for free. It seems other charged me for that privilege.

[BobP 56]

Carenado offers an FS9 to FSX patch. I was using the Stationair in FSX without any problems with the patch. I paid $29 for what? The 2008 model? The new updated FSX model? Bump mapping?I'm a 3rd party product junkie and a very generous supporter of their products. I'm not expecting anything for free, just a fair price for a version upgrade. In my opinion it is not a fair value when I had the same functionality with the patch. Being disappointed that a vendor you have supported for years doesn't offer a little relief for a previous purchase of the same product is not cheap. Money is tighter now and I'll spend it where the vendor recognizes the value of a good customer. Bob..

[bkeske 0]

>I paid $29 for what? The 2008 model? The new updated FSX model? Bump>mapping?Again, the model was completely rebuilt. You should be seeing quite an increase in frame rates compared to the ported aircrfat. Again, I know I have with the 182RG....which I basically stopped flying in FSX.As far as the $29 tag? I do think they are making a mistake here. I really don't care about the amphib model, thus the reason I probably won't purchase it, I have other aircraft to fit that niche'.I think they should have kept the base model separate form the cargo/amphib model, but hey, that is their call.

[Guest Revenant]

The only evidence of an brand new mesh or flight model is going to be if I purchase the new version of the aircraft, and at $29.00 I'm just not prepared to. Your comments are a view on the matter, but not proof.Carenado's claim of a 'new technique' means absolutely nothing and I actually used 'lame' in the correct sense of the word, not in a surfer-dude context, i.e. it doesn't have a leg to stand on.It could well be a substitute for saying "We've kept the original flight model and mesh, and created a couple of textures and we're going to charge you full price again for it."As a counter-example, RealAir Simulations don't seem to have a problem developing new versions of their aircraft, supporting them and providing updates - AND providing a discount for their existing customers. I don't see them going out of business.I, like Bob, don't want anything for free, otherwise I'd be using pirated versions. But, unlike a new Ford **** which physically has new parts that haven't worn out and are brand new (which is where your money primarily goes), these aircraft don't have a physical manifestation and therefore don't justify a full price charge to existing owners. The Ford **** analogy is a totally incorrect one and cannot be paralleled with software products.

[bkeske 0]

The 182 is a new model. I checked with a freeware software called 'model checker'. I've checked all my aircraft that I've bought again as 'FSX' aircraft. Some were, some were not, but are now, and some are still not. Again, the new 182 is, I assume so is the 206 is also. I'm going to buy the Cherokee this week, and I expect it to be a new model as well.There is no reason for Carenado to lie about their 206, nor any other new model they plan on making/replacing. They have made a decision to go 'full blown' FSX certified now, as if they do not, their products will not work in FSXI, as already been stated by Aces.I had to pay money, again, for all my FSX Real Air products. They were not free.Again, you can point you fingers at a couple designers, but pointing a finger at Carenado in this instance is unfair, as the assertions that they are not true FSX models is untrue.

[Guest Revenant]

I think you misunderstand the process of building 3D models for FSX (or any other game).I'm NOT saying that they haven't been exported using the latest native FSX export tools from 3DS Max - they have and yes, you can check them with an application. What I'm saying is that the actual meshes and flight modelling are not new, they will have been re-used from the original FS2004 build.If you don't understand what the heck I'm actually talking about, then I'm afraid you're not qualified to make a comment about Carenado's claim to have used a 'new technique'.

[bkeske 0]

Do you own any of the new Carenado models?I do, and the frame rate increases are substantial over the 'ports'.That tells me something.

[mgh 89]

"...these aircraft don't have a physical manifestation and therefore don't justify a full price charge to existing owners."Why not? When you bought the original product you got what you paid for - end of that transaction. If you want a newer version then you have to pay what the developers ask for it. Why should the developers sell it to you for less than me? If you don't think it's worth the money then don't buy it. "The Ford **** analogy is a totally incorrect one and cannot be paralleled with software products2Yes it can. The material costs of cars are small - think scrap value. The real costs are in development - just as for software.