Jump to content

Coral Sea

  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Coral Sea

  • Birthday 01/23/1961

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Flight Sim Profile

  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines
  1. Hi!For our users information, regarding FSX/SP-2, all our FSX sceneries are being worked to become full SP-2 keeping SP-1 compatibility.Actual status:- Cura
  2. Hi.Adding to the records :-) Our just released Cura
  3. Hi Thomas.Glad to see what you`ve written about 3DSMax, at least the similarity with GMax is a positive point, but it might remains a very epensive tool anyway, I believe.On the other side, you have just had a very nice idea: why don`t ACES develope a new and simple tool that would permit us to compile our adds to VNext? Allowing developers to buy it (for sure we would do so, on a accessible price) and use. Something simple, for example, treating on scenerie, we would pick our structures and ground works produced by 3DSMax, compile them on such a tool, and there would be the stuff. Done with a certified tool and compiled by an official tool.I really don`t know if it would be nice for producing aircrafts, but for nice sceneries it would be just that: simple and fast to use, nothing about dealing with that soup of letters and numbers used on some codes :-) , GUID numbers, extense coordinates and misterious XMLs, or something that would not force us, simple graphic artists, to have a programer knowledge or skills.Could it be possible?My best regards,Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.net
  4. Hi Tom, how are you?Don`t mind, accident happens.I hope the post that should be deleted was not mine. If it was not mine and as I`ve delayed my participation on the topic, being able to post just this morning, I would appreciate to copy it down here again, as it would be interesting to let my users and other simmers know my scenery developer point of view on the matter. Here it is.--------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------Hi.I've been following all these posts related to the FSX/SP1/SP2/3PDs affair here with interest. I've delayed my participation because I was too busy finishing our last scenery and then installing FSX on my new machine, so I would have a better base to contribute on a constructive way.These discussions have been very centered on aircrafts development and issues on FSX-SP2 ambient, and this is a completely diferent matter from sceneries development under the same ambient/platform.Some participants are mixing the two things togheter, when posting about the issues up to now, the development stages, tools / SDK usage, and level of problems. That can not be a true commom and simple discussion on some points.Allow me to post some opinions:- As an user, I have never had problems with FSX, in fact, I use both sims here and produce for both, as we have a split customer base, and this is what we think is the best way to follow. Each of the new generation sceneries ordered goes with two independent installers: one for FS9 another for FSX, the user chooses what to use or uses both, paying just for one product, and we had no price increases for that, indeed having a lot more work to do so on a new quality standard we've adopted after FSX release. A new scenery takes up to 6 months now to be made. This way, we have no ways to configure exactly witch version is selling more, if FS9 or FSX, but we are receiving positive feedbacks from both kind of users, so... we'll keep on this path for a long time.- When I mention (and I will be very sincere on this) a FSX scenery I don't mean that this is a pure-breed FSX/SDK developed one, and I have no problems with that. What matters for me is to deliver a scenery to be used at FSX, that it's bug/issues-free, and that will deliver a lot of fun departing or arriving on it, retracting the real airport on details and making flights more imersive, and along all this: very light on frames, as they have been.- Why this? Because I doubt there would be here at least one simmer that would like to order a FSX scenery that would bring him nicely modeled and textured buildings over a default or AFCAD style ground work, and that is what he would receive if that was a "pure-breed FSX/SDK developed scenery". Simple as that. No way to do that. Or you use and tweak old SDK tools, or you don't have a nice painted customized ground work. At least for us.- problems on exposing that? None. I'm not that guy that says: "Hey, look at me! I'm the ONE, I make FSX sceneries completely inside and by FSX/SDK, as I want to be modern and forward thinking, a step ahead the others or the best... Not me, I am already very very happy and proud to make and deliver sceneries to be used on FSX or FS9, to let my users happy, and to earn enought with their orders to mantain my family for another month, as after FSX this seemed to be the concern: survive month after month. Thanks God, things are much better now!- Regarding problems on FSX-RTM, FSX-SP1, FSX-SP2 like broken functionalities and other issues, as discussed by my fellow developers mates, this is indeed a problem and hit us all, but, the only way to deal with that is: they broke it, we fix it! No matter how painfull, how disgusting or how long it takes, but we can't afford to let it on bad shape for our users. So, we called all the bad names we know and went working on that after each released SP.- With FSX-RTM came the so called "round-earth" problem. We spent a lot of time figuring out how to propper plant a scenery on this new platform, without allowin bugs like flickerings, distant ground parts floating or sunking and we managed to release our FSX sceneries on a sucess way: working nice, bug free and extremely frame friendly.- With FSX-SP1, we had the bad surprise to discover that all our seven FSX already released sceneries, that have a nice working bug-free customized ground work started suffering bad issues on this, like floating ground on external views. Then, we had just released our Rio's airport, and managed to discover (after another painfull and long work) how to change things already done and ok on this airport and the other six ones, releasing updates for them all soon afterwards. Bad for us, bad for our customers, having to download and install all updates to fix things that were no more working as they were before this SP1.- When all was looking calm and nice, there comes SP-2 and we take a hit again. All trees and the few objects using transparency textures on our sceneries were no more transparents and not enough, were making other objects behing them vanish, pure and simple. Another case of broken functionality. This time, we were caught in midway development of Cura
  5. Hi Rhett, how are you?No, I've just said that this "solution" presented to us from ACES is something painful to do if you are developing a big airport like Rio, S
  6. Hi Virtuali, how are you? :-) No problem at all with your post. I understand it and have no personal feelings on what you've said, but allow me to help direct you exactly on what I wanted to express.I don't know about the working system you participate (Cloud9 I guess?) and sincerely, I'm not looking for geting rich making sceneries, of course, but yes, there is indeed a reason for suffering that much: I support and mantain my family, my daughter, with my work and this is what I do for leaving.Any sudden change on the market, any new engine change on FS, any new tool or technique needed to be used or any new FS version is a very very sensitive matter for me.This is why I'm so careful with my clients, this why I want to solve their problems so fast and in a propper way, this is why I want they very happy using my sceneries and this is why I take this stuff so seriously.We are not a strong and healthy US or European add-on development Empress hiring devs to make our sceneries and build a nice yearly profit merge (nothing at all against them, please) and releasing super mega complete THX sceneries :) using the ultmost new tecnologies. No... we are just two third-world guys, trying to maintain our families doing what we have always liked: making sceneries.How can we make ourselves survive in the middle of so many scenery aces out there on the market? Simple: offering honest products, with the minimal possible frame impact, reproducing the real airports archtectures in the best way, maintaining ourselves concentrated on the airport areas only, not trying to reproduce adjacent regions nor cities, and mantaining a support service of excelence, fast, helpful and dedicated to our users problems.We may have been doing the right thing, as we are in the market since late 2002, with a vast list of habitual clients that is growing at every release. We don't care to be the best nor the worst ones, just to offer this kind of stuff, keep caring our clients the way we do, and trying to make better sceneries at each new release.Excuse the explanation, but this is why I take it so seriously and suffer that much when things don't work the way they should.From the releasing of FSX we were not fully sure on what to do just on the updates procedures. We did imagine that we could get a way to update our FS9 sceneries to our customers in a way that would not be expensive to them. Soon we realized that it woud not be possible, so we decided to go on making FSX sceneries, as the first ones were ok on that round earth, by the new way we started to make our custom ground.That way worked nice, as there were no ground issues on our sceneries, even using customized ground on them. This rounded earth question was not a problem for us, after we discovered a way to take care of it.After SP1 things changed, and we managed to fix them once more. It was a hard task, but it worked again.The way we understand to make a scenery is to release it to our customers bug free, smooth on frames, free of ground and structures issues and with an improved visual, working nice on the sim it was intended for. The way we do them, we can manage to redo somethings after all, and let it full FS9 compatible too.This take us time and extra work, as I said before, but let our clients happy and we could not afford to stay tied on developing full FSX sceneries only, waiting for the market to reorganize itself around just FSX. My family could not afford waiting that much.I really understand that switching to FSX-only is an advantage and you are not wrong on choosing this way, but we can't do it right now. We still have an average of six FS9 sceneries orders between ten for our sceneries. It's becoming more well balanced now, but about two months ago the reason was seven FS9 sceneries and three FSX for each ten sceneries ordered.My dear developer friend, If you take a look at our FSX Rio's/SBGL, you will notice that it looks a lot more FSX scenery than the others before, as this is our most recent work we we have improved ourselves a lot since last year. FSX users of this scenery are sending very nice feedbacks on it and this is a great incentive we take after so many turbulences and shocks we passed by since FSX appeared.I hope we all (developers and simmers) have a smoother sky to fly from now on. No matter if it will be a FSX sky.My best regards and success on your projects.Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.com
  7. Hi Simmers :-) From a developer point of view, I could put here an extended text, full of explanations, but instead of this, just some remarks:- FSX Demo just released:We tried it, as we had a TNCM scenery then, and for our surprise, it looked ok over that demo terrain, just needing some small corrections. We were happy then, the idea was to update every single one of the 90 FS9 sceneries we had done so far to show perfectly at FSX, and at no cost to our users, as we did when we changed from FS2002 to FS2004. Of couse, we spread this intentions up, for the happiness of our users.- FSX about to be released:About one/two months before the release date, the add-on market virtually stopped, for almost everybody. No one was ordering FS9 products, as everybody was eager to have FSX as soon as possible, as FS9 seemed sentenced to death and to be forgotten as an "old stuff" and only FSX "would be able to make everybofy happy" as it represented the progress, the innovation, and things like that. Who would still order FS9 products, if FSX was already almost at our doors and soon there would be tons of FSX adds, as happened when FS9 took FS8's place?Can everybody figure how developers faced this scenario? A breaked market, FS9 projects still under constructions brought to a full stop, FSX products being planed, and no one sure about nothing?- FSX released:Needs no comments about what happened to us all, right? :-roll Developers faced the hard reality, eerything changed, even that demo looked so strange now... where has compatibility gone? Why everything that worked so nice at FS9 has become so useless on FSX? What to do?We spent days and nights working full time here to discover how to plant a scenery in a decent way on FSX. It was very hard, for sure! Is this a complaint of just someone who has not been successful? No. We did it, but at what a cost. We managed to be the first ones with a native FSX scenery on the market, after a very hard work. Soon 6 other sceneries followed this first one, all then working fine, done from scratch, from zero. They were not updates, and we did not charged old customers of previous versions for them. They all had a nice discount or even a free upgrade on some sceneries.- FS9 not died yet?:As FS9 turned again to be the main sim for a (very) large number of simmers, developers became divided again.....what to produce? Still FS9 products? Just FSX new adds? How to do them nice? And the time going by...What to do?- Yes! FS9 still alive:Another surprise for developers. FS9 products starting to sell a lot again...disgusted FSX users giving up, heading for FS9 once more, and ordering (a lot) of FS9 only products. Another factor helping this: the fear (sometimes not real) of performance hit of FSX adds, as the sim alone was already scaring for the majority of us. And the add-on market upside down again. Do everybody think that is easy to project and plan something on a scenario like this?- FS9, FSX on a split world:We took the decision we found to be the finest one: keep producing native FSX sceneries, reworking then to be FS9 fully compatibles too. Every single release of a scenery we have done to FSX had an independent FS9 installer included on the pack. This way, we pleased both FS9 and FSX simmers that use our sceneries. An extra work? Yes, of couse, but a manner to let every sinlge user happy, for sure. This was the best solution for us, I can't say if it's affordable to other devs, as each one has his own working procedure.- FSX SP1 released:Another nice surprise x( After installing it, we discovered that every single FSX scenery we have done, and that used to work so nice, started to have strange ground issues...like floating ramps, txws, lines, a crazy thing... An there we go again....another set of full day and night work, tests, tentatives, searches, and suffer to fix something that was already nice, but was killed by SP1. Thank god we manged to do it one more time, and have just released a banch of updates, covering all 9 FSX sceneries we have done until now. But it was really painfull to do. The strange thing (FSX is full of strange behaviours) is that some procedure that fixed a pos-SP1 issue on a scenery, does not work for another scenery, done exactly the same way of the other one....so, for each of the 9 sceneries a personal correction update, done in a diferent manner, as if the location of where the scenery is, had some influence for that. Very strange thing.It's hard, dear friends, to work like this. Developers, like me, are having a very turbulent life since FSX was released.Everything changed. Making sceneries used to be a very pleasent and enjoyable art. I can't say, right now, if it still is.Ahh... almost forgot: and about that solution of 100x100 meters max grounpolis that seemed to work?Very nice :D We have just done the huge Rio's Intl' airport for FSX and FS9...take a look at the airport area alone at Google Earth, note the size of those runways....very cool to reproduce all that amount of ground using just 100x100 meters squares, doesn't it? :-cool The worst part is that, in 2 or 3 years from now when things become tamed with FSX looking great full of adds like FS9 is now, with everybody flying a lot and having fun (the very way FS9 is now) there will come FSXI and everything will be upside down again :( Excuse for my bad English and long text, but I needed to say this from a long time, I'm really better now. It's finally out of my throat.My best regards,Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.com
  8. ""MEXICO Cancun Intl Cancun (MMUN) TropicalSim - This scenery loaded but when I tried to change the view to spot plane, FSX crashed to the desktop.""Hi 'fb' how are you?Just 3 or 4 days after we released Canc
  9. Hi,You may find something here too:http://www.tropicalsim.com/en/My best regards,Carlos Pereira.
  10. Hi Emilio.I'd like to ask you to send us an email at tropicalsim@terra.com.br to get all the information you need.It would be faster to answer you right here, and very nice to us too as other simmers would get the chance to learn more about our sceneries, but this would not be the right place, as it might be seen as an advertisement, and would hurt the rules we all may follow :-)Please email us.My best regards.Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.com
  11. Hi Emilio, how are you?Just install the package normally following the instructions.After that, go to your Scenery Library and uncheck these two airports.Doing like this, you don't need to delete the files, instead, they will not show up at FS.Any further support just email us at:support@tropicalsim.comcarlospereira@tropicalsim.com.brtropicalsim@terra.com.brceo@tropicalsim.comWe will be pleased to help you on the spot.My best regards,Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.com
  12. Hi!Wow!!!FSX has already been responsable for such a high level of adrenaline since last October :-boom In fact it has let us all almost completely crazy of so much adrenaline.And now there is MORE adrenaline coming on? :D My best regards,Carlos Pereira.
  13. Hi Phil, thanks for answering me.I'm still trying to figure correctly what you've posted on some phrases as English is not my native language.As an additional consideration, you may not know about this yet, but I would assure you for sure that a huge large number of developers (like me) fear the approaching release date of a new FS as a terrible nightmare to be faced on :-) without knowing if all things we've done so hard will be still useable or become completely useless.Think about my own experience last year (don't believe it has been very diferent to other guys): by early/mid September we started to be bombed by hundreds of customers mails and forum messages asking wether our (their) sceneries would be or not compatible with FSX, if we would make the changes required, if we would charge for them or not, and so on. This alone is already stressing enough and let our atention away from our work, even more that we really didn't know the exact answers to give them.By the time of the FS2002/FS9 transition affair, things were smoother and we could manage to update (and enhance) all sceneries to the new sim and let them available for all users for free. We had a hope we would do this again but the reality hit us hard and we had to explain that some way to the disapointed customers. The amount of work/time demanded to re-author everything requires that we just can't afford doing this update for free anymore, as every single scenery has became a truly NEW product comparing to the FS9 version done before. The only way to keep customers happy was offering nice reductions on prices for ancient users of original versions, as we are doing.The worst part of such a problematic transition is that, for the ones that depend on this work to support and mantain a family, like me, is terrible to watch the falling downhill movement of orders since September.By this time, FSX was the talk of the moment, and users were haulting further orders as they thought that new native FSX products were right around the corner, easy to be done and released or just updated, and it was just a matter of some weeks after FSX appearence to start ordering such adds.That is: since October very few users were placing orders to further FS9 adds, as nobody wanted to waste his money on old-fashioned FS9 products, waiting or the brand new FSX adds. By mid November/early December, there were still few orders for FS9 adds, and FSX was shocking simmers with the issues, so a very small number of them were ordering FSX products fearing their impact on frames, but our families were still to be maintained and our stress level were the only thing growing up :-) side-by-side with our charge of extra work.We were again lucky to decide on making every single native FSX scenery compatible with FS9 too as a new version, and let two independent installers avaliable free of charge to our customers. This is what has saved and allowed us to stay on market, but at what a price of tension and distress.Now things are going back to normality, at least for us, but I can't say the same to a large number of good and nice developers that are still working on the same and suffering as we had. FSX has really turned the market upside down like an earthquake, and what we all fear is that the next one has already been predicted and is scheduled, his name is FS11 :-)I really like and use FSX, our sceneries look great on it, in fact even the impact of them over the default ones was noticeable smaller comparing with the same impact FS9 versions had over their defaults, don't get it the wrong way. What we fear is the effects such Sim releases causes. Notice for a fact: this 2 years life-cicle for a sim is a very small one. When things are just becoming good and nice for eerybody, the sim is tamed, developed to all personal tastes and preferences, all adds are enhanced, updated and enjoyable to their limits, everything perfect... then comes a new Sim and causes all this on us.Look at FS9. For staying alone for 3 years instead of 2, their adds were so nice, well developed and so beloved for users. This is why there is so complaint about FSX too: simmers like them, want to keep using them, miss them on the new Sim.That's why (besides FSX SP1, of course) people is just to conected with FS9 for a long time being.Excuse me for the long post. Just trying to present you with one of the other faces os this FS universe.It's a sad feeling that takes us all, when developing a new project that requires time, dedication and effort, knowing that in just two years it will become useless.Does the fact that FS9 success for staying alone for 3 years, having the chance to be enhanced so much, making simmers so happy, may be a chance to think about not releasing FS11 in just 1 1/2 years from now? Or am I being inocent on this question?My best regards,Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.com
  14. >I am aware of nothing that is blocking 3rd parties from>re-authoring using the FSX SDK to deliver all forms of content>( vehicles, gauges, models, textures ).>While we aimed to have good back-compat, it is true we are not>100%. >And it is true that the goal of SP1 is performance and not>compat.>So I cannot promise any and all legacy content will>automagically work with SP1. Some issues will get better, some>will persist.>I dont know how I can state it any plainer than that.Hi Phil, how are you?First of all, thanks for responding my last questions on other topics.Well, I'd like to ask your sincere opinion here.As a developer, allow me to present you with a point of view that may be valuable for when dealing with what you are doing or will do about fixing and updating our FSX.Based on what you've stated above, is all a simple matter of just re-authoring everything every developer has done before using the new SDK. Ok, no problem on that from our part, but there are a lot of dev fellows that are still sufering hard on that.We have spent days and nights just after FSX was released trying to learn how to do that with our sceneries and we've acomplished it, thanks God. We have already released 7 native FSX sceneries so far, without flickering or flashing ground problems and withou any issue reported from our users, even custom made style runways keeping that wet look is not a problem anymore for us, among with hand painted ground work, so, don't take this as a critic from someone who could still be facing problems with his own developments :-)The problem is: can you figure how much time is it necessary to completely re-author (with your new SDK) something complex as a Level-D 767, or a PMDG-747, or nice as Misty Fjords, a FlyTampa scenery, or complete and big as German Airports, or even large as our 89 FS9 sceneries already released, just to mention a few of the numerous gorgeous products that are among our hearts and our users are claming to have on the new sim, to still keep using them as fast as possible, and that are still keeping them pluged on FS9?It's not so simple to re-author everything from almost scrath, having to learn, dominate and make use of new tools and technics.We here were luck enough to get it faster and working nice to our users, but other devs don't.My concern is that on the full-work ritm we are taking here, it took us almost 6 months to produce 7 FSX sceneries; as we still have 82 more to re-author, without mentioning the new ones we are scheduled to do, there will be at least almost two more years of full work to get them all at FSX (as we are doing them literally from scratch again).When this happens I'm afraid that FSXI will be already knocking on our doors, bringing a brand new SDK, new tools, new technics, new demands and the process will start all over again leting us all desperate and in great pain one more time :-(Is that what is reserved for us all? Can
  15. Hi.We at TropicalSim are completely dedicate to both sims.FSX was a nice chance to achieve a new standard on our sceneries, working with new tools and technics.We have already produced and released seven native FSX sceneries making them also full FS9 compatibles.There is no way to update a FS9 scenery to make it compatible to FSX, but the opposite is pretty easy and simple, and that's what we are doing here.Each one of these sceneries goes to the users with two independent installers: one for FS9 and another to FSX. No matter if one uses one sim or another or even both like me, two installers are provided for them all.Our users are reporting satisfaction about this policy we have adopted, so we will keep ourselves on this track for the time we see it's good for them.We are about to release our 8th (Salvador/SBSV) and 9th (Rio's Gale
  • Create New...