Jump to content

GoranM

Commercial Member
  • Content Count

    3,324
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,934 Excellent

1 Follower

About GoranM

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    Yes
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

11,409 profile views
  1. Unless they actually don't have a lot of work ahead of them. Then they deal with, "Why aren't they showing us anything. It's taking too long. XP12 is vaporware." The showcase was the aircraft. Not the scenery. I've had a ton of stuff done on add ons I've made, and refused to show it. Totoritko did streams of the 650 with a completely grey, basically modelled, untextured panel. On my end, the panel was about 90% complete. What is being shown to you, and what they want you to focus on, are 2 very different things.
  2. I really suspect you don’t know what laminar are capable of. They’ve been in business, competing against Microsoft for about 30 years. The rendering engine in MSFS is not licensed to asobo. It’s free to use for any company as long a percentage is paid. Personally, in my opinion, the over saturated Color’s and ambient occlusion in MSFS is quite the turn off. It’s not realistic at all. It looks cool. But way overdone.
  3. early alpha No. I'm very black and white. If I don't like something, I stay away from it. And their forums. Pretty simple concept. Some people like to continue to bang the same beat on the same drum. It gets pretty boring, very quickly,
  4. And the world still turns. X-Plane 12 is still coming out. It’s owned by 1 man. Not shareholders. There’ll still be people like yourself complaining about something. If X-Plane doesn’t impress you, why don’t you simply move on to something you do like? Why do you, and the others, need to make yourself heard…repetitively? X-Plane isn’t for everyone. MSFS isn’t for me. I choose to stay here and continue to enjoy X-Plane, the way it is. If it changed to what you want, it wouldn’t interest me. Purely because it’s so flawed, with a severely lacking SDK.
  5. “Visually” is a very broad term. As far as lighting goes, it’s physics based lighting. So it doesn’t get any more realistic. If you think it’s not realistic, 🤷‍♂️ Why is it no surprise people are picking on an alpha? Really. It’s no surprise.
  6. Practise restraint. Regardless, your criticisms on X-Plane carry as much weight as a politician. So, if you decide to criticise, safe to say you won’t be taken seriously.
  7. Try not to scrutinize every little thing in a video titled "Showing off the Evolution". They're, quite literally, showing the Lancair in an early alpha. Treat the sim as a background thing, with the Lancair being the object of scrutiny. If/when a video comes up, that is titled, "Showing off the clouds" or "Showing off the scenery", then, after taking into account the alpha/beta stage of development, go crazy with the criticisms on those items.
  8. I've been involved with X-Plane since 2009. Never tinkered with it. I've gotten a weather addon, and some ortho, but that is no different to Activesky and OrbX. I do remember many tweaks and some add ons for MSFS (TweakFS being one of them). Not really. You basically said LR are stupid...ok...Unwise...for not using the equivalent of WASM and SimConnect, which is a tinkering tool for developers, no? Without it, no complex airliners, correct? That's not a point/counterpoint. That's "If they don't use this, they're not good at what they do." I've assumed the same thing from MSFS users coming in here and posting repetitive negativity about X-Plane. But, the only thing is, we're being passionate about something, in the appropriate forums. I still don't see why that's a problem for some people? Ok. I mean, you didn't HAVE to announce it, but if you feel you had to...great. That's all we want, as well. Without others trying to douse the fire.
  9. Nothing can be further from the truth. I'm part of several discords where both are discussed. I admin 2 of them, where we have open discussion of MSFS. There are always discussions between the 2. The big difference is, in here, there are 3 or 4 particular individuals, who keep screaming how bad X-Plane is, and that X-Plane will die, and if LR want to stay competitive, Austin needs to do this, this and that. One I particularly love is "X-Plane needs to match or excel MSFS in order to stay competitive", to which my response is, "Does that mean if/when XP matches or excels MSFS, MSFS becomes obsolete?". The only response I get is "X-Plane won't match or excel MSFS." And not meaning to single you out, but comments like this. "X-Plane would be wise to follow a similar path." don't really go down well in an X-Plane forum, without facts as to why. You're basically saying, "MSFS is better than X-Plane because of this..." Glass displays in X-Plane can be coded in Cairo. They can't in MSFS. I'm not going to say X-Plane is better because of this. But I will say it's advantageous that it CAN be coded in Cairo. Why should X-Plane change how they do things, when what they have been doing has been working for countless developers? As long as it gets the job done, and people are happy, just let it stay the way it is. No need to re-invent the wheel. It takes teams of developers, several years (PMDG took 6 years to make their MD11 with 8 developers), to make a reasonably coded, study level airliner. It took 2 developers, 3 years to make a study level CL650. If we can stay civilized, and mature, I don't see a reason to abolish comparisons. The problem is, not everyone is civilized and mature. So, unfortunately, moderation is needed.
  10. It's fine to have an opinion, but if you're going to have an opinion, you'll need to back it up with facts. After pushing the boundaries in what X-Plane is capable of, after making the CL650, I'm not convinced that X-Plane will be wise to adopt any other workflow or SDK other than the one it has kept for the past 3 decades. We know, unequivocally, that the CL650 cannot be made, with all the features and systems coding it has, for MSFS.
  11. What part of your post (which doesn't even make sense), addresses the thread title? I'm giving people enough credit to understand that a full time pilot can't also be a full time developer. If you lack the basic common sense to understand the full context of my post, that's fine. I'm happy to clarify it for you. Why are these posts still being permitted in these forums, from the same people??
  12. How about we just wait until XP12 comes out? Then you can come back and start bashing that.
  13. So, how did we go from "Another XP12 preview drops" to critiquing XP11 scenery...again?
×
×
  • Create New...