FSDreamTeam forum

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: NISX on January 20, 2009, 03:16:37 am

Title: DFW?
Post by: NISX on January 20, 2009, 03:16:37 am
Is DFW still on the to-do list?

Thanks

-ESG
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: Buziel-411 on January 28, 2009, 06:36:55 pm
I believe it is, after KLAS.  :)
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: AaronMyers on January 29, 2009, 03:42:56 pm
I'd be curious to know if it's still on the list as well. Preferably from the developers themselves since they are really the only one's with the answer.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: virtuali on January 29, 2009, 04:01:39 pm
Starting with saying that no work on DFW will ever start until after LAS has been released, and barring any unexpected problems we might discover *after* starting it, like missing/outdated documentation and pictures, I'd say DFW should be the next scenery that will be put into development.

This doesn't mean it would be the next scenery that will be *released* because, just as with Geneva, we have another unannounced airport scenery that has already started, and should progress at the same time with LAS, so it might be released before DFW. We'll announce this one when we'll have a better idea of a possible release date so, please, don't ask which one is. It's in the US, though...
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: AaronMyers on January 29, 2009, 04:11:19 pm
Thanks for the info Umberto. Much appreciated.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: kdfw on January 30, 2009, 05:46:48 am
With PMDG MD11s out there, I'm sure demand for KDFW (at least FS9) will be strong.
Pat
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: waleed on January 30, 2009, 03:17:19 pm
Pat, why?

Is it a major UPS or FedEx hub? ???
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: Silverbird on January 30, 2009, 10:32:32 pm
Starting with saying that no work on DFW will ever start until after LAS has been released, and barring any unexpected problems we might discover *after* starting it, like missing/outdated documentation and pictures, I'd say DFW should be the next scenery that will be put into development.

This doesn't mean it would be the next scenery that will be *released* because, just as with Geneva, we have another unannounced airport scenery that has already started, and should progress at the same time with LAS, so it might be released before DFW. We'll announce this one when we'll have a better idea of a possible release date so, please, don't ask which one is. It's in the US, though...

Thanks for the update Umberto, wow what a surprise other u.s airport. if you can give any hints later on as you get closer to getting a release date that would be fun.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: JFKpilot on January 31, 2009, 01:40:15 am
Starting with saying that no work on DFW will ever start until after LAS has been released, and barring any unexpected problems we might discover *after* starting it, like missing/outdated documentation and pictures, I'd say DFW should be the next scenery that will be put into development.

This doesn't mean it would be the next scenery that will be *released* because, just as with Geneva, we have another unannounced airport scenery that has already started, and should progress at the same time with LAS, so it might be released before DFW. We'll announce this one when we'll have a better idea of a possible release date so, please, don't ask which one is. It's in the US, though...

Thanks for the update Umberto, wow what a surprise other u.s airport. if you can give any hints later on as you get closer to getting a release date that would be fun.

yeah, can't wait.  hopefully it's a smaller airport, more in the realm of geneva as opposed to a huge international hub like KLAS.  I'm praying its KSNA  ;D
Keep up the great work and hopefully your sceneries/ aircraft/ etc. will make fs9-diehards finally switch over to fsx.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: Aeroman on January 31, 2009, 02:38:23 am
It'll be smaller, it would have to be to be made in coincidence with DFW.  Virtuali, once you start work on it, I'll be happy to help you with information about the airport (KDFW) you may need...any changes, contstruction, etc...  I also have a file you may want...don't know if you have it already.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: kdfw on January 31, 2009, 03:16:23 am
Pat, why?

Is it a major UPS or FedEx hub? ???


Because AA used to fly MD11s and fly to various international destinatins from DFW.

I do see UPS and FedEX planes on the ramp, though. 

Pat
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: 777captain on February 05, 2009, 03:51:55 am
 
Starting with saying that no work on DFW will ever start until after LAS has been released, and barring any unexpected problems we might discover *after* starting it, like missing/outdated documentation and pictures, I'd say DFW should be the next scenery that will be put into development.

This doesn't mean it would be the next scenery that will be *released* because, just as with Geneva, we have another unannounced airport scenery that has already started, and should progress at the same time with LAS, so it might be released before DFW. We'll announce this one when we'll have a better idea of a possible release date so, please, don't ask which one is. It's in the US, though...

Awesome! You can always leave it up to FSDreamteam to create a brilliant surprise! ;D
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: jf5999 on February 23, 2009, 10:01:47 pm
Starting with saying that no work on DFW will ever start until after LAS has been released, and barring any unexpected problems we might discover *after* starting it, like missing/outdated documentation and pictures, I'd say DFW should be the next scenery that will be put into development.

This doesn't mean it would be the next scenery that will be *released* because, just as with Geneva, we have another unannounced airport scenery that has already started, and should progress at the same time with LAS, so it might be released before DFW. We'll announce this one when we'll have a better idea of a possible release date so, please, don't ask which one is. It's in the US, though...

I hope its PHNL or KSNA.  ;D
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: newmanix on February 24, 2009, 12:14:25 am
If I had to guess, i'd say it's KPHX...

In fact, I'm betting it's KPHX!!! ;D
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: SirIsaac726 on February 25, 2009, 11:39:07 pm
If I had to guess, i'd say it's KPHX...

In fact, I'm betting it's KPHX!!! ;D


I certainly hope so as Phoenix is one of my favorite places in the world but I don't know why you think it is. :D
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: JFKpilot on February 26, 2009, 05:24:52 am
To Umberto:
ORBX/FTX released a service pack for YMML with fsx gmax sdk ground.  This means rain effects without alpha transparency, detail map, etc. Any comment on this technique and feasibility for future airports? They claim this is a 'world-first', but I've been using a freeware scenery on avsim (st-pierre_miquelon.zip) since July 2008 which, the author confirms, uses fsx gamx sdk for ground.  So obviously it can be done; can you shed some light on why it should or shouldn't be used? Thanks in advance.     
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: Bruce Hamilton on February 26, 2009, 04:33:51 pm
At least someone acknowledges the need for KSNA!

Do you mean KSAN?  KSNA is John Wayne-Orange County, and I don't think it would be a big seller.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: newmanix on February 26, 2009, 06:05:32 pm
And FT already did a KSAN...

I would prefer KBUR over KSNA anyway...
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: Bruce Hamilton on February 27, 2009, 04:58:14 am
And FT already did a KSAN...

Released in 2003 and never updated.  Would you buy scenery that old?
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: newmanix on February 27, 2009, 10:05:16 pm
I did buy it. For 3 reasons. It's better than the diffault FS9 senery. It is very good quality. It has AES.

Wouldn't you buy it for those reasons? FSDT will not do that airport. They have made it clear, they are doing seneries others were affraid to do yada yada yada... KSAN is too simple for FSDT.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: SirIsaac726 on February 27, 2009, 11:03:13 pm
And FT already did a KSAN...

Released in 2003 and never updated.  Would you buy scenery that old?

Yes. ;)  Just like Newmanix I did.

FlyTampa's quality is just as good as FSDT and even their outdated sceneries (minus KMIA and KTPA as those are unbelievably old) are still very good and relatively light on the frame rates.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: phenocom on February 28, 2009, 03:44:36 am
FT has said that they will not make a KSAN for FSX and we need a KSAN for FSX to go with the excellent MegasceneryX for the Socal Area. It would be fantastic if FSDT could do San Diego and Also a FSX Version of KLAX which was brilliantly done in FS9 by Clould 9
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: Bruce Hamilton on February 28, 2009, 05:21:41 am
Wouldn't you buy it for those reasons?

Yes, if the price would reflect the age of the product.  Only $3 cheaper than their newest sceneries.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: SirIsaac726 on February 28, 2009, 06:58:11 am
Wouldn't you buy it for those reasons?

Yes, if the price would reflect the age of the product.  Only $3 cheaper than their newest sceneries.

But the price does reflect the quality.  Just because it is an older product doesn't mean the quality in it has decreased and isn't worth the price.  Anyways, it seems wrong to be going on and on about another company's sceneries on FSDT's forums so this is the last I am going to say about this.
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: newmanix on March 01, 2009, 02:11:21 am
In the case of the price, you guys have a point. I think it's more of a matter of how important that airport is to you....
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: virtuali on March 03, 2009, 11:59:34 am
Quote
ORBX/FTX released a service pack for YMML with fsx gmax sdk ground.  This means rain effects without alpha transparency, detail map, etc.

I really hope it *doesn't* mean this because, not using detail map or alpha transparency, can't be called a "feature", since it lowers the final quality considerably.

Quote
Any comment on this technique and feasibility for future airports?

Geneva already HAS rain compatibility, without forfeiting the detail texture, which is why it looks so much better, on top of supporing rain as well.


Quote
They claim this is a 'world-first', but I've been using a freeware scenery on avsim (st-pierre_miquelon.zip) since July 2008

"World First" ? We had FSX rain effect compatibility since the Bergen scenery we made for Cloud9 in January 2007, and we also had it on buildings, not "just" on ground...that WAS a "World First", without so much hype.

However, we prefer to decide if having this feature or not, depending on the scenery, putting the best compromise between visual features and performances to be the most important deciding factor.

One should keep in mind this general rule: if we don't do something in a scenery, it's NEVER because we don't know how to do it, it's because we tried it, and decided it didn't fit well with that specific scenery project, either because of performances, or because the general visual impact at *that* particular location, etc. There's no single method that work, that's why we don't always use the same methods but, instead, we choose which method that suits best the project at hand.

Also, the hardware people use keep improving over the time so, it's not said that, what we decided to forfeit in (for example) October 2007 when we released Zurich, might be still rejected on April 2009, when we'll release KLAS. In fact, KLAS will probably be more similar to Geneva than to Zurich...
Title: Re: DFW?
Post by: JFKpilot on March 04, 2009, 02:27:30 am
First of all I want to thank you for being so patient and providing such thorough answers to someone that's always a pain in the ass. ::)  You've got world-class products and service, which is really hard to top.   

I really hope it *doesn't* mean this because, not using detail map or alpha transparency, can't be called a "feature", since it lowers the final quality considerably.

Sorry I meant they don't use transparency for the rain efffects but DO use a detail map, not that it matters.

Geneva already HAS rain compatibility, without forfeiting the detail texture, which is why it looks so much better, on top of supporing rain as well.
"World First" ? We had FSX rain effect compatibility since the Bergen scenery we made for Cloud9 in January 2007, and we also had it on buildings, not "just" on ground...that WAS a "World First", without so much hype.

I think they meant ground with the fsx-gmax sdk, not with the fs2002 gmax sdk you've used since the cloud9 days, which was what I was referring to with the two sceneries I mentioned. Either way, you are right, it's overhyped.  Most people can't tell Geneva / Bergen etc etc have default aprons slightly showing underneath the custom ground, so I guess it doesn't really matter.

However, we prefer to decide if having this feature or not, depending on the scenery, putting the best compromise between visual features and performances to be the most important deciding factor.

This is smart. Most developers use the same techniques over and over. Fsdt clearly knows how to proritize -- for example fs2002 sdk would have been unfeasible at kord or jfk so you used resampled ground instead, and back to fs2002 gmax ground for the smaller lsgg and klas.

One should keep in mind this general rule: if we don't do something in a scenery, it's NEVER because we don't know how to do it, it's because we tried it, and decided it didn't fit well with that specific scenery project, either because of performances, or because the general visual impact at *that* particular location, etc. There's no single method that work, that's why we don't always use the same methods but, instead, we choose which method that suits best the project at hand.

That's a bold statement. Nonetheless it's justified -- you guys are geniuses. :o Since I'm probably a waste of your precious time I'll refrain from asking any more dumb scenery-related questions.

Also, the hardware people use keep improving over the time so, it's not said that, what we decided to forfeit in (for example) October 2007 when we released Zurich, might be still rejected on April 2009, when we'll release KLAS. In fact, KLAS will probably be more similar to Geneva than to Zurich...

I'm looking forward to it! Hopefully you can squeeze a long life out of fsx.

Thanks again.