FSDreamTeam forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dillon on March 16, 2008, 03:42:58 am
-
I don't mean to pry and/or imply anything but I would be curious to know which version of KORD is moving the most copies (or should I say selling the most). From the looks of it more people are finding issues with the FS9 version versus the FSX version as the support forum is jumping. Does that mean more attention is on the FS9 version or is it the issue list is greater than that of the FSX version? I'd like to know for the simple fact that FSDreamteam is on the fence about future version's of their airports for FS9. Hopefully the support has been there from the FS9 community as well as the FSX community (although that would go without saying. The FSX community apparently has the budget for constant hardware, upgrades, etc while the FS9 community are more so on a budget that's why we still use FS9).
So if it's possible let us know how support is going for both versions (nothing in detail if you so prefer). We all look forward to the next project as you guys took a chance on KORD. I for one have my fingers crossed for KDFW so I'm really interested in how well sales are going for KORD. I for one put the word out about this outstanding effort and I hope people are responding well to an excellent example of great programming... ;)
-
From your question, maybe there's a small misunderstanding about how this product is sold:
You can't buy the FS9 version or the FSX version or having to choose which one to buy.
There's only a product on sale, and that's Chicago O'Hare (the same is valid for Zurich). You can buy it either from FSX or from FS9, it doesn't matter from which sim you made the purchase, but as soon as you purchase one version, the other will automatically run as fully registered. Even if you haven't installed it yet, and even if you haven't yet installed the sim.
So, for example, one might decide to buy today from FS9, even if he has no plans to use FSX in the near future. But the license activation will be still valid, even if he decides to switch FSX next year, even on a different hardware.
So, to reply to your question, we don't know which version sells the most, exactly. We can only make a *wild* guesses, looking at the downloads.
For O'Hare is a little bit too early to have solid data but for Zurich, for example, before Christmas, the FS9 version was downloaded slightly more. From January on, we have seen an increase in downloads for FSX, so right now they are more or less the same.
About support. Yes, the FS9 version requires more support. But not because it inherently more flawed, but because the FS9 environment is full of 3rd party sceneries, modules, hacks, patches, so the chance to run into something that might create problems is higher. Some examples:
- FS9 has CD protection and there's has recently been the discovery of patching it to allow it up to 4GB RAM allocation. This, in combination, creates problems to our module, that we solved, but it requires us to maintain and keep updated two separate versions of our module. This increase the chance to make mistake distributing files in the installers. Most of the issues we had with FS9 are related to this, but now are solved. FSX doesn't have any of these issues in the first place.
- FS9 has plenty of 3rd party AI products that generate an amount of traffic so big, than it's easier to notice limitations in the AI engine, that in turn requires a lot of tweaking of the AFCAD. Having a look at the AFCAD discussions, it's safe to say the AFCAD for FS9 will always be a constant work in progress, because there's simply no way to accommodate every need and having a realistic flow of 200+ AI, without having to compromise somewhere.
- FS9 doesn't have a published official data access interface like Simconnect in FSX. There's FSUIPC, but it is most used for airplanes, we need other things for sceneries, so we had to create our direct data access interface, the Addon Manager that, opposite to what many might think, does a LOT more for the product than simply selling it... In FS9 a lot of this is made by using undocumented and unsupported techniques one might easily call "hacks". In FSX, the whole thing is way cleaner, and it uses documented official Simconnect SDK ways, when possible. Provided that Simconnect is running fine (it usually does, on a non-messed up FSX installation), we don't encounter as many troubles.
So, less "action" in the FSX section of the forum simply tells that FSX users are probably having less troubles in general, it doesn't necessarily mean everybody is using FS9.
About future plans: it's not secret we like FSX more. We said it many times, and it hasn't changed a bit. Unfortunately, with a market split in two, we also need an FS9 version to survive, so we finally found a way to develop the two together without going bankrupt in the meantime, but that doesn't mean everything is as good as it might be.
By doing this, we are *restraining* what we might do in FSX. And not only in simple things, like not going overboard with special texture effects in FSX that couldn't be reproduced in FS9. FSX has possibilities that no developer has fully realized yet, and are waiting to be exploited.
I keep hearing from other developers (especially scenery) that FSX has lost them the way to create interactivity in the scenery, that they can't do time-based or season-based events anymore, that they have lost LOD in SP2 so their scenery now performs poorly, etc. The truth, instead, it's that it's not possible to do that in the "FS9-way" (or, in some cases, the "FS8-way"), but FSX has way better ways of doing things related to interactivity, way more powerful, cleaner and with more freedom. The catch is that one has to learn how to *properly* use Simconnect to its fullest, and I don't think anyone has done it yet.
We already have such things, including working LOD in SP2, because of the way we use the combination of our Addon Manager, that calls into Simconnect to give us thes added abilities. No strange tricks here: just creative use of Simconnect to overcome what other finds to be major show-stoppers. The FSX version also has a very good fps (most of the users are finding it to be equal or even better than default KORD!!), because of this.
But unfortunately, we can't dig so deep into new FSX possibilities like we would, because otherwise we'll end up in a scenery that can't be back-ported to FS9 anymore. There is a project going on in the background we are waiting to finish, and that will open a whole can of works with interactivity in sceneries, but we need FSX to be more established to have it fulfilled.
We can only hope that, during the course of 2008, more people will finally have the hardware to run FSX satisfactory and, in addition to that, our FSX sceneries will finally offer some new things impossible to do on FS9, that might eventually convince even more people to finally move away from it.
-
Will you continue FS2004 compatibility of your future products until the end 2008 as it was promised?
-
Yes, of course. All sceneries will be sold in a double version until the end of 2008. This probably means 2 other major airports more, perhaps even 3, if we are lucky.
At the start of 2009, our hope is that will be possible to finally move away from FS9.
-
Thanks for the update. Hope to see many North American jewels this year
-
Thanks for the update. Hope to see many North American jewels this year
Yeah me 2.
So hurry up ;D
-
From the screenshots of FSX and the various videos I'm not sold on FSX (I don't care what it can do). You guys might need dual products well into 2009. One thing I will say when the day comes everyone can run FSX flat out (with add-ons) with most if not all sliders to the right, we'll finally see FSX as it was intended and most including me will convert over. Today that's far from the case... I've seen a few screenshots with a maxed out FSX (getting 1 or 2 frames per second I might add) looking amazing. Trouble is no one can achieve that with decent frame rates. Today decent performance is traded for a sim that's blurry in the distance with autogen next to none if at all and graphics in general jagged. Most shots I see of FSX look worse than FS9 and depending on the add-on, one needs to avoid cities. I will say again when the hardware is out that can fully exploit FSX then it will be worth the move for everyone. I don't see that happening before 2010. So good luck hoping for sole FSX support by next year. I for one hope FSX can run decently by then but with the falling dollar and high gas prices most won't have the money to invest in FSX until a year after the hardware is available to push FSX to the max. Once the hardware is out it'll take a year past that to be affordable for the average user. I need not mention that Vista (which is a great concept) needs one or two more patches before it's as stable as Windows XP. So let the waiting game begin and we'll see (like I said 2009 is 'very' 'very' optimistic on your part concerning FSX)... :-\
-
For the record I am using it for FS9 :)
I have no plans to move to FSX :)
-
From the screenshots of FSX and the various videos I'm not sold on FSX (I don't care what it can do). You guys might need dual products well into 2009. One thing I will say when the day comes everyone can run FSX flat out (with add-ons) with most if not all sliders to the right, we'll finally see FSX as it was intended and most including me will convert over. Today that's far from the case... I've seen a few screenshots with a maxed out FSX (getting 1 or 2 frames per second I might add) looking amazing. Trouble is no one can achieve that with decent frame rates. Today decent performance is traded for a sim that's blurry in the distance with autogen next to none if at all and graphics in general jagged. Most shots I see of FSX look worse than FS9 and depending on the add-on, one needs to avoid cities. I will say again when the hardware is out that can fully exploit FSX then it will be worth the move for everyone. I don't see that happening before 2010. So good luck hoping for sole FSX support by next year. I for one hope FSX can run decently by then but with the falling dollar and high gas prices most won't have the money to invest in FSX until a year after the hardware is available to push FSX to the max. Once the hardware is out it'll take a year past that to be affordable for the average user. I need not mention that Vista (which is a great concept) needs one or two more patches before it's as stable as Windows XP. So let the waiting game begin and we'll see (like I said 2009 is 'very' 'very' optimistic on your part concerning FSX)... :-\
Totally agree.
-
this day will never come, they'll release fs11 this or next year
-
It's very interesting to hear virtuali speak on the capabilities of FSX. I do not use it because I cannot justify the overall expense to myself. But I do know that FSX is a wellspring of potential for features the likes of which we have never seen.
Such a shame all that potential is hamstrung by a split market. In all my years I've never seen this kind of split so far into the life of the newer sim. I guess it was inevitable though. As fs has advanced more of us are 'content' as never before. Speaking for myself, fs9 addons brought visuals to a level I longed for since I started with fs4, not to mention advanced aircraft. FSX to me was like more candy to a child already stuffed :)
If at some point (fs11?) the performance demand on hardware remains relatively flat for the new platform as it did fs8-fs9, then we will all finally move on en masse once more.
-
I was just thinking guys that FSX's condition is really amazing. Here we have software that was released in 2006 that can't feasibly be fully embraced at least by FSDreamteam's measure until 2009 (I'm saying 2010).
-
Things to consider:
Look at the number of posts under FSX and FS2004 support for both ORD and ZUR. FSX support activity is roughly 50% of FS2004.
-
That's because the product was originally built for FSX and ported over to FS9...
-
Just a tid bit.....
I had the chance to speak with a client who is a manager of some kind over at Microsoft, and will remain nameless, and he tells me that even though the "offical reports" say other wise, the truth is that FS9 still is out selling FSX 3 to 1! ::)
Mmmm... Go Figure. ???
-
Just a tid bit.....
I had the chance to speak with a client who is a manager of some kind over at Microsoft, and will remain nameless, and he tells me that even though the "offical reports" say other wise, the truth is that FS9 still is out selling FSX 3 to 1! ::)
Mmmm... Go Figure. ???
Now you know no one here is going to believe that... ;) :D
-
Now you know no one here is going to believe that... ;) :D
But...But...But... It has to be true it came from a Microsoft guy!........... ??? The people at Microsoft never mislead you.....ever!......... ::)
yea riiiigghhhttt!!! ;D
-
Well,
I am very pleased, to know we have a VERY talented scenery developer that has realistic goals for the future. As well as, the ablility to please their audience. To know that we will continue to see FS9 and FSX sceneries is always very important.
I own both FS9 and FSX, and I still mostly play FS9 because of the stuff I have purchased for it. However when I get another 2 GBs of ram for my PC (Currently at 2 GBs) I will be switching over to FSX, and to be able to have activation of KORD and to come KJFK, I will be totally happy.
Thank-you FSdreamteam for all your hard work. Looking forward to your next releases!
Best Regards,
Marshall Tomlinson
-
Just some interesting numbers. There are currently two Afcads in the Avsim Library for the new KORD, one for FS9, one for FSX. 628 versus 265 downloads... Draw your own conclusions.
-
Hi Mike,
I am very interested in the changes you have made for the FSX version. ARe they just runway changes or even the jetway + parking positions? As they both needed some attension.
Regards,
Mikael
-
My file is for FS9 only. I'm not a big fan of FSX to put it mildly. ;D
-
Okey I see. Thats too bad ;)
-
I think maybe Umberto may be missing one vital aspect as far as people changing over come 2009. By that time (if it is already not here which I think it is) I would think any users that were going to will have done so. Myself, I am not going to change over to FSX ever. I will stay with FS9 until FS11 is out. Reason? Well, by that time, FS11 will not be all that far out (a year at the most?) and FSX just simply has to many issues. Microsoft has pretty much admitted all the fancy stuff they put into Vista has caused it to be to resource heavy and slow. They now are developing a all new OS to replace Vista which is named Windows 7 for right now. In fact many OEM's have gone back to offering XP for new builds instead of Vista. Businesses cannot stand Vista. FSDT will see very very healthy sales this year with mega releases like ORD, JFK and DFW. IF and I think that is a big IF, they go to FSX only in 2009, sales will plummet. I would hope FSDT will just bite the bullet and continue with dual platform development until FS11 comes out. Then we can all go to FS11 together and move on.
-
FS11 would take at least 2 years more so expect it during 2010. That's what I have read on some MS blogs... And I really hope Microsoft makes it flyable for FS11 and not as "less good" as they did on FSX. And let's hope they add better support for multiple cores ;)