FSDreamTeam forum
Developer's Backdoor => Los Angeles LAX Backdoor => Topic started by: Kappa on September 13, 2011, 09:18:42 pm
-
-
Cheers Kappa,
Looking nice.
Phillip
-
:o Thank YOU ! :o :o
-
This looks great! Excellent work, did you guys happen to model the In-N-Out off 24R as well as Imperial Hill? Also do the runway exits and entrances feature the hold short wig-wag yellow alternating flashing lights?
-
Looking fabulous guys! Great work!
-
Excellent not sure if anyone noticed at 2:30 in the video watch the aicraft cross 24L the "Runway Status Lights" this is to alert aicraft landing and or aircraft taxing to cross a runway that a plane is landing or taking off and vice versa is a plane is cross the runway an aircraft will know it by the lights in red once the planes clear the lights go off.
Very cool feature
Sean
-
Thank's Kappa! looks fantastic! ;)
-
;D
-
This is all I wanted. Take ALL the time in the world.
-
Wow love the video. I think we're very close to release now, well at least I hope so! KLAX is looking great.
-
Excellent not sure if anyone noticed at 2:30 in the video watch the aicraft cross 24L the "Runway Status Lights" this is to alert aicraft landing and or aircraft taxing to cross a runway that a plane is landing or taking off and vice versa is a plane is cross the runway an aircraft will know it by the lights in red once the planes clear the lights go off.
Very cool feature
Sean
If you have KDFW, you will see that feature.
-
This just goes off in my mind an FS9 Version...
-
Sweeet! Looks awesome. ;D
-
Ready to launch? :)
-
Ive been to this airport a million times and this is the real deal.I have never seen a scenery so good before. IT looks almost real. I cant wait to see what the Flight Sim veterans make in terms of videos.
-
Omg, are those palm trees moving??
-
Looks great as if you didn't know that already...! :) Great work!
-
Nice job..looks close to a release, maybe Thursday or Friday? ;)
Great detail, nice to see the 105 above the Imperial Hwy! South-side freight terminals are there too!!!
Can't wait for my home airport, Darryl
-
Has Oliver Pabst from Aerosoft already received the files he needs to implement AES at the new KLAX?
Jon
-
I'm in awe :o Los Angeles has been worth waiting for a long time. Excellent work I can't wait til I can snapp this airport up. ;) :)
-
Wow, we've needed this airport for awhile now so FSX is that much more complete and so glad a high quality developer like FSDT is knocking this one out the park. Looks fantastic, congrats FSDT.
But after seeing that video I can't wait much longer! :o
-
This just looks fantastic!!! The detail is amazing!
I really love the reflections in the windows...
-
Hi,
Your video preview and your work is wonderful, but I saw a detail at the beginning of the video that was a bug, it's about the traffics on the bridge on the left, cars and trucks have a bug elevation.
Thank you and good fly..
Juliano
-
Omg, are those palm trees moving??
Didn't look that way to me. :)
-
I observed that the green center taxi lights again have that flame type look to them. You all offered an alternative to that texture file for KLAS some time ago for those that did not wish to have that look. The alternative texture was more of a flatter type look. Can that alternative texture be made available for those that what it for this scenery? The flare type look of the green center taxi light does IMO not look good at all.
-
Impressive!!
Looking forward to the release for FSX. Please also do one later for FS9, since I use
both sims.
/ Leffe
-
Is there a discount on FS9 (assuming you release it) if you buy the FSX version?
Thanks,
Kin M.
(klax)
-
They've never sold the versions seperately, you've been here long enough to know that. ;D
-
Wow guys, it looks so great!!! You are really the best designers around!
-
Wow!!! Really looking forward to this release!
Although I'm a bit occupied tonight, since we have prime-minister election tonight, here in small Denmark! :)
-
That looks truly great. I doubt my computer is going to like it, but it sure looks good. When it comes out, I'll be doing KLAX-KLAS-KLAX first thing! Then perhaps KSFO-KLAX-KSFO.
-
Release imminent? Wife will be out of town all day Saturday and Saturday night. It sure would be nice to have some FSDT LAX to keep me occupied.
-
That looks truly great. I doubt my computer is going to like it, but it sure looks good. When it comes out, I'll be doing KLAX-KLAS-KLAX first thing! Then perhaps KSFO-KLAX-KSFO.
Same here, KLAX-KSFO in my American Airlines NGX! ;D
-
KSFO-KLAX-KORD,KLAX-KSFO-KORD,KORD-KSFO-KLAX,KORD-KLAX-KSFO......Hmm that would be fun. :)
-
I feel some DEN-LAX, ORD-LAX, MCO-LAX LAX-LAS-SFO-LAX-LAS runs coming
-
Virtuali, you may want to jump in before this gets out of hand if LAX is not released this weekend.......Or is it?
Paul
-
Virtuali, you may want to jump in before this gets out of hand if LAX is not released this weekend.......Or is it?
Surely this weekend, most likely today :)
-
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
FSDT Thank you, thank you...
Definately A great weekend to send the wife to her mother's... ::)
-
Virtuali, you may want to jump in before this gets out of hand if LAX is not released this weekend.......Or is it?
Surely this weekend, most likely today :)
Any word regarding FS2004 status?
-
Any word regarding FS2004 status?
We haven't even started thinking about it and, as it is now, we don't have much faith it can be done, we just made some informal discussions internally.
It's not only a matter of accepting a reduced resolution for FS9 (since it doesn't support the 4096x4096 textures we used), is that we also surpassed, by far, the maximum polygonal limit of the FS9 compiler, which means we would have to work for months splitting the scenery in smaller parts and retexturing it, losing both the optimization and our time, which would be much better spent doing another FSX product.
-
AMAZING CAN'T wait... SFO to LAX and back or to LAS....!
-
Any word regarding FS2004 status?
We haven't even started thinking about it and, as it is now, we don't have much faith it can be done, we just made some informal discussions internally.
It's not only a matter of accepting a reduced resolution for FS9 (since it doesn't support the 4096x4096 textures we used), is that we also surpassed, by far, the maximum polygonal limit of the FS9 compiler, which means we would have to work for months splitting the scenery in smaller parts and retexturing it, losing both the optimization and our time, which would be much better spent doing another FSX product.
Good. Agree 100% that your time would be better spent working on the next FSX title rather than stopping forward progress to work months on a 8 year old platform for little gain. I hope this is the path you all choose and finally let go with FS9. I look forward to LAX and the next FSX title after that one.
-
We haven't even started thinking about it and, as it is now, we don't have much faith it can be done, we just made some informal discussions internally.
It's not only a matter of accepting a reduced resolution for FS9 (since it doesn't support the 4096x4096 textures we used), is that we also surpassed, by far, the maximum polygonal limit of the FS9 compiler, which means we would have to work for months splitting the scenery in smaller parts and retexturing it, losing both the optimization and our time, which would be much better spent doing another FSX product.
That's such a shame. Sounds like my time as an FSDT customer has come to an end, a sad day for the hundreds of FS9 users that were all looking forward to purchasing LAX. :'(
-
Oh Dear! I can't believe it!!!!!!! I've been waiting for sooooo long for this.
-
Any word regarding FS2004 status?
We haven't even started thinking about it and, as it is now, we don't have much faith it can be done, we just made some informal discussions internally.
It's not only a matter of accepting a reduced resolution for FS9 (since it doesn't support the 4096x4096 textures we used), is that we also surpassed, by far, the maximum polygonal limit of the FS9 compiler, which means we would have to work for months splitting the scenery in smaller parts and retexturing it, losing both the optimization and our time, which would be much better spent doing another FSX product.
Hmm sad regarding the FS9 status... However I fully understand your position!
Looking forward to release!
(I personally have moved to FSX, since the PMDG 737NG)
-
Downloading....
-
Thank you for KLAX I love it so far and have only owned it for 10 minutes! Job well done ;D
-
Wow ???
Are there soo many FS9 users out there? They must have really budget PC's to not want run FSX. since must of them run fs9 because their systems can't run FSX. What a shame because the PMDG 737NGX does not compare to the FS9 version from their old 737's. I support FSDt for their cosideration to FS9 but I am glad or hope they stay away from going back in technology instead of forward. to me FSx is to FS9 what Windows XP is to Windows 7.
Best regards.
Thank you
FSDT
Edgar
-
downloading woo, but stuck at work arrgghh :P
-
If you don't make LAX for fs9 :-[ can you a least update cloud9' version of LAX... please.
-
You Dissapoint me Greatly... I am now balancing whether to buy all your FS9 Sceneries for this... Give me a badass Super FSX Computer for under 1000$ and we'll talk but FS2004 has greater limits IMO... If I ever got this for my FSX (Which runs like a DUMP) it would turn into Microsoft Powerpoint... I can run at a care free-no lag Setup for FS2004 with MAX world traffic and with REX, etc. and it feels like FSX... so for a couple of year I will NEVER Buy a product from you for a loooong time.
-
You Dissapoint me Greatly... I am now balancing whether to buy all your FS9 Sceneries for this... Give me a badass Super FSX Computer for under 1000$ and we'll talk but FS2004 has greater limits IMO... If I ever got this for my FSX (Which runs like a DUMP) it would turn into Microsoft Powerpoint... I can run at a care free-no lag Setup for FS2004 with MAX world traffic and with REX, etc. and it feels like FSX... so for a couple of year I will NEVER Buy a product from you for a loooong time.
Goodbye. Please delete your forum account on the way out.
-
Yay its out! Can't wait to try it on my much more capable FSX platform that looks and runs perfectly. And I won't be bashing a great company like FSDT because they are moving forward not backwards ::)
-
Well, you've lost me as a customer on future products now, but there are still some older sceneries from you I haven't bought yet
-
Everytime I try to click on KLAX info page or download it takes me to the Hawaiian Airports Volume 2 for FSX and FS9.
All the rest of the airports are out of order when you click on them.
???
-
Everytime I try to click on KLAX info page or download it takes me to the Hawaiian Airports Volume 2 for FSX and FS9.
This is done by your browser which has cached the page and is showing the previous version. That's why browsers have a "refresh" button...:)
-
FS9 has been released in Fall 2003, which means it us 8 years old. In 8 years the performance of PCs have increased a lot, while cost went down. I guess after 8 years it is time to invest into the latest generation which is FSX, which itself is already 5 years old. I really do not understand the complains. Forget about FS9 now.
-
:D Got it downloading......Thanks Umberto
-
FS9 has been released in Fall 2003, which means it us 8 years old. In 8 years the performance of PCs have increased a lot, while cost went down. I guess after 8 years it is time to invest into the latest generation which is FSX, which itself is already 5 years old. I really do not understand the complains. Forget about FS9 now.
So what??? it's still one of best simulator ever. It's crazy to convert to fsx now. >:( When MS flight is right around the corner.
-
Wow ???
Are there soo many FS9 users out there? They must have really budget PC's to not want run FSX. since must of them run fs9 because their systems can't run FSX. What a shame because the PMDG 737NGX does not compare to the FS9 version from their old 737's. I support FSDt for their cosideration to FS9 but I am glad or hope they stay away from going back in technology instead of forward. to me FSx is to FS9 what Windows XP is to Windows 7.
Best regards.
Thank you
FSDT
Edgar
FSX was released 5 years ago!.
I've been through 2 computer upgrades since then and currently run an i7 @ 4,2 Ghz with a GTX 480 card, SSD disks and 6 GB of fast tripple channel RAM. Still no FSX for me.
I'm not willing to trade-off the smoothness of FS9 loaded with 100% AI, complex addons and weather for some eye candy. Show me a PC configuration that is able to run FSX in these conditions with high FPS in complex airports like KLAX and i'll switch to FSX in a heartbeat. You know what? It doensn't exist.
So please have some respect for users that have different views and priorities. You prefer to fly to mega hubs with 10 planes parked? OK, no problem, your call.
Very disappointing decision from FSDT, if KLAX FS9 is dead on arrival, please have a moment to consider those who were left behind, and supported the company throughout. We were even willing to accept a lower quality port, with fake bridges and so on. The 10$ Zurich discount should be made available for other FS9 sceneries.
And congratulations on KLAX, it looks great and runs better than most airport addons in FSX.
-
The 10$ Zurich discount should be made available for other FS9 sceneries.
It's already like that, you can use it with any FSDT product, until the end of 2011, it's not related in any way to the FS version. And, btw, it's 9$ now.
-
FSX was released 5 years ago!.
I've been through 2 computer upgrades since then and currently run an i7 @ 4,2 Ghz with a GTX 480 card, SSD disks and 6 GB of fast tripple channel RAM. Still no FSX for me.
I'm not willing to trade-off the smoothness of FS9 loaded with 100% AI, complex addons and weather for some eye candy. Show me a PC configuration that is able to run FSX in these conditions with high FPS in complex airports like KLAX and i'll switch to FSX in a heartbeat. You know what? It doensn't exist.
I have not tested KLAX yet, but KJFK I am reaching 30 fps with 100% AI and REX weather. I can not complain.
-
+1 and BTW many of the users in here don't respect anyone else than them self... One word... ARROGANCE
-
FS9 has been released in Fall 2003, which means it us 8 years old. In 8 years the performance of PCs have increased a lot, while cost went down. I guess after 8 years it is time to invest into the latest generation which is FSX, which itself is already 5 years old. I really do not understand the complains. Forget about FS9 now.
So what??? it's still one of best simulator ever. It's crazy to convert to fsx now. >:( When MS flight is right around the corner.
It's crazy in your opinion to convert now..and only your opinion. So because you chose not to convert and because now that you have waited so long that another version is on the horizon, it is now somehow FSDT's responsibility to keep producing FS9 scenery for you??? What is arrogant is users that feel that they are entitled to endless scenery production from companies for an outdated platform. That's like yelling at the music industry for not making 8-track tapes because you have chosen not to update your vehicle's audio system...same premise.
-
Umberto,
Is it safe to say that 99% there will be no FS2004 version? Is it final and if it's not when do you expect a decision on that?
Thanks
PS. FS2004 is not about age, not about hardware, but about the things that some people do not understand. I'm too lazy to explain it again. It's like talking with a redneck about french wine.
-
You Dissapoint me Greatly... I am now balancing whether to buy all your FS9 Sceneries for this... Give me a badass Super FSX Computer for under 1000$ and we'll talk but FS2004 has greater limits IMO... If I ever got this for my FSX (Which runs like a DUMP) it would turn into Microsoft Powerpoint... I can run at a care free-no lag Setup for FS2004 with MAX world traffic and with REX, etc. and it feels like FSX... so for a couple of year I will NEVER Buy a product from you for a loooong time.
Goodbye. Please delete your forum account on the way out.
Made my laugh so hard Eric... :D :D
Wow ???
Are there soo many FS9 users out there? They must have really budget PC's to not want run FSX. since must of them run fs9 because their systems can't run FSX. What a shame because the PMDG 737NGX does not compare to the FS9 version from their old 737's. I support FSDt for their cosideration to FS9 but I am glad or hope they stay away from going back in technology instead of forward. to me FSx is to FS9 what Windows XP is to Windows 7.
Best regards.
Thank you
FSDT
Edgar
FSX was released 5 years ago!.
I've been through 2 computer upgrades since then and currently run an i7 @ 4,2 Ghz with a GTX 480 card, SSD disks and 6 GB of fast tripple channel RAM. Still no FSX for me.
I'm not willing to trade-off the smoothness of FS9 loaded with 100% AI, complex addons and weather for some eye candy. Show me a PC configuration that is able to run FSX in these conditions with high FPS in complex airports like KLAX and i'll switch to FSX in a heartbeat. You know what? It doensn't exist.
So please have some respect for users that have different views and priorities. You prefer to fly to mega hubs with 10 planes parked? OK, no problem, your call.
Very disappointing decision from FSDT, if KLAX FS9 is dead on arrival, please have a moment to consider those who were left behind, and supported the company throughout. We were even willing to accept a lower quality port, with fake bridges and so on. The 10$ Zurich discount should be made available for other FS9 sceneries.
And congratulations on KLAX, it looks great and runs better than most airport addons in FSX.
Well here are my PC specs. I7 960 stock, 570GTX, 74Gig Raptor drive for Windows 7, 300 gig Velociraptor for FSX only, 1 T for storage Barracuda drive, 6 gigs of 1600 3 channel ram, 24" LG monitor. I followed Nick' system set up for my whole OS and FSX. I have the following addons running every time I fly my PMDG 737 NGX, REX, ASE, Megascenery, UT2 at 100% airliner traffic. I run KLAS(FSDT) or KSFO(FlightB) around 20-24 FPS very smooth. While on VC and when I am up in the cruise I average 30-40 FPS. This is more that sufficient and extremly smooth.
I would say your system is not optimized and you should really look into maybe following Nick's guide.
I wonder if the people running FS9 are still using Cassett tapes also? or VHS...
Edgar
-
FS9 has been released in Fall 2003, which means it us 8 years old. In 8 years the performance of PCs have increased a lot, while cost went down. I guess after 8 years it is time to invest into the latest generation which is FSX, which itself is already 5 years old. I really do not understand the complains. Forget about FS9 now.
So what??? it's still one of best simulator ever. It's crazy to convert to fsx now. >:( When MS flight is right around the corner.
It's crazy in your opinion to convert now..and only your opinion. So because you chose not to convert and because now that you have waited so long that another version is on the horizon, it is now somehow FSDT's responsibility to keep producing FS9 scenery for you??? What is arrogant is users that feel that they are entitled to endless scenery production from companies for an outdated platform. That's like yelling at the music industry for not making 8-track tapes because you have chosen not to update your vehicle's audio system...same premise.
You are a noob. I have been flying FS since 98. FSX sucks so much, the worst simulator ever. I did give FSX a chance but I switch to fs9 again, due to horrible FPS. >:(
-
Is it safe to say that 99% there will be no FS2004 version? Is it final and if it's not when do you expect a decision on that?
It's not final yet, we want to test a few things, I only said that *right now* we don't know how to do it, regardless of the quality compromise, and the reasons for this I've already explained.
-
You are a noob. I have been flying FS since 98. FSX sucks so much, the worst simulator ever. I did give FSX a chance but I switch to fs9 again, due to horrible FPS. >:(
I am sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome this LAX scenery is that I am looking at from the window of my PMDG 737NGX..... gotta go.
-
A tribute to the flight sim market. My respects and congratulations to the team.
Dom
-
It's crazy in your opinion to convert now..and only your opinion. So because you chose not to convert and because now that you have waited so long that another version is on the horizon, it is now somehow FSDT's responsibility to keep producing FS9 scenery for you???
Stop putting words in people's mouths. He never once said it is their responsibility to produce for FS9 so cut the crap. I find it so laughable that many FSX users seem to get upset that people haven't switched to FSX and vice versa. Too many people feel the need to run their mouth's off at others over A SIMULATOR!
I am an FS9 user and will not upgrade to FSX because of Flight coming relatively soon. I upgraded my computer once and was never satisfied with the results on FSX and wasn't interested in spending hours on end trying to tweak it. I also had a ton of money invested in FS9 addons that I considered must haves and were not available for FSX.
Now, that said, I completely understand the decision to not support FS9 if that is what their final decision is. It is disappointing, but understandable.
-
Maybe we should ask Intel and Microsoft to stop developing new technologies or softwares because some users are in love with their pentium and windows 3.1 machines.... ::)
Now off to Fly my PMDG NGX KLAX-KLAS-KSFO current weather with REX textures 4096 and ASE plus Megascenery The whole CA state and Mega LAS with 100% UT2.
Edgar
-
You are a noob. I have been flying FS since 98. FSX sucks so much, the worst simulator ever. I did give FSX a chance but I switch to fs9 again, due to horrible FPS. >:(
I am sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome this LAX scenery is that I am looking at from the window of my PMDG 737NGX..... gotta go.
Indeed the most amazing scenery since a long time. FS9 sucks as the graphic can not compete with FSX. I fully agree that 30 fps in FSX with proper Hardware is not a problem, even with REX and 100% AI enabled.
-
So long FSDT.. Can't say I'm not disappointed in the decision.. I'll go spend my money elsewhere.
-
Blown away by the quality and performance. Thank you FSDT!!
-
Well, another customer dropping out here. I fully understand the explanation, why KLAX is not really feasable to be converted for FS9. There's nothing to argue about. I am just sad, as I was hoping you could make it work.
Sooner or later I'm going to get the FS9 sceneries of yours, which I still have on my to-purchase-list (KFLL, KDFW), but from then on, it looks like my time as a customer will come to an end, for an undetermined time.
I enjoy all your other FS9 sceneries a lot, they are simply the best. Thanks FSDT team for all your dedication and hard work, its appreciated!
Farewell!
-
Well said. For me, waaaay too much $$$ invested in FS9 to changeover to FSX, with "Flight" on the horizon. I also understand, it's just a business decision...nothing more...nothing less. I guess there are just not enough of us FS9 ers left. I can't imagine many more "converts" switching from FS9 to FSX with Flight coming however. :(
Jim
-
And another loyal customer that has bought all your scenery work....now walking away as I will mot be wasting any money on a platform that can do less than the one I have invested in.......so long and good luck maybe well do buisness in the future again....very sad though ???
-
Then again, re-reading I see that Virtuali did not yet say 100% that it would not be done for FS9.. I know there is not much faith it will be done, but one can always hope for one last scenery..
-
My computer can run FSX just fine. I stick with FS9 because I have bought so many add on's I don't want to have to start over with FSX. With all the add on's I have my FS9 can look just as good as FSX plus it runs great! And there are still add on's that I don't have for FS9.
-
WOW! This has to be the best FSDT airport for FSX! Absolutely amazing. Thankyou very much. ;D ;)
-
Well here are my PC specs. I7 960 stock, 570GTX, 74Gig Raptor drive for Windows 7, 300 gig Velociraptor for FSX only, 1 T for storage Barracuda drive, 6 gigs of 1600 3 channel ram, 24" LG monitor. I followed Nick' system set up for my whole OS and FSX. I have the following addons running every time I fly my PMDG 737 NGX, REX, ASE, Megascenery, UT2 at 100% airliner traffic. I run KLAS(FSDT) or KSFO(FlightB) around 20-24 FPS very smooth. While on VC and when I am up in the cruise I average 30-40 FPS. This is more that sufficient and extremly smooth.
I would say your system is not optimized and you should really look into maybe following Nick's guide.
I wonder if the people running FS9 are still using Cassett tapes also? or VHS...
Edgar
I think you are missing the point. Don't want to go off-topic, but for me 100% AI represents up to date, realistic traffic, with 1500 airlines installed and almost double the flights comparing to UT2. Also means I don't have to look at a Rolls Royce powered Air France A330 or a FS98 quality Embraer 145 while taxi on my brand spanking new KLAX (demo only).
A smooth FS experience means that I don't have to worry if my flight arrives at dusk or sunrise, if there are heavy clouds at my destination. For the guys with 30 fps at KJFK with 100% AI, I would like to know what are your numbers under these conditions.
I have tried to move to FSX several times, but it all came to the same ending. Tried every trick and tip in the book. I've always returned to FS9. I don't ask people to agree, I just ask them to respect a different opinion and stop whining why FSX is so much better. For many it is, for some (apparently) it isn't.
Again, enjoy KLAX, it seems a wonderfull and optimized scenery, just a shame that FS9 was left out.
And please, most, if not all current FS9 users come from FS98 age or earlier, and happily moved on to the newest sim versions as they were made available. But not FSX.
-
Those who says "I'm not longer your customer" must understand how stupid your words sound. LAGO and Virtualli started in the years when some of you weren't born. I had a privilege to be one of their early customers. And they're still alive and well.
I totally understand and respect FSDT decision to abandon FS2004 version of KLAX and I hope we will meet again when MF will hit the market. For me it's not a question of money for hardware (even though I hate the idea of overclocking), but rather the fact that FSX has nothing new to provide for comprehensive simmer comparing with FS2004 in general
Good luck FSDT and I hope it's not the end.
-
You Dissapoint me Greatly... I am now balancing whether to buy all your FS9 Sceneries for this... Give me a badass Super FSX Computer for under 1000$ and we'll talk but FS2004 has greater limits IMO... If I ever got this for my FSX (Which runs like a DUMP) it would turn into Microsoft Powerpoint... I can run at a care free-no lag Setup for FS2004 with MAX world traffic and with REX, etc. and it feels like FSX... so for a couple of year I will NEVER Buy a product from you for a loooong time.
Goodbye. Please delete your forum account on the way out.
Made my laugh so hard Eric... :D :D
Wow ???
Are there soo many FS9 users out there? They must have really budget PC's to not want run FSX. since must of them run fs9 because their systems can't run FSX. What a shame because the PMDG 737NGX does not compare to the FS9 version from their old 737's. I support FSDt for their cosideration to FS9 but I am glad or hope they stay away from going back in technology instead of forward. to me FSx is to FS9 what Windows XP is to Windows 7.
Best regards.
Thank you
FSDT
Edgar
FSX was released 5 years ago!.
I've been through 2 computer upgrades since then and currently run an i7 @ 4,2 Ghz with a GTX 480 card, SSD disks and 6 GB of fast tripple channel RAM. Still no FSX for me.
I'm not willing to trade-off the smoothness of FS9 loaded with 100% AI, complex addons and weather for some eye candy. Show me a PC configuration that is able to run FSX in these conditions with high FPS in complex airports like KLAX and i'll switch to FSX in a heartbeat. You know what? It doensn't exist.
So please have some respect for users that have different views and priorities. You prefer to fly to mega hubs with 10 planes parked? OK, no problem, your call.
Very disappointing decision from FSDT, if KLAX FS9 is dead on arrival, please have a moment to consider those who were left behind, and supported the company throughout. We were even willing to accept a lower quality port, with fake bridges and so on. The 10$ Zurich discount should be made available for other FS9 sceneries.
And congratulations on KLAX, it looks great and runs better than most airport addons in FSX.
Well here are my PC specs. I7 960 stock, 570GTX, 74Gig Raptor drive for Windows 7, 300 gig Velociraptor for FSX only, 1 T for storage Barracuda drive, 6 gigs of 1600 3 channel ram, 24" LG monitor. I followed Nick' system set up for my whole OS and FSX. I have the following addons running every time I fly my PMDG 737 NGX, REX, ASE, Megascenery, UT2 at 100% airliner traffic. I run KLAS(FSDT) or KSFO(FlightB) around 20-24 FPS very smooth. While on VC and when I am up in the cruise I average 30-40 FPS. This is more that sufficient and extremly smooth.
I would say your system is not optimized and you should really look into maybe following Nick's guide.
I wonder if the people running FS9 are still using Cassett tapes also? or VHS...
Edgar
I have the same pc specs, but the i7 960 overcloked to 4,2. With bojote tweaks, in default Atlanta I get 7-10 frames with UT2 100%. So, or your are magician, or you play FSX without shadows and 1024x768 screen resolution without FSAA.
FS9 has been released in Fall 2003, which means it us 8 years old. In 8 years the performance of PCs have increased a lot, while cost went down. I guess after 8 years it is time to invest into the latest generation which is FSX, which itself is already 5 years old. I really do not understand the complains. Forget about FS9 now.
So what??? it's still one of best simulator ever. It's crazy to convert to fsx now. >:( When MS flight is right around the corner.
It's crazy in your opinion to convert now..and only your opinion. So because you chose not to convert and because now that you have waited so long that another version is on the horizon, it is now somehow FSDT's responsibility to keep producing FS9 scenery for you??? What is arrogant is users that feel that they are entitled to endless scenery production from companies for an outdated platform. That's like yelling at the music industry for not making 8-track tapes because you have chosen not to update your vehicle's audio system...same premise.
You are a noob. I have been flying FS since 98. FSX sucks so much, the worst simulator ever. I did give FSX a chance but I switch to fs9 again, due to horrible FPS. >:(
I fully agree
After 5-6 year of FSX, many users (http://www.flytampa.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4851) use fs9 yet. Its the first time in all fs history that after five or six years with the lastest sim version available, a lot of simmers use the old sim version. FSX is a complete failure (microsoft close ACES after FSX :D), with a nice graphics, the real deal for kids.
Sorry for my bad english
-
^^
Please leave if thats what you want to post. Your useless comments make me sick and want to vomit. At lease some FS9ers here can politely accept that FSDT is moving forward and dropping the older sim because of the limitations.
Anyway, the holidays are not THAAAAAT far away (:D) and I might have to get this for an early gift....
-
Those who says "I'm not longer your customer" must understand how stupid your words sound. LAGO and Virtualli started in the years when some of you weren't born. I had a privilege to be one of their early customers. And they're still alive and well.
I totally understand and respect FSDT decision to abandon FS2004 version of KLAX and I hope we will meet again when MF will hit the market. For me it's not a question of money for hardware (even though I hate the idea of overclocking), but rather the fact that FSX has nothing new to provide for comprehensive simmer comparing with FS2004 in general
Good luck FSDT and I hope it's not the end.
Dimon, please correct your words. Umberto is not abandoning FS9. They are looking for a way. If it can't be done... Then it can't be done and should not be construed as abandonment. I myself am a Die Hard FS9 fan. Not because my computer can't run FSX at optimal settings or because of the thousands invested in FS9. It's because I simply don't like the feel of it. The look is okay but it feels like a game and thats another reason why so many have not made the switch. I am glad FSDT is making the effort and I am sure they will go over every possibility for an FS9 version. Thank you team. If in the end you can't, then thank you for all the many hours I have had and will continue to have with existing FS9 LAGO, Cloud9, and FSDT products. I am however, hopeful. ;)
-
Looks great! Sadly, I am also another one that looks like my days as a FSDT customer are over :-[ I will remain hopeful and keep checking back here though.
-
fsDREAM TEAM Eh? looks like the take our dreams and smash them into little shards... FSX's game engine makes me want to curl up and vomit everywhere!!!
Man, you need to seek medical attention. That is the worst garbage i have ever seen posted on a forum. For pity sake, "logout" and don't come back.
-
Umberto,
Is it safe to say that 99% there will be no FS2004 version? Is it final and if it's not when do you expect a decision on that?
Thanks
PS. FS2004 is not about age, not about hardware, but about the things that some people do not understand. I'm too lazy to explain it again. It's like talking with a redneck about french wine.
That's funny!!!
-
Virtuali,
Would FSDT be open to a compromise with concessions from both sides (FSDT and FS9 customers)?
What if you agreed to remodel KLAX for FS9, even if it will take some time, with the agreement and clear statement that from here on, there will be no more FS9 versions for ANY future product.
I've been here for years and I've seen all the arguments. I think no matter what, there will be people who no longer purchase from FSDT after you switch to FSX only. I myself may be included in that group as I have not yet switched to FSX and I'm not sure if I want to yet.
However, I think what pisses people off SO much is the fact that throughout the entire LONG development of KLAX, no decision was ever made either way, which always left open the hope that us FS9'ers will be able to get this scenery in an FS9 version. And then, on the day of the FSX release, we suddenly, after all this time, get the news that there likely won't be a scenery for us.
I know you said a long time ago nothing was certain and I know you said it's still not decided now. But the fact that even us FS9 users waited so long and held out hope, only to just now be brutally disappointed, makes it worse.
So, again, what if you went ahead and bit the bullet and agreed to convert it to FS9 (whatever that process requires) and us FS9 users will bite the bullet with the agreement and understanding that any new sceneries developed in the future will be for FSX only?
-
Would FSDT be open to a compromise with concessions from both sides (FSDT and FS9 customers)?
What if you agreed to remodel KLAX for FS9, even if it will take some time, with the agreement and clear statement that from here on, there will be no more FS9 versions for ANY future product.
Sorry, no. If it will take too much time, it wouldn't be commercially feasible anymore, because with the few FS9 users left (they are not growing, they are less and less every day), we could spend the time needed to do another product.
So, it will be either a short conversion or there will be no conversion at all. Right NOW, with the established knowledge, a fast conversion is not possible, because the FS9 scenery compiler simply can't take the amount of polygons we used at KLAX (we even have troubles with the FSX compiler, even if its limit is much larger), and will surely look a lot more blurred, because FS9 has 4x less the resolution.
BUT, as I've said, we might find a way to it anyway, possibly by writing new tools that do not exists right now, which means if we manage to do it, we could even continue to support FS9 indefinitely, of course with crippled versions of the sceneries, since they weren't *designed* to look good on both sims, we are only targeting FSX right now so, we don't restrain anymore (like we used to do) to apply design methods that would only look good in FSX.
-
It's not true Umberto, there are still plenty of fs9 users of there. :(
-
It's not true Umberto, there are still plenty of fs9 users of there. :(
Not since the NGX was released, and now KLAX, your argument is starting to take on water, might be time for you to bail out. FS2004 is near 10 years old, FSX is 6 years old.
MS Flight is not guranteed to be released, Train sim version 2 was canned half way through developement, MS Flight could very well go the same way, regardless of the cost.
So FSX could fit into the same argument in a few years down the track, when it is too, 10 years old ?
I have read some really rude posts on this forum re this issue of an fs9 version of KLAX, and quite honestly, some of it has been childish, and disgusting. Stomping on your toys is not going to change the fact, that one day, yes, one day, addons for fs9 will slow to a crawl, that is the way it is.
-
First of all, FSDT: thanks for the great addon! I just did my first flight out of KLAX and I was amazed but the amount of detail. Awesome job!
Personally I changed to FSX in January last year after the 2nd generation Intel i-core processors came out. Despite the performance loss of FSX compared to FS9 I am truly satisfied with FSX and I surely wouldn't want to miss all the new addons that came out and are more and more for FSX only. PMDG's 737NGX to start with.
I suggest you FS9 guys stop nagging. You can't stick with a 10 year old simulator forever and expect FSX to run smooth on your 4-year old rigs. Time goes on, as does technology and we have to accept that sometimes you have to invest in hard- and software to keep up with our hobby. I'm 30 years old now and I've been playing with FS since I was 8. It's never been different ever since.
-
Hello all,
For me, it's not a question of age but a question of how much money I have invested in FS9 and of course of all the still existing performance problems in FSX. Why should I change to FSX and invest a huge amount of time and money to bring it to the same level that I currently have with a perfect running FS9?
In the past, I bought all FS9 sceneries from FSDT but there will be no way that I change to FSX - I simply see no reason for it. I fully understand Umberto's arguments and it's clear that FSDT wants to be focused on sceneries with which they can earn money but I am not so sure if there are really so few FS9 users left (I assume that many useres are flying with FS9 and FSX). Of course Umberto knows the sales figures but even thinking economically, I would be very careful to stop programming FS9 sceneries because even other big companies like Aerosoft are still producing sceneries for FS9 and I think that they are not less profit-oriented than FSDT.
Regards,
Daniel
-
I would be very careful to stop programming FS9 sceneries because even other big companies like Aerosoft are still producing sceneries for FS9 and I think that they are not less profit-oriented than FSDT.
For starters, Aerosoft doesn't put the detail of FSDT into their sceneries... they are also more of a retailer than developer, they sell other developer's software. If Umberto wants to stop supporting FS9, that's his right. If that stops you from doing business with him, that's your right.
As for your argument about having too much money invested in FS9, I don't know of too many "FS9 Only" sceneries out there, just about all of them have been done for FSX as well and 99% of retailers will give you both copies for one price. You're just being stubborn because Virtuali may not give you your LAX.
-
Purchased this using the $9 discount and I can say that I'm stunned on how easy it is on FPS. Simply amazing guys :)
-
;D ;D ;D FSDT!!!
Why did you do 4096x4096 textures? You lost ability to convert scenery to FS9... So, you made quality product, but you lost many customers. ??? Strange management.
-
Well, I do also understand, that FSDT moves on to FSX only. For me it is the same as for many of the remaining FS9 users. I just spent to much money in upgrading my FS9 with various stuff, if I imagine how long it takes and how much money I would need to push a FSX installation anywhere near the current FS9 installation I have, I instantly get sick. I would need a new rig and rebuy many of the sceneries not offered for both FS9 and FSX at the same time. So, that's a no go for me at the moment.
However, I am sure that people underestimate the amount of remaining FS9 users, I am sure FSDT will realize it as soon as they start to evaluate the success of the KLAX scenery. In regard of this, maybe it will be suddenly again worth while to convert as well KLAX back to FS9, we will see...
To be honest, I don't yet believe in MS Flight. I am not planning with this sim unless its out and properly reviewed by some people. Actually I fear that it will be a similar desaster as FSX, with only being properly playable in about 5 years... so long, waiting for the FS9 LSZH 2.0 Upgrade now ;D
-
;D ;D ;D FSDT!!!
Why did you do 4096x4096 textures? You lost ability to convert scenery to FS9... So, you made quality product, but you lost many customers. ??? Strange management.
I think they used 4096x4096 textures so it looks better and gets better fps. BTW fsdt don't care about us fs9 users :-[ they are like PMDG... so sad. :'(
-
Well, I do also understand, that FSDT moves on to FSX only. For me it is the same as for many of the remaining FS9 users. I just spent to much money in upgrading my FS9 with various stuff, if I imagine how long it takes and how much money I would need to push a FSX installation anywhere near the current FS9 installation I have, I instantly get sick. I would need a new rig and rebuy many of the sceneries not offered for both FS9 and FSX at the same time. So, that's a no go for me at the moment.
However, I am sure that people underestimate the amount of remaining FS9 users, I am sure FSDT will realize it as soon as they start to evaluate the success of the KLAX scenery. In regard of this, maybe it will be suddenly again worth while to convert as well KLAX back to FS9, we will see...
To be honest, I don't yet believe in MS Flight. I am not planning with this sim unless its out and properly reviewed by some people. Actually I fear that it will be a similar desaster as FSX, with only being properly playable in about 5 years... so long, waiting for the FS9 LSZH 2.0 Upgrade now ;D
I do think that MS had learned a lot from FSX, how to make it better, with a new texture engine and it will be using 64 bit systems. FSX/9 only use 32 bit. Because I fly fs9, does not mean that hate new tech. No, but will not invest my money in something that sucks BIG time like FSX. I'll wait for MS flight.
-
I think they used 4096x4096 textures so it looks better and gets better fps. BTW fsdt don't care about us fs9 users :-[ they are like PMDG... so sad. :'(
Really dude, stop the melodramatic prose. Umberto, don't even dignify this guys posts with a response. Dude, get over yourself and leave. Go whine somewhere else with your drama-laced drivel.
-
Moderation, please.
-
Sorry Umberto, but he was provoking me >:(
-
MS Flight is not guranteed to be released, Train sim version 2 was canned half way through developement, MS Flight could very well go the same way, regardless of the cost.
Don't expect that. Flight is certainly farther in development than half-way. At this point, it wouldn't make economic sense to can the develop. ;)
-
MS Flight is not guranteed to be released, Train sim version 2 was canned half way through developement, MS Flight could very well go the same way, regardless of the cost.
Don't expect that. Flight is certainly farther in development than half-way. At this point, it wouldn't make economic sense to can the develop. ;)
Yes, maybe next year ;) I can't wait... then it's time for FSX to die... haha
-
At this point, it wouldn't make economic sense to can the develop. ;)
We're talking about the company that canned their ACES team, so nothing would surprise me. ;)
-
Umberto,
all your decisions is your case! of course you lost with your decision FS9 customers (many of them don't change because they have bought very much for FS9).
it's all ok!
but:
* why are you not responsing to O. Pabst's requests stated one year or more up to now to make LAX (cloud9) compatible for AES?
* how should FS9 users now use the given credit for LSZH to buy another upcoming product if they own all products from FSDT?
what should we think of it?
-
At this point, it wouldn't make economic sense to can the develop. ;)
We're talking about the company that canned their ACES team, so nothing would surprise me. ;)
They canned ACES after FSX was considered a massive flop. Made sense to me...they developed, at the time, a poor game/simulator. Now, it does fine since technology has gone down in price and up in quality. They didn't can them in the middle of development and at this point in development for Flight, it just wouldn't make sense. It would make more sense to continue with what they have and try and get as much return as possible.
-
The amount of posts in support of FS9 both in these forums and on many other websites clearly show that there is still a large market for FS9. ???
-
* why are you not responsing to O. Pabst's requests stated one year or more up to now to make LAX (cloud9) compatible for AES?
That we are not responding to Oliver, it's just not true. We had a discussion about this (about 3 years ago) with him, but the end result was that we really can't put any additional work on the Cloud9 KLAX anymore, because the scenery wasn't made to support AES to begin with.
how should FS9 users now use the given credit for LSZH to buy another upcoming product if they own all products from FSDT?
Nobody said we'll never do any more FS9 product, we released two airports (Maui and Kona) for FS9 as recently as July.
Even if we can't convert KLAX, we might still have other products for FS9 and, if we fail to deliver them before the end of the year, we could always extend the Coupon deadline.
In any case, there IS a cost associated to staying with FS9, but most of it, according to many FS9 users explanations (since the performance argument is now moot), the main reason for not switching to FSX is because of too much money invested with addons whose developers don't offer free upgrades to the FSX version. You should really complain to those developers about this.
We made our part: if you switch to FSX today, you will not have to spend a penny to use any of our products you already have.
-
The amount of posts in support of FS9 both in these forums and on many other websites clearly show that there is still a large market for FS9. ???
As I've said already, the availability of KLAX for FS9 doesn't have anything to do with our willingness to support FS9. It's funny how people fast forget that we released an FS9 product as recently as July (Hawaii 2).
Whether there will be a KLAX for FS9 or not, is purely related to technical matters due to how the scenery is made, and how it might look if stripped down of the FSX-only features, with the additional issue there's no way to compile it with the FS9 SDK right now, so we might need to write new ad-hoc tools for this, which might be or not commercially feasible.
The issue is, from the very early sales data we are getting, we simply can't see ANY negative impact of the fact we don't have an FS9 version. In fact, KLAX is headed to be our fastest selling scenery so far. So, cold hard data facts up to now (even if is still too early to tell), don't show any evidence that, by doing an FSX-only scenery, we are losing too many sales. I believe that PMDG just said the same, about the FSX-only NGX being their best selling product so far.
Don't forget that, by doing an 100% FSX-native scenery for FSX, we might lose FS9 sales, but we might also *gain* additional sales from FSX users, because they might see more value in a scenery designed specifically from FSX, compared to other offerings that looks FS9-ish.
This just to explain that, if we manage somehow to do a quick (read=almost automatic) conversion that might take a week or two at the most, we might still doing an FS9 version, because it WILL pay itself. But if it's a 4-months job because of the technical difficulty, we'll have to pass.
-
So U are saying??? there is 50/50 chance of making LAX for fs9 or what?
-
So U are saying??? there is 50/50 chance of making LAX for fs9 or what?
We don't know yet, because no actual work has been done on this, we'll see in the next weeks.
Perhaps you would understand better if I explain what usually happens in the development process: whenever there were internal discussions within the team to do something in a certain way, we always factored in the FS9 porting implications so, if something that looked good for FSX but would make the scenery too difficult to port or looking bad in FS9, we usually scrapped it. This means, we always had to give FSX users some kind of compromise, since no scenery really took advantage of the sim. We always made a "spiced up FS9 scenery" rather than a true FSX scenery.
With KDFW, we went a little bit further, but not entirely, which means the port to FS9 was surprisingly easy and not bad to look at.
With KLAX, we removed any restraint we had, and simply did whatever we wanted to do, without caring at all about possible problems for FS9.
The easiest to understand example is the usage of 4096x4096 textures: we are NOT using them to get higher than normal resolution, we are using them for SPEED. The overall resolution is exactly the same as (for example) KDFW, but with 4096x4096 textures, we use 16X less of them, which is way more efficient, since every separate texture is at least one material, and every time the graphic engine has to *switch* materials, it drops performances so, the less materials you have, the better. Ideally, if all graphic card could support it, the fastest scenery could be a *single* huge texture, with everything in. This is very well known to mobile phone game developers that are accustomed to run with limited resources: they all do all textures belonging to the same game in a single, large texture, otherwise called "Atlas"
Unfortunately, having designed the scenery for 4096x4096 textures, which FS9 doesn't support in any way, would present us with the following dilemma: just scale the FSX textures to 1024x1024, resulting in a 4X more blurred scenery OR manually remapping everything to conform to many 1024x1024 textures instead of few 4096x4096, which is a very long work.
This was just the more obvious example, but there are many others, like the fact the materials were designed to look good when associated with detail textures (which FS9 doesn't support) and not just plain detail textures, we used bump maps on the *detail* textures, which is something that can't be even simulated in FS9. Another example is the fact we used some very tricky shaders in FSX to allow for multiple layers and areas of customized detail textures, which are more complex than the already tricky ones we used in KDFW, and they port badly to FS9 too.
Last but not least, there's the issue of the polygonal complexity of the scenery, which makes the FS9 SDK going bonkers trying to compile it (we don't have any idea if FS9 would then be able to *run* it, provided we ever manage to compile it in the first place...), manually splitting the scenery to please the FS9 compiler is out of the question, the only way would be writing some new tool that does it automatically, but as I've said, I've no idea how difficult would be, because no work on it has been done right now.
-
Thanks Umberto, we'll keep our fingers crossed! :)
-
After few weeks or whatever.... and you think that there is no other way to produce LAX on FS9.
I just hope you continue to create FS9 sceneries along with FSX.
You've done US and couple of European sceneries, i think it's fair for the Asian FS community to see some Asian sceneries created by FSDreamteam.
We need a good FS9/FSX Narita, Kansai, Beijing or maybe Ninoy Aquino.
Thanks,
Kin M.
(Klax)
-
Yes please, change the topic. This FS9vsFSX eternal dispute is kiling us. I am exhausted.
:'( iFLY NG, PMDG NGX, Anchorage, Corfu, KLAX... we are living one the most fabulous year
for FSX.
FS9 has now the most formidable scenery library ever.
FS9 and FSX sales are almost growing at the same rate. COME ON !
-
That's like yelling at the music industry for not making 8-track tapes
8 track tapes? I remember those. Heck, I still buy LP's! And manufacturers are still producing turntables.
Just my 2ยข worth; but after thousands of $'s invested (and still so) in this wonderful hobby,(simming since the days of Sublogic), I have finally settled with FS9. I get great performance on a computer that is over six years old that have had several hardware upgrades; video cards and hard drives. One drive is dedicated just for the over 100GB space the sim occupies. And I dread the day something happens and I have to spends days if not weeks to reinstall everything to get it back to the current setup. It's just a PITA.
I tried the FSX demo and it just didn't convince me to switch. Performance wise it was fine, but the WX, and namely the textures just didn't come close to the addons I have in FS9, IMO.
I for one appreciate FSDT and other developers for supporting the FS9 community for as long as they have.
As the saying goes, If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Bill
-
FS9 may not be broke, but there comes a time whenit stops being supported. Microsoft stopped selling Windows XP and eventually automatic updates will cease, likely forcing me to switch to Windows 7 or possibly 8 by that time. All good things must end, and eventually even FSX will be gone.
-
Well, I usually never use FSX, but I wanted to give it a try, so I downloaded the Trial and loaded LAX up with the QW 757. I am getting 20 FPS there. Not that bad. It's the scenery with least imapact on FPS I've ever seen. Every scenery I own gives me about 8-10 FPS. FS9 still gives me 20-60 FPS, depending on situation, but if every scenery would run like this I would switch to FSX
Great work, Umberto and everyone else who worked on this :)
My system:
AMD Phenom 8600 x3 2,3 GHz
3GB RAM
Sapphire Radeon 5770 Vapor X 1 GB
Windows 7
-
Not that bad. It's the scenery with least imapact on FPS I've ever seen. Every scenery I own gives me about 8-10 FPS. FS9 still gives me 20-60 FPS, depending on situation, but if every scenery would run like this I would switch to FSX
All our sceneries perform more or less like that, we try to make them similar, some are slightly faster (well, the Hawaiian are surely much faster, but they are also small), some might be slightly slower, but the overall performance is very similar.
The problem with FSX undeserved bad reputation for low fps, it's only a fault of having too many addons not made specifically for FSX, especially AI airplanes and scenery, since the FS9 code (and FS8 ground polygons even more) runs very bad in FSX.
-
Not that bad. It's the scenery with least imapact on FPS I've ever seen. Every scenery I own gives me about 8-10 FPS. FS9 still gives me 20-60 FPS, depending on situation, but if every scenery would run like this I would switch to FSX
All our sceneries perform more or less like that, we try to make them similar, some are slightly faster (well, the Hawaiian are surely much faster, but they are also small), some might be slightly slower, but the overall performance is very similar.
The problem with FSX undeserved bad reputation for low fps, it's only a fault of having too many addons not made specifically for FSX, especially AI airplanes and scenery, since the FS9 code (and FS8 ground polygons even more) runs very bad in FSX.
Gentlemen, My fellow pilots and noble, dedicated enthusiasts ...
That should sum it up for all of us...Umberto has made it quite clear...
And with that statement, I believe that here, FSDT has provided us with the first scenery of its kind. I've deduced from his statement that all other sceneries; UTerrainX, GEX, UTrafficX, flytampa, aerosoft, simwings etc, and including some of the past FSDT products share this encumbrance by use of component techniques that are byproducts of the FS9 Coding..
As Such; and as an owner of FSX(in its 5th year), I shall remain patient whilst all developers provide products that meet the technical manufacturing spec as with FSDT latest. Its bad enough that some of the FSX products consume soo much hard disk space...I hate to be hit with the low fps too.
Nevertheless, I will soon purchase this LAS v2 as well as PMDG NGX...but until such time I shall expulse all other sceneries (or most of) for FSX from my system to enjoy and run FSX as it should.
I still pray for positive traction on the progress of converting LAX v2 for FS9...
Kind regards
Thank you again Umberto....for your insight and for producing such a marvelous product in LAX v2 and products overall....
-
And with that statement, I believe that here, FSDT has provided us with the first scenery of its kind. I've deduced from his statement that all other sceneries; UTerrainX, GEX, UTrafficX, flytampa, aerosoft, simwings etc, and including some of the past FSDT products share this encumbrance by use of component techniques that are byproducts of the FS9 Coding..
I'm not sure if your post was serious or not, but your deduction here is not correct, since you mixed up several very different product together that doesn't belong to my description.
Things like UTX, GEX, UT2 are surely native FSX products and don't really contribute much to bad performances, AIRPORT scenery which uses FS8 code, Airplanes AND AI that are not compiled with the FSX SDK DO, and I was referring specifically to those.
In the airport scenery category, I include even many of our own products, up to before KDFW. They where never known to be performance killers, but just because we restrained a lot what we did, since we already started with the heavy baggage of the FS8 code.
Not having to bring the FS8 code with us, is allowing to INCREASE complexity without a visible fps drop.
How do you explain, otherwise, that KLAX Terminals are all in the range of 20-25K polygons *each*, compared to Zurich, which is a far smaller airport, has less sophisticated materials, has less terminals at 7-8K polygons each, and it's not significantly faster ?
How do you explain the PMDG747 (ported for FS9 after more than 1 year of work) it's a frame rate hog in FSX, while the FSX-only and FSX-native NGX737 runs just fine ? They are both equally complex both visually and in the simulation aspect.
-
You - the developers - said that there will be probably no FS9 version.
The reason given by you was, as far as I understood, the loss of quality and time. Well, I think most of the FS9 users (like me) would accept that.
Let us therefore concentrate on the "time-aspect":
I cannot understand this reason. If one plans such a work and one knows that one will use improved textures, real high quality textures, one knows how difficult it will be to split them to get them into FS9.
This only means that you should have thought about that before producing this scenery and not after having done it. It only shows that FSDT follows the level of other developers like PMDG, i.e. to neglect all the FS9 users. You should never forget (obviously you did) WHY FSDT was and is that successful and high-regarded. You should never forget who created the basis for all this: FS9 users who are now left in the rain by you and many others. Enough reason for me, even though I have both, FS9 and FSX, never to buy again a FSDT product.
Concerning the published version or more likely the screens I saw so far: very very good work..
-
You - the developers - said that there will be probably no FS9 version.
No, we haven't. We always said that there WILL be an FS9, IF we manage to do it quickly. Which is something we started looking into it right now.
-
There are those in this thread that keep saying, its to late to switch to FSX because MS Flight is around the corner. Well, you might just end up switching to FSX instead. More and more info is surfacing that Flight is not going to be what everyone is expecting. The primary theory running now is it will just involve Hawaii and one plane as a base package with MS created additional packages later that can be bought separate. I think FSX will be around for a long time to come. I point you to the below two threads. Read the comments under the articles as well. Note what the Orbx head developer says in a interview just days ago (response #5):
http://airdailyx.blogspot.com/2011/09/exclusive-for-airdailyx-interview-of.html#more
http://airdailyx.blogspot.com/2011/09/microsoft-flight-not-on-hold.html
-
You - the developers - said that there will be probably no FS9 version.
The reason given by you was, as far as I understood, the loss of quality and time. Well, I think most of the FS9 users (like me) would accept that.
Let us therefore concentrate on the "time-aspect":
I cannot understand this reason. If one plans such a work and one knows that one will use improved textures, real high quality textures, one knows how difficult it will be to split them to get them into FS9.
This only means that you should have thought about that before producing this scenery and not after having done it. It only shows that FSDT follows the level of other developers like PMDG, i.e. to neglect all the FS9 users. You should never forget (obviously you did) WHY FSDT was and is that successful and high-regarded. You should never forget who created the basis for all this: FS9 users who are now left in the rain by you and many others. Enough reason for me, even though I have both, FS9 and FSX, never to buy again a FSDT product.
Concerning the published version or more likely the screens I saw so far: very very good work..
How old are FSX and FS9? If you buy a car for instance, you get spare parts for a specific period of time. After that you can do a headstand or a flip. It will change nothing. The product reached its operational life span. It is sad, but that's how it is. Wait a few years and even FSX will be as forgotten as FS 5.1 is nowadays.
-
I think all of us who want to continue to stick to fs 9 should go ahead and upgrade to windows 7 from what i have been told fs 9 works just as great in windows 7 as in windows XP. I think we do not need to worry there will be other developers out there who will make products that will please all of us. FSDT has done a great job On KLAX if they decide to never maker another fs 9 product then I am sure they will be other developers who will fill that need for us thanks. :)
-
I think all of us who want to continue to stick to fs 9 should go ahead and upgrade to windows 7 from what i have been told fs 9 works just as great in windows 7 as in windows XP. I think we do not need to worry there will be other developers out there who will make products that will please all of us. FSDT has done a great job On KLAX if they decide to never maker another fs 9 product then I am sure they will be other developers who will fill that need for us thanks. :)
100% agree ;) spot on.
-
There are those in this thread that keep saying, its to late to switch to FSX because MS Flight is around the corner. Well, you might just end up switching to FSX instead. More and more info is surfacing that Flight is not going to be what everyone is expecting. The primary theory running now is it will just involve Hawaii and one plane as a base package with MS created additional packages later that can be bought separate. I think FSX will be around for a long time to come. I point you to the below two threads. Read the comments under the articles as well. Note what the Orbx head developer says in a interview just days ago (response #5):
http://airdailyx.blogspot.com/2011/09/exclusive-for-airdailyx-interview-of.html#more
http://airdailyx.blogspot.com/2011/09/microsoft-flight-not-on-hold.html
You realize you are trusting a completely anonymous poster who quotes an anonymous source, right?
Sorry, but there are just too many rumors circulating (and it all starting with the scuzzball of 10 minute whatever). I won't believe a single thing until release OR information is released officially by Microsoft and the Flight team.
John, from Orbx, somewhat clarified what he was speaking about in another statement and basically admitted that Flight is still a huge unknown for them and they've pretty much grown tired of not knowing anything and as a business must focus on other things in the meantime.
John's statement, according to him, about only Flight only being Hawaii or only being GA aircraft is based solely the fact that MS hasn't shown us, the public, anything but Hawaii and GA aircraft. Do people not remember FSX and how much everything focused on Island scenes and GA aircraft in previews?
So again, until something official is released that says otherwise, I ought to expect Flight will be another sim. in the line. I'm not going to believe an anonymous poster who says their mother's great uncle's best friend who knew a guy that worked at Microsoft told him this crap.
-
I think all of us who want to continue to stick to fs 9 should go ahead and upgrade to windows 7 from what i have been told fs 9 works just as great in windows 7 as in windows XP. I think we do not need to worry there will be other developers out there who will make products that will please all of us. FSDT has done a great job On KLAX if they decide to never maker another fs 9 product then I am sure they will be other developers who will fill that need for us thanks. :)
100% agree ;) spot on.
I have windows 7 64bit and I have windows XP 64 and I can assure you that fs9 works best with Windows XP. I does work okay with windows 7 but it works far better on the older platform, but it (fs9) just needs lots of memory, I have 6gig Ram, and a fast processer to work best, I am using a duel core with 4.0GHz.it runs like a charm with tripple head2go and all the scenery add ons from VFR france REX & active sky covering the weather and all the main sceneries for europe and the states from all the major developers,,over 200 add on airports, I have the PMDG 747 the ifly 737 both CS and QW 757 the just flight Embraer the F1 ATR and it handles all this and runs 45 - 80 FPS but bot so well on windows 7.....I wont be swopping to FSX either
-
You - the developers - said that there will be probably no FS9 version.
The reason given by you was, as far as I understood, the loss of quality and time. Well, I think most of the FS9 users (like me) would accept that.
Let us therefore concentrate on the "time-aspect":
I cannot understand this reason. If one plans such a work and one knows that one will use improved textures, real high quality textures, one knows how difficult it will be to split them to get them into FS9.
This only means that you should have thought about that before producing this scenery and not after having done it. It only shows that FSDT follows the level of other developers like PMDG, i.e. to neglect all the FS9 users. You should never forget (obviously you did) WHY FSDT was and is that successful and high-regarded. You should never forget who created the basis for all this: FS9 users who are now left in the rain by you and many others. Enough reason for me, even though I have both, FS9 and FSX, never to buy again a FSDT product.
Concerning the published version or more likely the screens I saw so far: very very good work..
Completely I support!
It is a pity that won't be LAX for fs9. >:(
-
Completely I support! It is a pity that won't be LAX for fs9.
I really don't know why such unfounded assumptions gets spread: we NEVER said "there's won't be an KLAX for FS9".
We ALWAYS said, right from the start, there won't be a KLAX for FS9 IF, after we made all the due tests, we'll realize it would take far too long to do that would make it unprofitable OR it would look bad, with "bad", meaning worse than the Cloud9 version which is on sale now, right here.
All the explanations about the technical challenges were made to make people UNDERSTAND why doing this port might be difficult, and why it will likely look worse than the FSX version NOT as a cheap excuse to justify that we already decided it won't be made, because nothing like this as been decided, and even less announced.
Until you read here, directly from the source "there won't be an FS9 version", don't assume anything and don't believe anything you might have read elsewhere.
-
So....what are the chances of FS2004 version as of today, September 20th, 2011?
-
I'd say fairly good...I made some tests with terminals, they looks different from FSX, but not totally crap...
-
I'd say fairly good...I made some tests with terminals, they looks different from FSX, but not totally crap...
Great news.. :) We can live with it :D I'm sure it will look super... Just like DFW
-
Thank you, folks.
Obviously, we do not expect all this fancy-shmancy stuff from FSX and we're well prepared for the reasonable sacrifice in FS2004 (i'm not even sure that a word "sacrifice" is properly chosen). Honestly speaking, I'm pretty much happy with old C9 KLAX except for the lack of AES. Moreover, I'm still using C9 EHAM instead of crappy EHAM of other developer.
Bottom line: the beauty is in the eyes of the beholder
-
Thank you, folks.
Obviously, we do not expect all this fancy-shmancy stuff from FSX and we're well prepared for the reasonable sacrifice in FS2004 (i'm not even sure that a word "sacrifice" is properly chosen). Honestly speaking, I'm pretty much happy with old C9 KLAX except for the lack of AES. Moreover, I'm still using C9 EHAM instead of crappy EHAM of other developer.
Bottom line: the beauty is in the eyes of the beholder
Yes and since we spend more time in the air and less time on the ground, we can go on with good compromise. Most importing thing is AES compatible! Sorry guys, U can't recommend me BP ;D
-
I'd say fairly good...I made some tests with terminals, they looks different from FSX, but not totally crap...
Beautiful!!! Yeah I succumbed to the FSX version and I am pleased with the FPS... great work and my apologies for my rage ;)
-
I'd say fairly good...I made some tests with terminals, they looks different from FSX, but not totally crap...
Great news.. :) We can live with it :D I'm sure it will look super... Just like DFW
Ditto....I happy and smiling...and and shall graciously wait..
Thanks for the News Umberto....
-
I purchased O'hare for FS9 and got the FSX one too included... Will that be available for LAX if an FS9 version comes along?
-
Thank you very much Umberto for that update on a possible FS9 version. Keeping the fingers crossed it will work out! Again, thank you for your efforts!
-
I'd say fairly good...I made some tests with terminals, they looks different from FSX, but not totally crap...
:) :D ;D :o 8) :-* YAYYYYYY!!!!!!! Great news!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHOO HOO!!!!!! ;D ;D
May I also ask how LSZH update is coming along too??
-
May I also ask how LSZH update is coming along too??
That one will come in time for the new Terminal B opening.
-
Excellent! ;D
May I ask, is Fabrizio still working on a Geneva update? I spoke with him in May and he said he would start as soon as the Hawaii airports were finished, but since then, he hasn't replied to any of my messages (I offered to help with pictures etc)...
Would be nice to hear how things are progressing, if possible.
Many thanks,
Alex
-
Will There be an FS9 version?
-
Will There be an FS9 version?
Maybe... he will be testing it I guess.
-
Will There be an FS9 version?
This question has been answered countless times. Take a read through and you'll find that it is uncertain but Umberto did reveal optimism.
-
I'd say fairly good...I made some tests with terminals, they looks different from FSX, but not totally crap...
Good morning Umberto,
Anything new to share with us regarding the progress of FS2004 version of LAX? Sorry for my impatience, but I guess asking this question once a week wouldn't be considered as extreme persistence. ;D
Thank you!
Dmitriy
-
We are working on it.
-
Not yet, but it can't take too long.
-
Thank you, Umberto
-
Thank you, Umberto
Thanks Umberto.
-
We are working on it.
Thank you, Umberto.
Kind regards,
Daniel
-
Yes......thank you
I'm still holding on getting the FSX LAX, cuz I know that FS9 is possible.
That FSX version is very tempting, but my FSX still have limitation on simulating my long haul flights.
I have all the stuff that I need on my FS9.....from aircraft, panel, utilities and bunch of airport add ons
So waiting for FS9 and that Anchorage scenery from another product.
Kin M.
(klax)