FSDreamTeam forum
December 02, 2020, 07:51:28 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: AES support  (Read 9393 times)
Dieter K.
Newbie
*
Posts: 3


« on: January 17, 2010, 08:03:53 PM »

Hi,

i have LAX and KIAD scenery and i like them.
But AES support is misssing.
Did you plan to get some?

Thanks and have a nice week
Dieter
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40166



WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2010, 09:31:23 PM »

Already replied here:

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=2600.msg21569#msg21569
Logged

phenocom
Full Member
***
Posts: 106


« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2010, 11:03:19 PM »

You mean KDCA?. Imagine Sim and also Blueprint made KIAD
Logged
newmanix
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 755



« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2010, 09:44:10 AM »

Hello Virtuali,

May I please implore you to revisit consideration of modifing KDCA for AES? As it seems (we hope) we will get a payware KLAX next year and with the first Hawaiian package nearly complete, perhaps there will be time in the coming months to modify DCA for AES before the next BIG project starts. It's really such a small airport with few jetbridges and the last C9 airport that would really need it. Please, the level of quality for this airport is so great as it is, it doesn't need to be redone. It's just needs AES.

Please consider.

Thanks,

D'
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40166



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2010, 02:06:18 PM »

You really need to start considering we'll eventually drop FS9 at some time. We simply can't be keep hindered doing new stuff, if we are tied in capabilities and slowed down in developement by having to support FS9.

We are not even sure at this time if our next scenery (KLAX, most likely) will available for FS9 in the first place and going back working on a 4+ years old project like KDCA, which is an FS9-only product, to enhance it for a product which offers more value to FS9 users, it's not something that makes much sense.

And besides, we always said our only involvement to support former Cloud9 products, is to help users with installation or reactivation, to ensure they'll work with anything we'll release in the future and with any OS upgrades from Microsoft, nothing more than that.
Logged

newmanix
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 755



« Reply #5 on: September 06, 2010, 06:42:19 PM »

You really need to start considering we'll eventually drop FS9 at some time. We simply can't be keep hindered doing new stuff, if we are tied in capabilities and slowed down in developement by having to support FS9.

We are not even sure at this time if our next scenery (KLAX, most likely) will available for FS9 in the first place and going back working on a 4+ years old project like KDCA, which is an FS9-only product, to enhance it for a product which offers more value to FS9 users, it's not something that makes much sense.

And besides, we always said our only involvement to support former Cloud9 products, is to help users with installation or reactivation, to ensure they'll work with anything we'll release in the future and with any OS upgrades from Microsoft, nothing more than that.

Hi Virtuali,

The fact that FSDT will drop FS9 is not something I need to start considering. I have been aware of this for some time. And if you have reached the point (not saying you have) that you will stop making FS9 sceneries, then that's perfectly ok with me. This is a hobby not my life. I have nothing aganst FSX but having just purchased a 2,500 PC, I am just not impressed with the performance at heavy airports. I will make the full switch one day but for now I was just hoping you guys could give us this. If the jetbridges are seperate all you have to do is give Oliver the source files right? Is that really asking too much? And for the record, is has the apearance of the work you are creating today. Yes the fact that it's FS9 only is a downside. But I believe for nothing else, it would make a lot of your customers happy. Same for AMS and Bergen. Either way, i'll make this my final request here.

Caio,

D'Andre
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40166



WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 06, 2010, 09:14:39 PM »

If the jetbridges are seperate all you have to do is give Oliver the source files right? Is that really asking too much?

Fact is, they aren't. It the same issue with Cloud9 KLAX, we should go back to the drawing board and sorry, but this doesn't make much sense, just to get AES on a 4 years old scenery which runs only on a 7 years old discountinued sim, that soon enough will be two generations behind.
Logged

newmanix
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 755



« Reply #7 on: September 06, 2010, 09:58:09 PM »

If the jetbridges are seperate all you have to do is give Oliver the source files right? Is that really asking too much?

Fact is, they aren't. It the same issue with Cloud9 KLAX, we should go back to the drawing board and sorry, but this doesn't make much sense, just to get AES on a 4 years old scenery which runs only on a 7 years old discountinued sim, that soon enough will be two generations behind.

Being the loyal customer I am and with a strong feeling that even your oldest works are still works of art. I bought it today anyway. Cloud9's level of scenery detail was always ahead in years. It's old quality still even beats out some other current payware developers. It may be 4 years old, but it doesn't look that way at all and I am willing to bet it's sales would increase also given the fact that JFK and FLL are not too far away. Even the old AMS is still better then the new version. You and Cloud9 worked hard on that project.  I am sorry you feel it's not worth the effort.

Such is life. Take care.  Smiley
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40166



WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2010, 10:09:37 PM »

Scenery quality doesn't have much to do with going back working at it, because that's not the agreement we have with Cloud9 when we took over customer support, and it's not what we said to everyone regarding support for Cloud9 products.

We said quite clearly what support for Cloud9 products means, there's no need to repeat it, because it's in my previous post, and it's all over this forum and on the Cloud9 home page too.

You are asking something that we never said or promised we would do, and that doesn't make any sense for us to do right now. Since FS9 users are declining each day, any possible "increase" of sales because of adding AES support, will never repay the time we'll lose working at it, because it would be a tiny fraction of what is already a minority market (FS9).
Logged

newmanix
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 755



« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2010, 11:22:38 PM »

Scenery quality doesn't have much to do with going back working at it, because that's not the agreement we have with Cloud9 when we took over customer support, and it's not what we said to everyone regarding support for Cloud9 products.

We said quite clearly what support for Cloud9 products means, there's no need to repeat it, because it's in my previous post, and it's all over this forum and on the Cloud9 home page too.

You are asking something that we never said or promised we would do, and that doesn't make any sense for us to do right now. Since FS9 users are declining each day, any possible "increase" of sales because of adding AES support, will never repay the time we'll lose working at it, because it would be a tiny fraction of what is already a minority market (FS9).

Understood, and I will not debate nor argue that under any means. But what do you have to loose by simply giving the files to Oliver to AES it? The jetbridges are not part of the terminal scenery object right? There really shouldn't be much if anything for you to modify right?
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40166



WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 07, 2010, 01:05:30 PM »

The jetbridges are not part of the terminal scenery object right? There really shouldn't be much if anything for you to modify right?/quote]

As I've said in my previous message, they are, just like in KLAX, which means we should rework the terminals.
Logged

newmanix
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 755



« Reply #11 on: September 07, 2010, 07:58:31 PM »

Ok. According to the manual, there are about 5 or 6 jetbridges that do animate. Would Oliver be able to activate only those bridges for AES? Or would they have to be seperated from the terminal like the static bridges? Just curious. Some AES is better then no AES at all. And if it requires no work on your end, I think its worth it for the hundreds of people who bought and still enjoy the scenery and for the few like me who will still buy it.

Olivers portfolio of AES airports grows and more credits are purchased. It seems like win, win, win. But I am asking as more of a favior to dedicated customers rather then from a business standpoint.

Would it be possible to please do that?  Smiley

My last effort here is, perhaps, is the scenery owner from the origional C9 avail whom I could appeal since FSDT is only onboard at a support baises?
« Last Edit: September 07, 2010, 08:10:41 PM by newmanix » Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40166



WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 07, 2010, 09:27:08 PM »

Ok. According to the manual, there are about 5 or 6 jetbridges that do animate. Would Oliver be able to activate only those bridges for AES? Or would they have to be seperated from the terminal like the static bridges? Just curious

All bridges should be separated from the terminals, regardless if they are animated or not.

Quote
Some AES is better then no AES at all. And if it requires no work on your end, I think its worth it for the hundreds of people who bought and still enjoy the scenery and for the few like me who will still buy it.

As I've said twice already, it DOES requires work on our end, if the jetways were separated it would have been enough to send the jetways sources to Oliver, as usual. But they aren't so, we have to go back to the original models, and rework them to separate the terminals from the jetways.

Quote
Would it be possible to please do that?  Smiley

I'm sorry but, we simply have our hands full with too many things right now.

The number of things we are going to work on in the next months, is way more than what most people think ( some things we haven't announced yet, other we can't disclose even if we would like to ). This means we need to be very careful to select only the most important things and we don't have much chance for the smaller projects.
Logged

newmanix
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 755



« Reply #13 on: September 07, 2010, 09:58:01 PM »

Ok last question and I wont push it any further. Promise. If an outside developer were willing to do it, would you allow that?
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40166



WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 07, 2010, 11:07:34 PM »

If an outside developer were willing to do it, would you allow that?

Sorry, no. The scenery itself as a product might be old, but its source files are not something we can give away to outsiders, and there are other legal issue that we simply can't to explain here, but are obviously related to the fact the scenery copyright is not FSDT, but it's Cloud9. You simply have to accept the fact that AES for KDCA and KLAX is not going to happen.
Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!