Products Support > GSX Support MSFS
GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
WebMaximus:
I fail to understand why you always have this urge to over-complicate things. Very often to not use the word always, what seems most important to you is to be right and have the last word. Regardless whether you're right or not.
I made a very simple suggestion which I think many of us would appreciate. With the risk of repeating myself, with the suggested box unticked (which would be the default), people would be able to choose exactly what the like. Just like it already is. However, for those of us who would like to skip the crew and pilots boarding part for turnaround flights or simply to save some time, we could tick this box. Meaning the passengers would board and deboard with no further questions asked. Simple as that.
Now give me that famous last word of yours Umberto, telling me how I'm wrong and you're right so we can end this debate and spend out valuable time on something more fruitful ;)
virtuali:
--- Quote from: WebMaximus on February 08, 2023, 12:48:42 pm ---Now give me that famous last word of yours Umberto, telling me how I'm wrong and you're right so we can end this debate and spend out valuable time on something more fruitful
--- End quote ---
It would have been enough to re-read my post more carefully: it included all you need to read to understand it, so I'll copy it again: that's how users will say if we tried to do a YES/NO option like you suggested:
--- Quote ---"I'm annoyed by the question, but I always board pilots, but not the crew"
"I'm annoyed by the question, but I always board the crew, but not the pilots"
"I'm annoyed by the question, and I only want to board passengers"
See how just an "Yes/No" option wouldn't really work, for something that is INHERENTLY a 4-ways choice ?
--- End quote ---
But that's besides the point. The point is: where, exactly, I said it would be a "problem" making a drop-down choice with 4 choices ? Have I said this would cause issues, or made up some kind of excuse about NOT doing it ? Where, exactly, have you read that from any of my replies ?
Yes, we can add the option, and yes, it WILL be a 4 choices, because IT IS the best choice, way better than just an YES/NO option like you suggested, without even realizing your suggestion that GSX should board "Nobody" in case it was deselected, which is exactly the opposite how GSX always worked when there was no question: that in itself should be ample evidence that a 4 way choice is the better option, since we couldn't even agree on what should be the default, when the question is skipped.
WebMaximus:
There we go and great to hear what is coming 👍
...and edited to add, what would have been enough would have been for you to say from start:
"That's a great suggestion Richard and you know what, I'll make it even better by adding multiple options. To cater for all needs. Thanks for your feedback and for using my product."
NordoNyle:
Two things I want to ask regarding the future of GSX Pro.
1.) Any plans to incorporate a feature to have the tugs tow your aircraft to your parking stand? I feel this is something that would be appreciated by many and can be possible already with the current pushback system.
2.) Any plans to make configurations to have GSX be more "business jet/GA friendly" for aircraft like the Citation Longitude, CJ4, Cessna 172/152's etc? Some things like out-of-the-box compatibility with aircrafts, (for the GA side of things) the options to only have pushback/towing for the 172/152, and maybe new things like limos/vans rather than a bus to load pax, loading bags via a single ground crew member/no baggage cart, etc would be very nice to see with GSX making it more dynamic and usable for more than just commercial/freighter jets.
virtuali:
--- Quote from: Nyro51 on February 10, 2023, 09:29:00 pm ---1.) Any plans to incorporate a feature to have the tugs tow your aircraft to your parking stand? I feel this is something that would be appreciated by many and can be possible already with the current pushback system.
--- End quote ---
Of course. That was the 2nd most asked feature on GSX Creators Discord, after Remote Deicing so yes, we are fully aware is a requested feature.
However, this won't come before we'll have the chance to add all the upcoming additions to the SU12 Navdata API update, which will allow us to have a much better reliability whenever jetways and passengers are concerned. Since we expect SU12 Beta to start very soon, that will be the highest priority.
Next, as this Roadmap thread indicated, will be the extra Refueling trucks for airplanes with wings lower than 3.40 meters ( 737 and below ), which will also come before we'll ever look at the pushback Pull option, which is quite complex.
--- Quote ---2.) Any plans to make configurations to have GSX be more "business jet/GA friendly" for aircraft like the Citation Longitude, CJ4, Cessna 172/152's etc? Some things like out-of-the-box compatibility with aircrafts, (for the GA side of things) the options to only have pushback/towing for the 172/152, and maybe new things like limos/vans rather than a bus to load pax, loading bags via a single ground crew member/no baggage cart, etc would be very nice to see with GSX making it more dynamic and usable for more than just commercial/freighter jets.
--- End quote ---
Yes, but I'm afraid to do it right, it might require a dedicated add-on, considering the huge amount of new characters animations required. In addition to new crew that would perform things like manual pushbacks pushing the wings on smaller GA planes, there's the issue of having to basically redo ALL passenger animations that are currently tailored for airliners.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version