-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
Planes you would like to see totally redone.
- Thread starter aeronca1
- Start date
magoo
SOH-CM-2013
Well....thank you for the injection of diversionary humour into my morning....but truly..... we are not so easily confused?
(....Are we?)
The forum index shows the title of "Flight Simulator 2020" just above the "FSX General Discussion" title. I didn't think that I had thrown out such an extended hairpin curve?
None the less, I believe the law of averages will probably describe the next flight-sim product from Microsoft as "FS2020".....in time, as referred to by users in conventional terms.
It's a Darwinian Filter thing, isn't it.
Concerning the original topic; Aircraft sim model that so many of us would like to see created/re-created......is it an appetite based condition that can be solved by the individual who suffers the desire, themselves?
There are more tools and tutorials available than ever before. If GMAX seems old fashioned and too difficult to some, there's Blender, an amazing and powerful freeware program. A lot of info about it can be gleaned from postings by creators who frequent this website and at FSDeveloper.
There's all manner of opportunity to build, and lot's of support available from advanced creators who are more than happy to pass on their experience.
There are flight-sim flyers who have been pining away for a given aircraft model for over two decades and have yet to find it dropped into their open beaks. In that time, they could have become master carvers in flight-sim ether, and be up to their necks in "what-ever-they-desire" hands-on subject matter.
Yes, the process is involved, but it certainly ain't black art stuff.
And truly, it's not my desire raise hackles here. This is not politics or religion or anything sensitive or tempestuous. It's a hobby thing.
Truly not meant to patronize or insult anybody, I'm simply pointing out doors that open alternative opportunities, and perhaps....greater independence and reward.
There are a lot of good reasons why any individual would not/ could not pick up the gauntlet, and there are equal reasons why one would/could.
Does this all challenge a comfort zone? Absolutely.
But that's the spice of life, ain't it?
Food for thought?
I have lost count of the number of times I have tried to learn various modeling software. I have unfortunately concluded that I failed to receive any talent whatsoever in that field.
More experienced hands than mine answer that talent is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. I too have tried this and agree with them.
Wasn't going to post anything in this thread because of the beginning of thread complaining about vaporware and long build time complaining (wonder how the developers who work in their spare time feel about those statements) but in the end my own greedy needy side of myself decided otherwise. Piper Cheyenne 400LS needs to be done especially with 5 Bladed MT Props.
musterpilot
Members +
Not to Hijack things but I've solved the prop issue on the Norseman (Thanks to Arno over at Flight Sim Developers) So, since I am off work tomorrow, and after a bit of flight testing, I'll have a Norseman (Wheels) up and running as a straight FSX conversion from my original FS2002/04 model. I did figure out how to make the glass like the default aircraft, extra glossy glass.
As a bonus, I'll probably have my Super Pacer updated as well. The Beech Volpar needs a few more tweaks and I'm sorting a flap issue on the Gipisland Airvan for another FSX conversion.
The Pacer works a treat in P3DV4.5 perfect thanks would love to see the GA airvan done
John
This one, native:
Or this one, native as well:
Priller
I'm with you on the Dewoitine D.520. Althought I still fly it, this D.520 is showing its age...............But a state of the art Messerschmitt Bf109 E would be most welcome as well!
The ancient model by Jean-Marie Mermaz.
Cheers,
Huub
gman5250
Charter Member
Or, even better: a decent Brewster Buffalo!!
Priller
The Buffalo is one of the models that I was able to salvage from the catastrophic data loss. Currently the mesh and bitmaps are intact, the model will require significant work before it is flyable. The project is slated for recovery, but the process of re-constructing the lost data cache will take time and I have prioritized my projects.
nagpaw
SOH-CM-2022
Great ideas from everyone! I'll definitely second the B-25 and the F-82, and raise the PB4Y-2 Privateer and P4M Mercator. But the greatest wish from me is the Martin 404. It seems like the "DC-3 replacements" never received the FSX love like the Douglas and Lockheed four-engine jobs.
Brian_Gladden
SOH-CM-2025
pilto von pilto
Members +
The issue with these types of threads is this.
Hard fact 1
A developer will say they are making ( choosing the b25 mitchell only as an example... ) b25 then immediately the next couple of entries in that announcement will be " isnt <insert developer here > making one ? " or a better one is " it'll need to go some to beat <insert model from 10 years ago which whilst good for then is in fact inaccurate in a number of places > ". The the thread slightly derails into screenshots of the other devs projects. The dev who has commenced making the b-25 notices this and realises that at no point will his effort ever eclipse the 10 year old version nostalgia or the version that is "coming" and then abandons the project for greener pastures. The fault ( if there is any ) lies 50-50 with the community and the dev. The community for denigrating an addon before it even is finished, and the dev for not having the cojones to continue.
There are some great ideas in this thread. But at no point would a commercial dev ever touch one of the ones that has the words " the <insert dev here > is excellent but it would be good to get an FSX native version ". It's unfortunate but true once the community has latched onto a specific developer who has made a specific aircraft there is no shaking that loyalty. That's a good thing and a bad thing.
Hard fact 2.
As FSX users you arent going to want to pay large amounts of money for it. I get emails from potential customers who say " if this is over 30 usd for FSX I am not buying it because FSX is becoming obsolete ". And I get that. I wouldnt want to pay full price for a x360 console game right now. however if you look at the time/effort/money into a development required for a top shelf addon for fsx you need to be remunerated.
Hard fact 3.
Most of the suggestions on here arent commerically viable ( the dash 7 withstanding ) Unfortunately SOH is a niche market within a niche market. Freeware devs fine but commercially accusim/fluidsim/supersys-sim versions of these planes wont sell even in FS2020. Look at the proliferation of GA and tubeliners.
What's the answer ?
More freeware devs. Magoo hit the nail on the head perfectly. Go out there and start developing. Build it yourself. More developers in the FS world helps absolutely everyone commercial dev/freeware dev/end users alike. More competition. More talent pool. More knowledge. More variety. And dare I say it lower prices. The future's rosy if you decide to embrace it and develop the addons you want for yourself and your fellow hobbiest's and who knows you may decide to go payware and make a little ( and it is very little 1000 freeware downloads does not equal a 1000 sales! ) side money you can use to buy beer/motorcycles/fast-women ... not necessarily in that order.
Hard fact 1
A developer will say they are making ( choosing the b25 mitchell only as an example... ) b25 then immediately the next couple of entries in that announcement will be " isnt <insert developer here > making one ? " or a better one is " it'll need to go some to beat <insert model from 10 years ago which whilst good for then is in fact inaccurate in a number of places > ". The the thread slightly derails into screenshots of the other devs projects. The dev who has commenced making the b-25 notices this and realises that at no point will his effort ever eclipse the 10 year old version nostalgia or the version that is "coming" and then abandons the project for greener pastures. The fault ( if there is any ) lies 50-50 with the community and the dev. The community for denigrating an addon before it even is finished, and the dev for not having the cojones to continue.
There are some great ideas in this thread. But at no point would a commercial dev ever touch one of the ones that has the words " the <insert dev here > is excellent but it would be good to get an FSX native version ". It's unfortunate but true once the community has latched onto a specific developer who has made a specific aircraft there is no shaking that loyalty. That's a good thing and a bad thing.
Hard fact 2.
As FSX users you arent going to want to pay large amounts of money for it. I get emails from potential customers who say " if this is over 30 usd for FSX I am not buying it because FSX is becoming obsolete ". And I get that. I wouldnt want to pay full price for a x360 console game right now. however if you look at the time/effort/money into a development required for a top shelf addon for fsx you need to be remunerated.
Hard fact 3.
Most of the suggestions on here arent commerically viable ( the dash 7 withstanding ) Unfortunately SOH is a niche market within a niche market. Freeware devs fine but commercially accusim/fluidsim/supersys-sim versions of these planes wont sell even in FS2020. Look at the proliferation of GA and tubeliners.
What's the answer ?
More freeware devs. Magoo hit the nail on the head perfectly. Go out there and start developing. Build it yourself. More developers in the FS world helps absolutely everyone commercial dev/freeware dev/end users alike. More competition. More talent pool. More knowledge. More variety. And dare I say it lower prices. The future's rosy if you decide to embrace it and develop the addons you want for yourself and your fellow hobbiest's and who knows you may decide to go payware and make a little ( and it is very little 1000 freeware downloads does not equal a 1000 sales! ) side money you can use to buy beer/motorcycles/fast-women ... not necessarily in that order.
Josh Patterson
SOH-CM-2023
Sea Vixen! I was so scared when my computer crashed after SkySim called it quits. I thought I had lost their Sea Vixen but it was saved. (Except the texture for the inner surface of the left flap is now red for some reason.)A Sea Vixen and a Super Etendart!
Cees
Josh Patterson
SOH-CM-2023
A big YES to a PB4Y-2! Maybe Flight Replicas will spring a Privateer into the Upcoming B-24 release. After all the DC-4 included the Carvair as a bonus!
magoo
SOH-CM-2013
(Absolutely amazing recipe book created by Jedi Master Milton Shupe, including instruction detailing the infinite use of blood,sweat & tears as it relates to the electric ether. First of 47 FREE episodes.)
Gmax 1.2 for the Beginning Modeler #1 - Intro and Setup
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dgCObbUr5s
Download Gmax: http://www.turbosquid.com/gmax
Gmax 1.2 for the Beginning Modeler #1 - Intro and Setup
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dgCObbUr5s
Download Gmax: http://www.turbosquid.com/gmax
mike_cyul
SOH-CM-2025
Yes, a PB4Y Privateer will be coming after the B-24, but is likely to be separate.
The Buffalo is one of the models that I was able to salvage from the catastrophic data loss. Currently the mesh and bitmaps are intact, the model will require significant work before it is flyable. The project is slated for recovery, but the process of re-constructing the lost data cache will take time and I have prioritized my projects.
Now that is good to hear. I thought you had lost everything. Have a brilliant 2020!
Priller
tommieboy
SOH-CM-2025
Completely redone....I can't really think of one. But updated / expanded....it would be the Martin Mars! There is a real lack of heavy flying boats in all the flight simulators.
If I had to learn to create my own "aircraft" in FSX, I'd start with the Tic-Tac UFO!
Tommy