shaping up pretty well

[cheezyflier]

i was thinking about some of the really cool models which have come out in the past year, and the scenery, etc.
fsx now has very nearly all the best add-ons that fs9 did. i can remember feeling as though we might never get to that point

 

[Felixthreeone]

Actually..... i think you guys might have a bit more now than we do in FS9....I am a jealous simmer! There are some truly fantastic addons available for FSX now....makes me glad i will be getting a new 'puter next year! I have a lot to look forward to!

 

[Bjoern]

Actually..... i think you guys might have a bit more now than we do in FS9....

You think?

The "08/15" (say "average") market is covered pretty well so far, but there's still thousands of open niches that FS9 had filled.

We've still got a long way to go.

 

[Kiwikat]

The "08/15" (say "average") market is covered pretty well so far, but there's still thousands of open niches that FS9 had filled.

We've still got a long way to go.

That's only because the general lack of freeware development for FSX. There are countless more freeware developers for FS9. (stating the obvious of course...)

With no "FS11" on the horizon, I really do wonder where the hobby is headed. FSX can't possibly be the end.

 

[Bjoern]

That's only because the general lack of freeware development for FSX.

I'm wondering about that, considering that FSX has more possibilities and sophisticated tools for development.
And it isn't *that* much different from developing for FS9.

With no "FS11" on the horizon, I really do wonder where the hobby is headed.

Hopefully not towards payware add-ons only.

 

[daytonite_andy]

In regards to where the hobby is heading, has anybody been reading the Aerosoft website recently?

http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/re/iboshop.cgi?show270

http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showforum=278

We may have an answer in three years time....

 

[letsgetrowdy]

I soooo want to see the "Plane Design" Spitfire XVI for FSX. It had the most detailed/beautiful exterior model of any Spitfire in Flight Simulation.....
http://www.plane-design.com/spitfire.html

 

[Milton Shupe]

I'm wondering about that, considering that FSX has more possibilities and sophisticated tools for development.
And it isn't *that* much different from developing for FS9.

Hopefully not towards payware add-ons only.

It is different enough that most freeware developers (me included) will not be developing for FSX. There are plenty reasons why not but the main reasons are likely the additional time and effort required, the much higher standard of expectations in textures, VC construction, special controls gauges or xml code, and short interest level for new releases.

I think the only projects that will get serious attention and accolades will be payware developed. Most freeware developers cannot expect to come anywhere close to anything professionally developed. Most users expect that level of quality in products making it fruitless for a freeware developer to invest a year or more in a quality product.

Let's face it; once you get accustomed to such excellent renders as being put out today, competitive freeware is history. FSX quality and todays simmers will demand payware quality products.

 

[CodyValkyrie]

Mr. Shupe, I respectfully disagree. Look at what success Piglet has had. You yourself also created some wonderful addons that are still being used on a regular basis. I know for a fact that a majority of my fans cannot always afford every product I advertise, and I see regularly that they utilize freeware offerings instead for that reason.

Regardless, this is an interesting conversation that I am watching closely.

 

[MCDesigns]

I have to respectfully disagree also, look at Javier's Nimitz, Dino's Goshhawk and F-14, Piglets aircraft, the recent Ozx scenery for Tuscany, Jim's military bases and on and on. Granted there is more work involved in most FSX projects, but that ability to reach a higher level of detail is a good thing in my mind.

I personally find developing for FSX to be exciting and worthwhile, more so than with FS9. Ihere are so many more options and detail open to me than I had with FS9 (so much more I can't seem to finish any projects, got like 30 all working at the same time, LOL)

Granted I mostly do scenery, But I have done several aircraft for FS9 and FSX that I never released because of the work and lack of knowledge on my part that it would take to get it up to "MY" expectation level which is payware quality for lack of a better term.

IMO the only thing FS9 has going for it are more addons since it has been out longer and more performance overhead, which can be overcome now with current hardware in FSX.
I truly wonder how many developers say it's harder to develop for FSX based on hearsay and negative press that came out when it was first released and haven't even tried recently.

 

[tracyq144]

It is different enough that most freeware developers (me included) will not be developing for FSX. There are plenty reasons why not but the main reasons are likely the additional time and effort required, the much higher standard of expectations in textures, VC construction, special controls gauges or xml code, and short interest level for new releases.

I think the only projects that will get serious attention and accolades will be payware developed. Most freeware developers cannot expect to come anywhere close to anything professionally developed. Most users expect that level of quality in products making it fruitless for a freeware developer to invest a year or more in a quality product.

Let's face it; once you get accustomed to such excellent renders as being put out today, competitive freeware is history. FSX quality and todays simmers will demand payware quality products.

Just a "user" here, but I am sorry to hear you feel that way as your work in FS9 added so much to my enjoyment of that sim. You are an artist.

Just a thought here, but would the concept of "shareware" interest you, and maybe encourage you to develop for FSX? Or even really inexpensive payware?

I assume your love of the hobby led you to develop for FS9, and give your creations away for free, surely that love has not gone away?

I may not know what I am talking about, I truly have no idea what it takes to bring a quality FSX a/c to completion, I only know what outstanding work you did in FS9, and the talent it must entail.

Aah, I'm probably out of line here, but it's a shame to lose someone of your talents.

 

[Milton Shupe]

LOL Guys ... I said most freeware developers, not all, and I was referring to aircraft only. The developers you mentioned do excellent work ... and a new "batch" of designers are coming along who are better at more of the tools and faster to boot. When I look at the offerings for FSX, I am truly in awe. Thanks to FSXI not being imminent, I think we will see a lot more great stuff coming our way and I look forward to enjoying them instead of building them.

Frankly until you have been through the complete build and deliver cycle and invested the 600 or more hours in an aircraft project (just my part), I'm not sure how anyone could relate. It'a lot of work and FSX simply adds a bunch to the project time because of the technical requirements. Building FS9 level of aircraft quality for FSX is not worth all the extra effort IMO. I will leave it to the professional modelers and texture artists to bring the real quality stuff to the community. For FSX, I'll be a happy user, not a builder.

 

[Bjoern]

Text

Milton, why are you bringing expectations into the game?

I mean, you're a freeware developer. You can do whatever the heck you want whenever you want and in whatever quality you want without having to live up to any expectations at all.

After all, you're basically developing for yourself, right?


By the way:
I sometimes get the desire to try to convert your Dash 7. Are the source files avaiable?
Just in case this desire is getting serious...:d

 

[jdhaenens]

I don't know about Milton personally, but I believe you'll find that most freeware designers have a lot of pride in their own work and although there may have to be concessions made at times, we tend to think of our "customers" a lot more than you may think.

To be a decent freeware author my expectations really have to be much greater than my customers'.

Our standards for payware stuff (at least mine) can be pretty tough. I think I only have three payware products as far as scenery goes: Fly Tampa's Kai Tak, Bill and Holger's Tongass Fjords, and Bill's Plum Island.

 

[Milton Shupe]

Milton, why are you bringing expectations into the game?

I mean, you're a freeware developer. You can do whatever the heck you want whenever you want and in whatever quality you want without having to live up to any expectations at all.

After all, you're basically developing for yourself, right?


By the way:
I sometimes get the desire to try to convert your Dash 7. Are the source files avaiable?
Just in case this desire is getting serious...:d

Ha ... well, that's the line you usually hear from freeware developers but it does not apply to me. I started building for self satisfaction and to deliver a freeware product that was "rounded" out with equal quality in modeling, textures, panel and gauges, and flight model.

This still holds true yet it is taking more time to deliver the basics today ... and of course, the basics aren't enough anymore.

I have a new FS9 based Dash 7 that is FSX friendly awaiting textures and a few more details. Once we get this Puss Moth out the door, I will try to finish that up. Once done, I will certainly make the gmax source available.

Thanks

 

[Daube]

Mr. Shupe, I respectfully disagree. Look at what success Piglet has had. You yourself also created some wonderful addons that are still being used on a regular basis. I know for a fact that a majority of my fans cannot always afford every product I advertise, and I see regularly that they utilize freeware offerings instead for that reason.

Regardless, this is an interesting conversation that I am watching closely.

I agree.
Of course, the FSX "standards" are very high, but this is for payware.
When it comes to freeware, the standards and the expectations are not the same.
Just look at how many FS9 freeware models are used in FSX by the FSX'ers. Just looks at Milton's Spartan and Howard that are converted for FSX => exactely the same models, virtual cockpits and textures (ok, except for bump-maps...), but nevertheless they looks beautifull.

Milton, truth is: if you would design FSX planes exactely with the same level of details than your FS9 planes, the community would just LOVE them. Piglet has shown it already.

 

[CBris]

Milton, Sir, (I use the "sir" with capitals and the utmost of respect for your FS9 stuff. I loved it.)

From what I have learned from the many payware developers I have beta'd for over the past three years, I can fully understand why freeware devs have screwed back their efforts. I have probably been one of the most right royal PITAs when it comes to critiquing recent payware offerings - as I am sure they will tell you. :lol: So I do understand some of the issues, having had them explained to me many times now.

You are so right, when you say expectations have shot up - when I first saw what the paints alone demanded, I had to read up more than I bargained for on specular, reflectives and bumps. Even the SDK leaves us amateurs reeling, with all the hints for exporting the mdl from 3DS Studio. What amateur can afford a 4000$ modelling program?

"Quo Vadis FS" was discussed rather heatedly at the Aerosoft convention in Paderborn a few days ago. On the whole, the "death" of the Microsoft flight sim is not really worrying the "commercial market" - a period of stability is now ahead, where everyone can benefit. FSX serves the commercial market with some incredible new planes, and will continue to grow. FS9 lives on with those who reached the end of of their monetary boundaries and will continue in parallel with FSX for a while to come.

Many new FS9 planes can be recompiled for FSX - maybe there could be a trend where some devs with 3DS Max can do this for freeware devs? Maybe there is another 3D program, as yet untried, that will work with the SDK - Certainly a few developers have discovered that the latest version of 3DS Max no longer works properly with the FSX SDK export - so there is a potential downturn in the wings... I don't see Autodesk supporting Microsoft and continually allowing a "defunct" tool to stay usable. So 3DS Max modellers will have to keep the 2008 version if they wish to continue developing for FSX.

Although Aerosoft are toying with the idea, it will be more than a couple of years before a commercially viable new sim hits the streets. That means both FSX and FS9 will survive. I for one, have changed gear and moved to FSX. I won't be going back, despite the thousands of dollars my flight simulation cost me up to then. For me, FSX is just too much fun with planes like the new Christen Eagle (I even used the FS9 Eagle here before)

There have been a few excellent freebie addons for X, just as there have been portovers. The Rick Pipers, Dave Garwoods and others have done some major freeware work for FSX.

I see no reasons for worry, panic or complaint about the future of flight simulation as far as products goes. The main concern these days is growth. We're getting older on average. The median age of flight simmers is now just over 50 years and if you'd been in Paderborn recently, you'd even have been forgiven for thinking that it was a retired man's hobby. Silver hair and shiny scalps predominated.

We need to do a swift spot of PR to recruit new simmers. There are certainly a few very keen teenagers climbing aboard. They need encouraging so that they don't lose interest. And as for talent - there really are a quite a few new painters around of late. And they're getting good too. Some are even good enough to be making money out of their talents (McPhat, take a bow).

All in all, I do not see anything for anyone to worry about. We have two stable sim platforms that will weather the storm until whover builds the next simulation. Aerosoft or XPlane? Who knows. But to quote one of the most famous guide books in the galaxy...

Don't Panic!

 

[txnetcop]

LOL Guys ... I said most freeware developers, not all, and I was referring to aircraft only. The developers you mentioned do excellent work ... and a new "batch" of designers are coming along who are better at more of the tools and faster to boot. When I look at the offerings for FSX, I am truly in awe. Thanks to FSXI not being imminent, I think we will see a lot more great stuff coming our way and I look forward to enjoying them instead of building them.

Frankly until you have been through the complete build and deliver cycle and invested the 600 or more hours in an aircraft project (just my part), I'm not sure how anyone could relate. It'a lot of work and FSX simply adds a bunch to the project time because of the technical requirements. Building FS9 level of aircraft quality for FSX is not worth all the extra effort IMO. I will leave it to the professional modelers and texture artists to bring the real quality stuff to the community. For FSX, I'll be a happy user, not a builder.

Hey Milton, you've got the computer that will let you enjoy flying. You have already done so much for so many-so none of us would begrudge you the time to enjoy flight-simming instead of building. Thank you for doing so much for so many!
Ted

 

[harleyman]

Milton was and always be my FS9 hero...


You are the Man......:ernae:

 

[JayKae]

A lot of development over at OZx has to do with self indulgence of course but it is also for us Australians to show the world what an amazing country we live in and show everyone the best way that we can via FSX.