hello all. i have a question. it may seem a very silly question to some of you, but im curious as to why there are so few aircrafts to download on simv, compared to when fs 9 was the current model. the planes to download appear to have frozen up. am i not going to the right place for them? or are there just not people creating aircraft now?. i understand that aircraft packages dont create themselves and that there is obviously an enormous amount of time involved in making one.so please somebody get back to me and let me know. any answers would be appreciated, sarcastic or not  . get some.

You also have to notice that a huge part of the FS9 planes work with no problems in FSX.
And for the FS9 planes, remove the repaints and you'll see, there won't be that much left....

My understanding from Phil Taylor's posting is that, instead of trying to get the max out of FSX and deliver all that was promised, graphically at least, they've given up on it now after two 'tuning' 2 SPs and a small datadisk, and are getting on with other stuff, which may or may not include FSXI, which probably will not be backwards compatible. It doesn't surprise me that a lot of modellers are sticking with FS9, or just updating stuff, and not getting stuck into all the new things in FSX. A rough announcement about when FSXI might be ready would help some - for example, if it's in 3 years then 'getting into FSX' will be worth it for more people.

I see this as a FIVEfold issue:

One, the complexity of creating models for FSX that actually can take advantage of the existing capabilities of all of FSX's features has reached a new level of complexity.  And people are still trying to figure out what FSX is capable of due to the slow start (with service packs to make it "functional").  When FS2004 came out... it was a FAR shorter technical and hardware "jump" from fs2002.  So it was easier to adapt add-on development skills to that new platform.

Two, because of the SERIOUS hardware demands of FSX to get anywhere near what is "promised on the box", that has slowed the acceptance of the offering in the main existing FS community.  The new marketing and "missions" likely attracted a NEW audience to the flight sim title... so that helped keep sales solid... but it seems that many "serious" long-term FS addicts either are waiting to buy until things "shake out", or they bought early and were disappointed due to performance issues.  In any case, there are a LOT of people still happy with FS2004 and still using it.

Three, because there was such a long lifespan with FS2004, it gave the developers a LOT of time to figure out how to use the sim.  And time for a LOT of stuff to BE developed.  In the process of that the PAYWARE offerings that accumulated for FS2004 blossomed.  That payware added capabilities to fs2004 what were VERY sophisticated, like FSGenesis's very detailed trerrain mesh, the PMDG 747-400 "Queen of the Skies", Flytampa Airports, and Aerosoft AES services, to name just a few.  So FS2004 started to be a pretty SERIOUS simulator when you added all that kind of stuff.  And many serious simmers have.

So for point number four, many people invested a LOT of money in payware for FS2004.  That $50 simulator quickly became the $1000 simulator.  This provides incentive NOT to change over to FSX...... since most of that investment is not transferable AND "out of the box" FSX does not feature some of the stuff that the addons did for FS2004 (ala FSPassengers, etc.).  All of that payware showed what was POSSIBLE in flight simulation..... so all of this also "raised the bar" as to what was expected in serious add-ons.

Which brings us to point five.  Expectations.

The level of detail that serious simmers now EXPECT in an add-on aircraft, or in an airport, or in a "gee wiz" utility has been raised a LOT during the tenure of FS2004.  In the past, it was not all that difficult for a lone freeware developer to toss out a new aircraft.  (I'm NOT belittling the effort here... I undestand that is is not "easy".)  Not so simple to do anymore.  

These days, if the ITT temperature of the engines is not spot on to the real aircraft, people will be all over the boards complaining.  If the synoptics on the glass display are not exactly the correct ones for the model number of the Boeing being flown.... people will criticize.  If the climb rate does not match "specs", people will criticize.  If the hangar texture on Hangar #10 at Airport X is not exactly the same as the real airport.... people will complain.  If the add-on flightplanner does not go online and get the daily NAT trracks for the DAY out of Gander... people will complain.

So it has become much more demanding to produce add-ons for the newer sim.  Freeware developers do not do their selfless work just to hear people criticize it all to pieces all over the net.  And I see this as only getting MORE complicated as time goes by and as FSXI (and XII, and XIII, etc) come along.  At this time, to develop a "serious contender" add-on..... it typically takes a TEAM of people to put it together.  The lone developer is being put to the test both skills wise as well as to the TIME he/she has to devote to the hobby.  This will result in some attrition.  

I see the move toward more payware addons as inexorable as this complexity factor goes through the roof.  Yes, there will always be some dedicated and self-less freeware developers putting out STELLAR products.... but I see this number decreasing as the complexity increases.  Few will have the time to put out the next "Queen of the Skies" for free.

I also do not see this as a bad thing.  All in all... it will STILL result in better and better flight simulation available to the home user.  We might just have to pay a bit more for it.

best,

.............john

richardd43 wrote on Oct 16^th, 2007 at 11:00pm:


Just look up the word "".   

Seriously... NickN is the man to steer you right.  Probably clean out your WALLET in the process....... but he knows what he is talking about.  If he says, "With that you still won't be able to max out the sliders." then .....you won't.

best,

............john

Quote:


LOL.... that is my problem. I have worked on computers of some sort most of my life (I'm 64) and I am either learning less or forgetting more, not sure which.

I was looking at the Asus X-38 today but want to hold off until I see what the new CPU lineup will be like. Would hate to shoot myself in the foot with an early buy.

This is getting off the original subject of the thread... am sure there will be plenty of discussion about the new hardware later.