Medellinexpat

@judeb maybe. Of course we don’t know how MS are going to price this anniversary edition so ‘free’ might not exactly be what it suggests. One wonders if Inibuilds will hide behind their agreement with MS not to provide an XP12 update? If that do that their flash sale on the A300 and A310, when this news must have been known to them, would be at the very least cynical.

On their MSFS endeavor the A310 that is their initial product is going to be free as ‘will be a part of the Microsoft Flight Simulator 40th Anniversary Standard Edition coming in November of 2022’. Free doesn’t always suggest in depth of course and the two features they focus on is a FMC ( more features than on the Xplane versions) and a new EFB. For me the A310 is a bit of an odd choice for a package aircraft (255 delivered) with the initial Inibuilds version just being a passenger variant. It did cross my mind if this MSFS 40th Anniversary edition might be intended to be something of an XP12 spoiler, but I guess we will see. i am probably missing something but normally reviews here are for products you can buy from the Org store but they are no longer listed there (I think they were available, but I bought from Inibuilds direct). Given the flash sales I did wonder how well Inibuilds were faring, but perhaps as has been commented they now intend MSFS to be their focus. They did have quite a lucrative model, much of the underpinnings of the A300, A310 and the Beluga must have been similar but each sold separately. Perhaps that is what they will repeat on the MSFS platform?

These are good aircraft although Inibuilds themselves are not the easiest people to work with. Both of this aircraft we recently on flash sale at hugely discounted prices (over 80% off). It was a flash sale but if like me you have paid full price for these not a good feeling.

Interesting review. I bought this and consider it OK (as is the case generally with GlobalArt) but not exceptional. What I don’t like is the need to download MisterXs Library. I know its a common library for Xplane users but its a slippery slope having freeware libraries as part of a payware package. As for different gates for different plugins that is nonsense. So now I need to check the documentation when planning gate arrivals or departures? I am sure to forget that need one day. i guess I’ve been to the airport maybe twenty times in my life and the package is a fair representation without being particularly memorable. Frame rates for me have been good (using aircraft like the Toliss A321). A good choice of subject as South America is not well represented in payware. Outside of Brazil there have been a couple of Santiago efforts and a Bogota but not much else. incidentally Traffic Global filled out the gates nicely.

On charging for updates to XP12 there are two sides to that. If developers do not update their product then they will have nothing to sell going forward. Sales of XP11 only product once XP12 is released will likely plummet There’s a balance between providing a service for existing customers in providing the update and using your existing client base to fund making your product sale able to new customers. If developers do charge a fee will they be transparent about the work that was needed to justify the charge? My view is the developers with older product, say the IXEG 733 (I know its not in the Org store) would have a case to charge a fee. Something newer, lets say the Inibuilds A300 or the Toliss A340 are so recent (XP12 was already on the horizon) then them charging would be less justifiable. If developers do charge a fee then they will also have to make some development choices. Going forward only the XP12 versions will get updates and bug fixes? Will they need to maintain two code sources for the Org store, the XP11 only version and the XP12 version for new customers and those who have paid for the upgrade? Messy. And then there’s the whole issue of protecting their product. Product key verification becomes more complex when there is the key for the original purchase and presumably a key for the upgrade (or some other sort of workaround).

Does telling customers they are working on the transition break any NDA? If Laminar wrote a NDA in that fashion they were not thinking clearly. One rationale for people not moving to 12 would be that some of their purchases would no longer work. Where is the downside for Laminar?

One thing I find frustrating is the lack of feedback from the development community about who is and who isn’t making sure their aircraft wares are XP12 compliant. While I believe that generally products will be just fine it only needs one or two elements to be buggy in the transition to either break immersion or make aircraft basically unusable. So what in your fleet will make the transition without issues? There’s some guess work of course. Currently active developers like Thandra should of course work out issues, but Carenado who have had no recent Xplane releases and have a poor record in fixing issues already? I have begun looking at replacing some of my old fleet with newer wares, the Airfoillabs 172NG and the vFlyteAir Arrow III to prepare for the change. Add in the issue of whether vendors are going to charge upgrade fees for any work they do to make aircraft complaint and for the consumer its all rather frustrating given how close we are to the change. Even for the Org store it must be difficult. When will they be able to guarantee sales as XP12 compliant? An article detailing the situation developer by developer would be nice, but perhaps the information just isn’t available?

I bought this and found little feedback on it. The scenery is not bad but the installer (I use W11) is pretty bad. It runs, but gives no evidence that it is running and then eventually - after some time - completes. I did also get a message from another program that a library item is missing lib/lights but XP11 threw no error.

I bought today from the Orgstore Nimbus’ new Dulles. It was $30 - and worth it. That needs authorization but the reality is that at that price without some form of protection its liable to be pirated.

This issue seems something of a red herring to me. i’ve bought plenty of payware aircraft and I can’t think of ANY of them that do not require some form of activation. It is a minor inconvenience but as it helps prevents the piracy of software I think we understand why its there. Running out of activations sometimes (if rarely) happens but the vendors tend to handle the problem without issues. Actually for me the activation of scenery packages is more interesting. In the past more sceneries seemed to need activation but increasingly that seems less common. Perhaps its difficult to achieve but I am surprised it is not a more common practice.

Agreed a great summary of the year and much to agree with, in particular how the IXEG 737 still remains a great go to aircraft. The remarks on Boundless and Inibuilds are right on the mark as well. On the Hampden any chance of a review? Taimodels, as you say they are tackling some important subjects that have been ignored and where in some cases the stock airports are not great. To me they are at least upgrades on stock, and friendly on disk space unlike many sceneries these days. Your reviews of Taimodels airports really did not go into any great detail on your concerns, perhaps a longer and more detailed review of their Paris CDG or Bangkok might be useful. Anyway seasons greeting and thanks for all the reviews over the year. Like many your reviews point me towards things I might be interested in and sometimes allow me to take a massive swerve away. One last thought why give MSFS the excuse of Covid? Yes there may have been some impacts on development teams but presumably gaming revenues have soared during the pandemic which would have suggested investment. Like Boundless, busy and churning out sceneries during the worst of the pandemic.

Stephen firstly you clearly misunderstand my view on the Org store. Did you read it properly? I was intending to be supportive of the store and suggesting that developers who are avoiding it were potentially losing sales. Having the product on your own store only means that once the burst of release publicity has gone how do you even know the product exists? As for the argument that developers aren’t in some cases avoiding the Org store I’m surprised as several of my recent purchases weren’t available on the Org store. I gave an example of one in my post. What about a well known A300 and Beluga release? There isn’t much Asian scenery on the Org store. There is on another competing platform including Changi and a fairly new Narita. There’s also a much better Gatwick recently released than the one on the Org store. I could go on. Now that’s not to say I expect everything to be on the Org store, nor that there won’t be items that don’t meet the Org store standards but there are gaps and you won’t have to go far to find developers on posted feedback saying that they don’t intend to use the Org store. One posted in another forum that it was because the Org. Store didn’t meet their standards, which as I posted there made zero sense. Much as I like my points on the Org store I do wonder if eliminating that program (which might be unpopular) might allow the store to give a better deal to developers and encourage more complete coverage? Or even the option. Want your points or give the benefit back to the developers?

Welcome back. Excellent comments on the state of the add on industry and many of them were foreseeable. Those that left for the riches of MSFS leaving their old clientele behind. Step up names like Carenado who seem to have deserted Xplane. Even Orbx who other than a couple of releases now seem to have turned into a store for other Xplane add on providors. It would be interesting to get information from the source about just how well MSFS sales are going. Did deserting Xplane improve their finances or was it just the opportunity to retread existing other platform material for MSFs? There have been some positives. The 146 as you say (but the daily bug fixing packages became tedious) and some promising new developers like Boundless who have issued both niche and more mainstream sceneries. There has been some useful updating going on, packages like the Toliss Airbuses have had some useful changes and fixes. As MSFS has shown the industry still struggles with getting content out in a timely manner. You can fly between any two points in the world in MSFS in a detailed aircraft, provided the two points are no more than the range of a CRJ or a Piper. Lessons to be learnt for XP12 there. Sime small developers go against the trend. Vertical Simulations and their excellent US Regional airports. Stick and Rudder who always seem to have something in Beta and maintain a good dialogue with their customers. But as you say, small offerings and the larger ines that came along like Madrid Barajas although much needed weren’t very inspiring. Another trend has been developers avoiding the Org store and trying to sell from their own platforms. One wonders at the success of that. I browse the Org store (including the recent excellent sale) figuring out what my next buy might be. How do I know your Jackson Hole scenery even exists? The pandemic should have been a great opportunity for the industry with people stuck at home. Did they take advantage of it? One would argue not.

I am a big fan of VerticalSim and have both KFAY and the very recent Myrtle Beach. In fact I have all of the Xplane releases. In recent releases VS airports have become simpler to install (in the past the options for Ortho could make installation more complex) and there’s also good included documentation. Other than being very good sceneries what I like about VS is their choice of airports. They are all ideal for short haul and GA and at this point VS is getting nice coverage of the Eastern Seaboard of the US. Excellent airports for short hour or more flights in your ERJ, CRJ, Bae146 or even your favorite 737.

I’d argue the really tricky ones are the older jets like the FJS 732 and 727. With all or most of the flap hanging out and the slower spool up on the older jet engines more than a little care is needed to keep speed and descent right. Step into the Toliss 321 or Zibo and you’ll appreciate how far aviation has come in the past few decades.

UK2000 have departed the Xplane space and therefore you might well have to consider their Xplane offerings as abandonware. I run this with TE and get good frame rates but I do think some of the other Boundless sceneries are better. Its a good subject though and was a missing airport in the payware space.

I have bought this and had been looking forward to its release for some time. It is a challenging aircraft compared with many recent commercial aircraft releases but its worthwhile and easy to recommend. It also comes with a large and detailed manual which other developers would do well to copy. One good and bad thing. JF are being very responsive to issues people are raising, although none were show stoppers. But four updates in three days? Although Skunkcrafts does avert having to download the whole aircraft (again other developers might take note) but it seems every time I go to fly the 146 I first need to have to go through an update. The lack at present, although one is promised, of a custom FMC seems to be a constant complaint. Whether an FMC would have been in the aircraft, at least originally, is a fair point and the standard Laminar one is included. If you have to have an all singing and dancing FMC to fly what is after all a short haul aircraft I guess you might avoid, but using VORs together with some self navigation is equally realistic. Frame rates for me are fine, nearer to Toliss than Zibo. I have had issues using Better Pushback with the aircraft which I need to examine more.

While as the review says a decent Madrid is overdue the preview shots of the scenery published a few weeks ago were not impressive including some lurid lime green areas. Even these screen captures look a little bright and burnt. Some of the detail like the red roof edging also looks very bold. Hopefully this isn’t an opportunity missed but the palette looks rather odd.

I’d buy this - even though much of the content must be similar to the 757 pack I own - but there are plenty of comments out there that the sounds both inside and outside are too low. How was the volume when you tried it Stephen?

I have bought several Boundless sceneries and had commented in the past that they seemed to be improving at each release. The rate of releases has been increasing and when I bought Stansted for the first time I was rather disappointed. It was an excellent choice of subject but there’s something about it that’s missing. It’s difficult to put my finger on exactly what it is, a lack of life perhaps, and it did make me wonder if Boundless, in releasing so many sceneries so quickly, isn’t falling into a trap of not spending enough time in making them as good as they could be. Boundless marketing is also annoying. At the moment they have a sale on one site (a consolidator site), but not on their own, or on the Org. Store or another developer who they have formed an alliance with. So looking to purchase Boundless sceneries means price shopping over different platforms. The Org. Store should have a word.

Dead last in the race for sim-supremacy, if there is such a thing? It is true there is a huge amount of scenery being released for MSFS, odd in that the selling point of that sim was that it meant to be a very good representation of the real world. Look at the releases as well, lots of very small airports that are at best niche markets. Xplane has been around a while so a lot of subjects have already been covered, plus the native airports in Xplane are often very good and therefore obviate the need for payware. Add in free scenery in Xplane and its still dead last? As for payware aircraft despite a lot of the industry focusing on MSFS hows that coming along? Not very quickly. The back catalogue for Xplane aircraft certainly isn’t small. Just look at one developer, Carenado and the number of GA aircraft they’ve released. And on MSFS? FSX and P3D? How many Microsoft based simulators do you need? Xplane12 is somewhere in the pipeline. Consumer upgrades for either FSX and P3D likely? Stll dead last? How many releases do you need? Recently on X-Plane we’ve has a A300, a Beluga, a A321 plus a decent pipeline of GA aircraft filling in gaps in existing offerings. The Rotate MD11 is taking time. But then that’s the industry. Small teams or single developers working on what are increasingly difficult projects. Hull Infirmary is an unusual release, but that’s much of the character of Boundless and although niche it does support a rather underserved community, helicopters. And it is cheap. But if you want it MSFS has had some blockbuster releases and announcements in the past few days. Aerosoft’s Alta (360,000 passengers a year)and Orbx’s Samedan. Nothing wrong with those as releases, but that’s what Xplane is missing out on?

Yet another developer who provides an update just a couple of days after the initial release. Testing should uncover issues. Rare circumstances might be missed and should be fixed by why this rash of instant patches just after release? How can testing miss, for example, duplicated sounds or sounds not functioning?

Simbrief is an excellent resource and now at least I don’t have to look guiltily at the PayPal request every time I use it. Navigraph is a good utility as well (although from time to time their infrastructure and programs have issues) butI do wonder about the business model. The annual subscription with monthly updates is expensive and I’m never that convinced that that the monthly changes are that great. Perhaps I’m wrong. Simbrief could of course remain free but you could also see situations where it might be changed to make taking updated Navdata more necessary. While having some concerns Simbrief is so essential to me that I’ve always had concerns about how financially viable it was. At least Navigraph have a source of revenue to support the site.

On FSA I don’t disagree with your comments but it was woefully thought out, executed and responded to. They had the successful conferences which the pandemic had derailed. Why didn’t they stick closer to that idea, say Quarterly online conferences and then some priority access to the ‘real’ conferences in the future? They also did not seem to have refined a target audience. There is a lot of free content available about flight simulation but a lot of it is self promoting and thin in content. Having unique content, from developers, that was much deeper than what you commonly find online would have had an audience. Not a huge one perhaps but it would have been the base to build from. They might even have worked with that more knowledgeable base to build beta testing teams for developers. What would you rather have, 10% off Inbuilds products (which you can probably get anyway) or potential access into say their A310 beta team? Inbuilds departure from the group within 24 hours needs also to be recognized as an issue. As soon as there was noise they jumped? FSA thought out properly could have been a platform for several good things. Something like a Developer Code of Conduct that developers could have signed up to and promising standards and good practices around things like customer support. It might not have hurt the platform developers like Microsoft and Laminar to sponsor the effort. FSA would have promoted flight simulation, effectively for them its free advertising, a little cash would not have hurt. Personally, and many will disagree I’m not totally sure that a multi platform site is an easy sell. If nothing else you need to focus on the individual platform streams under a universal site. MSFS is so big and so much attention is focused on it that the other platforms often get short shrift. As I’ve posted before I gave up on the PC Pilot magazine after too many MSFS ‘specials’. So FSA you could have built a platform with content from your developer base providing content such as the trials and tribulations of building the Beluga. A twenty minute interview. Would I watch that rather than watching Captain Annoying streaming a three hour flight free. You bet.

To be honest I’ve rarely come across an aircraft that doesn’t need activation. Most sceneries don’t but most aircraft do and some, the IXEG 733 for example, seem to be checking for activation on a regular basis.