Medellinexpat

Agree completely with your comments on SAM. One positive it seems pretty stable these days - gone of the days when the farewell wave on the crash log would be some reference to SAM. Its intentions were always good, but the idea of rolling everything into one App, and with that huge intrusive control screen it always made it seem clumsy. Let’s move the jetway - and then have to quickly get out of the control screen to see the jetway now half way back to the terminal. Commercially it was quite clever with the sale of the add on modules but out of interest how often do you see follow me cars at airports these days?
SAM is of course threatened by XP12. Are there going to be moving jetways in base XP12? Will new shiny wet pavements kill off seasons files (not that they were ever a big thing). But then of course many developers now have made their sceneries dependent on SAM. No latest copy of SAM and your new payware international airport is reduced to Boeings and Airbuses grazing in a rather large field. So if developers don’t remove that dependency SAM for better or worse is going to be with us way into the future.

Hear you. One of the good things about Laminar (or the frustration) is that it is not a big corporate shop. Watch those presentation videos and we all know we are not going the mainstream route. Give Austin the chance and he will wobble on about everything that interest him and skip anything everyone else might ask. We all know that when released XP12 will instantly be benchmarked, at least in look against MSFS and we all know what the result of that will be. But for the faithful the improvements might open up the pocketbooks and keep them loyal. What XP12 cannot afford is lots of issues on release. MSFS other than the eye candy and the corporate campaign was hardly a tidy release but people like Microsoft are set up to manage those bumps. Laminar aren’t. The worst outcome is a repeat of the MD-11 saga. Years of built up anticipation that Rotate did nothing to manage (instead maintaining radio silence) and then when it came, part broken, a flurry of upset first adopters.

I have recently, thanks to Org store sales bought several new GA aircraft and have been flying around the summer skies of the UK and California, or at least the Orbx representations of them. And it has been very pleasant indeed. It might be my imagination but some of the recent Nvidia drivers also seem pretty good. Which led me to the thought that XP11 is really not bad at all, and (unlike many video games and simulations) I still have a lot more to do, to learn and improve - although my landings seem a lot more consistent these days. Then when I come online I read all of the calls for more news and a release date for XP12 and I wonder why. Perhaps XP12 out of the box will be better, but then like many releases it might take a few iterations. Now in XP11 unlike in MSFS I cannot really see my house, nor fly around a more accurate version of say London. But then XP11 does many other things better to compensate. And then there’s all my investment in XP11, not just the money but the time and the tweaking and learning it to a decent depth - although there is always more to learn.

So yes, XP12 would be nice, if only to get developers some much needed new sales. But in the interim I’ll just virtually fly, rather than seeking snippets from forums and videos. How does Guernsey to Swansea sound for this afternoon for example? Pleasant enough weather, but a little wet in the arrival perhaps?

I guess one argument that prices in XP12 might be higher is inflation. Many of the aircraft that may be updated were originally released and priced a few years ago so this might justifiably be an opportunity for developers to reset levels. Upgrade fees will be interesting. I have enough aircraft that in total in might be an significant sum. That might have some impact on sales of newer releases at least for a while as people find the money to upgrade their existing loved ‘fleet’. Plenty of people might have, say, fifteen pay-ware aircraft. Let’s say all of them were updated at $15 each. That’s $225 which puts the ‘upgrade’ price of the new base XP12 package into perspective. 

Stephen that is a nice sentiment but in reality will developers see it as a pool of money to fund development over the life of XP12 or will they see it as a one off payment to make the product compliant with XP12? I guess it may vary between developers. As for the question asked here should you purchase now, or when the aircraft is available in XP12 that is an interesting one. Lets say the current XP11 version is hypothetically $69. Lets say the upgrade fee will be $15. Will the developer, when XP12 is up and running and the upgrade done, make the price for new buyers to be $84 ($69+$15) or $69? My guess is the latter, but that is a guess. I think we are going to see a lot of variety between developers. Some will not upgrade, some will upgrade just to make it work in XP12 and some will upgrade and add XP12 features. One thing I guess is pretty certain, anyone staying with XP11 is unlikely to see either updates, bug fixes or any help if some other issue (like a Windows platform change) introduces new problems. Presumably once XP12 features are added back compatibility  is lost? 

Interesting timing in releasing this now ahead of 12 but if you read the developers thread in the forums payware section he does explain how that is covered. My biggest issue is that the package does change some of the native Xplane files which I am generally cautious about, although again the developer makes it clear that changing them back is no big deal.

As always an interesting article. On Inibuilds they always managed the message well. If you give vloggers exclusive access for reviews what do you get in return - good reviews. Make your forums only open to customers and then close threads before they get difficult and you start the magic of people believing that your products are without fault. Have a friendly discord and you get your fan base out telling the world that the A310 is the gold standard. Its not hard. Its planned, but its not difficult.

On the other side we have Laminar who manage this side of the business incredibly badly. Strange whirling light presentations, long winded interviews talking about the philosophy of XP12 rather than pumping up the new features. Personally I am not looking forward to the release of XP12 because with it will come a tidal wave of sewage, online posts complaining about everything from the known (that it will not be a free upgrade) to the unknown - that it now runs like a slide show on a ten year old laptop. XP11 to XP12 - an incremental update. Manage the expectations.

Now Inibuilds are on the other side and not every developer can be happy. Why did MS choose Inibuilds, with no track record on this or any preceding MS platform to be included as a default aircraft? Why did an A310 get chosen, hardly an iconic aircraft? If the MSFS A310 is study level (which I doubt) what does that say to the MSFS community about the cost of complex addons? PMDGs $70 or Inibuilds $0? Did Inibuilds get paid by MS for the inclusion or is it the other way around, a developer paying (or offering for free) an aircraft to get a lot of publicity and exposure with the community? In effect product placement.

Half way through the year and the one group of people to feel sorry for is Xplane developers. With the wait for XP12 sales can’t be great. If I can pick up a big discount on a recent Thandra release on the org store it may be good for me, but it is also telling me life is not good for developers at the moment.

Going back in the Inibuilds forum in August 2021 they were saying about XP12

‘We don't have any information on the new simulator.
If we have the means and ease to port the product over to the next sim, we will definitely consider it since we understand the current user base will be shifting over to the next generation.
Don't take this as confirmation, as we know nothing. For the time being, all of us are sitting tight, and receiving the same information.’

And they referred later inquiries in September to the same post. Remember the A310 was released in July and people were asking the question before buying. I wonder if MSFS had not come knocking whether they would have found that they had ‘the means and ease’ of porting their products over?

This is on the Inibuilds forum and suggests that they are going to walk away

‘We appreciate every single customer for their business and support during our product releases for X-Plane 11. These products were for X-Plane 11 and marketed as such. We have no comments on X-Plane 12, aircraft wise, to make currently, and our focus is very much on Microsoft Flight Simulator. We entered this business to provide the best quality add-ons. Entering a long-term relationship with the fantastic team at Microsoft Flight Simulator, allows us to do just that but to a much wider audience in Microsoft Flight Simulator.’

i would suggest Stephen that your review, in the introduction, states clearly that this developer has yet to make any commitment to supporting XP12 and that as a result buyers should consider this purchase only for use in XP11. 

Good that Toliss came out with their upgrade strategy for XP12. Maybe I am a bit dense but trying to understand what is free and what isn’t to me isn’t clear. The A340 upgrade is free. The A321 Neo is free. The A319 has a fee. The A321 is only free if you have the Neo, or has a fee whatever?
 

On updating through SkunkCrafts there’s a note from Toliss on the Xplane forum about two  .acf files that while running in XP11 need deleting after the update as they are for XP12 

For the revised liveries - always an issue -  Toliss seem to have engaged the livery painters pretty early allowing them to start work on the needed changes

Lastly good to see a developer making full use of Simbrief. 

Interesting, not a developer I had focused on - it would be nice if org store had them as one of the splits under GA aircraft. Looking at their wares, other than the two you mention here, their releases seem to be 2017 or earlier. Any story around the five year hiatus?

I did find this on fsnews.eu

‘As part of one of their development updates, iniBuild’s Ubaid has confirmed that iniBuild is looking forward to bringing their addons to X-Plane 12, however, can’t share any specific information as the company does not yet have access to X-Plane 12.’

The problem is that the article in question seems to be being updated from time to time so I am confused when he said that. Anyone know? 

I have not seen the performance issues mentioned here (were those FPS measurement before or after the Ortho creation) but will agree that like other recent FeelThere Xplane releases it isn’t very special. However Dubai is an important point on world air routes these days so as a choice of subject it makes a lot of sense.
 

On ‘ I would highly recommend first looking at other options in the Org store before going for this rendition’ what are the other options for OMDB? I can’t see any other on the Org store. What am I missing? All I can see under the United Arab Emirates is this OMDB offering by FeelThere and OMMA by Taimodels

Olderndirt generally I think you will be happy (not that I have any inside knowledge) but its likely that one or two developers won’t play ball either because they no longer have an interest in Xplane or their products are so long in the tooth (maybe originally XP10) that it just doesn’t make sense. Its not just about having product that works completely in XP12 but also product that can take advantage of XP12 features, not just on release but going forward. As an example replacing the rain on the windscreen feature that Librain used to provide. Developers who had 3rd parties do development for them - step forward Carenado - where that development arrangement no longer exists are the kind of people to worry about. 

@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 40^th 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.