Lack of Aerofly FS2 products

[Majickthyse]

It's a bit disappointing to look at the list of releases this year and see how little there has been for FS2.  I know that work is presumably still progressing on TrueEarth GB, but I don't remember the FS2 portfolio being this dead when Netherlands was being developed.

[John Dow]

With currently 2% of the market there's not a large customer base to support development costs I think.

 

The sim itself is amazingly smooth so hopefully as it develops and the number of users grows, that a threshold will be reached where Orbx can expect a return on investment for any scenery they develop for it.

[dominique]

1 hour ago, John Dow said:

With currently 2% of the market  

 

OrbX sales figure ?

[John Dow]

1 minute ago, dominique said:

 

OrbX sales figure ?

 

That was the last figure I saw it could have been ORBX sales or from somewhere else, don't remember sorry.

[John Venema]

2% is generous. As of today (despite considerable R&D investment on our part) AFS2 has provided only 0.28% of Orbx's income via OrbxDirect to date. Clearly we have to run a business for at least some profit and we will focus on our core platform P3D (75%) and the fastest growing secondary platform XP11 (15%).

 

If XP11 is 50 times bigger that AFS2 for us it makes sense to focus on that.

 

The TE GB port for AFS2 is on indefinite hold because the results we achieved were less than satisfactory and did not meet our quality standards, despite investing quite some funds into contractors and porting tech.

[dominique]

This is what I thought, the 2% seemed enormous to me !

[fabs79]

1 hour ago, John Venema said:

2% is generous. As of today (despite considerable R&D investment on our part) AFS2 has provided only 0.28% of Orbx's income via OrbxDirect to date. Clearly we have to run a business for at least some profit and we will focus on our core platform P3D (75%) and the fastest growing secondary platform XP11 (15%).

 

If XP11 is 50 times bigger that AFS2 for us it makes sense to focus on that.

 

The TE GB port for AFS2 is on indefinite hold because the results we achieved were less than satisfactory and did not meet our quality standards, despite investing quite some funds into contractors and porting tech.

Though frustrating as this is I completely understand your decision. Aerofly has a lot of potential but I'm getting increasingly frustrated with the direction IPACS has taken it in the last few months. Updates are rare and focus on tiny details like improving the FMC of the A320 instead of tackling long standing issues like the lack of of real weather, ATC and AI traffic or the absence of easy to use tools that enable freeware and Payware developers to get their creations into Aerofly. The forum is full of posts from people (including myself) who invest their time to provide some content to the platform but then run into dead ends because things that can be done in P3D in a matter of seconds prove to be near impossible in Aerofly. Flattening terrain or excluding default objects require complicated workarounds and sometimes expensive third party software to make it work. The secretive communication policy of IPACS doesn't make it better, nobody knows if or when more content will be released or what it will be. Despite Aeroflys stellar performance in VR I find myself returning to P3D more often just because I'm tired of waiting months for the next update only to be disappointed by the lack of progress. If IPACS continue like that I fear that Aerofly will suffer the same fate as FSW. 

[Majickthyse]

Ah well thats a shame, but ofc makes sense from a commercial point of view.  It explains the lack of products.  Maybe I'll shift my focus to FS2020 when it appears.

[Benny]

Thanks anyway ORBX, I did my part and bought everything you did for AF2.

Very sad indeed. I hope that one day things will change

 

Ben

[EvidencePlz]

I bought Aerofly FS2 in its early days when it was in early access, and uninstalled it last week. Suffice it to say it was a waste of money, and I've decided to forget it and move on. Lesson learnt though.

[uoutoftoon]

Certainly takes the wind out of the sails.  

 

Though there has been positive developments in aircraft systems, user scenery and improvements in VR and performance, the core Aerofly sim for PC has not Implemented any of those oft discussed key areas of flight sim that users keep asking for so it’s no surprise the market share remains limited.  It’s obvious, in my view, that IPACS has instead prioritized AFS 2019 mobile app and sees market share there (judging by forum activity).

 

If Orbx is calling a hold on AFS2 development that is indeed a disappointing development.   I for one am frustrated as I really want Aerofly for PC to compete enough to keep 3rd party developers engaged, for me a pivotal one was Orbx.

 

I still hold out hope Orbx will not close the door just yet.

[ZoSoChile]

Aerofly is my main sim. Mostly for the VR experience. It looks good and runs good. Very sad news, but understandable. Kicked in the balls 

[Qantas_10]

If Orbx do move away from AFS2 completely, it will leave a sour taste in my mouth that’s for certain.

Ever since the original GB announcement I have been holding out for this development (and others)  

Justflight also seem to be investing in the sim, the combination of the 2 developers would be a VR VFR paradise.

 

Maybe JV should consider selling via Steam instead of just Orbx Direct.  

After all, I should imagine most AFS2 (VR) simmers purchase from steam for the easy interface to VR.

[Nick Cooper]

Like this you mean?

 

[Qantas_10]

Thanks Nick ... I was talking about future developments for AFS2 and them being marketed on Steam.

Please don’t take my comment out of context.  It’s pretty obvious that Orbx has previously sold AFS2 products via Steam ...

 

The intent of my comment was ... if Orbx had developed GB for AFS2, would Orbx have used Steam , with the implementation of Orbx Direct?  I for one very much doubt it would have done just going by JVs comment, and that market approach, in my opinion, could have impacted future sales on the platform.  I guess we will never know ...

 

[Nick Cooper]

Hello,

 

I really don't think that your comment was taken out of context.

 

Quote

Maybe JV should consider selling via Steam instead of just Orbx Direct.

After all, I should imagine most AFS2 (VR) simmers purchase from steam for the easy interface to VR.

 

A further check reveals that of the six products that Orbx have

developed for Aerofly FS 2, all six are available on Steam.

 

 

I can see no reason why hypothetical products would not also be marketed there, bearing in mind that Orbx Direct

was launched in Novermber 2016 and the first of those six products was not released until June 2017.

 

Quote

The intent of my comment was ... if Orbx had developed GB for AFS2, would Orbx have used Steam , with the implementation of Orbx Direct?  I for one very much doubt it would have done just going by JVs comment, and that market approach, in my opinion, could have impacted future sales on the platform.

 

You seem to be recommending something that has already happened with all previous products.

 

The results, as published in this topic, would appear to suggest that unfortunately it has yet to be successful.

 

 

[Qantas_10]

Anyway moving on ...  

[Nick Cooper]

Apologies, I had understood that you wanted an answer.

Clearly you did not.

[fabs79]

I want Aerofly to be successful like anyone else, but I think IPACS have taken the wrong course if they want to attract more users to the platform. Maybe it's true that they focus on the mobile version now because they think they can make more money there. For third party developers that would likely be the final call to abandon Aerofly, for I doubt that mobile users are willing to invest in payware Addon content. For the PC users I just don't understand IPACS marketing strategy. From a Gamers perspective AFS2 is just too boring, no missions, no goals to be achieved... For the more serious simmers it lacks essential things like real weather, ATC, AI traffic, up to date navdata and of course more sceneries to fly in. If IPACS wants to win those over they should focus on providing development tools for 3rd party developers, for they'll never be able to make all this content by themselves in a reasonable amount of time. 

[andy1252]

On 8/29/2019 at 10:20 AM, John Venema said:

AFS2 has provided only 0.28% of Orbx's income via OrbxDirect to date. Clearly we have to run a business for at least some profit and we will focus on our core platform P3D (75%) and the fastest growing secondary platform XP11 (15%).

Hi John, and just pure curiosity but does this mean that the remaining 9+% is still active FSX sales? That''s sort of surprising and sort of encouraging at the same time.

[JimmiG]

As someone who also bought the original AFS, this development (or lack thereof) unfortunately doesn't surprise me. It's pretty typical Ipacs to promise lots of stuff and then gradually abandon the product without implementing most of its promises. Basic things that were hinted during Early Access still haven't been implemented, like a better weather system and water masks, let alone more advanced features like ATC.

It wouldn't surprise me if they were to announce AFS3 and once again promise all those features.

 

That said I enjoy AFS2 for what it is. It loads quickly, you can go up and fly immediately without worrying about any realistic procedures, and it looks decent and performs well without tweaking config files or shaders. It's like a mobile, casual flight sim, but on PC.

[fabs79]

1 hour ago, JimmiG said:

As someone who also bought the original AFS, this development (or lack thereof) unfortunately doesn't surprise me. It's pretty typical Ipacs to promise lots of stuff and then gradually abandon the product without implementing most of its promises. Basic things that were hinted during Early Access still haven't been implemented, like a better weather system and water masks, let alone more advanced features like ATC.

It wouldn't surprise me if they were to announce AFS3 and once again promise all those features.

 

That said I enjoy AFS2 for what it is. It loads quickly, you can go up and fly immediately without worrying about any realistic procedures, and it looks decent and performs well without tweaking config files or shaders. It's like a mobile, casual flight sim, but on PC.

I'm using it mainly for helicopter flying at the moment. The R-22 flight model is a quite good and since the Dodosim is not compatible with P3D V4 there is no alternative at the moment. Xplane is said to have some very good helicopters but the VR performance of the demo was even worse than P3D on my setup so I decided to stay with P3D for a while. Aerofly has superior visuals and performance but not much else I'm afraid. 

[Mak]

IPacs adopt a stupid posture. They deleted the topic on this subject and reported absolutely nothing about updates and progress of their simulator.

[Majickthyse]

1 hour ago, Mak said:

IPacs adopt a stupid posture. They deleted the topic on this subject and reported absolutely nothing about updates and progress of their simulator.

Maybe IPACS are being shrewd.  If FS2020 is a success it could radically change the whole PC flight simming scene, the more so if scenery is being streamed.  Maybe IPAC see moving Aerofly in the mobile direction as a survival move. 

 

I have spent years on FSX and P3D in the past but certainly don't plan to go back to that engine, which was struggling even without VR.  It's either Aerofly, FS2020, or a reluctant holiday from flight simming for me moving forward

[Mak]

I'm betting on Microsoft FS2020...

[yanlaoge]

It’s a pity. I mainly use Aerofly FS2. I have been praying Orbx to be its savior, as I agree with all the above analysis of its difficult situation.

But I don’t care now, with obvious reason that has also been stated above. The storm is thundering, and the world is changing.

[GregDude]

Sad but understandable development. I do wonder how the current Orbx FS2 library matches the FS2 customer market place...

 

I am a casual flight simmer. The Orbx (and other) librarys mostly don't meet my needs. I want large region beautiful scenery with dramatic elevation ranges and some semi unique landmarks.  I don't care for and won't budget for individual disconnected airports, I don't even understand how other people use them!  Consequently I've bought Netherlands from Orbx and Switzerland and South Florida from Ipacs.  I've love some of the Washington State or classic Hawaii to explore. I would like to accumulate a library of scenery regions over time and a very small collection of aircraft, specifically a fun yet powerful helicopter.

 

My point is, most of Orbx FS2 catalog is individual disconnected airports. I don't know if myself, as casual simmer, is common or rare, just that if I do have $50 to spend on scenery, there's nothing suitable for me to buy at present.

[WhoCares]

Okay, well, this is the end of AFS2 for me then.

[John Venema]

Just to clarify, we have not abandoned AFS2, just put TE GB on hold.

 

We have a dedicated resource in Sasha Normann (former FTX Scotland, FTX Germany team leader), starting with us full-time on Monday. His task? To optimise TE GB South for P3D massively, Port the rest of TE GB to P3D ASAP, and concurrently re-visit the AFS2 ports.

 

Sascha has access to four developers from the regions team to assist him, so the resources are finally in place.

 

This is unchanged from our roadmap and position we’ be shared since the start of the year, that things would accelerate from September. 

[Benny]

Hi guys, I do think that often we are a bit cry babies, AF2 or even any other simulator have a ton of fun stuff already  for us. Some folks are always waiting for new stuff and forget what we already have. As an example, the AF2 Switzerland DLC is one of the best scenery ever made in any simulator, I never get tired of it.

So let's wait... be patient and have fun with what we have

 

Ben

[Majickthyse]

21 minutes ago, Benny said:

the AF2 Switzerland DLC is one of the best scenery ever made in any simulator

 

 

Can't argue with that

[John Hargreaves]

As one of the 0.28%, I've bought every OrbX AFS2 product. I fly mostly helicopters and the quality of the AFS2 physics is right up there with XP11 and DCS. Flying the R22 round any one of the OrbX sceneries is to me one of the great joys of flight simming and I genuinely don't understand people who choose not to use it because of what it doesn't do rather than enjoying the heck out of it for what it does do amazingly well.

[Benny]

11 minutes ago, John Hargreaves said:

I genuinely don't understand people who choose not to use it because of what it doesn't do rather than enjoying the heck out of it for what it does do amazingly well.

 

WELL SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and yes the R22 is quite something

[HiFlyer]

Well, at least we have one Interesting development.

 

Previously in Aerofly at least, data/osm-based autogen (Called "Cultivation" by Ipacs) was restricted to square or rectangular shaped buildings except in the case of custom objects.

 

Orbx broke this rule apparently using in-house techniques for its Netherlands scenery, but otherwise breaking the rectangle/square rule was generally inaccessible.

 

Now, using Arnos Scenproc Scenproc 2.0.0 and script, the capability for easier creation of more complex buildings becomes available for developers.

 

I wonder if this might make certain conversions easier...

 

GTX 1070, 1920x1200, ultra settings.

1.6 million buildings 137 fps.

[Sethos]

Been a dead duck for quite some time now. They did have an amazing base with that engine but they really squandered it.

[Scott Harmes]

On 9/1/2019 at 12:10 AM, Benny said:

Hi guys, I do think that often we are a bit cry babies, AF2 or even any other simulator have a ton of fun stuff already  for us. Some folks are always waiting for new stuff and forget what we already have. As an example, the AF2 Switzerland DLC is one of the best scenery ever made in any simulator, I never get tired of it.

So let's wait... be patient and have fun with what we have

 

Ben

 

On 9/6/2019 at 5:58 AM, John Hargreaves said:

As one of the 0.28%, I've bought every OrbX AFS2 product. I fly mostly helicopters and the quality of the AFS2 physics is right up there with XP11 and DCS. Flying the R22 round any one of the OrbX sceneries is to me one of the great joys of flight simming and I genuinely don't understand people who choose not to use it because of what it doesn't do rather than enjoying the heck out of it for what it does do amazingly well.

 

 

Well said guys!