Jump to content

Concerned About Direction Orbx is Heading


KORDATC
 Share

Recommended Posts

I would agree, we also don't seem to hear from the devs much any more, the likes of Jarrad Marshall have disappeared from these forums...the direction has definitely changed, the company has expanded significantly and it has lost some of what made it great, it used to be "by flight simmers for flight simmers" (maybe that just didnt make any money though). Seems a quantity over quality approach and business model has been adopted.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree. So far I have bought almost all Orbx sceneries for three flight simulators. The quality has suffered a lot since Msfs 2020. I was particularly disappointed by Ketchikan, although I was so hoping for the release. Others have made the airport much better. The one from Orbx seems almost loveless. I hope Orbx returns to its old quality.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, flsm (Frank) said:

I just wish customers would objectively describe bugs and wishes without subjectively commenting on companies/staff and, just for the record, before this thread is closed, I continue to be pretty happy with Orbx.  Cheers.

This is the ‘general’ forum, not the support forum.  I haven’t bought PAKT, based on the quality shown in the product images.  If I bought it, they would most definitely get a post in the correct support forums.  But, in the ‘general’ forum, I feel I am completely within my lane to point out a ‘general’ decline in scenery quality.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Doug Sawatzky said:

Hi

 

I would like to keep this thread going, so hopefully it can stay constructive and civil. :)

 

 

I appreciate that a lot.  I don’t mean to be condescending, it’s not my intention.  I just really want Orbx to be at the forefront of the industry.  I want Orbx to be proud of every product they stamp their name on.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MSFS is like a gold rush for developers.  They all want to get there first with the most.  I suspect quality may suffer in the rush. I have not gone into MFSF partly because I have only been in P3D since May when I finally got my new computer built.  I have added a significant amount of Orbz scenery since then in P3D and am mostly happy with the results.  So I am in no rush to try MSFS.  It still seems to have problems that need ironing out.  I am waiting for A2A to start producing planes for MFSF.  When and if that happens I would take that as a sign that MSFS in on the right track.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JohnnyJohnJohn said:

All I know is, that the reason you don't see alot of what was in Orbx airports for MSFS like details like falling leaves from trees, etc, is because those items don't seem to be supported by this new sim as of yet.   Will we in the future?  Who knows, but we'll see. 

It’s not even that which I’m most concerned about.  Rather, things that should be standard in all new releases.  PAKT, for example (since it is what prompted my post) is missing hangars, has a default jetway plunked down on the airport, and seems to use the default MSFS ground vehicles.  In the past, Orbx always had their own custom ground vehicles.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, KORDATC said:

I appreciate that a lot.  I don’t mean to be condescending, it’s not my intention.  I just really want Orbx to be at the forefront of the industry.  I want Orbx to be proud of every product they stamp their name on.

I fully agree with you

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an interesting topic to discuss, but we just need to be mindful for the topic not to become a bashing fest of @Orbx because the discussion will not last.

 

Things change as the years go by. Seemingly a lot has changed since the heydays of Orbx being a leader in scenery development and improvement for FSX and P3D.

 

I can't quite put my finger on it, but I do feel that things have changed and I cant say it hasn't been on my mind in recent times.

 

Two points to consider:

1) Ambitions as a company can and do change or split in two (in house development and partnership) There are positives and negatives to this.

2) Highly productive talent and experience coming and going, it's inevitable, but has a dramatic impact. At times it is hugely positive, other times it comes as a huge loss and has a negative impact.

 

On a product such as Ketchikan (PAKT) and even Juneau (PAJN) for MSFS I think transparency is key. Both were originally developed for FSX/P3D by Russ White, from memory he is no longer developing for flight simulation, which is a big loss to the community! I don't think he is the only one to move on.

 

So I imagine there are serious limitations around these products in MSFS, without the original developer passionately going to the ends of the world and back to achieve insane quality.  

 

It feels like the "Throwback classics range" has come out of nowhere. What is it, what should the community expect, why is Orbx going down this path, is it something that the community wants and can respect or does it do more harm than good?

 

MSFS

2040361526_Screenshot2021-08-27at12-02-14PAKTKetchikanInternationalAirport-MicrosoftFlightSimulator.png.7edb09a4ab72736db86331b9ea51bc2d.png

 

FSX/P3D

420878010_Screenshot2021-08-27at12-01-53PAKTKetchikanInternationalAirport.png.1b03b9fe0e507ad79030389c6f594fed.png

 

I think there is immense pressure right now and no doubt it is a substantial challenge to manage.

 

Historically Orbx has built a lot of trust and respect over the years, giving them a brilliant reputation within the flight sim community. It's not impossible to become too reliant on that and loose sight of what the community still values.

 

In saying that, a lot of what we see in scenery development today has been spurred on by the high standard that Orbx sets.

 

MSFS is so incredibly young, in the scheme of what Orbx has achieved over so many years with other simulators.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 7
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would have been better if Orbx had made clear that it's Throwback Thursday line of airports are low-effort ports from obsolete sims and priced accordingly. I warned that by not communicating this they ran the risk of tarnishing their brand. Perhaps now they will start to see that it is unfortunately happening. It doesn't half help that there happens to be a well-done PAKT already out there to compare this too.

 

I am (mostly) happy with the Orbx scenery that I purchased from Central and shown in my signature and know to stay away from the Throwback Thursday releases now, but I want to see Orbx succeed and I think that by not having a better name for their budget line of airports they are doing their reputation a disservice. If that is considered "bashing" then I am in the wrong place.

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just my 2c worth: Orbx started as a collective of developers who were hobbyists and were offered a way to basically get pocket money for their efforts. The model was unsustainable for a business, which Orbx has become. In addition, MSFS seems to have constraints on what can be put in to a scenery and what doesn't work. Put all that together and it may appear that standards have been allowed to drop, but I think it's more of a case of reality catching up with dreams as the flight sim marketplace matures into a fully sustainable model. 

  • Like 6
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Andrew Hunter-Graham said:

It's an interesting topic to discuss, but we just need to be mindful for the topic not to become a bashing fest of @Orbx because the discussion will not last.

 

Things change as the years go by. Seemingly a lot has changed since the heydays of Orbx being a leader in scenery development and improvement for FSX and P3D.

 

I can't quite put my finger on it, but I do feel that things have changed and I cant say it hasn't been on my mind in recent times.

 

Two points to consider:

1) Ambitions as a company can and do change or split in two (in house development and partnership) There are positives and negatives to this.

2) Highly productive talent and experience coming and going, it's inevitable, but has a dramatic impact. At times it is hugely positive, other times it comes as a huge loss and has a negative impact.

 

On a product such as Ketchikan (PAKT) and even Juneau (PAJN) for MSFS I think transparency is key. Both were originally developed for FSX/P3D by Russ White, from memory he is no longer developing for flight simulation, which is a big loss to the community! I don't think he is the only one to move on.

 

So I imagine there are serious limitations around these products in MSFS, without the original developer passionately going to the ends of the world and back to achieve insane quality.  

 

It feels like the "Throwback classics range" has come out of nowhere. What is it, what should the community expect, why is Orbx going down this path, is it something that the community wants and can respect or does it do more harm than good?

 

MSFS

2040361526_Screenshot2021-08-27at12-02-14PAKTKetchikanInternationalAirport-MicrosoftFlightSimulator.png.7edb09a4ab72736db86331b9ea51bc2d.png

 

FSX/P3D

420878010_Screenshot2021-08-27at12-01-53PAKTKetchikanInternationalAirport.png.1b03b9fe0e507ad79030389c6f594fed.png

 

I think there is immense pressure right now and no doubt it is a substantial challenge to manage.

 

Historically Orbx has built a lot of trust and respect over the years, giving them a brilliant reputation within the flight sim community. It's not impossible to become too reliant on that and loose sight of what the community still values.

 

In saying that, a lot of what we see in scenery development today has been spurred on by the high standard that Orbx sets.

 

MSFS is so incredibly young, in the scheme of what Orbx has achieved over so many years with other simulators.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

5 hours ago, KORDATC said:

It’s not even that which I’m most concerned about.  Rather, things that should be standard in all new releases.  PAKT, for example (since it is what prompted my post) is missing hangars, has a default jetway plunked down on the airport, and seems to use the default MSFS ground vehicles.  In the past, Orbx always had their own custom ground vehicles.  

 

What would you have expected for US$6.59 | €5,60 | £4.81 | AU$9.09?

Come on guys, you are comparing these kinda products with € 35 airports.

 

Edited by wolfko
  • Like 5
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main takeaway as regards the "Throwback Thursday" series is that it should be appropriately labelled in the store. The nature of these products may be obvious to us obsessive forum lurkers/posters, but to someone just visiting the store, there's no real indication (apart from the price, of course) that this is an "economy" line of products. The phrase "Throwback classics range" is only really meaningful to forum "insiders".

 

One more thing... While I don't generally mind the "economy" aspect of these products as long as the price reflects that, I'd hate to see some of the more iconic airports take that route. I'm happy with Fall City, for example, but I'm a bit bummed that the "Throwback" release pretty much means that no 'properly' revamped PAKT will come from Orbx...

 

Regards,

Tym

Edited by TymK
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 "we will keep this thread open so we can have a robust (and I hope constructive) discussion around these topics, and what it is that makes Orbx great, today and tomorrow - not what it did 2 years ago, that environment does not exist any longer.

 

We are trying to adapt to what we can work with now, and with that, invent the future. It would be great to do this as a community as much as a Company.

 

Anna - firstly - what could be construed as my provenance for what follows- and why I can't agree that the past does not  exist any longer

 

I came into Marketing in the early 60s via Drucker and a diploma via Manchester/Harvard - have around 700 PPL hours - mostly in my own PA 32 and Seneca Twin engine - and since 1980 - the Lord only knows how many simming hours in Commodore 64 to MS2020 - and since 2007 - most of it in Just Flight and Orbx - again - most of both - real and simmed - below 10000 ft in VFR and IFR - and a couple of million air miles around the World on Business in both Prop and Jet airliners - above 10000 feet - and it is this figure - 10000 ft that I believe is the marketing key to your word - Adapt

It is my belief - that Orbx should look to the past as to why it was/is and can still be a successful power in the future of fight simming world - in BOTH PC and Consoles - and still see 2 markets - profitably.

 

Orbx made money for years in the market pre 2020 in 2 sims - and still can. This new 2020 market a is new sim and high volume due to the developement of the simming community - and now the console when you sort that out

 

Orbx - from its earliest days of coloured Australian regions - has given us both high and low flight experiences with its Global and Vector softwares all over the World

 

To satisfy those amongst us - that wanted to fly low and slow  - VFR and IFR - in basic P3D and X Plane sims - in better than default scenery - by giving us - only 2/3 years ago - True Earth and we lowly VFR flyers in the UK and West Coast USA a "photographic" experience of sorts - and we were happy with this developement.
Orbx started to go a step further by producing Cityscapes and particular attached airports 
 
(Actually it was Just Flight who first brought out the 1st VFR Photo software and I used that back in 2007)

 

Whilst a number of Orbx Regions were there - and increasing in number - it gave those of us with our thoughts in the "above the navel region" of 10000 feet - and a number of Aircraft developers - the Market for the devotees of "Tube" flying - high levels of skill and terrestial navigation - which low and slow - VFR didnt need - leading in turn to highly developed accuracy of a particular type of aircraft developement - The "Study Aircraft"
This was - and indeed still is - for sometime to come - the province of P3D and X-Plane.

 

There were still - and still are enough aircraft - vintage airliners - or Biz Jets to satisfy - the Gap between 10K and 20K feet - to need the Regional scenery on cloudless local-city to city-inter country - regional flights.

 

All these aircraft - large and small - needed somewhere to take off and land. Orbx made an additional name for itself by creating differing kinds of airport - in Australia - then UK - and USA. We were happy with what we got as long as there was a runway to land on - and latterly -parking bays - lights - and other airport paraphilia.

 

 2 years ago the peace was shattered by the Mighty Microsoft offering a revolution in flight simming - and in many aspects - they have! - and most of it is - Real time photogrammetry scenery below 10000 feet - and needing a quantum PC to run it - a super internet - and surprise -surprise - they produced a console to do just that - a super PC.

Now 12 months later and countless addons from the likes of Orbx - updates - additional aircraft - hordes of payware and freeware developers - we have actually got a sim that has a great future. We await to see if the X BOX sim survives - without those same developers - including Orbx - by having the install access - that has made the PC so successful- i.e. the community file method.
 
Now - some are wanting airports that glow with internal - (WHY?) - external - bits and pieces that only apply to the tube aircraft - that may be coming someday. I refer to travelling gates - external bays and markings - service trucks etc. The internals probably are to satisfy the Virtual Communtity via the MS controller enabling tours around the buildings etc.

 

Personally - I also enjoy my Flights above 25000 feet in my freeware 787 - 380 - and 777 over Orbx regions and looking forward to more of them. Examples have been  - Heathrow to Capetown via Nairobi in a VC 10 - Heathrow to Perth in a 787 via Qantas - and yesterday Heathrow to Darwin - recently announced by Qantas - over a completely different regions that Orbx have promised to give us - Asia - Russia -SE Asia

.

What does 2020 need to give us the flights above 10000 - apart from fluffy clouds -----simply nothing that P3D/X Plane does'nt give us now - except maybe an improved photogrametry Earth from 25000 plus - if we needed such a benefit.

 

Some companies are talking about producing study aircraft for 2020 - but we have  seen one only added so far. The aircraft supplied to the tube Market by Asobo - have not yet been seen to perform in said quality.

 

Below 10000 - 2020 is way ahead in scenery -thanks to 3rd parties-although periodical upgrades seem to provide more problems - whilst the Asobo aircraft offerings - don't really compete with the 3rd party addons - at least to long term flight simmers - they suffice for the majority - and more so - for the Part Time Console pilots
  
In a nutshell - to answer the OP and Anna - my research - such as it is - shows 2 distinct Orbx markets - that Orbx is not about changing it's attitude to long term / old customers and P3D type work - but serving the market needs of 2 - (maybe - 3 if we analyze the console market a bit more) - differing "Heights" - literally !!

Orbx has apparently become 2 companies in the past 2 years - the older team in OZ trying to satisfy their old market customers - P3D / XPlane minded - and the Brand new UK mob shooting for the newer volume market.

 

The older market is very much still alive - especially amongst the purists - which after all - that's what we all probably were Pre June 2019 when the crash that changed us - happened

 

So Orbx please note - that the thousands of us around at that time are still here - although somewhat tempted by that below 10000 vision 2020 is giving us - and look forward to you realising - that the same exists for regional scenery above 10000 - Near and SEAsia  - Oceana  in particular - and little airports for our VFR/IFR flying you provided in the past - for 2020 - esp the freeware ones - speaking as an old age pensioner

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Orbx could start an on-going Bug List and Wish List with votes like in MSFS so as to capture the needed, useful, objective comments that can then be prioritised and acted on, or rejected, or postponed, or whatever, rather than more maybe not so helpful subjective discussion.  Cheers.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a customer who has purchased a majority of the Xplane & MSFS catalogue from Orbx & who has been a fan of their past work, I have to say I sadly tend to agree with majority of the sentiment of the original post & am also finding my purchasing habits change from an almost instant purchase of an Orbx release to a close scrutiny & often skip of a scenery, to maybe purchase at a future discount rate, or a “lets see if another Dev does a version” -  mostly for airport releases.

 

This has come after a couple of recent buyers remorse purchases where I’ve admittedly been a little underwhelmed.

 

 

I think part of the reason is that MSFS has clearly been a step up visually & these are (mostly) aesthetic addons. When I look back on my XPlane sceneries (which I’ve had to do of late as MSFS has become almost unplayable for me since SU5), I have to admit that what I once thought impressive I now consider dated – I think this is just human nature when you go back to something older from something newer / more advanced. That’s not to say I haven’t enjoyed going back to Xplane (& the more stable / better aircraft/IFR experience) for a period.

 

 

In MSFS, I’ve recently been impressed by some of the offerings of NZA, Impulse, AUScene, Pilot Plus, as well as a few select others, so there is a bar that has been set in terms of what can be achieved within the sim at this stage & my expectations have changed accordingly.

Most of these have been priced in the mid $20 – low $30 Aussie Dollar Bucks range (i.e 12-20 Euro or 15–25 USD) & I am personally prepared to pay this for this level of quality.

I can only express my opinion as a customer who has purchased many a product in the past & who will continue to buy MSFS sceneries that make the most of the sim & elevate the immersion & simming experience further.

I can’t profess to speak for all or to understand the commercial viability of producing these types of products, suffice to say that I’m sure a lot of hours work goes into producing them by a dedicated group of people.

The scale / # of sales would likely be a key factor in whether they go beyond a labour of love/passion project to breaking even or turning a profit. Ultimately Orbx is a business that needs to stay viable in order to survive / thrive.

It is Orbx’s prerogative about where they want to place themselves in the market going forward & they also have commercial realities to face (& presumably a larger cost base than the smaller devs).

 

 

I’m sure it’s also difficult to balance quality & performance.

I have a high spec PC & personally want to see sceneries that push the boundaries of the platform & offer more bells & whistles, but others might not & want better framerates all-round instead. Without a mechanism for allowing low-medium-ultra dynamic graphics options for sceneries themselves, that balancing act will always be there.

 

 

I think we also have to accept that the SDK for MSFS has been an evolving challenge for developers who are forced to revisit & patch their sceneries at an extra time/financial cost to remain functional.

 

 

We should acknowledge that Orbx are being responsive, open & engaged. It must be a brutal experience having your work critiqued on a public forum & so we should always remain respectful & constructive, which for the most part (on this stream at least) seems to be the case.

 

 

Clearly a lot of the passion stems from some brand loyalty to Orbx & wanting it to succeed on the platform. Things are clearly changing in the industry in new & exciting ways. I too wish to see Orbx succeed in this market as it finds/redefines its place.

 

 

To end on a positive note, I have still enjoyed some of the Orbx products in MSFS, namely some of the Cityscences (Sydney is a personal favourite) & I also like the direction with the regions & hope to see more soon as I feel these really flesh out the world & increase the immersion even more.

 

 

Regards to All,

Johno

Edited by johnobono
Typo
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warning to the readers - I intent to stay with P3D and stay away from online systems (as long as possible....)

 

I discovered flight sim and FSX during a visit to "Musée du Bourget" (LFBO) - I had a hand on session during which I almost succeeded to land the FSX DC3 :)
It was like realizing an old dream and very quickly I discovered Orbx with Global, Vector and Open_LC EU.

A lot of other developers were proposing large airports, but Orbx was occupying a very unique market with regions and small airports (with a lot of attention to details AND including seasons).
I bought all the regions and more than 90 such airports.  But since several years, even before the MSFS vogue, I saw Orbx evolving, bringing large airports and TrueEarth (abandonning seasons except for NL - the only one I have bought), becoming also a distributor, loosing what made it different.

I keep still checking the sparse P3D creations which does not duplicate other devs large airports (and eagerly waiting the next OpenLC opus, and the one time promised remaining Channel Islands, just to name some futur instant buy).

I am missing the poetry of landclass and seasons and do hope that there is still a market for this niche, and that Orbx will still allocate some resources (not a large market, but able to provide some revenues).

But I start feeling lonely...  :(

 

Gérard

  • Like 8
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, if you miss the initial marketing push - "Throwback Thursday" products are slotted in with all the regional full quality scenery and only the "too good to be true" price tips you off to take another look at what you're getting.

Personally, I have no problem waiting another 6 months, 1 year or paying $15-20 for full quality airports that are optimized for and take advantage of MSFS features, I couldn't see ever buying a "stop-gap" airport - hell, I even avoid freeware since I'm super picky about what fills up my HD and community folder. ;)

I'm really looking forward to my favorite Orbx airports from FSX/P3D making their way onto the new platform - but they really need to be properly updated and optimized and I don't mind waiting / paying for that. ( updated roadmap would be great, so we know to wait and not buy whichever dev rushed out to recreate a popular Orbx P3D airport :P )

Thanks @Anna Cicognani and @Jon Clarke for replies and transparency!

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a old age pensioner , I have to be honest I don’t purchase as much Orbx scenery as I use to . Having made the

switch last August to MSFS I really enjoy just flying around the World low and slow . Individual airports really don’t 

make that a real priority for me . I will continue to buy the mesh scenery and regional packs but for me it’s the 

AC that I will spend money on . So it’s exciting to see all the AC vendors coming to Central . 
 

Cheers

John

  • Like 7
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yes, I remember the good old Orbx days when PNW was released as first region outside of Australia and after this we had to wait many, many months until the first Orbx stand alone airport for PNW had been released, one of the masterpieces of Andreas and Heiko. I can't remember, if it was either Darrington or Concrete. And then, again many months later, the other airport, Concrete or Darrington was released. So litterally it was one region and two airports which had been released by Orbx within about one year's periode then.

I am not sure if I like to have those "happy" days again.

 

This said, we all were exited about Neil Hill's superbly enhanced airports, which have been included in the regions and enjoyed them very much. These enhanced airports have been good enough for us for a long, long time, but now we are complaining about 5 $ Thursday Throwback products, which even have a much higher standard than the enhanced airports had.

 

And yes, like @BradB I do not buy as many airports any more like I did before MSFS. But this is not due to Orbx quality, but only, because I now fly the whole world with MSFS, literally every day in another area of the world, where I have not flown before. So why buying an airport, which I will use only once or twice, because the next day I will fly in another part of the world?

 

Edited by wolfko
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few observations.

Prior to MSFS, in FSX & P3D, Orbx could run the 'Wedding Cake' model.

Layer upon layer of purchasable add ons. (Check the Product page Global section to see what I mean)

MSFS has pulled that rug out from under them to a certain extent as many 'layers' are provided in MSFS out of the box.

So new ways of creating revenue have needed to be found. The Partnerships arrangement running off the back of Orbx Central is a good move, IMHO. Clip the ticket as a Partner product goes out the door.

But MSFS, with its legion of freeware scenery & airport creators must be a nightmare for Orbx.

There are some very creative people churning out freeware that can match payware, & it must be galling to have a team working on a payware airport for say 6 months & find someone has beaten you to the punch via releasing a good freeware version before the Orbx version comes on to the market.

In that respect Orbx may wish to consider an 'in the pipeline' section of the forum which outlines the airports & scenery & anything else being developed for release in the next, say, 12 months, which could alert Orbx customers & encourage them to hold off from an alternative source purchase, if the quality is there! (Quality - very important)

(I suspect there might be something like this now, but it doesn't hit me in the face on the forums. Perhaps it needs more prominence or I need new glasses) [2021 Roadmap - I should read that]:banghead:

Finally, it may behoove Orbx to run some sort of survey in its forums asking readers to rank what they look for in an airfield that triggers them to make that purchase.

The buildings, weathering, clutter, moving objects such as tarmac vehicles, shuttle trains, interiors, A1 aircraft, detailed surroundings encompassing the airport,  POI on the approach paths, tarmac/taxiway markings?

And so on. 

TTM

 

Edited by TigerTigerM
  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anna, I really appreciate the response and the transparency.  I have bought more sceneries from Orbx then I think any other developer in the past 15 years or so of simming.  I wish to continue that trend.  The main factor for me in purchasing a scenery is overall quality which I judge by the “do I get the feeling I’m there in real life”.  For airports that have them, default jetways are one of the main things that break that reality for me.  These are usually different in some aspects at every airport, so would really love to see them as custom models.  Price just isn’t a huge factor for me, unfortunately.  I’m prepared to spend more $$ for something that exceeds in that regard.  That is why Orbx has traditionally always spoken to me.  Perhaps we have been spoiled by the release of MSFS, but expectations have gone up accordingly as a result.  I look forward to many more wonderful sceneries from Orbx in the future.  
 

Sincerely,

Rob

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TigerTigerM said:

There are some very creative people churning out freeware that can match payware, & it must be galling to have a team working on a payware airport for say 6 months & find someone has beaten you to the punch via releasing a good freeware version before the Orbx version comes on to the market.

 


Sorta this - but also payware devs, new or established can look at the Orbx back catalog from XP and P3D and use that for their own roadmap - 'rush out' their own version of an airport that Orbx had proved would be popular.  I'd bought "the other version" of Vancouver and Key West, because I had no idea Orbx had a version in the works. Fortunately, it was a good dev, so I didn't waste my money, but I would have preferred to wait for the Orbx version, had I known. 

I did put the brakes on buying KJAC because I wasn't Orbx, and obviously Orbx has a really good P3D version - so I'll wait and see if that will be properly updated.

Unfortunately, the first person out of the gate will generally "win" as most people won't pay top dollar for a different version of the same payware airport, even if the 2nd one is slightly better.

Even the best freeware ( with few exceptions ) doesn't hold up to top quality payware - esp for optimization and performance, or having dependencies on other packages and the update process is easier with Central or something like it.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TigerTigerM said:

A few observations.

Prior to MSFS, in FSX & P3D, Orbx could run the 'Wedding Cake' model.

Layer upon layer of purchasable add ons. (Check the Product page Global section to see what I mean)

MSFS has pulled that rug out from under them to a certain extent as many 'layers' are provided in MSFS out of the box.

So new ways of creating revenue have needed to be found. The Partnerships arrangement running off the back of Orbx Central is a good move, IMHO. Clip the ticket as a Partner product goes out the door.

But MSFS, with its legion of freeware scenery & airport creators must be a nightmare for Orbx.

There are some very creative people churning out freeware that can match payware, & it must be galling to have a team working on a payware airport for say 6 months & find someone has beaten you to the punch via releasing a good freeware version before the Orbx version comes on to the market.

In that respect Orbx may wish to consider an 'in the pipeline' section of the forum which outlines the airports & scenery & anything else being developed for release in the next, say, 12 months, which could alert Orbx customers & encourage them to hold off from an alternative source purchase, if the quality is there! (Quality - very important)

(I suspect there might be something like this now, but it doesn't hit me in the face on the forums. Perhaps it needs more prominence or I need new glasses) [2021 Roadmap - I should read that]:banghead:

Finally, it may behoove Orbx to run some sort of survey in its forums asking readers to rank what they look for in an airfield that triggers them to make that purchase.

The buildings, weathering, clutter, moving objects such as tarmac vehicles, shuttle trains, interiors, A1 aircraft, detailed surroundings encompassing the airport,  POI on the approach paths, tarmac/taxiway markings?

And so on. 

TTM

 

+1 - Feedback from new and old customer's is always good .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My sense is that MSFS pulled the rug out from under many development companies. It crashed into the market without mercy, and the technical side of add-on development is nowhere as simple as initially promised. My hat is off to Orbx and all the other development companies who have no choice but to adapt to this 800 pound gorilla. I'm amazed at how well and gracefully Orbx has managed the early stages of transition. That's my two cents.:)

  • Like 6
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to say this, but it appears the quality is going down. I have been an Orbx customer for a long time, but I started to notice that quality is not what it used to be. The irony, for me anyway, is that the quality of airports were better on, in my opinion, lesser simulators when it should be the other way around. A simple case in point is PAKT, were a company I really didn't know about and one from which I have never bought a single product, has a way better quality of PAKT. It seems Orbx thinks is better to sale quantity instead of quality. For those of us who care about quality and are willing to pay for it, is a big blow. In all honesty, if i new about the other version i probably would have bought it instead. I always pick Orbx first because of their products.

What happened Orbx?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They(Orbx) say the sdk limit them from having "people flow", while other devs managed to have animated people, aerosoft, and now pilot plus.... What happend to Orbx innovation? Clearly its possible... Instead we just get cheap port overs and what looks like a cash grab,,, Sorry, I dont believe that these throwback products dont make money, Orbx is not a charity organisation afterall.

 

The only products im happy with for MSFS from Orbx is the Sydney scenery and their mesh products..  I used to buy everthing Orbx in the past, now I seem to prefer their "partners" offers. Its sad really and im not sure if I will abandon ship

 

Im not trying to be mean or anything, Just a very dissapointed fanboiii... 

Edited by kaboki
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very interesting thread.

 

I started with FSX/P3Dv4 and bought just about every Orbx product available. The enhancement to the 'standard' scenery was excellent. great flying which I still enjoy.

 

Then when True Earth GB was released I purchased XP11. I have also purchased almost all of the UK airports for XP11. I really like flying over the UK.

 

With the release of MSFS2020, I held back a bit to see what developed. I have a new pc coming late September for MSFS2020 ( I will also install P3D and XP11 on it).

 

But looking at the way new sceneries are being added by MS I do wonder how many Orbx scenery products I will buy. This thread has reflected what was going on in my head.

 

From what I can see MSFS is still a developing program. I am really not sure how scenery designers best fit with its progress.

 

Anyway, I wish Orbx all success as I have had great please from my purchases of Orbx scenery.

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a long time customer and an old aged pensioner, have become more careful with my purchases, due to the age of my computer have been loath to move to cutting

edge until I have replaced my hardware. I am still running FXS, and looking to move to P3D, given bandwidth constraints and the immaturity of the product do not wish to move to MSFS as  I prefer to spend my time flying than troubleshooting and try to work out if it is a hardware or internet issue.

 

It will be a shame if Orbx loses its magic touch, I gave up buying other venders scenery products, as I knew if I bought from Orbx the quality was good there were no

compatibility issues.

 

Nice to know your still listening and thank you for keeping this topic open

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I benefited greatly from being able to port over all my Orbx scenery from FSX to P3D back in May when I installed P3D.  I also benefited from Throwback Thursday and was able to purchase and install more Orbx scenery at sale prices.  I get the impression that a lot of the bitching is about Orbx and MSFS.  Sorry you guys are disappointed.

 

Computers are fast.  When you work with computers a lot you wind up expecting everything to be fast.  Maybe a little patience would be helpful.   

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said @stiletto2.  You have given some objective, specific ways Orbx could improve some things.  As I said in my first post, that is what helps, not subjective, non-specific statements similar to:


Orbx needs to return to what it once was”  (very subjective)

 

“Orbx needs to be at the forefront of the industry and be proud of every one of their products”  (as if we need to tell Orbx that! - It’s probably at the centre of their business plan!)

 

Hence in my second post I suggested maybe having an on-going Bug List and Wish List where we can vote so that Orbx gets an idea of our priorities, like in MSFS.

 

BTW, here is another small objective thing.  A post in the Forum mentioned a free airport with the Alaska Mesh, but this was not mentioned in the blurb where you buy the Mesh.

 

Gotta love Orbx!

 

Cheers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/27/2021 at 9:11 PM, Sniper31 said:

previously I would ONLY buy Orbx scenery, period, no exception. And now, for me, Orbx scenery is starting to feel like just another scenery package in the big mixing pot of sim scenery that is being churned out

 Exactly the same for me. For years I'd only bought Orbx - but not now, I'm afraid :(

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...