shermank Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Just an opinion, but it seems to me that ORBX should work to set some sort of standard in re ad hoc scenery complexities. We all enjoy the work of designers, especially the freeware and it is appreciated. But, when pilots have to spend so much time trying to coordinate scenery and performance with the overall product installation, that seems to be an unnecessary roadblock. Don't get me wrong. I have been a performance tweaker since Day One (probably too much considering the unintended consequences coming into play ) ). But, I wish there was a way that developers could coordinate with ORBX so that we all could enjoy scenery the way it is meant to be seen and flown through along with all the rest of the magnificent ORBX products. Again, I want to stress, I appreciate all the efforts of developers, both pay and freeware for the betterment of our hobby. Sherm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Hill Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Hi Sherm, I've read carefully your comments and I'm not sure what you're driving at. All we ORBX dev's doing region, payware and freeware work to a fairly simple guideline for sim setup, or are you meaning developers from outside ORBX coordinating with us? Confused, Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shermank Posted October 31, 2014 Author Share Posted October 31, 2014 Neil, outside, is exactly what I mean. There is no question ORBX and its developers seem well coordinated. My comment was primarily driven by the discussion over the new Yosemite scenery. Its installation and use has evidently left many people puzzled. I am not sure how such things can really be coordinated, but I do think the reach out should come from outside developers if they are serious about compatibility with ORBX,which now seems the dominant player in the scenery enhancement world. Sherm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teecee Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 ShermanK. So you want to set standards for those great people that produce freeware outside of Orbx? Sorry, but get real. These people give their time and skills for free..you don't like using their product, don't DL it. Simple really. Teecee. PS: I for one had no problem downloading and installing Yosemite by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shermank Posted October 31, 2014 Author Share Posted October 31, 2014 ShermanK. So you want to set standards for those great people that produce freeware outside of Orbx? Sorry, but get real. These people give their time and skills for free..you don't like using their product, don't DL it. Simple really. Teecee. PS: I for one had no problem downloading and installing Yosemite by the way. Hi Teecee. No, I am not trying to set standards. I am merely thinking out loud about ways to make installations of complex scenery a bit easier for people who may not know all the tips and tricks to achieve what you and probably most others who follow the forums, managed to do. BTW, I also installed the Yosemite scenery without difficulty, as I did with the much more complex Alpine scenery produced a few years ago by Frank, and of which I only recently became aware in an ORBX forum thread. (if you have not found and installed it, I suggest you look at Frank's web site and ask him to send you the download link.) So, please do not think me the enemy of generous developers, but rather their friend, as well as the friend of those who might need less complex ways to install scenery. One thing more, I am in no way a techie, and have the greatest respect for scenery designers and all the others who contribute to a hobby which we all love. Sherm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipdriver Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I love ORBX products but I don't expect other developers to necessarily have to coordinate with them. Some have (like FlyTampa) and that is great, but then again who would be the overarching authority to demand such compliance. FSX/P3D are software that have finite resources and we as users have to make choices when more than one developer makes a resource hungry add-on (whether it be scenery, aircraft or other utility) for a given scenario. No one developer should be told, "you need to simplify your project so that some other developer can make a more complex one." I believe it is the end user's responsibility alone to determine for themselves what aspects they will sacrifice among what is available to maximize their own enjoyment. That is part of why ORBX airports have control panels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shermank Posted October 31, 2014 Author Share Posted October 31, 2014 If my suggestion is unworkable, or unpalatable, then they should be disregarded. My understanding is that this is a democratic community that thrives on discussion. And, I do agree with you that the end user makes the final choice on how to use, or not use a piece of software. I am sensing some hostility to an idea which I only meant to throw out for the betterment of everyone in the community. I never meant for this to become contentious to any degree, just an area of nominal discussion. Sherm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Neil, outside, is exactly what I mean. There is no question ORBX and its developers seem well coordinated. My comment was primarily driven by the discussion over the new Yosemite scenery. Its installation and use has evidently left many people puzzled. I am not sure how such things can really be coordinated, but I do think the reach out should come from outside developers if they are serious about compatibility with ORBX,which now seems the dominant player in the scenery enhancement world. Sherm Hi Sherm, I have started that thread and the problem was fixed fast by Ed. Stuff happen. On top it's FREE! What I don't get about your post is the Yosemite Scenery is fine when installed. are you talking about an equality in FPS performance between different scenery? I mean, it's all about FPS. We are all struggling at some point with that. As for installation, ORBX is AN EXAMPLE on this matter. I mean it as been flawless over the year. I was told once that designer are the sole one who can update/fix their own scenery. And I get why now. I'm sure (they won't tell ) that they have business meeting very often over the phone/skype... he he he. Me, I'm the worse customer as to: Airport option OR/AND setting the slider as recommended... men I will never learn! Every time (or almost) I reported elevation problem the fault was on my side, LOOK AT THE PDF FILE.... grrrrrrrrrrrrr. My only remaining problem with all ORBX stuff is the black building in Queentown (NZQN), Martin the designer is the only one who can fix that (of what I heard).... But I have learned to live with them. Not a big deal and again, maybe it's on my side. Cheers, Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antonvs Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 If my suggestion is unworkable, or unpalatable, then they should be disregarded. My understanding is that this is a democratic community that thrives on discussion. And, I do agree with you that the end user makes the final choice on how to use, or not use a piece of software. I am sensing some hostility to an idea which I only meant to throw out for the betterment of everyone in the community. I never meant for this to become contentious to any degree, just an area of nominal discussion. Sherm Welcome to "Pleasentville". I sympathise with you Sherm. I can see where you are coming from and that you have good intent but I feel that you have stumbled into an inherent flaw in community forums. Namely that with the written word there is a trap that you can easily be misunderstood as there are no additional cues of body language and tonal inflection (other than the use of such tools like lol). We seem to then be very easily put off by someone's comment especially if it was meant as "constructive criticism" where the emphasis seems to weigh too much on the later rather that the former. I know from personal experiance here that this can happen and unfortunately it just means that one feels less inclined to offer a suggestion for fear of reprisals. And then we all loose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macca22au Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 I agree with you, Antonus. Orbx can take comment and criticism, but there is a group of boosters and fan-people waiting with flamethrowers for anyone who even hints at something not quite right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shermank Posted November 1, 2014 Author Share Posted November 1, 2014 I am really sorry I brought this up. In fact, the concept was sitting on my mental,desktop for a few days before I decided to post my comment. As I have said, I meant no insult, no complaint,certainly no hostility. It was just an idea. Antonus, you are correct about the dangers of forums. The same holds true, of course with email. It is a lesson once learned and now to be applied. Sherm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macca22au Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 Be of good cheer Sherm, and keep posting your thoughts, there are more than a few of us than willing to defend against the myopic, psychopathic fundamentalists of simming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teecee Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 ShermanK. Thanks for you reply to my original post.It is obvious that you are a caring thinking person, and if my reply was offensive to you I apologize. I still think your proposal was unrealistic, but after some of the acid comments here, I am happy to leave it at that. Teecee. Macca (myopic, psychopathic fundamentalists of simming.) I have been posting on this forum since it's conception, and have never been called such names. I find your post insulting. but that said, it is your right, as it was mine to post my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurizio Giorgi Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 That's maybe too much the direction of this post, even if it's recognizable the effort of all of you to mantain the tones under the limits. I won't comment the content, but i make an observation, ORBX uses its own material, so that when we release a freeware, under our brand, it has to be in line with the material we use, otherwise it wouldn't have too much sense to release it as an ORBX addon. The standard is for us, to create sceneries having already a uniform base on how to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.