• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Poll: Still developing for or supporting FS9?

Now that Flight Simulator X has been released will you develop for -

  • Flight Simulator X only

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Flight Simulator X and Flight Simulator 9

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Flight Simulator X and Flight Simulator 9 with FS 9 being for a limited time.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Flight Simulator 9 only

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
When I use GMAX for FSX, even parts of the new generation airplanes do not compile with the FS9 SDK, and they look completely different.

So, I cannot design for both. I could make a design for FS9 and a different one for FSX. But a) the user will blame me the FS9 design does not look as brilliant as the FSX design, and hasn't the options, and b) the user will not understand that even a 25% discount for updating from FS9 to FSX model is a gift, since the work in common is 10% maximum.

And since the work ahead for FSX is many man years, I will not waste a minute in going back.

Burkhard
 
As, at the moment, I spend most of my time developing missions I don't think I'll have to answer the question for which version of FS. :D
But my next scenery project will definitely be for fsx only.
And I totally agree with what Burkhard wrote.
 
I am going to continue developing sceneries for FS9 only, until the majority of the Flight Sim Community can run FSX decently enough to be able to enjoy my sceneries.

The first major FSX product will probably not be until early next year, and when I can afford a computer to be able to make FSX sceneries without having to deal with the FPS problems.


Regards :coffee:
http://www.smithdesigns.co.nr
 
I've only just moved to FS9 from FS8, and am still maxing out a P3!
My poor old PC runs FS9 with prodding but I can't fly or develop for FSX yet, I'm hamstrung by hardware. No big deal, as my projects are fairly simple endeavors and will probably be converted for FSX without too much grief...but I hate being behind on the software and hardware, and will start developing for FSX as soon as I have decent gear!
 
My current project is FS9 only. In a year or so, when and IF I move to FSX, then I'll update her. There are various reasons why, mostly computer related. :p
 
lmoelleb said:
Unfortunately there is a general idea by users (not just FS users, also "standard" software users) that backward compatibility is free. I guess it is this ignorance that make people stick to FS9 and ask for it to be supported in new versions.
Click to expand...

I think it's more the idea that the old is known, tried and true, and that a lot of people have a lot of time and effort (and in many cases, money) invested in the "old" product. It's the same with Windows. many will not move on from XP to Vista - most for spurious reasons, and as I understand it, many are put off by the new look and feel of Office 2007.

"If it was good enough for father, it's good enough for me" has been a catch cry for generations, and even very young people can be infected by it.

I, on the other hand, have embraced Vista, Office 2007 and FSX as the way forward, and I look forward with anticipation for FS11, and so on, as there is always new and better experiences to be had with each iteration of the sim.
 
Hmmm

Well I check this forum periodically. A very interesting topic to be sure.

Personally I am going to develop predominately for FSX only. I would like the develop for FS9. But realistically, FS9 is slowly dying. For all of those who might disagree, I would challenge you to think for a minute. How long is it really going to be before most people switch to FSX exclusively. With better pc's and graphics cards technologies being developed constantly. FSX's popularity is growing quicker than you might think. This time next year, I bet most fs pilots will be using FSX. FSX with all its flaws from the development point of view, is a thousand times (a figurative statement) easier to develop for than FS9. The performance of FSX has been improving with each service pack. SP2 made a HUGE improvement on my game pc. It is unfortunate that FSX was not more developed when it was released. We do not even have full DX10 support/features in FSX. However, it is a work in progress. The real clincher for the widespread use of FSX is going to be a 'stable' server and client released to the public. I am not a fan of Game Spy nor am I fan of limitations for my choice of servers to fly on. So the person that can develop a multiplayer server and client (that is stable and better than DirectPlay based software is going to take FSX to the next level)
As far as backwards compatiblity with FS9, why bother. I like FS9, but FSX and FS9 are two totally different species when it comes to development. FSX is the future, it needs some love that is for sure, but its easier to develop.
Would I backwards develop software for FS9? The answer is no, by the time my software is released to the general public, my money says most simmers will be flying with FSX.
Ok some other points. I bought Vista the day it was released. DX10 requires Vista. I adore Vista, it lives happily on all my pc's. For all the Vista haters out there, well I feel bad for you, you are missing the wave of the future. Technology moves on, and it grows with time. XP had just as many issues on its release, but there were half the pc users at the time, hence less exposure to its issues and the awareness and publication of them. I remember all the games I could not get to work on XP.
Well the FS9 to FSX transition is no different.
I am not going to waste my time developing for old direct x version, old os versions, and FS9.
From a commercial perspective, there is not much economic sense developing for FS9 or XP or DX9
Do I still fly with FS9, the truth is yes. But only when I fly online. There are no standalone FSX servers that are not based on DirectPlay, personally I am sick of DirectPlay based multiplayer software. There are also no 'FSNavigator' type software for FSX, etc the list goes on, hence my argument above.
Vista, FSX, DX10 rocking for me.
 
Well, I for one disagree that "FS9 is dying." Simply look at the statistics availble at AVSIM's Library and note the top 100 downloads for the past year.

You will find precious little for FSX! Actually, as of today only six files out of the top 100 are for FSX, the other 94 being FS9... :eek:
 
Bill,

Thats the thing, a lot of people are still enjoying FS9, for whatever reasons - it doesn't really matter, I think the more pertinent question is:

Who sets the playing field, is it the developers, or the users?

Personally I develop for FSX, but when it comes to my own "leisure" time I'll use FS9, because I prefer it - no other reason!

Alex
 
Alex Barrett said:
Bill,

Thats the thing, a lot of people are still enjoying FS9, for whatever reasons - it doesn't really matter, I think the more pertinent question is:

Who sets the playing field, is it the developers, or the users?

Alex
Click to expand...

From a commercial development house's POV, the marketplace sets the playing field, which is why Eaglesoft has comitted to producing content for both FS9 and FSX...

However, we are not going down the path of creating bi-simulator compatible product. We will continue to produce content that's exclusively for use in FS9 and FSX respectively.
 
n4gix said:
However, we are not going down the path of creating bi-simulator compatible product. We will continue to produce content that's exclusively for use in FS9 and FSX respectively.
Click to expand...

I find that an interesting (in a good way) attention to detail. A determination has been made that the compromises needed to make a product compatible for both sims ends up being a less-than optimal product for either.
 
n4gix said:
Well, I for one disagree that "FS9 is dying." Simply look at the statistics availble at AVSIM's Library and note the top 100 downloads for the past year.

You will find precious little for FSX! Actually, as of today only six files out of the top 100 are for FSX, the other 94 being FS9... :eek:
Click to expand...

52 out of 100 on Flightsim.com are FSX or FS9/FSX. How many of the AVSIM FS9 top 100 are fine for FSX as well? For instance, anu WOAI package, which are all showing as FS9, can also be used in FSX.
 
I think that is a good point.

Personally I wonder why people still develop for FS9 originally. I mean, if it's compatible, ok. But within 2 years of time FS9 will be gone completely (well, almost), while FSX will be active for at least another 4 or 5 years.
In the end I like motivating people to get FSX because there are good addons out there especially for FSX, because that is one of the main reasons why people still hesitat buying it. So I develop for FSX to give them more motivation to keep up with the newest FS version. :D

(no I don't get provisions from hardware sellers :D )
 
I develop 100% for FSX, quite simply FS9 has all but reached its development potential. FSX has many features that many developers are yet to fully realise or use, which is why in my opinion it is much more fun and challenging.

The other day we visited a cutomer of our who has a full size 737 cockpit and with our products combined with his great setup had us in absolute awe. Never had flying a sim looked so damn cool. It truely made FS9 look like a video game rather than a sim.
And this guy had had FSX sitting on his shelf for many months until about a month ago now realising the potential it has given his flying experience.

Also know of some people who had actually thrown FSX in the bin, only to realise what it can do in the last few months.
 
FSX only, the FS9 tools for elevation data and having to stick to LOD boundaries for rendering make FS2004 and earlier too much of a pain to code for...

Plus as Arno and others have mentioned, the fidelity possible in FSX and beyond really is too good to pass up...

I've only got a few addons, ultimate terrain x, 5m mesh, dillingham x and shockwave lights redux and I'm happy...

Am waiting for an FSX only version of a Piper Tomahawk though... The Just Flight model is a frame rate hog...
 
Economic reality

Truth of the matter is that I can't afford to upgrade my computer often enough to keep up with the demands of new FS releases. Right now I have a machine that will run FS9 fairly well. I don't see any real gain for me with FSX since I would have to run it with less detail and performance. I'm not one of those that developers need to be concerned with anyway, just thought it might be useful to insert the fact that a lot of us out here wait until we can upgrade our computers to go to a new FS version. For me it's usually every other version.

However, I don't expect developers to continue with FS9, why should they waste their time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top