Jump to content

Any news on next update?


Wise87

Recommended Posts

Last word from the developer was around Jan 15 relating to the LNAV issues. Don't want to hear another rushed statement but like to know if progress is being made? To many consumers have benched the CRJ because of the on going issues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What could be an issue from Lockheed that would hold this up when there are hundreds of other aircraft that work?

 

Please don't take that the way it might sound. I think it's a fair question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Deputy Sheriffs

Not every aircraft uses the same API (interface) functions as other aircraft. Sometimes problems also only show up when using different API functions in a particular order or for a certain amount of times per time frame. 

As far as I know the issue Mathijs referred to is a problem with a limited number of click spots in a virtual cockpit. This limitation is true for all aircraft, but only an aircraft that tries to use more click spots than the currently "critical mass" feel this limitation.

But LM has provided a fix for that which is looking good so far in development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Aerosoft

And that brings a new release into view. We should be starting tests very soon.

 

And the issue we faced did indeed pop up for the other developing teams that have the highest amount of click zones (or worked not very efficient).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, canadagoose said:

I understand Lockheed gets all the attention and IS the future, but some CUSTOMERS still use FSX.

 

Sure, some customers still run FSX despite a major leap forward in the flight sim software, and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.

 

This is far from the first time that we've had a new sim introduced.  Years ago most people moved from FS2002 to FS2004, but there were still people who stayed with FS2002.  When FSX was released there were people who stayed (and a few who stay even to this day) with FS2004.  And when DTG re-released FSX (FSX:SE) with major enhancements (one of the biggest being that autogen was no longer needlessly processed twice in parallel thus reducing processor overhead) some people stayed with FSX.  Everyone who chose to stay with the older sim did so for their own reasons and I'll reiterate that there is nothing at all wrong with that.  After all, nobody should be told how to enjoy their sim experience.

 

But the development business is separate from people's decisions to run older, less capable or new more capable software.  As a company, Aerosoft can either develop for the future, or develop for the past, and we all know what happens to businesses who stay in the past there are only thousands of years of business experience with clearly answers that question.

 

People aren't usually aware of the financial investment required to develop, market and sell and support a product, but each of those steps is very costly and any company/developer including Aerosoft has to at sales projections to determine if developing a product for an older sim is financially responsible.  You see, just a few years ago FSX and P3DV3 were so close together that it was a small matter to make software compatible for both sims.  Today with not only a 32-bit and 64-bit sim, but the other many significant changes, it means developing a product twice as the similarities to the naked eye they might seem the same, in reality they are two entirely different products with each requiring a different investment.  Even scenery developers like FlyTampa, Flightbeam and FS Dream Team have looked at this and have stated that all of their future development will be for 64-bit sims - they just can't afford the cost of product that only a small number of people (and getting smaller every day) will purchase.

 

There are countless products for FSX and Aerosoft will of course continue to sell them for who chose to stay will FSX.  Given the number of people changing to P3D each day, I would be surprised to see much future development for FSX - I'm speaking for myself here, not Aerosoft or other developers.

 

Best wishes.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
vor 15 Stunden , canadagoose sagte:

I understand Lockheed gets all the attention and IS the future, but some CUSTOMERS still use FSX.

 

The next update is currently undergoing testing. And yes, it contains several fixes specifically for FSX. I didn't forget you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand the shift to P3Dv4 but I'm glad FSX hasn't been fully dumped by developers. My only concern with P3D is the constant need to buy new versions. Looking forward to the new update. It would be nice to see landing light reflections on the FSX model since FSX users don't have the benefit of dynamic lighting. If this isn't possible that's fine, but it would really make the aircrafts appearance a night a bit more realistic. 

 

Will there be any performance improvements?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
On 13.2.2018 at 15:14, Caribpilot sagte:

Will there be any performance improvements?

Hard to tell, to be honest. For me it's a gradual change from one version to the next. And not only the CRJ code has changed, also P3D is now 4.2 and several other things were added to my FS installation. On my system (mid-range), I don't see any stutters and overall nice framerates when I fly the CRJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
vor 3 Stunden , lolocool16 sagte:

hello, on the next update have you fix the problem of yoke moving in all directions in flight?

It moves, but not much. I don't see an issue there. If it jitters all the time, it's probably a noisy input signal that's fighting the autopilot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem I've been having with performance is only when in the VC. The fps in the VC drops quite a bit and while I don't always like drawing comparisons, I have other more complex add-ons that are outstanding in performance in the VS and exterior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Caribpilot said:

The problem I've been having with performance is only when in the VC. The fps in the VC drops quite a bit and while I don't always like drawing comparisons, I have other more complex add-ons that are outstanding in performance in the VS and exterior.

 

System specs please?

 

Best wishes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FX-8120 3.1GHz

AMD 6670 1G Video

16 GB RAM

 

As a comparison, I can get up to 25-30fps with the NGX, 777, Q400 etc. The CRJ is smooth in the exterior view, but the only decrease in performance is experienced in the VC when all of the displays are on. When using the panel state feature of "DAVE", during the transition of panel states the fps increases during that time and then it drops a bit when the displays are loaded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Aerosoft
7 hours ago, Caribpilot said:

FX-8120 3.1GHz

AMD 6670 1G Video

16 GB RAM

 

As a comparison, I can get up to 25-30fps with the NGX, 777, Q400 etc. The CRJ is smooth in the exterior view, but the only decrease in performance is experienced in the VC when all of the displays are on. When using the panel state feature of "DAVE", during the transition of panel states the fps increases during that time and then it drops a bit when the displays are loaded.

 

With 1 Gb of GPU memory the VC will never be fast. What is your simulator?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm using FSX-SE. The product page says that the requirements are "Graphics card: Nvidia GeForce® or AMD Radeon, 512 MB VRAM"

I'm guessing this is just the very minimum but doesn't promise the smoothest experience? I do plan on upgrading in the future, but I was just a little puzzled that I get a smooth VC with other add-ons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

you have become very quiet about the updates, fixes, what has been found so far, what could be fixed,....

Would be nice to hear something from you since the CRJ is not quite nice to fly in this state (well it can be flown but feels like a BETA...)

 

Regards,

Gerald

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/25/2018 at 8:18 AM, GEK_the_Reaper said:

Guys,

 

you have become very quiet about the updates, fixes, what has been found so far, what could be fixed,....

Would be nice to hear something from you since the CRJ is not quite nice to fly in this state (well it can be flown but feels like a BETA...)

 

Regards,

Gerald

 

I second that.   This little pesky issue with the doors not staying open is very annoying for a $49.00 payware model.   I was really looking forward to fly the CRJ from Aerosoft but the plane is about to get benched.  Really disappointing.

 

FSX:SE user.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use