Jump to content

Rob Ainscough

Members
  • Posts

    308
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Rob Ainscough last won the day on January 24 2020

Rob Ainscough had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About Rob Ainscough

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.robainscough.com
  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

7654 profile views

Rob Ainscough's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

208

Reputation

  1. I have no commercial conflicts with Aerosoft, these days Aerosoft is primarily a publisher. What I'm currently working on is "freeware" for MSFS. If you're bothered by some comments then there is a reason. You seem to be contradicting yourself. Here is the 0.8.0.0 MSFS SDK I'm working ... not exactly "complete": I agree that P3D V5.x is not where it should be and it's changes in lighting and atmospherics is causing issues ... still. It has some great moments, but yikes, night flights can be pretty horrid visually with EA on. But MSFS is just as much a moving target if not even more of a moving target, plenty of issues from floating lights to elevation problems to incomplete SDK, etc. Right now I would NOT do airport development for MSFS especially with recent announcement of MS/Asobo providing UK airports for free ... the writing is on the wall. Absolutely agree with you that one goes where the money is, where I take issue is the your good cop bad cop approach to P3D Vx.x. Is making statements about how "P3D has flatlined" good for you or those developers publishing P3D content under Aerosoft? Perhaps you are pushing for ONE platform (a noble quest and one I would have liked to seen many years ago) because it's easier to manage, but even if casual simmers were 20:1 over serious simmers, then P3D and XP would be irrelevant in your financial desires so why push to announce they are "flatlined"? I can only assume you are doing it to push users away from other platforms and towards MSFS ... a marketing strategy perhaps? I know many that aren't dropping P3D/XP as they have reported a return of sales since MSFS is NOT currently providing "everything" they want/desire. But what I've detected over the years is the "the most amount of money for the least amount of work possible" ... how much of that is out of your hands as a publisher I don't know? I don't sell product to publishers as they take 25-50% of the top. Myself and many others have repeatedly indicated we're willing to pay for updates to existing airports to bring them up to full feature compliance with P3D, some of your developers did, some did not. So if money is the driving concern, you have customers willing to pay. Like I said, I'm doing freeware for MSFS right now because I want to learn the SDK and get my feet wet with MSFS. I have no idea where MS/Asobo will go with MSFS and I'm not going "all in" as MS have burned me a few times before with "latest and greatest" and I'm not just talking Flight Simulation ... stay diversified is an IMPORTANT part of operating a business. Cheers, Rob.
  2. My post wasn't about MSFS ... your bias is supreme, you win. It was about NOT bringing new supported features to P3D ... that was long before MSFS was even in Alpha (going back years). SpeedTrees goes back to P3D V3.x (4 years ago). This was in response to the repeated rhetoric from Aerosoft about zero sales, leveraging compatibility at minimum work effort over the years ... it wasn't about MSFS. You might want to re-read what you just wrote ... how can a platform have "advanced features" and also be "obsolete"? But thank you for your "suggestions" and allowing me to "feel free". Cheers, Rob.
  3. Someone suggested my post would be more appropriate here (and I agree) so I'll link it: Cheers, Rob.
  4. I like MSFS, it's a good game and fun and I'm working on supporting it with freeware. However, for a more complete simulator experience I'm still very much using P3D V5.x (and XP) and will continue to do so but unlikely to purchase ANY Aerosoft products based on some of the comments I've read on the Aerosoft management side. MSFS is a moving target. P3D is a moving target. XP is a moving target ... that's how we get better products, they evolve and grow this is a "normal" development cycle. I understand that Aerosoft are concerned about "moving targets" but you've already collected my money and you know the targets were moving. I (and others) have been more than willing to pay for upgrades (or higher initial prices) to support ANY new platform features and updates from 15 year old legacy FSX. But when Aerosoft doesn't deliver those new features consistently and keep them updated, then the sales (or lack of) is a result of Aerosoft's decision to NOT support these features. Blaming LM doesn't work, never has, look into the mirror. I don't see Aerosoft blaming MS/Asobo for the many failures in their release from installers that don't work to floating lights at airports, to an SDK that's not even at version 1.0 yet, to missing depth in commerical aircraft simulations, to many other bugs that have come with MSFS. As for P3D features Aerosoft has not used to any level on consistency, I'll be specific: PBR Sloped runways Dynamic Lights Dynamic Reflections Material Scripting SpeedTrees All things that enhance the visual experience to make it look better that aren't supported by FSX, yet you bind your customers to FSX as the lowest common denominator and have done so for years and have shown a huge reluctance to implement ALL these new features years later. I get it, it cost money to implement new features ... this is a surprise, it shouldn't be? I get it, Aerosoft were in very early with MS/Asobo before anyone else, hence the platform bias and lack of feature implementation. Do you think MSFS will NOT implement new features in the coming years or make adjustments? PBR, Dynamic Lights, Dynamic Reflections, SpeedTrees, Material Scripting was introduced in P3D V4.x and even P3D V3.x. I find Aerosoft's continued reluctance to add feature support disappointing, bias, and frankly not accurate. You know your sales numbers, you know your profits, you leveraged P3D for years selling older legacy FSX products for as "compatible", I bought them, I supported Aerosoft. Support is a two way street and is NOT platform specific. The continued P3D sales are zero rhetoric isn't making me want to buy MSFS products from Aerosoft, it's only establishing a company I no longer want to do business with because of how platform support is managed. I realize this message will get deleted for what will be a short life ... maybe someone will get a glimpse of it before it's gone. I'm usually very respectful of Aerosoft, but when I see that respect being abused it's time to speak up. Cheers, Rob.
  5. I can't say anything about the A330 or the CRJ in terms of FPS as I haven't tried to load them in V5. But I'm seeing about a 2X increase in FPS ... specifically ORBX GB South over London and London City airport, I can run graphics setting considerably higher in V5 and still sustain 30 FPS ... same graphics settings in V4.5 give me 15 FPS. The shift to DX12 and other performance tuning has been rather dramatic for my setup and in my testing. Cheers, Rob.
  6. No thanks Dave, not fond of how Discord is setup ... would rather do Skype groups and international phone calls are free Cheers, Rob.
  7. But MS/Asobo said they reached out to all 3rd party, are you suggesting "exaggerations"? I signed and agreed to my NDAs under MFS, but still no SDK yet ... more delays ... considering I was told back on October 18th the SDK will be available in a "month" ... almost Feb and still no SDK and it's going to be a "limited feature set" SDK. So agree, shared cockpit seems unlikely in MFS any time soon. Cheers, Rob.
  8. Currently at the top. You betting the Bank on this title? I had no idea it had shared cockpit, how's that gonna work in MFS? Cheers, Rob.
  9. Be sure to set your monitor refresh at 60Hz or higher. Any chance the F-14 will get a PBR makeover for P3D? Cheers, Rob.
  10. Wow, some great adventures around KEF and Iceland ... I wish I had at least been able to do the flight, sadly high winds cancelled the flight ... I guess they must have been really high winds as I understand it the Iceland Air pilots are pretty proficient in bad weather. Faxing an AFM ... isn't that like 1000's of pages? Oye! Cheers, Rob.
  11. Thanks for the response gents, but you're not really solving my issue to my satisfaction and was aware of the work-arounds. Ctrl + F doesn't work ... it will not search my list of purchases, only what's active on the page. Type sensitive dropDownList will quickly forget after about 2 keystrokes so if I type in "Ha" and pause for a fraction of second and then type "m", I don't get "Hamburg" I get "Madeira" ... it's a frustrating experience and as I pointed out doesn't show my "older download orders". I get the feeling "older downloads orders" button is going to remain for years and never get combined into my actual full list of items I've bought ... how many years since the transitions, 2 years or more? Other oddities like under "My account" there is a "Orders" and a "Instant Downloads" ... why both? What would be more efficient and better for both myself and Aerosoft sales is an intelligent search so that if I type in "LPMA" (and I'm logged into my account), rather than bringing me to the "sales" page for Madeira with option to "Add to Cart" even though I've already purchased the product ... if found, it would bring me to my Product already purchased page, if not in my purchases, then bring me to the "sales" page for Madeira. Please keep in mind, I'm trying to make this easier for me to want to buy from Aerosoft store and not go elsewhere ... I buy A LOT of products from Aerosoft. Still in US Dave, long story, flight cancellations in Iceland and very poor support/rerouting, but will be back out in UK Feb 24-Mar 5. Cheers, Rob.
  12. I noticed in the "update" threads like this: there is no mention of whether or not a product is to be updated via the AS updater or via a re-download? In addition, would like to request that updated version full version "current" installers be made available in our account download section ... especially of the older installers caused any issues. And finally, PLEASE, PLEASE ... begging now ... provide some ability to search my downloads (I have a lot of them which I think is a good thing, no?) And it's been a few years now, why do we still have two separate locations for downloading our purchased products? I thought these were going to be combined eventually? As it stands now, I'd rather go to SimMarket to buy Aerosoft products just because they provide a good search feature for my existing purchases. I know I've requested this before and I got brushed off, fair enough ... but it's pushed me aware from purchasing from Aerosoft. Cheers, Rob.
  13. I rarely make these types of extreme comments regarding 3rd party products, but at $45.10 (upgrade pricing) the A330 is by far the best "bang for buck" aircraft I've ever purchased in my decades of buying add-ons. From the systems depth (much more than I expected at this price point) to the beautifully rendered PBR VC, brilliant use of dynamic lighting, excellent sounds, remote CDU support, combined with a host of other fantastic features and FPS friendly. The developers on this project really should take a bow, I'm extremely impressed. Cheers, Rob.
  14. While installing the A330, it has a dependency for VC++ 2019 run times that it installs (I think for TruGlass?) ... After the VC++ 2019 run times complete the installer immediately attempt to restart. Fortunately I was able to cancel the restart and return to desktop to finish the installation ... which wanted to install additional products (RAAS I think). Had I allowed the restart, the installer would have never completed. Probably want to move the dependency that requires a restart as the last step in the installer execution chain. Cheers, Rob.
×
×
  • Create New...