Us Cities X - Indianapolis

[JGplanes 3]

This is Awesome! I never thought anyone would ever pay attention to INDY . I have been building little addon scenery for years for this area, just never published anything. Now I have something to fly over when I take off from KHFY! Love the helipads! There is one right next to where I work, and you can even see it in one of the pictures. I would love to see KIND done well, especially with the new terminal and all. I have a 3d model of it I built, but it's almost too complex a project for me to take on myself. Great stuff! I will buy this the second it comes out! Well done Aerosoft!

BTW Make sure Lucas Oil Stadium is in there, since the Super Bowl will be here in 2012 and it is a main attraction.

Next city vote: San Diego

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I never meant my post as a (hidden) argument against FSX/pro FS9. The only thing I wanted to state that 30-50FPS might be nice for some VFR-flying in not that heavy FPS-eating aircraft, but isn't reality when it comes to flying airlines like the PMDG MD-11 or the Ejets by Wilco. If you fly with that kind of planes to FSDreamteam KJFK covered with clouds, with Manhattan X in the background, you are in serious trouble FPS-wise when you have a normal to upclass rig.

Thus I wanted to ask: does the same goes for this add-on? Is it as heavy as for example Manhattan X? Is this an interesting option for the serious virtual-airline-pilot?

And indeed, for airliner-flying I use FS9. I have no better choice ATM. My overclocked E8400 and overclocked 8800GTS640 can't handle e.g. MAF2008 crowded with AI and cloudy weather with FPS below 12.

Kind regards,

Erik Brouwer

This being a total VFR scenery I would say interest for serious virtual airline pilots is limited.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

It's pity that FS9 versions are not planned. I think FS9 market is really big and worthy even in a.d.2009. FS9 is much better and stable product than FSX and many people (including me) did not upgrade to FSX.

Sorry, simply technically not possible and when it would be possible it would be most likely too slow on a single CPU system.

We'll try to make products for FS2004 when ever possible, but it is getting harder and harder to find enough customers for them. As the investments in products grows we need to go for the large market when ever possible. If you find a few thousand friends that start buying FS2004 products we'll for sure could do more FS2004 products.

[Erik Brouwer 8]

Sorry, simply technically not possible and when it would be possible it would be most likely too slow on a single CPU system.

We'll try to make products for FS2004 when ever possible, but it is getting harder and harder to find enough customers for them. As the investments in products grows we need to go for the large market when ever possible. If you find a few thousand friends that start buying FS2004 products we'll for sure could do more FS2004 products.

Hi Mathijs,

I fully understand your slow movement to Fsx, away from FS9. I remember the days back in 2004 when everyone bashed FS2004 for being to heavy for the current systems on the market.

But I have one question:

First you tell us sceneries like this or Manhattan X are simply not possible. Short after that you state :

'If you find a few thousand friends that start buying FS2004 products we'll for sure could do more FS2004 products.'

What is now actually true? Is it the market, or the limitations of FS9? Both of those reasons make the move to more FSX products justified, but I am just curious of what the real reason is..

Regards,

Erik

[Silverbird 15]

Mathijs please consider Honolulu Hawaii, it would make a really beautiful city scenery, you can take a helicopter tour ride or boat to get there fly over diamond head, it would definitely be a great aerosoft product. not to mention it would go perfect with your Hawaii Dillingham X product, Indianapolis is looking really great!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Honolulu01.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honolulu

[saprintz 82]

Hi Mathijs,

First you tell us sceneries like this or Manhattan X are simply not possible. Short after that you state :

'If you find a few thousand friends that start buying FS2004 products we'll for sure could do more FS2004 products.'

What is now actually true? Is it the market, or the limitations of FS9?

Those two statements are not inconsistent, IMO. I think the point is that, for the products that ARE FS9 feasible, Aerosoft will produce them... IF the market makes that a viable and prudent decision. Other products, like ManhattanX or IndyX, just would never be able to even load in FS9, so market demand has no bearing. That's my read of it, anyway.

[mhimhi 5]

Those two statements are not inconsistent, IMO. I think the point is that, for the products that ARE FS9 feasible, Aerosoft will produce them... IF the market makes that a viable and prudent decision. Other products, like ManhattanX or IndyX, just would never be able to even load in FS9, so market demand has no bearing. That's my read of it, anyway.

I agree with these statement, too...

I'm one of which would prefer a more detailed ground, but i understand copyright and dimension issues, even if for me it would't be a problem, dowloading 4gb file...

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Hi Mathijs,

I fully understand your slow movement to Fsx, away from FS9. I remember the days back in 2004 when everyone bashed FS2004 for being to heavy for the current systems on the market.

But I have one question:

First you tell us sceneries like this or Manhattan X are simply not possible. Short after that you state :

'If you find a few thousand friends that start buying FS2004 products we'll for sure could do more FS2004 products.'

What is now actually true? Is it the market, or the limitations of FS9? Both of those reasons make the move to more FSX products justified, but I am just curious of what the real reason is..

Regards,

Erik

Both are true.

A product like this as one we planned now can not be done for FS2004. But if we knew we would sell a whopping lot for FS2004 we would simplify it, remove all sounds, reduce the complexity, get rid of the car traffic in the streets and would end up with something that would have been kick ass 2 years ago.

But that's a 2 weeks of work and that will not be repaid in the current market. Simply put, we'll probably LOOSE money when we do a FS2004 version as well. That's how narrow the margins are for us at this day and age for a product like this. Making something like this for FS2004 is just a lot more complex then it is for FSX. Development for FSX is rather cheap compared to FS2004 and that's why we can do so much more on the FSX platform at this moment. The money is made where the customers can be found and for something like this that's with the thousands of FSX customers that buy and don't write a lot. Do not be fooled but the forums. All customer polls we see simply do not match with our sales records and when pushed we rather have sales for FSX then people that say they like FS2004 more. FS2004 users are serious, important to us, dedicated, but they simply do not buy enough to keep the 40 people of Aerosoft in business. FSX customers are silent, but they spend. So that's why we will be very happy to make something like this (but simpler) for FS2004 if you can get us the customers.

[JGplanes 3]

I hate to say this, but I think some people don't understand how different it is developing for FS2004 than FSX. Even if a scenery is built specifically for FS2004, the development time takes longer due to the SDK and tools available.

But that's just IMO. I been playing with this stuff since FS3.1.

JGplanes

[Waleed 29]

Future requests:

1-Chicago ( I prefer serious VFR scenery like Manhattan or London, but this would be acceptable) .

2-San Diego ( I prefer serious VFR scenery like Manhattan or London, but this would be acceptable) .

3-Las Vegas.

4- Paris( I prefer serious VFR scenery like Manhattan or London, but this would be acceptable).

5- Madrid.

6- Dubai, as new construction projects are on hold at the moment.

Thanks.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I hate to say this, but I think some people don't understand how different it is developing for FS2004 than FSX. Even if a scenery is built specifically for FS2004, the development time takes longer due to the SDK and tools available.

But that's just IMO. I been playing with this stuff since FS3.1.

JGplanes

True. If you stay under the limits that FS2004 sets it is not complex to compile something intended for FSX to FS2004, but these days that is very hard. Developers just love the options and freedom that FSX gives them and it is nearly impossible to force them to stay within the boundaries set 5 years ago in FS2004. These are professional 3d people, they want to work for the future, not for the past.

[Egoix 0]

Matijs, any plan to do german cities like Berlin, Munich, Frankfurt...in this way? I think it will be the icing on the cake after all your add-ons covering Germany and its airports and airfields

[JGplanes 3]

Did someone say Homeland Security! Well how do you explain me standing out on the ramp of the new KIND taking pictures like this!

Someone (besides me; maybe with me?) should take on the "newest terminal in the world." I can provide information as needed.... Besides, I already know where someone could get their hands on a highly detailed gmax model of this.

JGplanes

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Matijs, any plan to do german cities like Berlin, Munich, Frankfurt...in this way? I think it will be the icing on the cake after all your add-ons covering Germany and its airports and airfields

Not at this moment.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

US Cities X - Indianapolis is getting rather close to release, we got the final files and are doing the last tests for a release early next week. Attached a overview of the coverage and the included heliports. I can tell you that the people in our office are scooting along the buildings from heliport to heliport. At lunch time we'll probably organize a race to see what's the shortest time for a touchdown on all heliports!

[FalconAF 0]

I would like to request Las Vegas also. I've lived out here for the past 5 years now and there is no FSX scenery that reflects the amount of new construction that has occured in most of that time. The closest scenery I have been able to find is a very good GMAX addon from a Japanese developer, but it is severely outdated. Most of the new hotels/casinos on "The Strip" are not in it (Encore, Venetian, others), and many "old" hotels that have been "blown up" in the past few years are still in it (Stardust, etc).

An updated Las Vegas would be a tremendous addon for FSX, and much appreciated. And probably a very good seller, too. FS DreamTeam just released their new KLAS McCarran airport today, and all indications are it is selling like mad. I just installed it, and the only thing I wish I had now was more current "buildings" in Las Vegas for the Strip, etc.

FalconAF

[01pewterz28 0]

Add my request for Las Vegas looks like Vegas has the most requests

Sean

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Release is now scheduled for tomorrow (Wednesday April 22nd), and the last images looks pretty good, even if we say so ourselves.

[JGplanes 3]

Can't wait!

Looks Great!

'Sure I'll be up late!

[JamesChams 108]

Mr. Kok,

This scenery looks really amazing I think your going to compete with ORBX for the FSX USA market.

Is it still planned for a May release?

[Waleed 29]

Mathjis, I am just curious as to why Indy?

For me it is wonderfull, but why this city out of all others first?

Thanks.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Mathjis, I am just curious as to why Indy?

For me it is wonderful, but why this city out of all others first?

Thanks.

Because it is such a typical US city. High rise center and extended suburbs. We needed to experiment a bit with the way we can make these simple scenery rather fast.

[Waleed 29]

Like I said, I am loving it. Looking forward to the release.

Thanks for the reply.

[pastorpilot 0]

Gentelemen ...

I am really excited about this release. Indianapolis is my home town. Thank you thank you!! I just purchased and downloaded this. I will install it on my computer at home tonight. But WHY did you include the RCA Dome which was demolished three months ago to make room for the new convention center????? LUCAS Oil Stadium took the place of the RCA Dome as the home of the Indianapolis Colts NFL franchise. Downtown looks outdated with the RCA Dome standing.

Is there anyway to delete the model in the files? Please help if possible. Again Thank you for scenery. I will report on how it is going, soon. Steve

[Sasa 921]

But WHY did you include the RCA Dome which was demolished three months ago to make room for the new convention center?????

What?! They did!? Waaahhh!!!

All that work for nothing.

Well, will possibly take it out if there is an update coming.

There is no single file with the RCA Dome that could be deleted. Most 3D objects are in one file.

Bests,

Sascha