Jump to content

Disappointed


Recommended Posts

I was holding off purchasing the FSDT KFLL scenery in hopes that AES would make a version that included some road traffic to this life-less airport and was very disappointed when I saw that it was not to be. What happened?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know why you would be disappointed.

When has Oliver ever added "Road Traffic" to another developers scenery?

Perhaps maybe I missed something somewhere. :unsure:

He had talked about possibly doing it on another AES post that I read referring to KFLL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He had talked about possibly doing it on another AES post that I read referring to KFLL.

Such road traffic would be AESlight. You mix AES with AESlight here.

And I would like AESlight for Las Vegas and Lauderdale too. But that's IMO something where FSDreamteam has to be the active part.

Ciao,

Rainer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

I was holding off purchasing the FSDT KFLL scenery in hopes that AES would make a version that included some road traffic to this life-less airport and was very disappointed when I saw that it was not to be. What happened?

Sir,

I am disapointed about your post and the form you do it without signing it with your name. I am not responsable for the for the scenery looks like and so there is no reason for such a post. And I never say, that I will do a Aeslite for that scenery, which has nothing to do with AES by the way.

When you ask for a enhancment and you expect to get it, then think about the form of you communication. In this way, you will not give anybody a motivation to pay attention for what you request. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And they wonder why people are moving away from simulation, its when you get developers talking to potential customers like this.

My sentiments exactly. I posted a topic a month or so ago about this and their reply was that maybe it could be done but they would have to wait until the scenery came out. Also, I read alot on this forum and many people don't sign their names (including myself) and are never attacked because they didn't do so. Maybe it's because I wasn't doing cartwheels from joy. Its kind of a double standard don't you think? I have been a customer of theirs for awhile now and have never been replied to in such a manner. Sorry I left out the word "lite" in my post but I'm sure you knew what I was referring to since the person who posted after me knew exactly what I meant.

signed,

Gregg M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Gregg,

have you really seen a thread where Oliver promised an AESlight-scenery for Lauderdale? As far as I know there was always an AES-support announced.

I'm a little bit surprised and very sure that Oliver would never tell such a trash here. Since Vegas (so much earlier) I ask him "behind the scenes" for an AESlight support for FSDreamteam because they - FSDreamteam - decided to design sceneries with FSX and "downsize" them to FS9 - without street traffic which I think is very sad.

But Oliver can't be the active part here. That's something FSDreamteam have to decide in my eyes.

Ciao,

Rainer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't remember exactly the post but from what I remember he said he will try to do it I hope he can add it to those 2 airports klas and KFLL as the traffic will definitely add allot to the scenery. but I don't remember ever him saying that he will do 100% I did get upset myself here at the board when I asked about tropcicalsims mpto for fs9 and fsx, they told me they sent the scenery to Oliver but I never got in answer and it was never posted in the the aes development status. so I have no clue on whats going with that scenery. I'm sure he will try his best threes allot of work involved and testing so I understand, and sometimes we word things different and may sound rude to others, since were all from different places and cultures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what exactly is AESlite?
Let's make a quick search and...

AESlite handles all the Apron and Car Traffic around the airport

AESlite and AES are two different things (only the names says it comes from the same idea: Enhancing Airport Services. AESlite is and will only handle basic traffics (cars and trains) on and around the airport and is selled as part of the related scenery.

AES is a complete different Product, dealing with Services around your Aircraft while you are on ground. It is possible, that parts of AESlite (Apron traffic) could be integrated as a feature in AES too for a future version, but that don't mean that it will not anymore part of AESlite for users who don't use AES

Hope that helps. Directly from its creator.

Med venlig hilsen,

Rafal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And they wonder why people are moving away from simulation, its when you get developers talking to potential customers like this.

Indeed - the fact the poster was confused between AES and AESlite scarely seems to justify the response he got. He was not rude or aggressive - he just asked a question (a response along the lines of those from Rainer would have been more appropriate).

Jonathan Moore (name signed in full ;) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, FSDT are the ones to be disappointed at for compromising the quality of their FS9 products. It's very sad. It's our hopes that FSDT will allow Oliver to add an AESlite for KLAS and KFLL but it's FSDT's decision. Either way, the worse FSDT quality gets, the less I will decide to purchase them. I have decided not to buy KFLL due to the lack of traffic on the roads.

Very sad indeed, I wonder what they will take out next...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they - FSDreamteam - decided to design sceneries with FSX and "downsize" them to FS9 - without street traffic which I think is very sad.

Hello Rainer,

We haven't downgraded anything in the FS9 version of our sceneries, because we haven't created any road traffic for KLAS and KFLL even in FSX, it's FSX that creates that for us!

That's just how FSX works: if you draw the standard VTP roads, that we need to draw anyway in order for the scenery to match with the nearby road network, FSX will populate that road with traffic, without any further work on our part.

So, we haven't "downgraded" the FS9 scenery at all, and expecting to do extra work trying to replicate FSX-only features in FS9 is just wrong.

For example, FS9 doesn't have bump mapping or specular mapping. So, obviously, the FS9 version of our sceneries, and any other scenery out there, do not come with bump mapping and specular mapping textures and nobody complained about this.

The same with road traffic: it's a feature that is an FSX default capability that FS9 doesn't have, not something that we specifically made so, same as with graphic effect, it's just wrong to pretend to have it in FS9, or saying that we "downgraded" the scenery or removed the feature in any way.

I had to post this, because I think there might have been some kind of misuderstanding about this issue, as if we purposely "removed" something from the FS9 version, and it's not the first time it happens: some users complained that the FSX KFLL screenshots were much better than FS9, because the port was shown in the background, as if we did that one too and "removed" in FS9, which is not correct as well: we haven't modeled the port in FSX either, it's part of the FSX default scenery from Microsoft, which is simply way more detailed in FSX...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Rainer,

We haven't downgraded anything in the FS9 version of our sceneries, because we haven't created any road traffic for KLAS and KFLL even in FSX, it's FSX that creates that for us!

That's just how FSX works: if you draw the standard VTP roads, that we need to draw anyway in order for the scenery to match with the nearby road network, FSX will populate that road with traffic, without any further work on our part.

So, we haven't "downgraded" the FS9 scenery at all, and expecting to do extra work trying to replicate FSX-only features in FS9 is just wrong.

For example, FS9 doesn't have bump mapping or specular mapping. So, obviously, the FS9 version of our sceneries, and any other scenery out there, do not come with bump mapping and specular mapping textures and nobody complained about this.

The same with road traffic: it's a feature that is an FSX default capability that FS9 doesn't have, not something that we specifically made so, same as with graphic effect, it's just wrong to pretend to have it in FS9, or saying that we "downgraded" the scenery or removed the feature in any way.

I had to post this, because I think there might have been some kind of misuderstanding about this issue, as if we purposely "removed" something from the FS9 version, and it's not the first time it happens: some users complained that the FSX KFLL screenshots were much better than FS9, because the port was shown in the background, as if we did that one too and "removed" in FS9, which is not correct as well: we haven't modeled the port in FSX either, it's part of the FSX default scenery from Microsoft, which is simply way more detailed in FSX...

Virtuali,

I understand your point and you do make sense. Would you allow Oliver to create AES lite traffic for FS9 FSDT products if he is willing to? LSZH, LSGG, and KLAS could all use some good AES lite. And I would even buy the KORD if equipped with AES LITE. It makes a difference when you see road traffic on approach. Makes your speed seem more realistic. Like the Aerosoft LOWI or Leipzig Halle. All those cars and trains moving about make a huge difference.

Other than that, and lack of glass reflection on terminal windows, I have no real issues then.

FlightZone, although insolvent, (assuming that's why they are gone) still remains king as highest quality in FS followed by LSZH...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since Oliver gets a release copy to add AES to, wouldn't he already have consent to add AESLite as well?

I am sure there is a written agreement between Aerosoft and FSDT regarding what Oliver is to do with the scenery for AES. For him to do AES lite, FSDT would have to say it's ok to modify those scenery files.

I assume...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not speak on behalf of Oliver but if I am Oliver I want to know what is in it for me if I add AES lite to another developers airport? Maybe to add AES lite you would be required to spend a couple of credits?

I cannot see anyone (including Oliver) doing AES lite for free...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

Ok, let me try to explain it, so we can end the discussions here:

AES is a product, providing the technologie Base to bring aircraft oriented services to airports.

In many cases, a communication and agreements with the scenery developers is need to make adaptions for there airport possible. But there is never a commercial agreement needed, because there are no commercial impacts between the developers or distributers of the scenery and me or Aerosoft. They sell there scenery product, Aerosoft sell my AES Credits.

AESLite is a technologie framework to add different forms of traffic animation on the apron and the surroundings of airport. The technologie is provided in form of a consulting support to the developers of the scenery and there are commercial agreements available about the payment for this consulting, and customer pays for the scenery product (inclusive AESlite).

This commercial agreement are at the moment only possible with developers cooperating together and with Aerosoft (GAP,Simwings, Gianni and others maybe) and based on the limited time available at the moment not enhanceable to other externals. That maybe will change in future, but therefor also the technologie form of AESlite must be enhanced first, so the the impact of agreements can be reduced to the needed minimum.

I am happy, that you like the technologie of AESlite and the positiv feedback will help to keep the process ongoing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Rainer,

We haven't downgraded anything in the FS9 version of our sceneries, because we haven't created any road traffic for KLAS and KFLL even in FSX, it's FSX that creates that for us!

That's just how FSX works: if you draw the standard VTP roads, that we need to draw anyway in order for the scenery to match with the nearby road network, FSX will populate that road with traffic, without any further work on our part.

So, we haven't "downgraded" the FS9 scenery at all, and expecting to do extra work trying to replicate FSX-only features in FS9 is just wrong.

For example, FS9 doesn't have bump mapping or specular mapping. So, obviously, the FS9 version of our sceneries, and any other scenery out there, do not come with bump mapping and specular mapping textures and nobody complained about this.

The same with road traffic: it's a feature that is an FSX default capability that FS9 doesn't have, not something that we specifically made so, same as with graphic effect, it's just wrong to pretend to have it in FS9, or saying that we "downgraded" the scenery or removed the feature in any way.

I had to post this, because I think there might have been some kind of misuderstanding about this issue, as if we purposely "removed" something from the FS9 version, and it's not the first time it happens: some users complained that the FSX KFLL screenshots were much better than FS9, because the port was shown in the background, as if we did that one too and "removed" in FS9, which is not correct as well: we haven't modeled the port in FSX either, it's part of the FSX default scenery from Microsoft, which is simply way more detailed in FSX...

Only to answer to Virtuale please let me add this here:

Hi Virtuali,

maybe you missunderstood my posting (maybe because of my bad english...)

I wrote "FSDreamteam - decided to design sceneries with FSX and "downsize" them to FS9"

That doesn't mean that you design s.th. for FSX and put features away for the FS9-version.

Of course I know that you use better FSX-standards.

I wrote "downsize" in this style:

You design first for FSX and use all its possibilities.

After that you compile your sceneries again for FS9. Of course with (when it's possible) the same features.

"Downsize" as a recompiling for an older version. I should better had used the word "recompile". Ok.

After this recompilation you don't add such things like traffic for FS9 as you did in your older sceneries before Vegas and Lauderdale when you designed first with FS9-compilers.

And that's the difference I meant.

Ciao,

Rainer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wrote "downsize" in this style:

You design first for FSX and use all its possibilities. After that you compile your sceneries again for FS9. Of course with (when it's possible) the same features. "Downsize" as a recompiling for an older version. I should better had used the word "recompile". Ok.

Yes, that's correct.

I've replied to simply clear up the issue, because the term "downsize" was a little bit ambiguous. That's why we prefer to say we "back-port" to FS9, to indicate that, whatever can be ported (because is supported by FS9 as well), will go in the FS9 version, the rest will not.

After this recompilation you don't add such things like traffic for FS9 as you did in your older sceneries before Vegas and Lauderdale when you designed first with FS9-compilers.

That's not entirely correct. Or, better, is not the whole reason.

In earlier sceneries, we had ground traffic vehicles (not road traffic, aiport traffic) in FSX made using Simconnect objects driven by our Addon Manager, which is very convenient, because we just need to lay down a track, and the vehicle will follow it, complete with realistic ground physics, because it's a real simulated object, so we could specify speed, acceleration, etc.

For the FS9 version, we had to do extra work, to layout an animation track in GMax to get a animated BGL with static objects: an entirely different method, which also lead to inferior results, due to the lack of the ground handling physics, that required to do extra work in FS9 that wasn't really needed in FSX.

We did this for some sceneries, but then decided the extra work wasn't worth the effort so, in spirit with the decision of porting only what can be ported without doing extra work in the FS9 version to replicate an FSX feature, we stopped adding those animations in FS9.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...