When Frankfurt Hahn will come for FS2004?

[Velocity 47]

Hello

I want to ask when will the FS2004 Version of Frankfurt Hahn come?

It was announced many times also for FS2004.

Thank you

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

FS2004 versions of FSX projects are really hard to get done at this moment. There simply are not enough customers (there are enough FS2004 users, but not enough of them buy add-ons) to make it commercially possible.

[PatrickZ 300]

In other words, it's probably never going to come. But you can always use the old Frankfurt Hahn scenery from German Airports 4. Outdated, but still the best available.

[Velocity 47]

I still hope, that you make it.

As a german and only FS2004 user I wish Hahn very much.

All other germany airports were done for FS2004 and Frankfurt is only one of the last which is missing.

So hope you can rethink about that.

@PattrickZ

I don`t use the old Version and the new Version looks much better.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I don`t use the old Version and the new Version looks much better.

Yes, but a lot of that has to do with FSX and not the project. FSX can simply display better textures, give a better 3d effect. For us a FSX/FS2004 project is hard to do for many reasons;

• If we show FSX images on the project page the FS2004 customer complain it does not look like what they bought
  
• If we show FS2004 images the FSX customers will not buy it as it looks very....2004 and it is 2012 now
  
• If we have FS2004 versions in the box some of the retailers will not stock it because they feel it is not a seriously up to date project (and sometimes they do have a point there)
  
• There are a load of FS2004 users but simply not a lot of FS2004 customers that are willing to spend money. We need 2000 FS2004 customers for a project like this to break even. We can not find those at this moment.
  

There is NO company who has done as much FS2004 scenery in the last 3 years as Aerosoft has done. Not even close. But we simply can not take serious losses on projects. Break even is okay as we like to keep the customers, but loosing ten thousand Euro on a project gets project managers kicked out. As we always said, get us 3000 customer for a FS2002 scenery and we'll do those. Aerosoft does what customers want, we need to.

So it is not up to us to rethink. It is up to customers to buy.

[Rafal Haczek 1612]

Of course this discussion is a dead horse (for many FS9-ers, including me, too), plus if Mathijs says FS9 versions don't bring him money then it obviously is so, but I would like to comment on one thing:

If we show FS2004 images the FSX customers will not buy it as it looks very....2004 and it is 2012 now

Mathijs, are you really saying screenshots of quality scenery addons developed for FS9 in the last few years look like those which were made eight years ago?

You know that a lot has changed in the scenery development techniques. I realize best scenery will look better in FSX as the textures will have higher resolution.

But, come on, you can't say Flytampa's, Flightbeam's, UK2000's, Drzewiecki Design's, Sim-Wing's or German Airport Team's airports made in, let's say, 2010 or 2011 look like being made back in 2004.

I have tones of scenery for FS9, including a lot of payware which was later remade (like some German airports), and the difference is so immense that I couldn't even look at my 2004 or 2005 versions (still hoping for LFBO).

What is more, most of the time I have also FSX installed (I need it e.g. for my beta testing tasks) and would like to say that comparing most airports released for both platforms I cannot really see any clear difference.

I could take some screenshots of EDDF terminals from both sims, show here and let you guess which is which.

I am talking about airports (my way of simming), not landscape or small scale airfields where highest quality FSX texturing cannot be beaten (like ORBX).

And once again, I am NOT discussing the financial aspect of developing FS9 payware scenery. Mathijs knows ten times better than me and I believe him in that matter.

There is NO company who has done as much FS2004 scenery in the last 3 years

True and thank you for that. I do appreciate it and have spent a lot of money on it (my wife would say: much too much, lol).

And for those FS9-haters who will soon vote my post down, please spend a short moment thinking honestly if what I wrote is untrue and if these words do any harm to you.

[Goof 490]

Gents...

There was a time, where developers created addons (aircraft/scenery) for FS9 and then converted them to FSX. It was quite easy to convert them in this direction, as FSX shares many things with FS9. BUT...

Today, most developers produce their addons for FSX, with techniques which only work in FSX. Now, if they want to convert them back to FS9, it´s like doing a completely new scenery (because FSX-things don´t work in FS9 ) which takes a lot of time. This working time costs a lot of money. The number of FS9 users has decreased a lot in this time. So the problem is, that there are too less FS9-customers, who buy the sceneries and therefore the working hours can´t be paid. Easy as that.

now i guess you can understand, why there are some addons (like Mega Airports or big hubs--> more likely to be bought) that are developed for both sims (simply because there are enough customers for both sims) and some addons, which are only developed for FSX. Simply because for a small airport like Frankfurt hahn, there is the possibility that Aerosoft may loose money if they design it for FS9 as well.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Mathijs, are you really saying screenshots of quality scenery addons developed for FS9 in the last few years look like those which were made eight years ago? You know that a lot has changed in the scenery development techniques. I realize best scenery will look better in FSX as the textures will have higher resolution.But, come on, you can't say Flytampa's, Flightbeam's, UK2000's, Drzewiecki Design's, Sim-Wing's or German Airport Team's airports made in, let's say, 2010 or 2011 look like being made back in 2004.

Good comments Rafal.

Let me rephrase then. I do not think there has been any serious improvement in scenery development for FS2004 in the last 4 years. I think that AESLite was the last serious improvement as it brings so much life into airports. Four years ago we knew what was possible and were bumping left and right against technical limitations. To make smaller detail you need more detailed textures and that's the biggest problem. It was the same with aircraft. only far more limiting. In 2006 we were releasing aircraft with as many polygons as were officially possible. There are tricks, but we tested all and all had serious side effects. In FSX we still have a lot to explore and are actually only limited by the amount of money we got and the framerates. But with faster multi core CPU's framerates are really a problem of the past (though I know many still think different).

There is one other aspect that you need to keep in mind. There is a big difference between screenshot and actually using the products. Where a low res texture might look bad in a screenshot it can be fully acceptable in the sim as it moves. But if there is anything what sells a product it's screenshots. They make or break a products sale.

For our Mega Airports it still makes good sense for us to make the FS2004 versions. For many reasons, not at least because these airports do not work as well as we would like in FSX. For the products that have at best 1/3 the sales potential of Mega Airports it is simply becoming harder and harder to make it commercially work.

[Guest cptawsom]

If we show FS2004 images the FSX customers will not buy it as it looks very....2004 and it is 2012 now

That is true for me.

I will not buy - from any online shop, not just Aerosoft's - a scenery that is both FS9 and FSX, if it doesn't have FSX screenshots, and good ones too -> ie -> HD, and antialized.

If the above-mentioned are not met from a developer/publisher, I consider it a lack of respect, for me as a consumer/client, and for my money, that I'm giving the developer/publisher.

If they want my money, they shouldn't show me inferior screenshots.

[Guest cptawsom]

Mathijs, are you really saying screenshots of quality scenery addons developed for FS9 in the last few years look like those which were made eight years ago?

Yes, they do.

But, come on, you can't say Flytampa's, Flightbeam's, UK2000's, Drzewiecki Design's, Sim-Wing's or German Airport Team's airports made in, let's say, 2010 or 2011 look like being made back in 2004.

Yes, they do.

You know that a lot has changed in the scenery development techniques.

No. FS9 just doesn't have a good-enough "under-structure". And being an engineer myself, I know, that no matter how good/nice is something you built, if the underlying foundation is not good enough, you are going nowhere.

I realize best scenery will look better in FSX as the textures will have higher resolution.

FSX has much more than that.

Is a hyperdrive-equipped spacecraft, compared to FS9 which is a middle-age timber-wagon/carriage driven by horses/oxes.

And for those FS9-haters who will soon vote my post down, please spend a short moment thinking honestly if what I wrote is untrue and if these words do any harm to you.

1. I do not hate anyone.

2. But I do like to tell (and always do tell) the hard truth, even if it may be unpleasant for anybody.

3. You asked if FS9 users, harm FSX users. And I will tell you honestly my personal opinion:

Yes they do.

Real life example (the same principle applies to many others):

How many dozens of man-hours, or even man-days, did the developers of Yekaterinburg, spend on the FS9 version of the scenery, because it was still marginally making a profit, or at least cutting it even?

Now, if they didn't manage to cut it even at least, and they would loose money on their FS9 project, they wouldn't make it in the first place, they wouldn't spend all these man-days on the FS9 project, and FSX customers would have had their scenery ready, sooner, in their hand.

Truth is hard and unpleasant, but the FS9/2004 platform has long passed the point of no return, towards certain death.

PS: I am aware, that this may happen to FSX in a few years time (in fact, it is almost certain). But not now, not at this time.

Whether some people like it or not, the hard (and unpleasant for some) truth is, that FSX is "the dominant species" on this planet.

PS2: How many dozens of FSX-FS9 products out there, are more expensive for FSX customers, because they also include an FS9 version in the same price? Nothing is offered for free these days ("the house always wins").

So why FSX customers should pay extra, for the sake of the FS9 ones?

[Kampfzwerg 0]

And why are you announcing a FS9 version to bring out, if ye but then decided otherwise? I think that's quite a nerve!

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

And why are you announcing a FS9 version to bring out, if ye but then decided otherwise? I think that's quite a nerve!

We have not yet announced not to do a FS9 version, but they are of low priority at this moment. If we did announce a FS9 version already, I think that that might have been a mistake.

[Velocity 47]

@

Mathijs Kok

That gives me a little hope.

Thanks!

[Bodo Müller 1]

Dear Mr. Kok,

We have not yet announced not to do a FS9 version, but they are of low priority at this moment. If we did announce a FS9 version already, I think that that might have been a mistake.

Aerosoft, in person you, is going more and more rediculous. The FS9 version was announced to be done after the FSX version in connection with a working and tested new security system. So either the new security system is not working with FS9, or the sales numbers of the FSX version were much behind the estimate so that the design team refuses to do a FS9 version now.....

However, I ask you to refresh your mind of what you were telling in the past and stick to that instead of giving silly reasons why you do not things previously promised. Otherwise I ask you to think over your way of doing project management. Either you plan to develop a scenery project for both sims right at the beginning and both, Aerosoft and the particular design team, stick to that or better quit announcing projects for FS9 if Aerosoft suffering of memory loss.

[Rafal Haczek 1612]

Bodo,

Please remember this is an Aerosoft forum and Mathijs is the host here. The fact is he can write, do and decide whatever he and his team wish.

Any statements any developers, not only Aerosoft, may make at any moment are not firm and do evolve in time depending on many factors only they know.

I remember similar problems with FlyTampa, PMDG, CaptainSim, Carenado and many others.

Please notice I am an FS9 user myself and I would love a new Hahn for FS9, but harsh posts like yours only add fuel to the fire in which we are already minority.

Thanks for understanding and please don't get angry. Most FS9-ers are very experienced and mature simmers and it is great when they present mature attitude in their posts.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Dear Mr. Kok,

Aerosoft, in person you, is going more and more rediculous. The FS9 version was announced to be done after the FSX version in connection with a working and tested new security system. So either the new security system is not working with FS9, or the sales numbers of the FSX version were much behind the estimate so that the design team refuses to do a FS9 version now.....

However, I ask you to refresh your mind of what you were telling in the past and stick to that instead of giving silly reasons why you do not things previously promised. Otherwise I ask you to think over your way of doing project management. Either you plan to develop a scenery project for both sims right at the beginning and both, Aerosoft and the particular design team, stick to that or better quit announcing projects for FS9 if Aerosoft suffering of memory loss.

So we are "ridiculous", we give "silly reasons", we "need to change our project management" and we "suffer of memory loss". And you seriously expect that commenting like that will change our minds? That we now say Mr Mueller you make perfect sense, you opened our eyes and we'll gladly do the project, even if it will make a loss?

Or do you expect that you'll be blocked from posting for a while? Cause that just happened!