ORBX XP11: What are your predictions?

[tutmeister 729]

Another thing that orbx do that seems to be forgotten. When you buy a region you get updated airports.

On top of their global I use ftx regions for all the UK. It means I get new airports for all the UK. Now they aren't like uk2000 or orbx's own payware but they are pretty good. Airports are very lacking in the UK in xplane and are of variable quality.

Imagine grabbing better scenery,textures, autogen AND all the airports in one package. Nobody offers that in xplane.

I'm one of those people that wants a solution that I pay for and it works. No more 20 different libraries all having to be kept up to date. Freeware can look good but the freeware guys don't do turnkey solutions, you have to grab this from here and that from there and oh yes you need that flags library from over there.

Their work is great but there is more to a great scenery package than just nice textures and limited (amazing looking) airports. Paid packages from someone as big as orbx means they can provide all in one solutions that will bring people running.

 

Chris

[tonywob 4,825]

Their airports really are no different that the gateway approach in that it's just generic buildings placed better. I think they would be wasting their time adding lots of generic airports (Especially in Germany and the UK where people are very actively adding to the gateway). ORBX have a winning formula on FSX/P3D which doesn't transfer 100% over to X-Plane and would need a rethink.

 

I think one possibly would be to improve the default airport textures and objects (MisterX has already done the ground textures). It's get tiring seeing the same blue hangar everywhere, so maybe using a library system to provide a few different high quality hangars without actually having the need to redo the airport would be a win and is quite doable if anyone wanted to take it up.

 

However it seems clear that their first product will be an airport and city just as it will be on Aerofly. Designing airports and cities is a much easier task than creating regions, so it's probably a good place to start and get their feet wet.

[Guest]

Maybe they will work on the regional  autogen, that seems to be something that they are good at, it would be nice if all of Europe didn't look like Bavaria, and you are wrong if you don't think the scenery could do with some help, coastlines are really poor at the moment and could do with a bit of a tidy up, tree sizes are all over the place, landmarks are in short supply.

There is plenty for a development team the size of Orbx to be getting on with, it will be a boost to Xplane's ecosystem that's for sure.

 

+1

 

Maybe but I don't think so. Depending on their implementation and price point they might be able to dominate the market. Of course the longer they wait the worse it's going to be for them.

 

I don't own X-Enviro yet but I think they are too late already. Things like skies changing color without having to use limited textures alone is something that ASN for XP would lack. Besides, afaik ASN uses a lot of undocumented tricks to get things working in FSX/P3D and I highly doubt those tricks will work in XP which would mean they had to start from scratch... I don't see that happening.

 

Orbx dealt with P3D continuous updates.

 

And they will also have to deal with XP continuous updates... FSX was sort of dead and standing still when Orbx began working for it. I do in fact think that XP will receive more continuous updates than P3D...!

 

Another thing that orbx do that seems to be forgotten. When you buy a region you get updated airports.

 

Those upgraded airports are nice but nothing really good or interesting. I flew in Norway for the past few years and in P3D I the freeware airports of Norway and they all blew the updated airports out of the water. And in XP  have been using freeware airports in Norway, mainly from someone called tdg and they also blow every updated airports (in P3D, of course) out of the water. The updated airports look nice because there are moving people and parked planes but usually they look nothing like the real thing. The freeware airports do. And quite often they have payware quality. Even those from lesser known developers.

 

ORBX have a winning formula on FSX/P3D which doesn't transfer 100% over to X-Plane and would need a rethink.

 

 

+1 I really hope they don't bring all their FSX/P3D products to XP just like that. As I have posted a thousand times by now LOL 

[pilot83 387]

Besides, afaik ASN uses a lot of undocumented tricks to get things working in FSX/P3D and I highly doubt those tricks will work in XP which would mean they had to start from scratch... I don't see that happening.

 

For me a good weather product is first a smart coding (bypassing platform limitations + taking advantage of platform features) and second its about art assets by talented developers.

This leads me to think of these combinations

In FSX/P3D: ASN + REX

in XP11: xEnviro + talented texture developer

 

And as we know already, texture improvements are already on their road map.

[tutmeister 729]

 

 

Their airports really are no different that the gateway approach in that it's just generic buildings placed better. I think they would be wasting their time adding lots of generic airports (Especially in Germany and the UK where people are very actively adding to the gateway).

 

 

 

Those upgraded airports are nice but nothing really good or interesting. I flew in Norway for the past few years and in P3D I the freeware airports of Norway and they all blew the updated airports out of the water. And in XP have been using freeware airports in Norway, mainly from someone called tdg and they also blow every updated airports (in P3D, of course) out of the water. The updated airports look nice because there are moving people and parked planes but usually they look nothing like the real thing. The freeware airports do. And quite often they have payware quality. Even those from lesser known developers.

 

Orbx standard region airports are not up to other payware or even some freeware but they aren't supposed to be.

What they are though is there. It means you can buy a region and it is complete, textures, vector data, autogen and airports. All there without having to find freeware for every new airport you want to fly to and then get the relevant libraries for it before you can use it.

 

Xplane for years has been like that and it is one of the reasons people don't like it. If you want to tinker then great, if you want to throw money at the problem then go with orbx. I know I will because I just want it to work.

 

The gateway has improved things but there are still so many airfields with nothing there. Especially in the UK so I can't wait to have a complete solution.

 

At the moment my preference would actually be orthos plus Tony's GB Pro and new regional autogen and then a complete airfield pack from someone like uk2000 that covers every airfield in the UK. That way it is super accurate, looks great and all the airfields are actually there and accurate.

 

I dont think that will happen so in the mean time if orbx deliver a complete region then that will be great instead.

 

Chris

[Pastaiolo 1,690]

I think the most tempting chance right now for them would be to make some regional autogen now that XP11 supports it, don't you think?

[Guest]

What they are though is there. It means you can buy a region and it is complete, textures, vector data, autogen and airports. All there without having to find freeware for every new airport you want to fly to and then get the relevant libraries for it before you can use it.

True, if Orbx would deliver regions with XP-like (!) ground textures and autogen (both regional!!!) then I might be interested. Vector data is already there in XP by default although not always looking very good. What I personally would like to see most are photoreal regions though, with OSM based autogen. I also do think it would be a clever idea if Orbx would create packages with regional autogen and trees etc. now that XP supports that. I don't know if full blown regions are the way to go with XP.

 

BTW There is a freeware addon for XP that puts various buildings at 24.000 airports around the world: far from realistic but at least airports won't be empty anymore.

 

And concerning all the time it takes to install libraries: it was a bit of work in the beginning but after installing a few libraries for a few airports I haven't had to install any libraries anymore. Take note that there also is a freeware installer that contains a load of libraries after which you only have to install one or two to get everything complete. What I mean to say is that once you installed the basic libraries you will hardly have to install anymore of them. You make it sound as if every airport comes with various different libraries: that is not the case. Having said that... it would of course be easier to get addons which includes everything: it does take some time for new XP users to get into it all and that may be a hurdle not everyone is willing to take. 

[ca_metal 2,284]

I think the most tempting chance right now for them would be to make some regional autogen now that XP11 supports it, don't you think?

Not only autogen but plazas, parks, golf courses and things like that. OSM has all this and maybe they have a better source. I guess they can make lots of new objects for X-plane. 

 

 

[Desaix 235]

I'm quite sure their ProjectX is at first to release the Chicago Meigs scenery, same for AF2 and XP. And by the way he said that they will work on anything else on second half of the year so I don't really expect anything ready soon.

[tonywob 4,825]

 

 

Not only autogen but plazas, parks, golf courses and things like that.

 

Yep there is a a tonne of information to be utilised in OSM or available from other sources. I was able to place objects like this using W2XP, but the issue is that the ground textures have to match (e.g. Using photoimagery) otherwise it looks terrible. Just regionalising the autogen and adding some parks etc is nice but it won't work on its own, they will need to make the ground textures match. I don't know anyone as of yet who has managed to create realistic ground textures around cities based on real data without using orthos (Please share if you know of anything that can do it). I think Outerra's approach for nature areas works, but urban and rural areas are an entirely different ball-game.

[Guest]

Yep there is a a tonne of information to be utilised in OSM or available from other sources. I was able to place objects like this using W2XP, but the issue is that the ground textures have to match (e.g. Using photoimagery) otherwise it looks terrible. Just regionalising the autogen and adding some parks etc is nice but it won't work on its own, they will need to make the ground textures match. I don't know anyone as of yet who has managed to create realistic ground textures around cities based on real data without using orthos (Please share if you know of anything that can do it). I think Outerra's approach for nature areas works, but urban and rural areas are an entirely different ball-game.

Ortho/photoreal is the ONLY way to go. Generic textures will always suck up to a certain point. Certainly in urban area's. Right now I can't find sources that are good enough and my PC is too old to handle things otherwise I'd be using Ortho4XP for everything.

[Paraffin 2,197]

I think the most tempting chance right now for them would be to make some regional autogen now that XP11 supports it, don't you think?

 

I would buy a regional autogen package for Central and South America, and for Southeast Asia. It's jarring to see north american buildings in those areas.

 

Unfortunately that's probably the last area they'd tackle. They'd follow the money to the more popular flying areas.

Ortho/photoreal is the ONLY way to go. Generic textures will always suck up to a certain point. Certainly in urban area's. Right now I can't find sources that are good enough and my PC is too old to handle things otherwise I'd be using Ortho4XP for everything.

 

Orthophoto might have a place in certain areas like city centers, but the problem is resolution. It's never high enough to look right at ground level, so you get this clash between high-res scenery objects like runways next to blurry grass on the ground nearby. I like sitting on the runway in X-Plane and seeing high-res ground texture off the runway.

 

The other problem with orthophotos is that they're always the same and always look best at noon with full sunlight on a summer day. They don't change enough with lighting at different times of day, or in different weather conditions, or in different seasons. That could be fixed by adding more photo variations, but satellite coverage doesn't work like that. They need to image when the weather is good near the middle of the day. That's the only image you'll ever get for orthophotos.

 

Even ignoring the static image problem, we're probably many years from having access to the ultra-high res photos that will look good enough at ground level or flying under 1000 feet. Especially for worldwide coverage.

[Desaix 235]

Well L18 or L19 textures at ground level with a decal applied look quite good, I'd say much more realistic than generic texture. I think payware ortho are set at this level of LOD and with Ortho4XP you can easily change the LOD for a particular area ( I do generic terrain at L17 and airport at L18/19). Unless you fly an heli really low you don't need a LOD greater than 17 outside airports, even a L16 with decals looks usually believable at 500 feet

 

Problem is sometimes with mountain orthos because you can clearly see static shadows there where the gradient is pronounced.

 

What is frankly fool with Ortho right now, is that everyone must do his homework and we cannot have a common repository where to download the best done ortho for each 1X1 tile. Everybody is forced to download GBs of data and the total amount of bandwidth consumed is a waste of resources and time.

[Guest]

 

 

What is frankly fool with Ortho right now, is that everyone must do his homework and we cannot have a common repository where to download the best done ortho for each 1X1 tile. Everybody is forced to download GBs of data and the total amount of bandwidth consumed is a waste of resources and time.

 

Amen to that. And here is where you would expect a developer come in at some time.

[Oscar Pilote 22]

Think it twice, it doesn't take more bandwidth, even potentially half the size if you compare jpg to dds. Of course some users will try a few zl/provider combos before settling down, and there are plenty of other issues remaining with orthos. But at least we are entering the era of legally distribuable high quality data, both raster and vectorial.