KORD Update (For FS9)

[gmcg]

Hello,

I was wondering what the plans are for KORD with 10C/28C and 10R/28L for FS2004. I've read all the replies about a possible new version for FSX but I was wondering about those with FS2004?

Thanks,
gmcg

[virtuali]

After KLAX, which has been released in 2011, we stopped developement for FS9. The only updates we'll release for FS9, will be those strictly necessary to be sure the software will still run, for example following a Windows update. But no new features for FS9.

[gmcg]

What about a simple afcad update? I'd pay for that.

Another company dumping FS9, shame 

[Hnla]

What about a simple afcad update? I'd pay for that.

Another company dumping FS9, shame 

New AFCAD isn't that hard to make yourself. FSDT has better things to do, like update O'hare for FSX, let alone FS9.

[virtuali]

Another company dumping FS9, shame

As I've said, we dumped it in 2011 so, it's not really news today.

[gmcg]

What about a simple afcad update? I'd pay for that.

Another company dumping FS9, shame  

New AFCAD isn't that hard to make yourself. FSDT has better things to do, like update O'hare for FSX, let alone FS9.

Maybe for someone who has the time/knowledge.

Another company dumping FS9, shame

As I've said, we dumped it in 2011 so, it's not really news today.

I have no idea why companies are dumping FS9. It still serves a purpose and has a descent market share. Kudos to ifly, Blueprint, and TropicalSim; just to name a few.  

Hopefully someone posts an update if FSDT isn't going to do it.

[virtuali]

I have no idea why companies are dumping FS9

We discussed this 2 years ago. No need to do it again.

It still serves a purpose and has a descent market share.

No, it doesn't have any market share to speak of.

Kudos to ifly, Blueprint, and TropicalSim; just to name a few.

If some developers never created proper (native) FSX products to begin with, it would be very easy for them to support FS9, because what they do are really FS9 products ported to FSX. That's not what we do.

But, again, it's entirely useless to discuss it now. It's almost 2014, the decision has been taken years ago.

[Hnla]

I have no idea why companies are dumping FS9. It still serves a purpose and has a descent market share. Kudos to ifly, Blueprint, and TropicalSim; just to name a few.  

Hopefully someone posts an update if FSDT isn't going to do it.

Maybe this post will help clear up your completely blind theory on the FS2004 market.
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,7358.msg64749.html#msg64749

That's very simple: since FSX users are the VASTLY OVERWHELMING majority right now, developing to be still compatible with FS9 means we have to limit the FSX version in what it can do, which instead IS a "great offense" to FSX users, because by keep using FS9 methods and technologies in FSX, we undermine the quality of the FSX version of the product, and we are killing our future, because we can't keep innovating with new stuff because, if you haven't noticed, with *each* new scenery we added a new feature, which is constantly putting away from FS9, at to the point that with CYVR, there's now way we could do it in FS9, other than redoing from *scratch*, as if it was another separate product.

And, when we made the last try with FS9, with KLAX, it took us lot of pain to convert it for FS9, and the result wasn't nearly as good the FSX version, because textures were 4x less resolution (since FS9 doesn't support 4096x4096 textures) and frame rate was WORSE than the FSX version, because in order to replicate some of the detail that was added in FSX with Shaders, we had to increase the polygonal complexity, with additional workload added because we started to exceed the maximum amount of polygons FS9 can display for an object.

And since we released KLAX for FS9 after two months, we had a REAL statistic about how big (or I'd rather say, small) the FS9 user base is right now, since KLAX for FS9 sold less than 1/5th of the FSX version.

This was 1 year ago. The only thing we were able to observe during last year, is that most of those that stuck with FS9 until 2012, after the failure of MS Flight, which might have allowed them to jump directly to it, skipping FSX, have now come to their senses and either switched to FSX (since MS Flight failed, it's clear that FSX is here to stay), or to Prepar3D, which IS basically FSX, but is still under development, so it has a future.

Of course, being testers for MS Flight, and having seen it with more than a year in advance, we knew very well how it was, and we were sure it would have been a failure the moment MS sent an email to every 3rd party developer they cancelled the developers program.

It was at THAT time that we decided to stop working on FS9, we just gave it a last chance to it with KLAX, but that only gave us the final evidence we needed to assess how small the FS9 user base became."

And quite frankly i'm quite surprised you haven't switch to FSX after your LONG topic about getting new hardware?(http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,7044.msg59682.html)

[gmcg]

I wouldn't call it a blind theory, you can't just use FSDT data for the market share. I bet part of the reason FSDT KLAX FS9 had only 1/5 of sales for the product was due to the fact the word was out that it didn't play well with FS9, just my opinion of course. I really have no need to make the switch..... FS9 suits me just fine, especially with all the add-ons. Why put myself through months of headaches when I don't have the time nor the desire to switch. Plus I don't want to pony out hundreds or thousand(s) to get the add-ons back up to speed. Maybe someday but not now.

The post you mention was very good. New, dedicated, FS rig came out of it. No real reason it serves a purpose here.

I guess there is no reason to continue this thread, my original question was answered.