$70 is big bucks?

Really?

I can think of a lot of things people spend more on with nothing to show for it. Given the countless hours of learning, entertainment and pleasure X-Plane has given me over the years, it’s a bargain.

Another one here, NLS. I’m part of the “consumer public”–I don’t fly in real life (yet?) so I admit eye candy is a bigger draw for me. MSFSX fits that bill but was never an option since I use Macs, plus I like the idea of realistic flight model over a game even if I can’t fully appreciate it.

I’ve dabbled in XP for years, finally bought XP8, but couldn’t stick with it because the major cities… weren’t there. v10 finally brought some hope with autogen and Open Street Map integration, but there’s still a long way to go. One thing I would’ve liked to see is auto-generated airport terminals and facilities where custom/accurate ones don’t exist… anything is better than a completely flat concrete surface where buildings should be.

You’re not alone, I agree with you.

Ahh….the Amiga. Still got mine and it works. Preferred my Atari ST though, something romantic about it. Maybe it was the beeping, LOL.

Since the moment I have bought X-Plane 10 almost a year ago and paid $70+ for it, I was dreaming of seeing a city as a city, even from far.
I fly in the NYC area, it is a joke what you see now.
I have asked many times about it here and every time was told that it was a high priority…

Recently , there is a light in the tunnel since 10.20 B5 introduced SOME as they are called art assets and when I fly over the bigger cities , there are at least few more medium size buildings.

I know that things are hard to get done properly but I also think that the LR priorities in general are wrong.

Who gives a f^%%^ about a little fine tuning how the street lamps are seen when you fly over NY as it was after Third World War….

I see the pluses , I see the 64 bit as a future but as far as the cities , medium and big size, I am very disappointed.

When the credit is due, I give the credit but in the area described above, it is just impossible.

X-Plane is not a freeware, we pay big bucks for it.

Yes we would all love our home areas, but I am talking for at least MAJOR world landmarks (landmarks ARE part of realistic flight – not all of us fly 777s…) and maybe 10 major world cities. Something to lure the more “consumer” public (I warranty it would grow sales significantly btw…). I don’t understand the separation of realism to just flight models and plane design. Don’t those planes fly in Earth skies? Else we could just put place-holders “here is a mountain, there is sea”. LR make Earth rendering better and better, yet they don’t seem interested in what is integral to realism. You can’t fly above NYC and make it look like it’s large village in Iran.
I don’t want to open again the argument of how major cities actually looked… better with 10+ years old simulators. Even Interceptor on the Amiga (a computer with fantastic graphics for the time but using bitplane architecture which was extremely unfriendly to “polygons” etc.) released on 1988 (that is 24 years ago), had the major San Francisco landmarks, that you could point and understand about where you are without resorting to maps.
Anyway… seems I am almost alone on this (!).

So you believe there is no point for the consumer base to have any argument, just accept “facts” and buy or not buy, like sheep or something.
OK, way different view here. Won’t elaborate though, wrong place.

Thank you for your reply Brian.
(btw I am still looking for good sources for free/donation scenery that is up-to-date with X-Plane 10.X – can you point me to any?)

To get to the field… well no. So if I like a specific recipe I NEED to be able to make it myself? (yes it would be nice, but yet…) If I like rolercoasters, should I build my own? Some people are good and like doing certain things and some other are good and like doing other things. Then all people “share” this expertise and talent and work, either freely or for a price.

I don’t think “consumer” interest is just on the planes. I won’t open this discussion (it has been 1000 times probably in the forums).

Quick note: we have both LR employees and volunteers working on scenery – it’s a mixed group!

No.

Here is what I observe to be the holdup with XP scenery. If you want to sell it, it has to be better than lego bricks…which means you need to be able to model and texture. Right now, the modelers and texturers are where the money is right now…planes. The market supports planes better because they aren’t geographically bound (anyone anywhere can like a plane, but a scenery is more likely to be purchased by someone from that area). Scenery comes from folks who either have the passion and want to make some money (Tom Curtis, butnaru, etc.) or folks who have little/no desire to make money but enjoy doing it (Frede, Cami, myself and many others). It could also use a push from the company, but since the primary scenery and art people aren’t on LR payroll don’t hold your breath. It is up to us. So my question to you is…Why don’t you get in the field? Even a lego brick airport (which isn’t that hard to do once you get into it) is better than an empty field with a runway.