Glad someone understands as not many do currently.
As i said elsewhere i am not going full Payware, just making stuff for Skysim as i like the concept they came up with of High Quality stuff at reasonable (hopefully) money.
it is getting a lot harder to make a complete model now as you have to make everything inside as well as out and Rivet counters are still not happy :roll:
I am hoping to not get Alienated on here for just working.
pretty sure anyone that buys the Hawk when it's done will be pretty happy with their purchase as it will be a reasonably accurate rendition of the T1 Aircraft and fun to go Valley bashing in.
Rick Piper wrote:
I have had many e mails attacking me for this already but i am not going to argue with people.
it's my choice.
i also see i am being slated on some other forums for choosing to go FSX native but as stated it's far easier to make FSX native and convert the model to FS9 than vice versa but nobody has bothered reading that part.
not anywhere did i say i was not making a FS9 version
Well Rick, I think you should be safe in the knowledge that anyone sending emails and messages attacking your decision hasn't really got a leg to stand on, so to speak, unless they're willing to write you a blank cheque. As for going FSX native, I can't believe how so many people find this so mystifying. Someone the other day was complaining about a certain new payware product being FSX only. Why not? FS9 is over 4 years old! FSX itself has been out for over a year.
Much as people may love FS9 and hate FSX, some people need to understand that as a developer (this coming from a non developers - my - logic) you have to work to the most up to date version possible, and then "downgrade" the model to the previous version if it makes (in this case commercial) sense. I dare say there will be the same whinging when "FS11/XI" appears. :roll:
yes your spot on with what i ment about FSX vs FS9.
I love FS9 to bits but FSX works better for me as a developer as i can model more detail and get much better framerates than i would with same detail in FS9.
for example
My Hawk has 4 times more vertices than my Jet Provost model
in FSX my JP gives me 25 fps & the Hawk shows 75 fps in the same state.
FSX also fly better and can be tweaked easier than FS9 as there is less legacy stuff in the fde.
I'd not be concerned about being alienated Rick. Many (me included) would have been happy to pay for the 748, meatbox and Chippy (even with my crap panel!!) so you'll not be losing your already extensive customer base.. in fact, you'll probably gain from it as many of the great unwashed out there only USE payware for some misguided reason ;-)
Showing the self shadowing which for me looks much better now post SP2
addable pylons etc from aircraft loading/fuelling menu. (lower shot)
(Yes i know my JP MB Mk4 Bang seats are wrong but they look better than the Mk10 that i have yet to build )
Dave B xwink
I wouldn't let you pay matey :kissu: (well almost )
Just one thing, the pilots that we see through the loop tend to have o.g. helmets and not white. That is very small and probably not that important either!
Robin wrote:Just one thing, the pilots that we see through the loop tend to have o.g. helmets and not white. That is very small and probably not that important either!
Depends on their background - the F3 mates instructing will probably want to cling on to their white/grey bonedomes as long as they can. Nowadays I think everyone is becoming green though eventually...
:roll: 
)
