Orbx TE Washington state USA + UHD not AFS2

Quote from Tomfa

Yes, in a way your philosophy of seeing things is correct, but remember that in the past, ORBX had already supplied countries like Germany, Ireland, Norway or Scotland for FSX and P3D! So in my opinion, and this despite I also appreciate the landscapes of the United States, it would be better in the first place, to see developed in TE these for AFS2. But the path is still very far from reality.

Landclass regions are much cheaper to develop because land use data is often freely available by local governments. If sales are lower than expected it's not that much of a problem. Orthophotos are usually quite expensive. In Germany, AFAIK only two federal states and three cities offer free orthophotos. According to a post by developer Christian Bahr Orthophotos for all of Germany provided by government sources cost 36000 Euros alone plus development costs for the scenery. You'll have to sell a lot of copies to make that profitable.

Un séjour sans faille

Quote from J van E

36000 euros for Germany may sound like a lot but I think it isn't. Last week John Venema posted on the Orbx forum that XP has a limitation which forces Orbx to create TE scenery for specific tiles: in order to create Washington for XP they had to include a small part of Canada. Quote: "The tiny area we used in this region cost over $20,000 for 1.5m/pixel resolution." I think Orbx is making and moving more money than some people think.

But anyway, Orbx is working on Washington now and they will most probably add the rest of the PNW region to it later on: I wouldn't expect any European TE regions anytime soon (apart from GB). Washington for P3D is planned to be released in 2020 so any new regions shouldn't be expected before 2020/2021 and as I said, those will probably be US regions.

Apart from that: the current Orbx-order is clear: It's XP first, P3D second and after a long while and some good thinking AFS2 might follow... so anything that might come to AFS2 will have to be developed for XP and P3D first. Don't expect any AFS2-only regions the coming decade.

Thank you for your information! Like this, we all know the future and the roadmap of AFS2 ...

After so many investments, finally, to wonder if I ended up making the right choice after FSX?

Quote from J van E

If you are happy with AFS2 in its current state you already made the right choice! If you chose AFS2 because of what I might become in the future... I found out it's never wise to chose anything solely depending on what you think it might become in the future... because you never know what the future brings.

I myself only have AFS2 installed right now because it offers what I 'need' now: superb performance, reasonable aircraft (Q400, Duchess 76) and great scenery (TrueEarth and perhaps Southern Florida). I frequently think about reinstalling P3D (and/or XP) but it's too much trouble and performance will never ever be on par with AFS2 (not even on medium settings and after using TE in AFS2 I can't stand medium settings anymore ). And although I do miss the deep systems of the Majestic Q400 plus ATC etc. I also don't have the time to use all that... A short flight in P3D with the Q400 takes an hour and a half already (including preparing etc.) while I quite like the half an hour a complete flight in AFS2 takes right now.

In short: of you made the right choice depends on what you want from a sim. AFS2 is the right choice for a lot of people (probably more so that a lot of people think) but it may be the wrong choice for others.

Thank you for your encouraging response!

Yes, before I had long hesitated the choice between XP and AFS2, and as you have also described, I finally decided for AFS2, for its fluidity and quality, but understand one thing, when you invest a lot of money. with all the IPACS and ORBX DLCs and future projects are not going anywhere, unlike XP or P3D, it's still frustrating and a question always arises over time? and this despite the patience ...

Cheers