SWISS Livery | Request

  • Is the swiss repaint not available on mobile? I thought it was... we need to stay below the 4GB download size which could be a reason why it's now included on mobile and only on desktop.

    Now? You meant not, right? ;) I always thought, liveries wouldn’t use up so much storage but I have a suggestion. What about livery packets, it would be really awesome!

  • Is the swiss repaint not available on mobile? I thought it was... we need to stay below the 4GB download size which could be a reason why it's now included on mobile and only on desktop.

    Why must we limit the game space to a certain size and Castrate a large amount of content of the game. It should be possible to design more content to be provided to users as DLC, and support the free deletion of unnecessary files provided by the game to let users decide what content they want.

    It's hard to hear, but aerofly provides too few airports and coatings on the mobile end, even if you have completed the whole Europe seriously. For the details of the mobile terminal scene, we hope that we can obtain more regional international airports.

    The same global low definition scenery as AF4 currently provides. Spend some time at several international airports in some states or provincial capitals. Wider coverage. Updated navigation data and higher precision navigation data if possible. These can be sold as DLCs. These will make the value of your game more than double on the mobile side. You sell it at a heigher price. Users in need definitely think their payment is worth it.


    As you may be well aware, as a mobile game, most people will not hold their mobile phones for a long time to complete the startup and taxiing of the aircraft. We want to take off from more famous international airports and fly to a place of our own to see the beautiful scenery with our favorite airlines. Aerofly has more beautiful and high-precision scenery than all mobile simulation games, which is why we still choose AF.

    This process can be very long, but it is necessary for mobile users. You can raise the price of the game and set up DLC to pay extra. Internal purchase is the norm in mobile games nowadays. Besides, aerofly is the cheapest professional flight simulator at present. What we see is not a lower price, but a better and more professional platform than other simulators.

    As my personal opinion only. Your team is understaffed, and we, as users, should know it well. More satisfaction means more unlimited requirements. The development of mobile terminal will run counter to your desire to create more professional PC terminal simulation flight. I hope the team can make more content, so this is only an opinion I reserve.

    貴方の運命は、すでに我が手中の糸が絡めとった!:saint:<3

  • The 4GB limit comes from the apple app store and google play store. The downloadable addons are hosted externally which costs money for us that's why the scenery addons cost money on mobile. Adding more downloads thus adds more expenses and more work on our side.

    You can refer to most mobile games on the market. They only provide a client with a size of several hundred MB. The game subjects are all from the server.

    The operation of the server also means that the game cannot be just a closed buyout game. Only the constantly updated content of internal purchase can guarantee the profit of the game. This also leads to games often having a life cycle. Games that exceed their life cycle often stop operating. For example, xplane9mobile has stopped downloading games in 2020.

    Of course, if you rent games at a monthly fee, for example, the unlimited flying game body costs US $3, and the pro service costs US $10 a month. This makes them not only use the latest navigation data, but also have huge operating costs in recent years to invest in new development projects.


    However, the current annual iteration mode of aerofly is more suitable for the buyout system. You need to raise the game price to maintain profitability. If more server costs are invested, it will be more suitable for the current game market to keep updating and renting games on the same generation version. If the game is operated in this way and kept updated. Aerofly may officially compete with other games in the mobile market.

    (perhaps I have conceived too many ideas here, and the transformation of the operation mode of the game is definitely not my own decision, so this is only my personal view.)

    But I still want to make a good comparison: we have 500 airports in Europe, but none in other places, many of which are small airports. And we have 500 airports around the world, most of which are famous international airports. Obviously, the latter is more attractive to mobile users.

    Due to the limitation of performance, the fineness of the airport does not need to be improved. The current mobile terminal airport can still use more reference buildings to replace most of the terminal buildings. The airports in more regions but less in number will definitely attract more mobile users to aerofly. (although this concept will not be of any substantive help to the PC)

    貴方の運命は、すでに我が手中の糸が絡めとった!:saint:<3

  • I don’t think that they shouldn’t focus on smaller aiports anymore. It’s the love into detail what I care about and that’s why I love Aerofly. Maybe I am one of a few people that always starts at a Gates cold and dark, flys with a checklist and tries to be as realistic as it’s possible.

    It would be horrible if Aerofly becomes a pay to play app. So far it has a fair price but subscriptions are horrible, for example.

    They should give us more DLCs but they shouldn’t start with the mind set: quantity > quality. That not how it works. Maybe RFS does it that way and they are successful but from the realism it’s absolutely trash. Sorry for such an expression.

  • I don’t think that they shouldn’t focus on smaller aiports anymore. It’s the love into detail what I care about and that’s why I love Aerofly. Maybe I am one of a few people that always starts at a Gates cold and dark, flys with a checklist and tries to be as realistic as it’s possible.

    It would be horrible if Aerofly becomes a pay to play app. So far it has a fair price but subscriptions are horrible, for example.

    They should give us more DLCs but they shouldn’t start with the mind set: quantity > quality. That not how it works. Maybe RFS does it that way and they are successful but from the realism it’s absolutely trash. Sorry for such an expression.

    So here comes the question.... Have you ever tried to take off from a small airport you don't know and fly to another small airport? Do you often seriously complete the startup of C172 and drive it to a certain country?

    I believe most people prefer to fly from one provincial capital airport to another in an A320 or B787. For mobile platforms, small airports tend to be: Hey, I have passed many airports along the way. Such an add-on.

    Of course, if the small airport happens to be in your city, you may study its history.

    RORTOS games are funny, aren't they? The rotten aerodynamics, bad modeling, and ridiculous aircraft sound effects are simply an entertainment game. The pro service costs $6 a month.

    What? How many RFS downloads are there in Google? More downloads than all AF series? Why? I'm not an RFS player, so I won't make too much comments. As for why so many users support RFS, you should go to the review area of the game.

    Xplane10mobile has 5 million downloads in the Google market, and they need to pay for each model. Their A320 does not even have detailed modeling, and the avionics system of b738 is not complete, and it is even impossible to input takeoff performance.

    Infinite flight also has 1 million downloads on Google, and pro service costs $10 a month. Obviously, they have made a lot of money.

    You need to recognize the fact that aerofly mobile terminal does not have strong user stickiness, and the slow update speed and incomplete content are the main reasons for players to switch to other flight platforms.

    Af2022 has only 10000 downloads in the Google market and its price is only equivalent to one month's IFPro. Why is that all? You should go to the review area of other games.

    $100000. I learned from other players that IPACS is a 5-person team. How long do you think this money is enough for them to live? How much can they do to benefit the game, such as expanding the servers that provide free DLC download services, recruiting new members, and expanding the area of their offices?

    To be honest, if AF wants to be competitive in the current game market, it should first solve the problem of many functions, rather than the quality problem. All games are of perfect quality on the basis of some. The new content means that price increases are unavoidable.

    Ask a funny question. Some people pay for pro services for one month's if, but you only pay so much for one year's AF, and you always ask to update the content you want. And hope they will update these contents as soon as possible. Do you think this is reasonable?

    貴方の運命は、すでに我が手中の糸が絡めとった!:saint:<3

    Edited 2 times, last by orangedog433 (August 21, 2022 at 5:43 AM).

  • How to offer new content, more content or provide new and or updated features is an ongoing discussion internally as well.

    We think there is no right or wrong way, it really depends on what type of customer you are talking to.

    Some users are perfectly fine with monthly subscriptions, some are not. We personally don't like monthly subscriptions, that's why you haven't seen it in our products so far.

    We will leave is all options open for the future, but supporting multiple solutions, e.g. like a single paid app and another subscription app is something we probably won't support as it increases the development work quite a bit. Even though our team is bigger than just 5 people ;)

    And please for future discussions: Please don't bash competitors here in our forum. Each simulator has it's pros and cons and it really depends on what the user wants.

    As for the next version of Aerofly FS we currently evaluate what new features we can integrate and still keep it running smoothly.

  • Regarding the current version, an update is planned to correct the multiple bugs reported by users ?

  • First of all. Yes, I Love to fly to the Wasserkuppe. Try it out yourself. It’s amazing! And once, I did a 2 hours flight with a C172 but I have to say, that I most likely fly with jet airliners because they are faster and easier to fly than a KingAir or a Chessna (with autopilot).

    I believe the same way as you do but everybody should get what they like. And we have many big airports.

    My city is Hamburg and it doesn’t have any small airport. It’s an aviation city and it has the Finkenwerder Airbus factory and its the Lufthansa Technik hub.

    For me, RORTOS isn’t funny. It’s kind of sad to see that games like these get more support than detailed games like Aerofly. I like the fact that Aerofly is something else even though the development takes longer and they don’t make so much profit.

    You talk like a guy that wants Aerofly to be like the other flight simulators. But that’s not the case. Aerofly is something special on the mobile market as I said before and they shouldn’t change it that way.

    You could be a developer as well. Just ask them🤷‍♂️

    Dont you see how often I report bugs??? This is a clear prejudice.

  • Thank you! I am not a fan of subscriptions either but what a bout DLCs like the scenery? They can be a payment as well. It would be awesome to have more features where you get more profit from. And it would be amazing for us as well.

  • I still only keep my own opinion.

    First of all, as you said, the content of aerofly is very beautiful. So why is aerofly not competitive in the market? This requires asking players who have chosen other games.

    Each simulator has it's pros and cons and it really depends on what the user wants.

    If production team want more players to buy games, the production team needs to know what other games meet the needs of their players rather than meet some of your needs. When production team know what they lack, they should know the priority of adding these functions. It is the key to attract users to solve the problem of function.

    Secondly, the production team should improve on the basis of solving the problems. This is what IPACS has been doing. Poor function optimization and long update date will lead to loss of players.

    Finally, the production team is guaranteed to make profits to support more content. The addition of new content will attract more players to choose AF, which is a virtuous cycle of the game. And I believe IPACS knows this. But they can't always put their energy into the update of the mobile terminal.

    As at the beginning, I reserve this view. The low sales volume of AF is caused by the combination of these three steps. But I think the first step accounts for a larger proportion.

    The mobile terminal has been iteratively optimized, but too few new contents have been added. Af2022 is a major update, but other Flying Games have met the needs of most players. Therefore, the sales volume is poor

    I once tried very hard to recommend aerofly to my friends. However, IF players gave me the answer that there were too few international airports in the region and the game lacked online flights. XPM gave me the answer that the game lacks a perfect weather system. According to you, each player chooses his favorite game because of his own prejudice. You don't want AF to make any changes. Other players still choose their favorite games. How wonderful!

    貴方の運命は、すでに我が手中の糸が絡めとった!:saint:<3

  • Of course. In your position, it is the responsibility of the authorities to fix any errors in the game as soon as possible instead of adding more errors. Because you paid for it. The team has been working on fixing bugs that our players have raised, and I'm sure we'll see results in an update soon. But anyone who has bought any version of Aerofly so far can't change the fact that AF sales are dismal.

    I always thought Aerofly was a success as a flight simulator built by a small team. Officials have completed the complete framework needed for a flight simulation game. The basic functions are already in place. But as a marketable game, Aerofly has had less success. Each game builds new features on top of itself, and these features are often more important to players than fixing minor bugs. Whether it's XPM, IF, or not professional games, it seems to be telling us this.

    貴方の運命は、すでに我が手中の糸が絡めとった!:saint:<3

    Edited once, last by orangedog433 (August 21, 2022 at 2:50 PM).

  • Thank you! I am not a fan of subscriptions either but what a bout DLCs like the scenery? They can be a payment as well. It would be awesome to have more features where you get more profit from. And it would be amazing for us as well.

    In original mobile Aerofly FS and Aerofly 1 there were a lot of add on pay aeroplanes, I did not mind paying for them and in a way it increased desire and the perceived ‘quality’ of the sim.

    I’d like to contribute more financially in such a way to (fewer) maturing mobile iterations but IPACS must know that a well packed package every year brings better revenue.

    I don’t like deleting old versions, it was painful not being able to load mobile ‘Aerofly 2’/(renamed)FS2 into my new M1 iPad. It would be a calamity if the original mobile Aerofly FS became incompatible.

    Edited once, last by Overloaded (August 21, 2022 at 3:09 PM).

  • Who are you talking to? I never said that I don’t want any changes but I don’t want a change in the direction of RFS or others. Otherwise I would never have requested this livery. ;)