| Author |
Message |
ba43
Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Posts: 17
|
 Posted:
Wed Aug 05, 2009 4:32 pm Glacier Bay X?? |
  |
Is there any truth to the rumor that there will be a Glacier Bay version coming for FSX??? 
Brad
|
|
   |
|
francois
Site Admin
Gender: 
Age: 57
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 2187
Location: Europe
|
|
Posted:
Wed Aug 05, 2009 5:24 pm (No subject) |
|
|
  |
|
ba43
Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Posts: 17
|
|
Posted:
Wed Aug 05, 2009 8:36 pm (No subject) |
|
YAHOO!!!!
I'm purchasing a new system from Jetline Systems and can't wait to make the move to FSX. I've held off for almost 3 years now and will be picking up Misty and GBX when finished.
Putting in my download order for Tongass X as soon as I hook up my new PC to the internet next week. 
Thanks Francois.
Brad
|
|
| |
|
francois
Site Admin
Gender:
Age: 57
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 2187
Location: Europe
|
|
Posted:
Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:45 pm (No subject) |
|
|
| |
|
Ozzy
Gender:
Age: 56
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 76
Location: KPNE
|
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:28 am Ultimate Terrain: Alaska X |
|
Have ya'll seen the screenshots of the newly released Ultimate Terrain: Alaska X? Did the GBay folk merge with Scenery Solutions? If I didn't know better, i'd swear that's a GBay clone!
|
|
| |
|
fbobum
Gender:
Age: 43
Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Posts: 12
Location: USA
|
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 05, 2010 3:35 pm (No subject) |
|
Scenery Solutions has said that Holger Sandmann worked with them on the project.
|
|
 |
|
Ozzy
Gender:
Age: 56
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 76
Location: KPNE
|
|
Posted:
Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:16 am (No subject) |
|
« fbobum » wrote:
Scenery Solutions has said that Holger Sandmann worked with them on the project.
If he's doing a GBay for FSX, then why add the GBay sceneries in the UT Alaska X?
|
|
| |
|
JBKruzer
Gender:
Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 10
|
|
Posted:
Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:54 pm (No subject) |
|
Ultimate Terrain Alaska X is a really good product for the entire state, but it doesn't quite reach the level of detail that Glacier Bay V2 does in FS9 in the Glacier Bay area.
I'm happy with UTAX, but am still anxiously awaiting GBX!
_________________
"A good landing is when you can walk away from the plane. A great landing is when you can use the plane again."
|
|
| |
|
Ozzy
Gender:
Age: 56
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 76
Location: KPNE
|
|
Posted:
Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:52 pm (No subject) |
|
« JBKruzer » wrote:
Ultimate Terrain Alaska X is a really good product for the entire state, but it doesn't quite reach the level of detail that Glacier Bay V2 does in FS9 in the Glacier Bay area. I'm happy with UTAX, but am still anxiously awaiting GBX!
You took the words right-out of my mouth  I was not impressed whatsoever of the Gbay area screenshots. I don't run FSX at all, but if I did, i'd never purchase that one. The GBay in my FS9 would make that UTAX one look like a Mattel Toy! 
|
|
| |
|
Holger Sandmann
Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 843
Location: Sidney, B.C.
|
|
Posted:
Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:25 am (No subject) |
|
Hi guys,
Ultimate Terrain Alaska X is a statewide add-on so naturally it cannot be as detailed as a "local" addon like Tongass, Misty, or Glacier Bay v2.
We're still planning on Glacier Bay X (and several components are already quite advanced) but as a freeware project it's something that happens on the side and thus takes longer.
Cheers, Holger
|
|
| |
|
Ozzy
Gender:
Age: 56
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 76
Location: KPNE
|
|
Posted:
Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:00 pm (No subject) |
|
Thanks for clearing that up Holger...
|
|
| |
|
JBKruzer
Gender:
Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 10
|
|
Posted:
Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:28 am (No subject) |
|
I certainly do not want to be among those who are criticizing UTAX. I am a big fan and think that it makes the entire state of Alaska look dramitically better and MUCH more realistic than FSX. It was well worth the money.
My point was simply to say that I am looking forward to the additional enhancement that Glacier Bay X will bring to my home town of Juneau and the surrounding area. I'm certain that it will be even better than GB v2 (which I still run on FS9 every once in a while.)
For me, it's not one vs. the other. I have been anticipating both products since I got FSX. I consider both essential and worthwhile add-ons. Free or not. A LOT of work is involved in developing complex projects such as these and I greatly appreciate the effort that Holger and many others are putting forth to make our simulations more enjoyable.
_________________
"A good landing is when you can walk away from the plane. A great landing is when you can use the plane again."
Last edited by JBKruzer on Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:49 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| |
|
cvearl
Gender:
Joined: 10 Dec 2009
Posts: 86
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
|
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:17 am (No subject) |
|
I agree I totally believe in the value of UTX product lines. FSX without them is pretty flimsy! I do love the handmade localised sceneries alot as well. Tongass rocks! Bring on the GBX and MistyX. I'll pay money for those if they are at the level Tongass X is. 
That siad, can you imagine if the fellas doing UTX tried to do Canada, USA or Alaska to the level of Tongass or PNW from FTX?! Holy cow. We would all be dead and burried before they completed it.
Those detailed SPOT enhancements are fantastic but thank goodness for the likes of UTX making the other 95% of the landmasses VFR capable. Default FSX is missing almost all the rivers and roads and rural towns not to meantion how topographically "wrong" the water bodies and cloastlines are. Without UTX I might have given up on flying my local hometown area. That's for sure.
C.
_________________
Tongass X - ORDER Number: 577191
Super Cub X - ORDER Number: 577537
Plum Island X - ORDER Number: 586118
|
|
| |
|
DC_pilot
Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Posts: 34
|
|
Posted:
Sat Feb 13, 2010 6:49 pm (No subject) |
|
I´m one of those waiting for a GBayX. With FS9 I really loved to fly around Juneau, Skagway and Haines. They are really poor in FSX (as default). Are they any better in UTAX or should I just stay at the TFX area until GBayX will be released (hopefully)?
|
|
| |
|
JBKruzer
Gender:
Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 10
|
|
Posted:
Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:19 pm (No subject) |
|
« DC_pilot » wrote:
I´m one of those waiting for a GBayX. With FS9 I really loved to fly around Juneau, Skagway and Haines. They are really poor in FSX (as default). Are they any better in UTAX or should I just stay at the TFX area until GBayX will be released (hopefully)?
Juneau, Skagway, and Haines are MUCH improved with UTAX. It doesn't have quite the level of detail in the modeling of the towns that GBv2 does in FS9, but the improvement in the terrain and shorelines is dramatic.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
98.23 KB |
| Viewed: |
1262 Time(s) |
|
_________________
"A good landing is when you can walk away from the plane. A great landing is when you can use the plane again."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
