Cameron Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 NOTE: This was an April Fool's Joke Hi, Folks,It is with great sadness and a heavy heart that I announce we have folded up the Saab 340A project. There have been many uphill battles in development with this project, especially in the programming side. While we did get 90% of the way there in our development, that last 10% often times amounts to the biggest hurdles in these kind of products.Leading Edge Simulations' team will be taking a small break away from any kind of development over the next couple weeks. We believe there is a larger market for slightly more simplistic simulations that take less programming and better 3D/eye candy. As such, we will soon announce the next two projects that have already been underway once the guys at Leading Edge Simulations get back from their break.We thank everyone who has been patient throughout the development process of the Saab, and for sticking around for news as long as you have. Your words of encouragement are not missed!
Connie5 Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 Wow...horrible news! Will you maybe have someone else pick up this project or work on it at a later date? I have been waiting patiently and so long for this project. It's one of the nicest aircraft I have ever seen for X-Plane.
Yidahoo Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 Given that this is April 1st I am in two minds as to whether its true or not. I hope not.
hobofat Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 Wow...horrible news! Will you maybe have someone else pick up this project or work on it at a later date?I have been waiting patiently and so long for this project. It's one of the nicest aircraft I have ever seen for X-Plane. I've got this great bridge I think you might be interested in. I hate to see it go, but will of course give you a great deal on it. Suspension wires not included. 1
Mario Donick Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) Well, I also think this is just an April's joke, but sadly the statement We believe there is a larger market for slightly more simplistic simulations that take less programming and better 3D/eye candy. might well be true for some folks. Edited April 1, 2013 by mariodonick
wim1976 Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 Nice joke, I was trapped in at if my daughter had not had many "1-april-jokes". Keep up your tremendous efffort. I know developing is a way of sweat and tears. But in the end we can enjoy together!
PWJT8D Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 I think a better April Fools joke would be to release it today. Now that would have everyone fooled!!! 2
Orcair Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 Hahahahahaa. This along with the Virgin Atlantic Glass Bottom and WestJet Furry Family ads are some of the better ones.
tkyler Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 Good riddance....that project was a piece of junk anyhow! 2
MaidenFan Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 Good riddance....that project was a piece of junk anyhow!Yeah, and it's not like anybody would have bought it anyway!
AnonymousUser68 Posted April 1, 2013 Report Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) Good riddance....that project was a piece of junk anyhow! Much like the Abacus 787 ^ The Abacus 787 is the joke of the flight simulation world. Edited April 1, 2013 by X-Plane Australia 1
KAPTEJNLN Posted April 2, 2013 Report Posted April 2, 2013 (edited) well first of april depends on location but it´s to close to be true, but defenetly sad if it´s true Edited April 2, 2013 by KAPTEJNLN
Mario Donick Posted April 2, 2013 Report Posted April 2, 2013 Maybe Cameron should clarify if this is indeed an joke. I'm not yet convinced. Just today I talked to someone who confirmed the view "more eyecandy, less depth".
Cameron Posted April 2, 2013 Author Report Posted April 2, 2013 NOTE: This was an April Fool's Joke Hi, All, My apologies for being inconsiderate of the date this was posted. This post is not to be taken as a joke. We appreciate the support throughout!
KAPTEJNLN Posted April 2, 2013 Report Posted April 2, 2013 dam "more eyecandy, less depth" i could diss agree more.. if X-plane should be a sucees we need some good planes and not only good looking stuff, it´s flyeing it depends on more then most eyecandy.. sorry but it´s how i feel
Mario Donick Posted April 2, 2013 Report Posted April 2, 2013 (edited) Oh. Well, many things might add to this decision, one of them being able to develop and support a more complex plane in a reasonable amount of time. Often, this can only be done by bigger teams.And indeed there is a market for eyecandy planes. But do it right. Don't do a second ATR 72-500 (which is nothing but a shiny default plane with lots of bugs).Besides that ... XP really needs more complex planes for being taken seriously by FSX simmers. Just the 777 and the CRJ 200 are not enough ... and there is not a single General Aviation plane that is as deep as some of the planes available for FSX ... Maybe this field would also be an option for LES? Edited April 2, 2013 by mariodonick
woweezowee Posted April 2, 2013 Report Posted April 2, 2013 Unreal. shock. I bought this DVD in april, 2011, in anticipation of this plane… What else to say.
rick_studder Posted April 2, 2013 Report Posted April 2, 2013 (edited) It's sad and somewhat baffling if you decide to trash an aircraft with so much graphics finished because you cannot make the plugins work. I guess you have your reasons, but have you considered releasing the plane in a simplified, plugin-free version, or even using another plugin SDK like SASL? Seems such a waste when so much work must already have gone into it. And the part about customers preferring eye-candy over depth? Well, count me out. With Ben's recent and peculiar post about laptop problems in mind, I'm crossing my fingers that this is not due to some catastrophic shortcoming of Gizmo. Many other projects depend on the framework — the MU-2 update, the IXEG B737. Edited April 2, 2013 by rick_studder
Recommended Posts