close

FSDreamTeam GSX Level 2: The FSElite Review

FSdreamteam Gsx
PRODUCT INFORMATION
Developer
FSDreamTeam
Purchase From
FSDreamTeam
Price
$29.00
BUY HERE
Version Reviewed
1.0.0.1
Press Copy Provided By
FSDreamTeam
SimMarket
FSElite's preferred Flight Sim vendor is SimMarket. (Why?)

As per our Community Charter, all of our reviews are free from bias, prejudice and favouritism. Don't forget, each reviewer has their own style and thoughts, although they all abide by the Review Guidelines - something I suggest you read.

It should be noted that I received the product approximately 1 week before the public release to assist with testing of the product. The purpose of this period was to test any bugs that would be show-stoppers for releasing the product. I did report some quality issues discussed in the review prior to release.

When GSX launched back in 2013, it revolutionised how flight simulator handled the ground operation side of things. Although there were other tools out there that did similar things, they all required specific files to be designed with it so that it would work for those key airport. Furthermore, it also cost per airport (in the form of credits). However, GSX changed the game by offering these types of services in a one-off flat rate cost, which covered every single airport within flight sim. Yes, it did require a few edits here and there to be perfect, but on the whole, it worked for most situations.

Despite being released 5 years ago, GSX has been supported continuously since. Small bug updates here and there and also larger, feature-adding updates meant that GSX has become one of the most popular and used tools in our sims. A common question the team always faced was “when can I get 3D passengers to board my plane?” It was said at the time that PCs weren’t ready to handle the intensity of hundreds of animated passengers board the plane. Then it was a case of the simulators not able to support that many objects on screen without it running out of memory.

Fast-forward to 2018, and GSX developer, FSDreamTeam, announced at Flight Sim Expo that a new product has been developed to finally add those virtual passengers to the sim. It’s been a long time coming, so let’s see how GSX Level 2 fares after all this time.

The most important thing to note straight away is that GSX Level 2 is a add-on for an add-on. You must have GSX already owned and installed to take advantage of GSX Level 2. It’s an unusual option for a developer to take, but as explained by the developers, the idea is to bring more of these expansions in the future so people can be flexible on what features they want in the sim. I personally think the naming choice chosen will start to become confusing as more of these modules are released, but that doesn’t really impact the quality of the product – but I do think it may add to some confusion later down the line. I’ll come back to overall value at the end of the review, but when reading, keep this fact in mind.

So what exactly does GSX Level 2 actually do? It does two key operations:

  • Add fully 3D character models for passengers and crew.
  • Add SODE jetways with the ability to have them added to airports worldwide (replacing default or non-SODE jetways)

For those who may not know what SODE is, let me briefly explain. SODE, Sim Object Display Engine was created by 12bPilot to add more details and effects that weren’t possible with the current FSX/P3D SDK (PDK for P3Dv4). Many people assume SODE is just for jetways, which isn’t true. SODE actually enables developers to include other effects for their scenery including moving wind-socks (based on actual wind values), change textures based on weather and other dynamic details. The tool is free for developers to use in their projects, but some developers are cautious about using SODE in their products as it is closed-source – meaning if 12bPilot abandons the project and the simulator sees an update that breaks SODE, then there’s very little anyone can do about it. Unless otherwise proven, only 12bPilot has access to the source code only, despite multiple developers attempting to buy it in the past. I have attempted to contact the developers at FSDreamTeam to clarify, but to no response. This information isn’t pertinent to the review, but worth acknowledging later on.

Back to GSX Level 2.

GSX Level 2 has poised itself as an expansion to the original GSX, but providing animated passengers and as a SODE jetway replacement tool for every airport. It’s a product of two halves, so I’ll go into the detail for both.

Animated Passengers

It’s been a long requested feature from the community to have animated passengers within the flight simulator. For whatever reason, users really wanted to simulate the effect of seeing virtual families, business people and the elderly climb up the metal steps next to the plane and walk through the door. I must admit, seeing this feature for the first time was pretty cool, and when flying the plane, my mind did think back to the hundreds of people who poured into the plane. It was pretty immersive to think I was now responsible for all those people.

It’s not just the passengers that are animated either. Both pilots and crew make an appearance from a specific crew bus. Again, it’s pretty cool to watch them climb the steps and walk their separate ways. Whilst cool, it would be nice to see a more dynamic range in models used for the pilots and crew – for example female pilots / male cabin crew and even more culturally diverse models. I’m not trying to turn this into a political debate, or anything of the sort, but from a feature point of view – it’s still important in my eyes.

I could say the same for the passenger models too. There’s of course a lot more variation in how they look, but there’s simply not enough variety to make it a believable scene.  You’ll see the same grandmother at least 7 times when boarding a pretty busy flight. I counted around 20 unique models. Something as simple as changing the colour of their outfits would help me become more immersed in this.

Even in this shot you can see the same models multiple times (see the grandma)

When it comes down to the modelling, there’s a lot of work which can be done to improve the passengers boarding and disembarking. Texture quality is pretty low, with model quality even worse. See the screenshots below to see what I mean. Furthermore, the animation varies from okay to not great. Watching the passengers scurry from the bus to the steps is like watching an episode of The Walking Dead, in the way they have zero control over their arms, legs or other stiff movements. Models would also clip through one another more often than not.  Despite how good the animations are for their other ground ops people, this is a real disappointment.

Maybe this is outside the scope of the project, but I would love to see the passengers actually react to things like outside weather or destination. E.g. Cold and wet weather means people with coats and other non-summery objects. Other annoyances to me also include how the passengers board the plane single file with zero delay. Any rampie or crew member will tell you that plane aisles block frequently and often. Yet GSX Level 2 boards everyone swiftly and promptly in around 2 minutes.

Clipping is a common problem for GSX Level 2

SODE Jetway Replacement

“We will replace all default jetways with SODE ones at airports” – that was the message received at FlightSimExpo and also during product release. I feel like GSX Level 2 over-promised and under-delivered on this aspect. Let me explain.

When GSX was released, it used a similar tag-line to suggest that pushback would be made available at all airports. To a modest extent, this was pretty true. It took either the default BGL or the add-on scenery BGL file and the push-back would follow that to a reasonable path. For the most part, it works fine with little to no editing. This was the approach I had assumed would be taken with the SODE jetways. However, upon using the product, it’s actually far from that reality. There’s three possible situations:

  • Default Airport with no SODE jetways
  • Add-on Airport with no SODE jetways
  • Add-on Airport with SODE jetways

Default Airports with no SODE jetways is an area where the product shines surprisingly well. It will take the default jetways from those airports and replace them with SODE ones. Furthermore, it does a decent job at guessing the style of the jetway and any banners / gate numbers associated.

However, things get a bit complicated with the others. Let’s take FlyTampa Amsterdam for example. It’s a huge airport with many gates, jetways and parking stands. Sadly, FlyTampa didn’t integrate SODE jetways into the airport itself. As a result, users of GSX Level 2 who want to have SODE jetways, will need to implement the jetway at each gate if they want to use it. Of course, you could just do a single gate and fly in and out of that every time, but that’s not really the point. Although there are videos showing the process can take just a few minutes, that’s a few minutes per airport in your library and not something I feel like doing each time – especially if I have to reinstall a scenery.

The final situation is pretty easy for GSX as the software doesn’t touch them at all, and works just fine.

What is very interesting is how much detail and customisation you can have with the jetways. There’s over 80 jetway types included which are incredibly detailed and extremely well modelled. You can also customise whether there’s a GPU attached, air cooling, ground markings which ads are on the jetway and more. It’s all done in real time within the sim so you can see exactly what changes you’re making as you do them. Using the power of DX11, you will also be able to edit the text and colour pretty easily with absolute minimal impact on the frame rate. You can even customise the bridge from the terminal to the jetway – along with the type of bridge and what walls surround it (e.g. glass, plastic, etc). And if it’s glass, you will see the virtual passengers walk down the jetways.

There’s just a lot to work with and the editor itself for moving objects I don’t feel is the most user friendly. It’s quite cumbersome, as you then also have to use another tool (external to the sim) to then change the BGL and save it. It took me a long time to change one or two jetways and after that, I gave up. You can apply jetways to gates generically to whole airports relatively quickly, but again, if you have a large library, it sucks up a lot of time. I would hardly say this is a SODE jetway replacement worldwide.

In general, the SODE jetways work well and are a lot better than the default ones within the sim. We’re also fortunate enough to have a community who are willing to create these profiles and share them online. I think it’s worth FSDreamTeam creating some kind of community system which easily allows users to download these config files quickly and easily – even the installation instructions of these files aren’t the clearest. The manual itself is pretty confusing and has been merged with the original GSX one, which doesn’t really help people identify what section relates to which quickly and visually.

How it interacts with aircraft

Although not a feature of the product itself, it’s important to discuss how it interacts with the aircraft itself. In general, I’ve always found things like re-fuelling to be a bit temperamental. Never really understanding when to press “refuel”, where to refuel the plane from or when to do it. It seems to change its mind often. I feel this is similar for boarding passengers.

The tutorials released on how this works defines it pretty simply: select how many passengers you want to board, load up GSX and request boarding. However, this then starts to be a bit buggy if you’re, for example, attempting to do a turn-around. If you disembark you load, want to spin it around and select the boxes to run, you may end up seeing no passengers board as the system things nothing needs to be loaded. I’ve had it happen on multiple occasions and the only way to ‘reset’ it is by simply restarting GSX.

Speaking of turnarounds, there’s no possible way to simulate this right now. Every disembarkation means the pilots and crew will leave the plane, meaning a new set will need to board. Furthermore, passengers always have to board via a bus in the world of GSX, compared to maybe a ‘custom’ defined point on the apron. It all feels very barebones right now with limited options on how the product interacts with the plane.

Performance

The performance of GSX Level 2 is certainly the highlight of the product. Because of the poor animation and low resolution and polygon count of the models, it does mean that there’s little to no performance impact on the simulator. Even with a hundred character models walking towards the bus or down the jetway, things still run smooth. There’s still the occasional frame jump when a new action is taking place (e.g. first passenger bus unloads), but it’s micro-seconds and not really impactful to the experience itself.

Value

As I mentioned at the beginning of the review, GSX Level 2 is an additional piece of software that must be purchased alongside the original GSX. That means the overall cost of the product is approximately $60 USD. That’s a lot of money for a new person investing into the simulator looking to get the most from it. I’m surprised we didn’t see some kind of discount bundle for those who were looking to invest in both – that would’ve made the initial blow a lot easier to handle.

Even if we took the cost of GSX Level 2 on its own, I still think $30 is a lot of money for an add-on to the original add-on. For something that still has missing features, a few bug issues here and there and requires a -lot- of tinkering by the end user, I feel it’s not really value for money.

What does get more concerning is thinking back to what if SODE developer 12bPilot decides to walk away. A few updates from Lockheed Martin later and suddenly our $30 (or $60) investment becomes even harder to swallow. Of course, that’s a bit of speculation on my part, but it could happen. Obviously this is the case with any product that relies on SODE in some way, but GSX Level 2 has over 50% of its features locked in by SODE, meaning a huge chunk of the product may break compared to a scenery which means only the jetways may not work.

FSDreamTeam have proven to be reliable when it comes to frequent updates to their GSX platform, so I see no reason why GSX Level 2 will be any different. We’ve already seen a few minor updates since launch, so hopefully more ideas and features will be implemented to make this a much more desirable product.

 

Review overview

Presentation 4
Features 4
Performance 6
Value 4

Summary

4.5 FSDreamTeam has provided a much-requested feature, but at a very high cost. The overall idea of the extension is pretty interesting, but fails to pull them off as effortlessly as you would come to hope. I can only hope that as time goes on, GSX Level 2 becomes more of a necessity rather than the “hey, that’s kind of cool” piece of software it is now.

Tags : FSDreamTeamGSXUtility
Calum Martin

The author Calum Martin

I have been an avid fan of Flight Sim since the release of '2000 and have been developing my love for aviation ever since. I have the knowledge and experience to really deliver an excellent aviation community. Although no real life flying experience, I have a good understanding and always learning more and more. | View My Specs
Add to the discussion, be kind and have fun. Your opinion matters, but consider our guidelines before you post.

Our comment section is designed to be ran by the community for the community.

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry that something went wrong, repeat again!


By clicking the 'Submit' button above, you are agreeing to the our Privacy Policy.

57comments

by Newest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

Harsh review considering some of the amateur scenery projects that have been awarded 8.9 reviews recently.

Agree with @FSXLiveries.com

FSXLiveries.com

@RonATT
Can you prove your accusations or just throwing them here and there?

MK Studios are just kids with a bunch of stolen flytampa textures. LPPT will be replaced as soon as someone competent does it.

I love GSX. Probably one of the most innovative products for a long while.

LPPT is amazing and not a as crappy as GSX….

All good points Calum.. But to me gsx 2 was invaluable.. Some of my old airports which had only static jetways now have multiple moving glass jetways where I can see pax walking into the plane.. This opens up my airport network that more destinations are possible for me now than before..

@david

How did you inform yourself about GSX SODE jetways not connecting to AI ?

@fsxliveries

I’m pretty easy to please, as long as honesty, care, and a good effort is involved. I think FSDT should be given time to respond, and they and others need to learn from this.

@Umberto

I’m not your enemy, I simply want FSDT to be held to a higher standard because I know you are capable of a higher standard. I’m glad this review and the comments got your attention. None of us would be here if we did not care.

FSXLiveries.com

@af
Do I agree with you? Sure, at least partially. I also wish we didn’t have to play around any add-on at all. It would be great if we could just double click one file like when installing for example repaints for PMDG planes. Double click and it’s done. however moments/things when it’s not that easy.
But still, I can’t agree with the final score.
Everyone has their opinion and can give the score he believes it is worth. I can’t blame Calum or anyone else for that. Neither I think that the almost every single review on FSElite has a good balance,
Tho in this particular review I would add another 1.5 because that’s how I see it, in most cases I would personally add or subtract one or just half of the point which I believe is in the margin.

@af

Ok fair enough, I didn’t know that it is not working with AI. I really expect a setting there like it is with SODE. The only reason I read was to save performance but this should really be our decision.

And I don’t really know what you mean with AFCAD airports to be honest. Every airport is a AFCAD airport for me.

And I do not accept false ads but I inform myself before I buy. Every ad ever existed has been wrong to a certain degree, not only in flight simulation.

@david

So you KNEW that the GSX SODE jetways were NOT going to function with AI? And you knew that AFCAD Airports would not be compatible at all?

It sounds like you expect and accept false ads. Shouldn’t you be against it rather than cozy up to it? By doing so, you are worse than them, and it will only get worse.

I’m glad Calum is not like you!

@af

GSX Level 2 really does EXACTLY what I expected beforehand. And this is because I was informing myself before, watching the videos and read the announcements from Flightsimcon etc. I mean this is something you should know by now, that the advertising text on the sales page isn’t always what is to be expected. If you only believe those texts, then every add-on airport is “very detailed” “high performance” etc. Most of them aren’t.

@fsxliveries

You are coming to a conclusion that agrees much with what I’m saying.

If a flight sim add-on (other than explicit aircraft/scenery/ect. “design” add-ons) has features that require work/creativity and NOT flight simming, then those features can be part of an SDK of that add-on. But to make a version 2 of something suddenly becoming a big part creative design, then it becomes extremely problematic and deceptive.

It has to be assumed by add-on developers that flight simmers want to FLY, not become programmers/designers. Some flight simmers do like to create and design, that is fine, and that is what SDKs and “design” products are for.

“Ground Services X (GSX)” is not and has never been portrayed as “Ground Service and jetway designer/creator X”, but if FSDT wants to go that route, it should have been made clear, it wasn’t!

FSXLiveries.com

@af,
No, I did not mean every single add-on. But look at the two examples:
1. Chaseplane
2. REX 5 (SF), REX 4, REX 3 and so on.

Sure, with REX it goes quickly but just because you apply it globally to entire sim.
Chaseplane at the other hand? You have two choices – spend your own time on making your own camera setup or rely on community members.
I have not seen anyone riding on OldProp developers heads for not giving us any pre-defined cameras, except those from “world” tab. Did you? Moreover, with initial release (2 years ago) till 1.0 which just came out there was a lot of flaws and things that had to be fixed, sometimes making the software impossible to use. Tho I read some complains, still the amount of them wasn’t that huge like in case of GSX. I find that odd because tho GSX is a nice addition of immersion to the flight operations, Chaseplane is “must have” in my opinion. Did Chaseplane received such of bad score in reviews in any stage for “what it is now” and not “what will it offer at the end”?
Well, maybe FSDT should should do what OldProp did – release L2 as Alpha or Beta?

I do agree however that there is a field for many improvements and must admit I didn’t spotted jetways not working with AI.

Umberto Colapicchioni

@af

You are not “required” to create any airports. The program doesn’t require to do anything to enhance default airports.

We always said, right from the very beginning when the product was first announced, what was involved in customizing 3rd party airports. Here’s the link:

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,17940.0.html

I’ll copy here the relevant part:

—————————
What about 3rd party airports ?

YES, we can replace them too but, it won’t be made automatically, you’ll have to go through the GSX parking customization page, and indicate the parking(s) you want the jetway replaced so, it will automatically create a very small .BGL EXCLUDE file, which will remove JUST the jetways from any 3rd party airport that used the default (CTRL+J) animation system, but its own custom models.

We DO NOT touch any of the original scenery files, and if you just remove the GSX-created Exclusion .BGL, that scenery will go back to the way it was. We’ll have a single shared folder in the \Fsdreamteam\Addon Manager\Exclude, which will contain all these automatically created Exclude files, with a name that will clearly relate to the associated scenery.

Also, if your addon airport already use SODE jetways, we won’t touch it, assuming a developer who made the effort to support SODE, already did jetways in the best possible way so, we won’t allow customization of these sceneries.

So, for example, you might take your FlyTampa EHAM scenery, which is very nice, but doesn’t have SODE jetways, and replace them with SODE jetways, allowing things not possible with the default animation system, like multiple jetways per parking, up to a maximum of 4. And yes, the editor will allow you to customize the range of every exclusion area so, you’ll be able to remove static jetways too, as long as they were modeled as a separate object.
—————————

Do you find anything that is not accurate or doesn’t match the actual product in that description ? This was made in June 2018, 3 months BEFORE release.

In addition to that, we published a video tutorial which explains *precisely* how to replace a jetway on FlyTampa EHAM the SAME day of release, Sept. 7th:

Do you think the video to be not accurate or somewhat mislead about what’s involved ? Do you think we hid something ? All the information was already there on release day.

And, the program is available in TRIAL.

And right now, has sold in one month more than GSX in its first *year*. A-product-which-is-available-in-TRIAL, sorry if I repeat it, but it’s the key concept.

I understand that customizing airports might not be everybody’s cup of tea but that’s really besides the point. The real value is also the ability to download work made by others. Each time we improve the editor, and make it easier/faster/better for those that DO like customization, it will increase the number and the quality of what will be shared, and this will benefit even those that “just” want to fly.

I’m not sure I understand your comment about AFCAD not compatible with GSX SODE. Surely GSX is compatible with AFCADs but, since the first GSX has been released, it always required self-contained AFCADs and it only read 1 AFCAD at the time so, if your comment was related to the inability to use partial enhancements, (like a set of additional parking to be used in combination with a default AFCAD), that’s is how GSX always worked since 2012 so, it’s nothing new, really.

And finally, we’ll add support for AI as well. It will require a new version of SODE, since we use part of the AI support that is already there in SODE, and will plug GSX on top of it.

I agree with @af. Changing out the jetways for GSX L2 “SODE” jetways and then finding they don’t work with AI aircraft is a showstopper for me. If it’s due to system performance, even 12bpilot gives the user the option to enable/disable SODE jetways for AI aircraft to help performance. Does GSX L2 offer this option? Nope. I do like some of the other features of GSX L2, but I can’t see the point of editing jetways if they are only going to work with the user aircraft. Seems a step backwards instead of forward.

@FSXliveries @Unberto

So because P3D is an open platform I should have to EXPECT to be put to work with every add-on I buy??

Where would it end? So I buy FS2Crew and now I have to totally create flows and checklists? FS2Crew would have went out of business within a month! When I bought the NGX, all I had to do was learn how to fly it, I did not have to know how to build one! Or worse know the manufacturing process of a tire! I exaggerate to make a point. When I bought Active Sky I did not HAVE to create weather, I can just load it and fly. But if I want I can create weather.

What I’m trying to say is the “create” thing needs to be an OPTION NOT A REQUIREMENT. I realize its not a “strict” requirement, but for many who have accumulated possibly hundreds of airports, GSX has become a 2nd job but it could have been avoided. I understand GSX cant be messin with others sceneries, but Umberto you have been around long enough to know that many flight simmers have add-on airports that suit their flying needs. My Flightbeam airports do work fine, but all the afcad airports I have require me to totally get rid of GSX SODE because GSX SODE will only read the base scenery in that case. You say it yourself, AFCADS are not compatible with GSX SODE.

Then there is the issue of GSX SODE not even working on AI at all – NO OPTION again! As if EVERYBODY flies on VATSIM or IVAO and nobody has Mytraffic or Ultimate Traffic.

If the initial advertising of GSX SODE would have made this clear then FSDT would not have so many complaints. Nothing about AFCADs being impossible – here is FSDT advertising — Sounds so simple.

Features:

Animated Passengers, boarding/unboarding the airplane using either Staircases or Jetways.

Many different characters, each one with his own different animation and walking style.

Visible Pilots and Crew boarding/unboarding the airplane.

Loadmaster assistant replaces the Crew on Cargo airplanes.

SODE replacement Jetways at every airport.

Complete Jetway editor, to fully customize the Jetway appearance at each parking spot.

More than 80 different Jetway types, modeled after real-world specification, each one avabile in different variations.

Jetway Numbers using DX11 (Prepar3D 4 only).

Jetway with Air and Power units, which can keep the airplane battery charged.

Default Jetways are replaced automatically.

3rd party Jetways using the default animation system can be excluded on demand, in the airport customization.

Umberto Colapicchioni

For the record, GSX was originally priced at 39$ of 2012 when it came out, and as I already said, it was way less capable than today. Yet nobody back then questioned its price, maybe because they were used to “pay per airport” in AES.

FSXLiveries.com

@Calum
Leaving aside all arguments Umberto brought in his comments, there is another one “little thing” many of us (including sometimes myself) is the fact that you can’t compare the prices and their values from 2012 to 2018 that easily. What I mean is the fact that economy is changing, the salaries as well, usually going up. Ii’s hard for me to imagine that you would get the exactly the same product – here GSX – for the same ~40 euro if it was released just today and not 5 or 6 years ago.
It goes actually to all products, not only in our sim world so expecting the same value for the same price today I would call at least risky.
There also might be, I will repeat because it is just speculation, might be another factor why the price of something is so and not so – lack of competition.

Calum Martin
Author

Comparing your utility to a aircraft is like apples and pears. But let’s not forget that people will need to pay $34 for the original add-on first before they can contemplate this add-on as you haven’t made any flexibility for those who want both who may not own one already.

I’m not comparing GSX as of now to anything. Upon release, GSX had more features and stuff than what GSX L2 has upon launch. And yes, like I said in the review, I expect you to improve L2, but AS OF RIGHT NOW, it’s not a value for money product in my eyes. In 7 years time, maybe that will change, but I can’t review a product for what may happen in the future. You’re charging money to people right now for a product so that’s what we review.

Umberto Colapicchioni

@Calum

29$ in the era of 130$ airplane addons, are a very cheap price for a product that:

– Improves automatically thousands of default airports.

– Allow to improve any other airport, with some work.

And, it seems you are making a comparison with what GSX does TODAY, after 7 years on the market and with constant updates always released for free, with Level 2 does, which is brand new.

I must remind how GSX was on release date, Jan. 31th 2012:

– The loaders only used luggage. There were NO cargo loaders and no support for ULDs. They came with version 1.3, some months after the initial release.

– There was NO settings page, at all. It appeared in version 1.1

– There was NO airplane configuration editor. GSX used to read AES intelliscene.cfg files and users could only create their airplane configs by creating a GSX.CFG file MANUALLY, with Notepad! The airplane editor came with version 1.7, several months later.

– There was NO scenery customization of any kind. When it came, it was only possible to change the pushback direction and not much more. The first edit that allowed to move the vehicles graphically appeared with version 1.5, several months after the initial release.

– The ability to add docking system came only with GSX 2.0, years later.

– The follow me to the runway appeared in 1.9.5, years later.

– There were NO deicers, at all. They came in 1.9, years later.

– The refueling was very weak initially. It was improved a lot in 1.9.9, years later.

Calum Martin
Author

@Umberto

I brought that up because you spent a lot of time discussing it in your comments.

My point in this review is that it’s an expensive product for what amounts to 2 primary features – neither of which really work all that well or have some serious things that need improving.

Passengers – animations are pretty poor, loads of clipping, unrealistic boarding, no turn arounds and lack of variation in the people used.

SODE Jetways – Great at default airports (which I mentioned), not so great at payware airports. I completely understand there’s complications here, but there was no forethought on your end as a developer on how to make it as easy as possible. E,g, this community thing. I refuse that it should be the expectation of the community member to have to go through forums, Facebook groups, etc to find files. That ownership is on you as a developer to provide an easy user experience. Look at how ChasePlane includes a community feature to allow people to enjoy presets made by the community – same with companies like REX. They’ve set the standard and your product falls below that.

I’m thankful I got the product for free from you for testing and review purposes, but I imagine for many $30 ($64 if someone doesn’t already own GSX) is a pretty tough pill to swallow. This is where I think you should really re-consider – the pricing structure makes no sense.

GSX included a butt-load of features to justify the $34 price tag and worked a lot more universally. L2 adds a couple of new things yet still expects $29 for it – that doesn’t scream value at all in my opinion.

Umberto Colapicchioni

@Calum,

Missing features are not really the problem here.

Your review seems to be opposed to the very concept of a product that empowers users by allowing them to customize any scenery, even one that might have been bought years ago and long abandoned by the original developer. Reading the review, it seems that if you are not interested in doing that, the product is not for you.

That’s what I strongly disagree with. Even if only a small percentage of users is interested doing this work, it’s more than enough to create value for everybody else, as long they are sharing their files.

The missing features might result in the editor easier to use but, reading other comments that even 4 minutes is too much, is clear that someone not interested in customizing an airport, will never do it, even if we could improve the editor and make it easier than it already is, even 2 minutes to create a customization will always seem too much.

The issue is, replacing jetways on a 3rd party airport will NEVER be “easy”, and it cannot be automated reliably, without risking destroying other developer’s files, or infringing copyrights. The current method of creating exclusion files is the only one that can be done safely, doesn’t touch any of the original scenery files, and allows to easily go back to the original scenery, if anything goes wrong, and respects everyone’s copyright.

The only “missing” feature I could agree with, is an easier way to get access to shared files, but I’m sure that if we waited another year to release GSX Level 2, so we could launch a web service together with it, it would be almost empty. Let’s give some time to users to learn the subjects, improve their work, and you can be sure that, by the time we will have a better sharing method, there will be enough interesting content to consider it worthwhile.

And, don’t be so quick to discount the value added to default airports, where the product is really “plug-and-play”. Although we are also in the business of making add-on sceneries, there are many countries which are neglected by developers, and improving on the default sceneries has always been a strong point of GSX.

If default airports were really so worthless improving, why there are other products specifically designed to improve *only* default airports, like REX World Airports HD ? That one cannot improve anything other than default airports. GSX and GSX Level 2 can improve BOTH default airports and, with a bit of work, add-on airports too.

Calum Martin
Author

Umberto you seem to miss the point about the product we review. You talk about things “coming soon”, or “we are working on this feature”. That’s great and I’m excited for it. However good your intentions may be, the fact is those features just don’t exist yet. As a result, how can I possibly review a product on the “what if” rather than what people are actually paying for today.

I have no doubt you’ll continue to update GSX L2 (something mentioned in my review actually), but I’m not reviewing what is promised, but actually what has been delivered. It’s exactly why we have a date on the review and the product version.

Our policy, is and will be, to update a review when a significant update has been made. You fix some of the stuff up and include these nice new features, then I’ll come back to it in the future.

Umberto Colapicchioni

@af

As fsliveries already correctly pointed you out yes, have a product open to user customizations is precisely what makes the product’s worth.

Do you find the simulator you currently use to be complete and worth the asking price, if there were no add-ons for it, made by “others” ? Or, would you buy a *cheaper* simulator, but with no add-ons and no easy way to create and share them ?

Yes, the customization features ARE a big part of what GSX has always been about. We just expanded on them.

You find replacing a jetway to be complex ? Wait until we’ll add full Pushback customization, with push-pull and multiple routes for each parking, like in real life.Which is, incidentally, the next most requested feature after visible passengers so, obviously, it will the one which will come next.

But that’s not the point. The point is:

– GSX clearly replaces all default jetways automatically, and this simply just works. This means, ALL default airports, especially those in areas outside the ones covered by add-ons, have become more usable and visually appealing from day one. Perhaps combined with REX Worldwide Airports HD which, in fact, it IS suggesting to use it together with GSX Level 2.

– What would have been your suggestion on the issue of replacing jetways in 3rd party airports ?

– Do you think it would have been feasible, or even ethically right TRYING to create something that did that “automatically” ? On files you bought, created by other developers ? I would be very pissed if someone did something like that on *our* sceneries!

@Umberto

It seems like you assume paying customers to be like, “Be thankful that we do it”.
The main problem I see, is that FSDT is lacking miles behind to 2018 quality standards, but still charging premium prices.
GSX v2 is not at all worth the price you call for it. I had super high expectations, but boy did you disappoint me.
In terms of UX, the Jetway Editor is the worst thing I’ve seen in a long long time. Try harder!

FSXLiveries.com

@af
So no you should blame Microsoft, Dovetail and Lockheed Martin for making open platform instead of the entire simulator in the quality we got today thanks to every single add-on.

So Umberto, the whole point of the product is, for us who don’t want to create, to WAIT for others to create. Wow what a concept for us to pay for. I thought the point of GSX was immersion, how stupid of me.

Umberto Colapicchioni

It seems the whole point of the product is being missed here.

Not “everybody” is supposed to become a “scenery editor” but, it’s enough that somebody will, and will share its creations, and the real product value should be obvious.

You FS Elite guys are young (which is good for you), but in ancient times, there was a “expansion” product for MS Flight Simulator 4.0, released by Microsoft, called “Aircraft and Scenery Designer” (A&SD), which for the first time allowed anybody to “become a scenery editor”, and could improve on the sparse default scenery.

It was very clunky to use, and creating a new scenery from scratch took ages. But you could create small scenery files (they had an .SC1 extension) and share them online, which was very different back then, since we used to connect by dial up and “pay for time” to online services like Compuserve or BBS like Xevious.

And it was this cumbersome product which sparked the whole add-on community as it is today.

And yes, we are working on a way to more easily share, download and install the user contributions, and to provide professionally-made contributions as well.

We are also constantly at work to make the editor easier and more powerful. Copy & Pasting settings from a parking to another is being worked on, and this should save lots of time to create a customization, and we are also adding mouse drag & drop (not in FSX, sorry), to make editing faster.

Again, not everybody is required to do this but, the more powerful and easier to use the editor becomes, the higher the quality of the user-made contributions will be, which will benefit every user.

There’s a single user ( cartayna on our forum ) that has already shared 35 airports in a very short time! And he also produced a series of video tutorials about it.

I have read this a couple of times and I think it’s been ages since I have read something as undeserved and harsh, as if there were something more here than the product (excelent in my opinion) here at stake. It sounds kind of personal. Completely undeserved. And 100% agree that most of the criticism comes from totally missing the point of the product.

Does the boarding interface interac with the pmdg fmc ?

Simple answer: No. That would be PMDGs job. I love FSLs GSX-integration. I hope more and more aircraft developers follow suit.

I’m actually having fun tweaking gates, I managed to fix some “broken” gates at a 3rd party editor which never updated their SODE models (by removing them from their xml file and adding GSX models)… now they finally work!
And I really enjoy the integration we’ve put in place with the Maddog X.
Definitely there is room for improvement on a more user friendly interface and a portal to share files make a huge difference.
IMHO (as others pointed out), price is negligible considering I’m using it for every flight.

Andrew Thompson

Woah, brutal! I was not expecting that score. I love GSX! There is only two programs that I use EVERY fljght and GSX is one of them. Its like a witch hunt down in these comments, tough to read

I love fselite- and I love gsx. Without gsx my flight sim experience would be unbelievably dull. I would gladly (I know I’m in the minority) pay 30$ a month to the team to focus development on gsx because it has to be my favorite addon and the one with the most potential.

What was great about the original GSX was that it worked right out of the box and didn’t require much customization on the part of the user. GSX Level 2 seems like it requires a lot more user input to get things to look believable.

Also, I don’t understand why the developer is bragging about their own fully customizable pushback tool. Better Pushback is a free plugin for X-Plane that does a beautiful job of making it easy to push a plane where you want it and it doesn’t cost you a penny. Rather than the developer making petty comments about the reviewer’s age, maybe they should spent more time fixing the bugs in the current offering.

After reading the review and all the comments so far I’m also of the opinion that the review is too critical and the scoring too low for this add-on.

I think the comments about the pricing are way over the top and unjustified as the reviewer has no knowledge of the effort and costs that have gone into this add-on and the fact that based on FSDT’s stellar reputation (imho) there will be a lot of free updates and improvements released for this add-on that need to be factored into the initial cost (in terms of cost recovery over the long term).

I think FSDT deserve a lot of praise for trying to bring out innovative products for this community and for their excellent updating system which keeps all my airports and products up to date with zero effort from myself (I wish all Flight Sim developers did this, including some major ones that I have spent a lot of money with).

I’d rate the review a “2” overall and as someone else has said I’ll stick to FS Elite for news from now now and bypass the reviews.

I’m gonna add in my two cents- I really do think that this review was done too harshly compared to the plethora of mediocre products that score highly in the rankings. For news I look to FSElite but for reviews, I look elsewhere.

FSXLiveries.com

You shouldn’t abandon FSE’s reviews.
In my opinion these are mostly well balanced, especially when compared to some news outlets I visit as well.
Repeating what I said in other comment. In some cases I would add or subtract 0.5 or 1 point, this is the within the margin. Believe me or not, I always do my best to keep my point of view objective as much as possible so it doesn’t matter if the product comes from the company I like more or less. I’m looking on the product, not the company’s name.
Folks from FSElite crew do really good job here.

I was hoping this was going to be amazing. GSX is a ton of fun. They should have nailed this. Obviously they needed revenue quickly. I’m sure it will be improved. To be fair they have updated the original GSX for years for nothing. Some credit due there.

There are points that both sides are right. May be points are a bit on the low side, -but only a bit- I have to agree with the reviewer that it doesnt bring so much value compared to what GSX brought. Dont miss one point here: the competitor of GSX2 is GSX, not any other product. Dont count the number of services you can get with GSX and GSX 2 and then justify the pricing. With GSX you are adding a new “dimension” into your simming experience, it is totally new. Where as with GSX 2 you are “expanding” what you already have.

That said, I believe and hope the value will be there in time, as FSDreamTeam has proven it with GSX. however for the time being, yes the value is just not there.

Calum Martin
Author

@FSXliveries – I haven’t compared the prices of 2012 products to 2018 products in the review. However, the point remains that if a new person to the community wants to have all these great features, they have to pay the full entry price to enjoy it. I still feel even for people who have owned GSX for many years that $30 is still a pretty high price to pay for not of features (some of which are broken, regardless of whatever updates come – it’s broken today).

The reason I mentioned GSX in response to a comment is because when GSX released (irrespective of price), it actually did more and did things better than what this product does.

Am I against developers making money? No – far from it. They work tirelessly to bring content and immersion to our simulators.
Am I going to say if I think a price for something is unfair? Yes – that’s part of my role as a reviewer.

FSXLiveries.com

@Calum, I got all of your points. I just paritally don’t agree with some of them. 🙂

As an x plane user, I’m used to adding jetways to airports.. But this gsx tool is much more powerful and user friendly than what I have seen before.. U cannot make this complex feature any easier.. I think it deserves a higher score..

I feel like this purchase was totally worth it. I put on my captains cap (actually a sea cap ‘n hat someone who owns a yacht would wear), put up a YouTube cold and start video on my second monitor, let GSX do it’s magic, and by the time everyone is loaded, I’m ready to roll. Occasionally, I hit the ‘S’ key to watch my disabled passengers limp up to the doorway and get a brief sense of satisfaction that I’m pretty much a real airline pilot. I also love when the “follow me” feature in GSX that takes me on a 90 minute tour of P3D’s default scenery airports. There’s a lot of default KOMA scenery y’all are missing if it wasn’t for a GSX European van showing you around.

They are using the same texture models that are present in OMSI 2. So I think copyright free stuff. How old is that game?

So what are you paying for? Only the boarding logic that was already present in GSX 1. Extension of avatar mode in P3D and a couple of variations of sode jetways that on non-default airways you need to install yourself. The rest is the same bugs as GSX 1.

On the models department. They need to be creative. If you send in headshots from the community (and consent to that it can be used in GSX (GDPR)) they can texture every FS enthousiast. How many will be sitting their waiting to be on the plane or not. If you put in logic that also your country is known so you only board in that country for example.

The possibilties are there.

I have to agree in someway with Umberto, that if you go through the tutorial I made with a lot of patience and “love” lol, is not that difficult. Of course is not a plug and play addon, but it makes it more fun and challenging this way. there are tons of options of jetways, docking devices (and from what I have seen in the few weeks that this has been launched they are more been added..), that makes it impossible to be simplified beyond what it is today. Having said this, I do aknowledge the fact that if you are aiming for perfection in a scenery requesting all vehicles to be placed in time, that the start position and the stop position are the same as in the real life, that all the jetways work to perfection, and so forth, a large airport can take up to 10-14 hours to configurate (and this is if you are very familiarized with the procedures). Thus I believe that the community here plays a big role. Also today another user that is becoming master in this addon is helping me on the “Full” configurations (100% tested all working perfect).. so give it a little time for the community to do his part. I am extremely thankfull to GSX2 and its release because with this tool great improvements in sceneries can be achieved.

Also, lets take in mind that half of the work that takes to configurate a scenery is not the fault of GSX2, but due to the fact that many many many sceneries have not very good AFCADs, which is the file that GSX2 uses to configurate the positions of elements, pushbacks and so forth… You can really tell that new sceneries being released lately have been working into making this AFCAD files better, thus making GSX2 configuration easier. So if you guys want to profit from my configurations.. feel free to visit the page in the forums that I have created and that over 300 people visit a day to make a use of it..: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19008.msg131922.html#msg131922 Also the Tutorial is available at this link..

Cheers,

Cartayna

I was out for more than 7 years of flight sim world, my last flight sim was MFS2004 or FS9 as we know it and I loved it so much, the market was rich in excellent airplanes add-ons, you could finally fly the plane is it is in real life – and i really had the opportunity to fly in the cockpit of an airplane that I’ve flown day before on my sim and to see that it really as as real as it gets.
Than we were also being able to get airport scenery which represent the airport as it is in the real life which was also cool. So we were getting even more close to our “as real as it gets” policy.
Than came the first add on with ground services (AES), passengers on board (FSPassengers), online flying. And I was extremely satisfied at the time. AES at the time was great, but it worked only with some sceneries, you were supposed to by credits ( i know i spend a lot of money on that) – but as said at the time it was an extraordinary product.
Seven years latter we have new Flight Sim platforms, even better airplane software’s, but I somehow have the idea that the last few years the development community was more focused on main scenery’s. I was and still am expecting to be able to integrate or merge somehow the google earth with flight sim because it would be the only way to get it as real as possible.
Than I found out about GSX Level 2 and have seen some videos and I got excited – now you really see the pax coming up and down the stairs, refueling can be controlled directly from the aircraft etc…is it perfect no it’s not – it is worth it…o yes it is.
I get the points made in this article but this product actually has just been released and as all other product has to face mayor update and in regard of GSX surely will in the future.
For me personally I would be more concentrated on some technical issues of this product than that much on the appearance of the passengers boarding and de-boarding the plane, as someone said, the pilot is much occupied with his workflow inside the cockpit than looking if grandma is boarding twice (and nobody assumed of the diversity right there – we have twin passengers travelling together).
I would be more focused on the issue that the ground service vehicles are passing through the fuselage, i would also aloud the possibility of multiple services at once (as in the real world you can have the catering and fuel vehicle at the same time) it would be less time consuming (specially on turn around – even though a majority of airplanes add on don’t recommend the turn around – they actually say to refresh – i hope in the future they will find a way to do something with that ). I also agree and the fact that at some airports where the pax are using stairs they don’t need the bus vehicle). What is unrealistic is the pilots and crew boarding just a minute before the passenger, as we all now they do board at list 30 minutes before if not more, depending on the aircraft types – i would board them or right away or not at all, assuming they already are on board.
It would be actually good to have some kind of payload generator or add it to the actual GSX Control Panel, where we could chose the number of crew, passengers and cargo to load.
In regard of the jet ways I did follow the you tube video tutorial and was able to make the changes, the only problem is that now on some airports I have the GSX jet ways and the original jet ways that for some reason wasn’t excluded via the GSX control panel and this is somehow annoying, but from where i stand is much batter even this way than not having them at all.
I believe that the GSX team is taking all our comments as constructive criticism (at list my comments are) and we should give them some credit. The product is completely new (I mean the Level 2) and I can’t wait to see what the updates are bringing us in the future.
Best regards,
Daniel

FSXLiveries.com

I played around the add-on for few weeks and tho there are some good points Calum made , however with some of them I can’t agree.

1. Animated passengers:
Despite some pilots says it is a useless feature because you usually spend the most of the boarding time on the plane set up for next leg, I do agree that it gives an extra immersion and feeling that you won’t fly the empty plane.
I really like it and like to switch to external view watching them boarding/de-boarding if the plane is prepared.
As for poor modeling and texturing Calum mentioned, I believe there are some good reasons why FSDT decided to release it as it is.
I guess they will increase the variety of pax models and textures in future updates same as they did with additional ground service vehicles, expanding the library of companies operating at the airports. At least this is what I hope for.
But for a initial release, it isn’t bad in my opinion.

As for the texture and model quality, I think FSDT tried to keep them on reasonable level by using low-poly models so this won’t hit the overall performance.
I say “I think” because it’s just my speculation and maybe someone with modeling experience could clarify it.
But to say it frankly, I would leave it like it is. For me personally is good enough.

At the other hand there are issues that definitely needs a fix and Calum said about them. For example passengers going through each other, as well as the style how they walk.
It doesn’t have to be detailed like in some football games where developers use multiple camera and sensor setups to record the movement of the player but my own first impressions when I watched the passengers walking were:
“Damn, they didn’t make it to the toilet in time!”
“It is like watching cowboys in “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” or any other western movie.”
The other mentioned issue is the boarding and de-boarding crew. It’s kind of weird situation when they leave the plane even if you want to do a 2nd leg directly.
And as Calum said, it’s buggy.

Let’s move to jetways.
In my opinion a lot of people misinterpreted “SODE jetway replacement worldwide”.
I can’t recall what exactly Umberto said on FSExpo (I might watch the video again) but I’m not sure if he said it will auto-magically change all gates in the entire library collection.
Can you imagine what mess it would be if this replaced every single jetway in every single add-on?
Instead of that you get opportunity to change the single or multiple jetways on airport of your choice.
That’s true, it is very time consuming and for someone who didn’t work with the aircraft/airport customization tool it might be confusing and not user-friendly a t first glance.
Real-time customization tool was a problem for me as well at the beginning but after spending less than an hour, I managed to set all equipment at the gate pretty quickly.

The thing that needs improvement is definitely some community system where we can upload/download the config files for jetways/entire equipments for various airports and where we can vote on + or – the changes. I am aware there is “Sharing Area” on FSDT forum for both, aiports and airplanes config files but it isn’t user friendly. To find out if the config is good or not, you need to go through the comments which costs additional time. Instead of that, something similar (and maybe more advanced)to REX’s community sharing system would be better.

As for SODE implementation and fear that the Jeffrey might be abandon the project in future, for now there is no better system we could use.

As for the other GSX (in general) issues, what always bothers me is that the fact that the some vehicles are hitting or even going through entire planes body.
For example the stairs which will attach the 4L doors. Even if manually placed in safe initial spot, they like to turn left and hit the 747’s 3rd engine just to turn back to the correct wawy. Same happened to me with cargo loader for left side. Loader was placed manually in safe spot behind the aircraft on left side and as soon as it moved it went through the fuselage under the wings to right side of the plane just to turn around and go back to the left side, again through the fuselage.

As for the value in general, I wouldn’t be so hard on it. Tho spending 70 euro might be not cheap, neither 33euro just for Level2 and would be nice to see some discounts for existing users, I believe it is still worth the price in overall. I said that before and I will repeat it:
– Product Lifespan -> initially released more than 6 years ago (according to Umberto’s comment it was released in Feb 2012) and still getting updates and fixes till today
– Support -> Without any doubts I can say that I have never seen any other company’s employee with such of activity and will to solve the customer problems on forum like Umberto.
– Compatibility -> Since FSX till P3Dv4 with no additional costs
– Company’s will to add new or re-design features like pushback which will come as free update.

I also agree with Umberto when it comes to splitting some features to separate expansions.
Here is the quote of his comment under another article:

—-QUOTE—–
The features YOU BOUGHT GSX FOR, which are Pushback, Refueling, Catering, FollowMe, Deicers, are the GSX core and HAS been updated countless of times in the past 6.5 years (GSX came out in Feb 2012) and WILL be updated again, even after the Level 2 Expansion.

Who, exactly, “promised” Animated Passengers and Global Jetway replacements ? That’s precisely why we are doing an Expansion, but it seems you got it backwards. With this as an Expansion, you are free NOT to buy it, if you are not interested in THOSE features that NOBODY promised you, but you’ll still be able to get constant updates for the features YOU BOUGHT GSX FOR.

After the Level 2 Expansion, we’ll start working on a Pushback improvement, and this WILL be FREE, because this IS part of the features you bought GSX for.

The alternative would have been to make a whole new GSX product, with an upgrade price, and stop maintaining the old version, and who cares of those that just bought it yesterday and maybe didn’t even *care* about animated passengers or jetways. That would meant forcing the new features on everybody, and forcing everybody to pay for the update, just to stay current. Yes, lots of other products are doing exactly that. No, we aren’t…
—-END OF QUOTE—–
Now would you prefer to get everything as a completely new product and pay it for it probably higher price than base GSX?
I prefer the way as it is now because I can choose if I want to pay for extra features I will need and those I won’t never use.
Also, what is worth emphasizing is the fact that you can get the product on lower price. I got mine GSX (base) for 15 euro on FSDT sale while back.
It’s true, it did not happen often but still. And if you are on FSElite’s discord server you might rise the chance of being informed in time about this or any other discounts publishers or developers offer.

I think this is a great concept and considering that you use the add-on on every flight, the cost is negligible. Compare that to 20-30 USD for a single airport. Or compare it to AES, where you would last about 10 big airports for this sum and might even need additional credits if an airport is updated by its developer.
Though I agree, I don’t wont to work on every airport I fly to as well. So the critical point would be to have an integrated feature, that makes existing user mods available for direct installation in the sim. Since Umberto already announced they are working on this, I am very excited about the future.

You raise some good points although I find your final score a bit on the low side (I would grade it around 7/10). But that’s okay. You seem to expect quite a lot more from the passenger part than I do. I usually just watch from a distance and from there it looks just fine.

The SODE part is done quite well but as you say, usually I am not up to it, when I want to make a quick flight to adjust one or two airports beforehand. That’s why I only did it for very few airports I am using a lot. The fact, that FSDT does not deliver those ini-files for their own airports shows, that it is not that easy and quick like they want it to be.

Another thing that did not sit very well with me is the custom logos. The process is little insane. Every update (and there are quite a lot) will delete your custom logos and you have to add them again to the cfg. That’s why it is almost impossible to share those ini-files with others.

Apart from that I enjoy the product and like that I have the possibility to change everything. I just hope that the sharing gets a little easier. But for some old airports without SODE Jetways this can be really nice. I added it to the old Aerosoft BIKF or Taxi2Gate Toncontin MHTG and it looks really nice.

What I do not agree on is your fear on SODE. FSDT is one of the last developers we have to fear that kind of thing. I am quite sure, they have some kind of agreement. Take Aerosoft for example: 90% of their airports are all like made for the simulator at the time of release. Many of them don’t work later and will never receive an update again because the developer parted with them or disappeared at all.

So this kind of thing can happen to you, no matter if it is payware or freeware. Things happen (RealAir for example). You are always only safe for the simulator you have right now.

Hi Umberto,

I only own your Hawaiian airports and I checked the forums time to time, but could not find anything. All I wanted to say: If it even takes you a certain amount of time to properly do it, then it certainly is not an easy and quick task.

Umberto Colapicchioni

This is the 2nd comment I see about we don’t deliver .INI files with our products, or the other which said our own CYVR doesn’t work with GSX Level 2.

This is simply not true. We always delivered .INI files with our products, and even more so with GSX Level 2. At this time, the current situation is:

KLAS, KIAH, KMEM, KCLT and KSDF were already released with SODE jetways.

KJFK has been updated with the new SODE jetways a couple of days after L2 was released

KLAX has been updated already, and we do a big work on it, including updating all ground markings at TBIT, which were provisional were KLAX was initially released.

LSGG has been updated too, and we even modeled a specific new jetway for it.

CYVR has been updated a couple of weeks later.

We are working on KDFW right now, and we’ll probably add the Hawaii airports last. We won’t update KORD, since it’s worthless working on it right now, considering a whole new version will come out.

I humbly remind all these updates are free, and GSX Level 2 IS FREE on FSDT airports.

The issue is, in order to see these updates, you MUST remove a GSX customization file which you made *before* GSX L2 was released, located under %APPDATA%\Virtuali\GSX.

Since our provided .INI files are located in the main scenery folder, there’s a priority system in place. The .INI in the scenery folder has a lower priority compared to the one in the %APPDATA% folder, and there’s a reason for that: an .INI file provided in the \scenery folder is read in “read-only” mode, which means if you start customize it, the .INI file in the \scenery folder will not be changed, and a NEW one under %APPDATA% will be created, but BASED on that original .INI file. This way, if you Reset a parking or remove the whole file, you don’t start from scratch, but from a reasonable startup point that, having be created by the original scenery developer, is supposed to be good.

But the issue is, because of this priority system, an .INI file you might have made *before* GSX Level 2 came out, will still take precedence over the one we distribute in our own \scenery folders, which now includes the new jetways, but you must remove your .INI file in order to see the new jetways.

Great to see the OMSI grandma back

Max Dyba

YES!

No doubt – that SODE announcement was huge. The delivery of SODE in GSX2 is still a huge mess. Umberto will likely make it right, but his reputation has suffered. Maybe KORD V2 Will redeem him. Most flight simmers don’t want to become scenery creators, we just want the SODE to work so we can fly. If the GSX2 update was free then that would have been another matter. But flight simmers paid for SODE jetways and still have to become scenery editors in many cases, and AFCAD add-ons became more important than SODE in GSX2. The foresight was totally absent. The groundbreaking feature became a disaster for no good reason but to make flight simmers guinea pigs.

Now when I read Umberto’s comments do I find that I have to tinker with an INI file to get CYVR to work 😳. I did not read this in a manual? Why does there installer fix this or an FSDT Live Update run do it?

The sad fact is that GSX2 does not work at FSDreamteam’s own products such as CYVR😳. The gates are different between the two products for this airport. And it does not have SODE jetways. Surely they could make it work at the airports sold by the same company??