General Category > General Discussion

Next european airport

<< < (3/5) > >>

Aeroman:
Well, that scrambled my brain trying to interpret that, haha, but I get it.  Thanks for the reply.

BernhardS:

--- Quote from: virtuali on March 04, 2009, 09:37:18 am ---We did a nice rendition of Florence airport ( one of the most popular touristic destination in Italy ) for Aerosoft, and it also has the whole city in 3d together with it, and very good fps on top of that. It's also an interesting airport, because the short runway combined with the surrounding terrain, makes for a challenging approach.

Well...JFK sold in a couple of *hours* more than Florence in a year, and Zurich and Geneva didn't fared much different.

That basically defines the issues about making italian airports.

--- End quote ---

Virtuali,

of course I forget about Florence....my fault.
I really accept your business decision about neglecting italian airports. But my wish only goes to Rome. Aerosoft would call it a Mega-Airport, so is that airport really so uninteresting for the simmer-world, that only a small crowd of people would buy it?
You cannot compare Florence to Rome. And I cannot imagine, that Rome would be a smaller succes than Geneva.
US-Airports will surely better selling than italian airpots, but isn't the amount of making a KJFK is much much greater for an italien designer-group, than making a LIRF?
Cloud9's LIRF had a very hard opponent in ISD-Freeware in FS9. But ISD is death, so there will be no competitor in FSX and FSX is growing more and more.
So maybe you can think about that.

Bernhard

virtuali:

--- Quote from: BernhardS on March 04, 2009, 11:23:00 am ---You cannot compare Florence to Rome. And I cannot imagine, that Rome would be a smaller succes than Geneva.
--- End quote ---

Don't take it for granted, we did several italian sceneries in the past. The best selling one was, incidentally, Aviano, probably because it's not entirely italian, being a NATO a/b. However, still as a "best selling", it sold way below our recent products and our expectations for a commercially sustainable product.


--- Quote ---US-Airports will surely better selling than italian airpots, but isn't the amount of making a KJFK is much much greater for an italien designer-group, than making a LIRF?
--- End quote ---

No, and that's precisely the point. Considering the effort of making a major airport like LIRF is about the same as KJFK, why should be makign something that has a 1/4th sales potential, at best ? Being closer to the place doesn't change anything, because we wouldn't be able to take the kind of pictures needed in any case, so we need to rely to existing documentation, and that quantity and quality of it is far greater for US airports and, incidentally, Swiss airports as well...



--- Quote ---Cloud9's LIRF had a very hard opponent in ISD-Freeware in FS9
--- End quote ---

And guess who was the designer...

I'm assure you: he lost money on that specific project. We have already been there and done that, as they say...

Dimon:
I think folks, you should stick with US airports since it's gold mine now. Aerosoft and UK2000 did a pretty good job on Europe covering this area for both FS2004 and FSX with excellent products and you have nothing to fish in this lake for next 2-3 years - that's the fact of life. North America was totally ignored in last 3 years. Yes, FlyTampa is perfect, but it's getting old with each day. Imaginesim is too far from modern standards even though I still use most of their sceneries.

That leave us with only TWO North American airports that were in modern good quality - FSDT KJFK and FSDT KORD.  ::)

BernhardS:

--- Quote from: virtuali on March 04, 2009, 12:45:44 pm ---No, and that's precisely the point. Considering the effort of making a major airport like LIRF is about the same as KJFK, why should be makign something that has a 1/4th sales potential, at best ? Being closer to the place doesn't change anything, because we wouldn't be able to take the kind of pictures needed in any case, so we need to rely to existing documentation, and that quantity and quality of it is far greater for US airports and, incidentally, Swiss airports as well...
--- End quote ---

I didn't knew, that your products rely only on existing documents. Many designers are saying, one can only make an airport, if one can visit it from all sides and make fotos from it.
So I thought it must be easier to visit Rome and get a permission for making fotos than in New York.


--- Quote ---I think folks, you should stick with US airports since it's gold mine now. Aerosoft and UK2000 did a pretty good job on Europe covering this area for both FS2004 and FSX with excellent products and you have nothing to fish in this lake for next 2-3 years - that's the fact of life. North America was totally ignored in last 3 years. Yes, FlyTampa is perfect, but it's getting old with each day. Imaginesim is too far from modern standards even though I still use most of their sceneries.
--- End quote ---

That is something I don't understand. FS is an american product, but by far the best addon-designers come from outside the states? Even FlyTampa is half-german. Maybe americans don't want to do something, that makes not so much money? Or do americans have so much fun with FS-stock-airports?
So I can really understand Umberto, saying that there is a much bigger market in the States than in Europe.

Bernhard (still hoping that someone else will make an up-to-date-version of LIRF for FSX)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page