Las Vegas Update or Re-make

[virtuali]

so the only people who would benefit from this update is pre existing customers who already own las.

That's precisely the reason why we WILL do it, instead.

We don't want to force our existing customers to do a new purchase from scratch, because our scenery is outdated. Doing the update is a way to ensure that, no matter how long ago you bought something from us, it will always be supported.

We surely can afford a (small) investment, just to keep our customers happy or, at least, offering them an alternative.

[01pewterz28]

An update for existing customers is great.

I am one who is existing but will purchase the FT KLAS as I want the whole City as well.

I do look forward to the new ORD as well as CLT I look forward to purchasing both of those.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[okupton]

I appreciate that and that's one reason FSDT is a quality developer.

[simsuper80]

I'm not going to day which developer is better, both of them are great in there own ways. But I would think that the fact that flytampa is doing las Vegas should be good news for fsdreamteam. I mean, that's one less airport to work on, therby freeing up a bunch of time and work to focus on other airports like KFLL, KORD, and possibly DFW and JFK.

[bradl]

I'm not going to day which developer is better, both of them are great in there own ways. But I would think that the fact that flytampa is doing las Vegas should be good news for fsdreamteam. I mean, that's one less airport to work on, therby freeing up a bunch of time and work to focus on other airports like KFLL, KORD, and possibly DFW and JFK.

there is a drawback to that as well.

That means that FSDT's customers would now be pulled away to their competitor, despite having spent the money for FSDT scenery, and without knowing what type of framerate hit their sim may take from not knowing how their competitor's scenery works.

In short, just because one design team is making scenery for a given airport does not mean that they have a monopoly over that airport.

BL.

[virtuali]

I mean, that's one less airport to work on, therby freeing up a bunch of time and work to focus on other airports like KFLL, KORD, and possibly DFW and JFK.

Not forcing existing KLAS customers to spend money for a repurchase of a new airport from another developer, just because we failed to update our existing one, might encourage to allocate the money saved into purchasing something else, perhaps KCLT, or KSDF, instead of another copy of KLAS.

We had another look at KLAS, and it doesn't really look "old" compared to KORD (that really needs a complete remake), so we think an update to keep it current, will continue to make it very usable.

[moz2]

KLAS HAS A NEW TERMINAL SO WILL YOU UPDATE OR REMAKE KLAS BEFORE FLYTAMPA BRINGS THERE'S OUT

[virtuali]

KLAS HAS A NEW TERMINAL SO WILL YOU UPDATE OR REMAKE KLAS BEFORE FLYTAMPA BRINGS THERE'S OUT

Sure, we'll update the airport to the current status, of course. Adding a new terminal shouldn't take much time.

[pgde]

As a long time FSDT customer, I certainly hope that the Las Vegas update is in actuality a complete makeover. FlyTampa just released an initial shot of the D terminal and it looks more modern IMHO than the current FSDT product.

[virtuali]

As a long time FSDT customer, I certainly hope that the Las Vegas update is in actuality a complete makeover. FlyTampa just released an initial shot of the D terminal and it looks more modern IMHO than the current FSDT product.

That would be precisely the reason why it would be best to do a small and quick update that can be offered for free, in order to bring the airport to the current situation related to parkings and the new tower.

It doesn't have any sense to work for many months to do a total remake, with the only result that we would have to share sales with FlyTampa.

[Hnla]

I think it's awesome that FlyTampa is doing an excellent KLAS. An updated KLAS from FSDT has been requested for 8 years, and now they are too late and lost their chance. Flytampa will make huge $$$ with KLAS.

Competition at it's finest. Love it!

[bradl]

I think it's awesome that FlyTampa is doing an excellent KLAS. An updated KLAS from FSDT has been requested for 8 years, and now they are too late and lost their chance. Flytampa will make huge $$$ with KLAS.

Competition at it's finest. Love it!

In FSDT's defense, as I was one of those who requested the update 8 years ago, they could not have known how the layout of T3 would have looked, let alone the other major changes that happened (read: destruction of the old International Terminal, A3 at 7R being rebuilt as a high speed exit rather than a full 90 degree intersection, new ATC tower moved to a different location, extension of C between the C and D gates, among others) that they could easily/quickly push those changes out as there were no layouts at that time that showed everything finalized.

I even got that, because being local to Vegas, I knew of the changes; A3 at 7R was already done prior to KLAS v1.1 being released, but no chart showed that change! FSDT not being local in Vegas, would not have seen that. They would have had to wait for the airport diagram in the FAA's AF/D or Google Maps to update to show the changes (in short, they were dependent on others updating so they could see the updates).

So I get that, and get that it takes time; what people don't get is the magnitude of the changes, getting all of that information together, aligning it with FSDT's other projects, and slotting in the time and developers to get the work done.

In short, it isn't as easy as people think. So you (general, not specifically you) should sit back and look at it from their perspective.

BL.

[pgde]

As a long time FSDT customer, I certainly hope that the Las Vegas update is in actuality a complete makeover. FlyTampa just released an initial shot of the D terminal and it looks more modern IMHO than the current FSDT product.

That would be precisely the reason why it would be best to do a small and quick update that can be offered for free, in order to bring the airport to the current situation related to parkings and the new tower.

It doesn't have any sense to work for many months to do a total remake, with the only result that we would have to share sales with FlyTampa.

So, the way I interpret your post is you are giving up on KLAS to FT. Sorry to hear that. This does not bode well for PHNL and Hawaii Airports 1 and 2. I agree that FT will make big $ with KLAS, especially since they don't have the Couatl baggage that FSDT does.

[virtuali]

So, the way I interpret your post is you are giving up on KLAS to FT.

That's just an obvious business decision. If we were doing what you are trying to suggest, which means spending months or maybe an year to do a complete remake, means we would at best share sales with FlyTampa, and this will damage BOTH, also considering that would have meant 3 different KLAS versions on the market, since people is STILL buying our current one!

Instead, we'll offer a FREE update, which will not cost us much money to develop (will still cost some, of course), which will be a gesture towards our customers, that will not feel *forced* to spend money on a new scenery, only to stay updated to the real world situation. It's important everybody will realize that, once they buy an FSDT scenery, it will never be abandoned.

It seems that some guys seem to see this as a matter of "pride", which is entirely irrelevant to us, since we are no hobbyists, like many in the flight sim business are, but professionals working at this full time so, if another developer decided to remake a scenery we already sold in large quantities, that doesn't mean we should follow to the bottom end, just to keep our pride, and losing money in the process...

I agree that FT will make big $ with KLAS, especially since they don't have the Couatl baggage that FSDT does.

The Couatl "baggage" you are referring to, is what makes our sceneries more feature rich, less prone to OOMs, with usually better frame rates, better integrated with GSX, better integrated with GSX, with hundreds of jetways (that other developers say they are slow), and better integrated with SODE.

And, in the future, when memory won't be *so much* of a problem (all simulators will be 64 bit), the more things will be allowed to put it without risking OOMs, the more the Couatl "baggage" will be needed, because even if OOMs will be rare, the problem will then be the fps so no, Couatl will still be required for it's useful services.

[simsuper80]

I was hoping this would happen. Not only do you not have to share sales, but more time and resources can be spent on other airports like Chicago.

A similar situation is happening with aerosoft and imaginesim with both of them doing singapore.