I have almost all the new sceneries that they have released within the last 6 months or so. Except for EHAM, I have never had any issues with FSP. Infact almost all of them have ran better than the default. I havent got LCLK yet, but I dont think that I will have any issues with it. Example would be EDDM: Defaukt I was getting about 10 -14 FSP, with the Aerosoft version, I am getting about 18-25 FPS depending time of day. With frames at the rate, It runs smooth enough that you dont care because you cant see the difference. Do you have any of there newer sceneries? If so, which ones. I will try to find out what the fps issue is from Aerosoft. I would compare Aerosoft to FSDT, or FlyTampa anytime for quality, and performance.
Well the last things I bought from them were NiceX, LisbonX, and GibraltarX, out of which Nice and Lisbon were done by Aerosoft and Peter Werlitz had his hand in both of those. Lisbon X is acceptable in terms of performance but has a few texture issues with signs flashing in and out of the scenery, but Nice X is the biggest FPS hog I have ever seen, especially considering its a small airport.I have tried running it with the scenery complexity sliders set to normal, water at a low setting, no AI, and clear weather. The result with those settings maybe 25 FPS if I am lucky. I started a thread about it in their forum after it came out, which went about 10 pages or so if I remember correctly. A few patches came out to fix the shimmers, which I had already taken care of by mipping them myselft, but nothing was ever done about the performance. When I questioned them about it they said it must be my rig causing problems, etc. Mathijis even posted that I should reinstall everything including Windows and it would fix the problem. I'm sorry, but if every scenery I own by FSDT, FT, Imaginesim, LatinVFR, BluePrint, etc., works fine and gives good FPS, then there is no way I am going to wipe my HD for one scenery. I talked to a few others via PM on their forum as well as a guy here in the FSDT forum that has Nice X, and while less vocal about it, they expressed the same problem with Nice X that I had. In the end I Frankensteined Nice X with Nice by FranceVFR. Granted its not as pretty and has default ground textures, but at least I get 35+ FPS in the area with any a/c and scenery settings back to high.
Fast forward to today. They release Orly, same thing for both FS9 and FSX users in their forum complaining about FPS, also the same Peter Werlitz had his hand in that scenery. In fact Peter, like he did with Nice, told one or two guys that since they were running OC'ed rigs that it must be their computer was too much for the scenery, which in my opinion is hog wash. They're the only developer I have ever seen tell people numerous times that having the latest fasted rig will make their sceneries work worse, rather than better.
Then their Antalya X which some people are having issues with according to their post in the Antalya X section.
Larnaca X just came out and while there's only 1 post complaint so far, its about poor FPS. After its been out for a while it will be interesting to see what happens with it.
If I remember right your on FS9 which my be why you have no problems with their stuff. It seems that a lot of the complaints are on the newer sceneries for FSX, although a bunch of people have complained about Orly for FS9 as well. Maybe they are better at designing FS9 stuff that performs well than they are with FSX sceneries? Its just to the point now with them, that after each new release and the comments of dissatisfied customers complaining about poor FPS that it really makes me think twice about spending money there.
The other thing about them that I dont like as well is their customer support. Shaun is a nice guy, but almost every answer is "let me check with the developer." I understand that he doesn't know everything, but it seems like the devs of these products hardly ever stick their nose into the conversation to help. If you have an issue with an FSDT airport or an FT airport, Umberto or George/Martin will stick with you until they solve the problem. When FSDT KDFW first came out I along with one or two other guys had an issue with the ground textures bleeding. Umberto stuck with me to trouble shoot for about 2 weeks until a solution was found and he actually changed something in the scenery to fix my problem. If that had been Aerosoft and only 2 people complained I seriously doubt they would have done a thing to fix it since it was only a few people.
I know some people are thrilled with Aerosoft and almost seem like they follow them blindly and buy any scenery they make and take Aerosofts word for everything. Frankly though, I don't think they are anywhere near the league of FSDT and what FSDT can accomplish scenery wise while still mainting good FPS. The argument that Aerosoft always puts up when compared to FSDT or FT is "well how many sceneries have they released this year?' which leads me to believe they are more about cranking stuff out as fast as possible rather than taking thier time and putting out airports that not only look good, but perform good as well. I'm not knocking them or people who are fans of their stuff, but my own experience from buying their sceneries and experiencing their customer service has been far from stellar.
Anways, if you can figure out what the problem I have with Nice X is, I will buy you a virtual beer since it basically was $30 down the tube. Granted it wasn't much money, but none the less I dont mind spending money, however I hate wasting it. If you search for a solution over there you may run across my Nice X thread and notice its me since I use the same user name there as well.
I will be interested to see if you can find anything out, so thanks in advance.
