FSDreamTeam forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Didier Chabanne on January 14, 2012, 11:01:56 pm
-
Hello world here KJFK Blueprint for FS9 and FSX, in the person Defaux
who want to pay too much for a scene that's not much worth to me
but that's every taste. For me it's scenes like that in early
on FS9 or FSX.
http://www.blueprintsimulations.com/BluePrint_KJFK.html
thank you
-
The JFK we have is old, and still better than that one will ever be. ::)
-
The JFK we have is old, and still better than that one will ever be. ::)
And in its current state, it looks bad compared that what we are doing now, which means we can only guess how the update with the new graphic will probably look like...
-
Thats for sure Virtuali. ;D
-
With an update to JFK will look even much better and amazing then the Blueprint Simulations version could possibly ever be.
-
remember when I write Blueprint worse I said that your lack of scenery he realizes and color.
He answered me that he will not amiloration scenery on the future.
I was astonished at the response of Blueprint, but it's better than nothing to do.
thank you
-
BP is a joke... ;D (in my opinion) A least they could work with the anti aliasing in the screenshots. Looks like crap... also in my opinion. ;)
-
BP is a joke... ;D (in my opinion) A least they could work with the anti aliasing in the screenshots. Looks like crap... also in my opinion. ;)
Oh more garbage from these guys eh?? LOL! WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE BUYING THIS CRAP?!?!? I honestly want to know!!!! It must be kids getting money from mommy or something...
-
BP is a joke... ;D (in my opinion) A least they could work with the anti aliasing in the screenshots. Looks like crap... also in my opinion. ;)
Oh more garbage from these guys eh?? LOL! WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE BUYING THIS CRAP?!?!? I honestly want to know!!!! It must be kids getting money from mommy or something...
I'd seen better looking freeware scenery
-
It must be kids getting money from mommy or something...
Kids today get C notes for allowance, they can afford better. Lack of good taste, perhaps? ;D
-
Well, I am going on 41 and I have bought their KMCO, KDTW & KMSP. Reason being, what else is there for those airports in FSX? While surely not FSDT standards, they are good place holders until something better comes along. They are better than default. They will be even better once I can add GSX to them. IMO they should have done KEWR as that has been sorely neglected in FSX.
-
Well, I am going on 41 and I have bought their KMCO, KDTW & KMSP. Reason being, what else is there for those airports in FSX? While surely not FSDT standards, they are good place holders until something better comes along. They are better than default. They will be even better once I can add GSX to them. IMO they should have done KEWR as that has been sorely neglected in FSX.
I agree with this. While they are not in the league of the "scenery greats", they are better than default. What they lack in quality, they make up in quantity. It may take FSDT 8 or 9 months to create a new airport and it will be another standard-setting, incredibly well done scenery, but the guys at BP take a fraction of the time to produce airports that are otherwise untouched. This business with JFK is somewhat silly for them because why should they compete with a much better product... but in other cases, like MCO, DTW, MSP, etc., it is good to have the option for payware if freeware is not available.
-
...why should they compete with a much better product...
$ame rea$on they did LAX, DFW, and BO$. And the Cloud9 version of MCO is much better, IMO.
-
Well, I am going on 41 and I have bought their KMCO, KDTW & KMSP. Reason being, what else is there for those airports in FSX?
Well that's easy. Microsoft makes very good default airports that put Buleprint to shame as don't you clearly see? Blueprint is a few notches DOWN from the default.
-
It must be kids getting money from mommy or something...
Kids today get C notes for allowance, they can afford better. Lack of good taste, perhaps? ;D
Maybe they just keep making stuff to annoy me... I guess I deserve it as their grabage seems to just PISS ME OFF for some reason. It's like they are crapping on my front porch or something. It's only when someone posts their work here, or someone like Dom Mason (who I truly respect very much) puts it on his blog (which I love) do I come to know about these Blueprint paper mache projects...
-
and, and, just hang on a minute here. and while I am on this little rant of mine, anyone who posts Blueprint cardboard cut out Tonka toy developments in this forum is honestly just spitting right in Umberto's face and the entire FSDT team for that matter. Don't do that. That's just mean. Honestly. Just mean. >:(
It takes months for FSDT to put detail in their work while it takes merely seconds for Blueprint to release their form of (quality) hence their "quantity". Notifications of their lack of work just don't belong in a forum of HIGH QUALITY scenery developers.
Hey, anyone see that FREEWARE CYVR? I friggin love it man. It's only about 1,000,000 times better that Bluepirnt.
-
...why should they compete with a much better product...
$ame rea$on they did LAX, DFW, and BO$. And the Cloud9 version of MCO is much better, IMO.
Well yes, obviously money is the reason for competing with better products. But what I mean is that they shouldn't be bothering with the already made better products, like LAX, JFK, BOS, etc. but for something like MCO where it is only available in FS9, why not have it...
-
Hold on a minute.........I can't believe they are still going to touch another airport for release........My favorite one O'Hare International Airport. Aghhhhh..........
Blueprint would actually make me very angry if they release their version of ORD sometime this year >:(
-
Blueprint would actually make me very angry if they release their version of ORD sometime this year
Why, you think it'll be better than what FSDT has done?
-
...why should they compete with a much better product...
$ame rea$on they did LAX, DFW, and BO$. And the Cloud9 version of MCO is much better, IMO.
Well yes, obviously money is the reason for competing with better products. But what I mean is that they shouldn't be bothering with the already made better products, like LAX, JFK, BOS, etc. but for something like MCO where it is only available in FS9, why not have it...
Cloud 9 made Orlando for FSX not FS9
-
Blueprint would actually make me very angry if they release their version of ORD sometime this year
Why, you think it'll be better than what FSDT has done?
I'll clarify a little bit for you Bruce. Since last year, Blueprint has done major hub airports that have been covered with less then ideal quality. For a time on Blueprint Sim's website they had some forward plans of airports (some have been released!!! :P) that they were planing to do......O'Hare being one of them. My point being absolute why is BP Sim trying to compete with FSDT....Period ::)
-
Two things come to mind!
First of all it reminds me of the nostalgic scenery packages called airport 2000 which I loved to fly in and out of... In FS98!!!
Second I think these people can only do airports like these because of the severe lack of US airports! Only these guys actually did IND or DTW etc.
Hopefully FSDreamteam, Flightbeam and Flytampa can help to tip this lack.
Boaz.
-
Yes ;) We need more US airports of good quality.
-
Two things come to mind!
First of all it reminds me of the nostalgic scenery packages called airport 2000 which I loved to fly in and out of... In FS98!!!
Second I think these people can only do airports like these because of the severe lack of US airports! Only these guys actually did IND or DTW etc.
Hopefully FSDreamteam, Flightbeam and Flytampa can help to tip this lack.
Boaz.
Hey Windshear, Check out DreamScenery's IND if you're interested in that version.
-
For a time on Blueprint Sim's website they had some forward plans of airports (some have been released!!!) that they were planing to do......O'Hare being one of them. My point being absolute why is BP Sim trying to compete with FSDT....Period
I first discovdered Blueprint back in 2009, and O'Hare was already on their list of planned airports. And they aren't competing with FSDT, they target a totally different demographic.
-
Hey Windshear, Check out DreamScenery's IND if you're interested in that version.
[/quote]
Thanks, but although they have taxi way line grass, they have almost no detail on their buildings and more importantly the gate area(where you will be closest to the building).
In hope how ever they will gradually get better and better!
Look at imaginesim, their airports are not up to par either, but their SIN and HKG were a step up, they made Asian airport bearable to fly to, I still hope people with talent will finally go Asian! There are many simmers in China, Japan and South Korea, combined with the many non Asians who would like to fly to say Tokyo Narita or Shanghai...
-
Tokyo Narita... Simply amazed nobody has done this for FSX.
-
I'm amazed at how angry people get at BluePrint. :D Some of the reactions give me a good laugh, so thanks.
This business with JFK is somewhat silly for them because why should they compete with a much better product... but in other cases, like MCO, DTW, MSP, etc., it is good to have the option for payware if freeware is not available.
It certainly isn't silly. They've been doing this for a while now. They are in this as a business and a business wants to make money. They wouldn't be making these products if they weren't making money.
With DFW and JFK, I am a little baffled because they are charging 25 USD which, at that point, I would envision most customers just opting to spend a bit more for the more detailed version (FSDT). But I've only been in this market on the consumer side so who am I to question them. The one thing I know is they wouldn't be in the business for this long if they were losing money so they must at least be breaking even (but the more likely scenario is they are actually making a profit).
-
This business with JFK is somewhat silly for them because why should they compete with a much better product... but in other cases, like MCO, DTW, MSP, etc., it is good to have the option for payware if freeware is not available.
It certainly isn't silly. They've been doing this for a while now. They are in this as a business and a business wants to make money. They wouldn't be making these products if they weren't making money.
With DFW and JFK, I am a little baffled because they are charging 25 USD which, at that point, I would envision most customers just opting to spend a bit more for the more detailed version (FSDT). But I've only been in this market on the consumer side so who am I to question them. The one thing I know is they wouldn't be in the business for this long if they were losing money so they must at least be breaking even (but the more likely scenario is they are actually making a profit).
That's what I'm saying (regarding JFK and DFW, etc.).
Of course it's not silly, it is a business and they are obviously making money. I was saying that for airports that have not been done for FSX yet, they are a good place to buy from. It also kind of bothers me how angry people seem to be at Blueprint; if it is so bad, then just don't buy it...
-
To compete and fsdreamteam flytampa and even sim-wings may have to Blueprint
change the way they do. To me the scenery's good but the colors have to change
gray and black and white to another color.
thank you