FSDreamTeam forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Didier Chabanne on February 10, 2011, 11:12:22 pm
-
http://secure.simmarket.com/blueprint-klax-los-angeles-fsx.phtml
http://secure.simmarket.com/blueprint-klax-los-angeles-fsx.phtml
Hello
Blueprint is coming soon with KLAX I prefer fsdreamteam.
thank you very much
-
That is horrible. Even the original Cloud 9 version is so much better!!!
-
KLAX is my home airport and wheras it is not the greatest airport in the world, I am very offended that these people would actually sell some pathetic garbage like that.
-
Like blue print has said in the past their scenery is for lowest frame rate impact, cost and its not that bad considering it includes the new Intl terminal upgrade, Hopefully FSDT will include the same if not a future update, I personally own all FSDT scenery and all duplicates of airports for one reason call me picky or whatever words but I fly AES airports to only AES airports Imaginesim to Imaginesim FSDT to FSDT and so fourth, you get the picture, plus the frame rates at Blueprint are great but always prefer FSDT.
-
Hopefully FSDT will include the same if not a future update
The updated terminal will surely be featured in the initial release, if the real one would be operative by then, otherwise in an update.
-
When I saw the screenshots for LAX, Yuk(sigh) :P
-
...but I fly AES airports to only AES airports Imaginesim to Imaginesim FSDT to FSDT and so fourth...
Some of the most stunning airports available come from a developer in Australia who shuns AES. Don't get me wrong here, I AES just about every airport that supports it, but you miss out on a lot of good scenery with the "I don't fly to non AES airports" attitude.
-
Hopefully FSDT will include the same if not a future update
The updated terminal will surely be featured in the initial release, if the real one would be operative by then, otherwise in an update.
Virtuali, are you saying you will model the new terminal but you won't release it untill it actually opens? Is this to keep with the real world timeline? Or to make any unforseen changes that could occur in real life? I can say, I see the development every day and it's going up pretty quick. The only portion so far is behind the TBIT North wing at gates 119-123. Do you need a picture?
-
Fsdreamteam hope will make an update as important
Blueprint with that of the famous fast food restaurant and car park floor.
thank you very much
-
Virtuali, are you saying you will model the new terminal but you won't release it untill it actually opens?
We'll decide when the airport is almost ready, and see how much completed the new terminal is.
-
that scenery looks like fs 2002, not even 2004.
thank god we have people who actually can make quality stuff
-
that scenery looks like fs 2002, not even 2004.
thank god we have people who actually can make quality stuff
Agree, it should be a freeware product right?
-
Virtuali, are you saying you will model the new terminal but you won't release it untill it actually opens?
We'll decide when the airport is almost ready, and see how much completed the new terminal is.
Well I can tell you without a doubt that if you are looking to release within the next 2 months, there won't be much but the skeleton. Construction on the satellite pier hasn't even started yet. And what is visable, is what I said before. If you have no one actively sending you updates of LAX, I will shoot you a fresh photo on Monday.
-
KLAX is my home airport and wheras it is not the greatest airport in the world, I am very offended that these people would actually sell some pathetic garbage like that.
Offended? Wow, some of you are dramatic. BluePrint wouldn't be selling their scenery if doing so meant losing money so obviously their strategy is working. But if you don't like...SIMPLE: DON'T BUY IT and vote with your money.
-
KLAX is my home airport and wheras it is not the greatest airport in the world, I am very offended that these people would actually sell some pathetic garbage like that.
Offended? Wow, some of you are dramatic. BluePrint wouldn't be selling their scenery if doing so meant losing money so obviously their strategy is working. But if you don't like...SIMPLE: DON'T BUY IT and vote with your money.
Yes I agree, it does work. It proves that there are people out there that will buy anything. Whomever is buying that stuff have a right to buy it as much as I have a right to give my opinion about their subpar, cheap quality made products. And, BTW, that is a fact not just my opinion. Dramatic enough for you "Sir"?
-
If you want to see the current state of the expansion, check this out
http://www.earthcam.com/clients/lax/?page=pano&project=cam1
-
If you want to see the current state of the expansion, check this out
http://www.earthcam.com/clients/lax/?page=pano&project=cam1
That's about accurate!! Hopefully by spring it will look alot better for Umberto to consider adding a more completed version...
-
.... Hopefully by spring it will look alot better for Umberto to consider adding a more completed version...
Was that Spring in the Northern Hemisphere or southern one? ???
Just wanted to get an accurate assessment of your assumed timetable for blueprintSim/FSDT, as it might require more time then that for the project to actually be finished - apparently they (KLAX) are having some minor *budgeting* issues and construction is slowing down; or so I hear... ::)
-
Was that Spring in the Northern Hemisphere or southern one? ???
Posting twice the same "joke", doesn't make it more funny...when someone refers to a time/date for an airport, it's always the local time so, I guess it should have been plenty obvious that Spring is the one in the Hemisphere where KLAX is located.
Besides, Spring is assumed to end June 20th or 21th, but this is typical for the US, there are other countries in the Northern Hemisphere, like China, were Spring officially ends April 30th, other in Europe where the end of Spring is in mid-May and some to the end of May.
Just wanted to get an accurate assessment of your assumed timetable for blueprintSim/FSDT
Don't see how you could ask here for an accurate assessment for our timetable for blueprintSim and besides, that scenery is already released. About our version, before the end of Spring is the most accurate date we can give now.
As usual with any of our products, when we'll have more accurate informations, we'll release them, on our own pace.
-
Virtuali,
Was that Spring in the Northern Hemisphere or southern one? ???
...
Besides, Spring is assumed to end June 20th or 21th, but this is typical for the US, there are other countries in the Northern Hemisphere, like China, were Spring officially ends April 30th, other in Europe where the end of Spring is in mid-May and some to the end of May.
Well you have to remember that I come from the Aviation community and we always refer to time (as referenced) based on UTC/GMT; thus, it wasn't meant to be a "joke" but an inquiry for clarification. More importantly however, this is now a "global village" as the internet has allowed for people from all time zones to interact globally. So, the need for specific time label statements can be considered important to some people and it can be misunderstood based on which region of the world you happen to be in/from.
Just wanted to get an accurate assessment of your assumed timetable for blueprintSim/FSDT
Don't see how you could ask here for an accurate assessment for our timetable for blueprintSim and besides, that scenery is already released. About our version, before the end of Spring is the most accurate date we can give now.
As usual with any of our products, when we'll have more accurate informations, we'll release them, on our own pace.
I think, here, the idea of whether the new construction projects on the actual airport (KLAX) being delayed would affect your (FSDT) release or BluePrintSim's updates to reflect those changes are in questions here. As I stated earlier, there are delays in the actual airports construction projects so could that mean that you will also need to delay your respective releases/updates; perhaps?
-
Well you have to remember that I come from the Aviation community and we always refer to time (as referenced) based on UTC/GMT; thus, it wasn't meant to be a "joke" but an inquiry for clarification
And you are wrong again. because time in aviation is attached with a label such as UTC/GMT only when referencing to a flight.
When referencing to a ground installation, like an airport, and we obviously are, the time is always intended the local time at the airport, since we are discussing the *building* of it, which doesn't have anything to do with aviation procedures thus, using an aviation language and conventions is not appropriate.
Or, do you think the KLAX airport web site (or any other written text mentioning a season when discussing a timeline) should always append "Northern Hemisphere" to it, in case they'll ever reference to a season ?
So, the need for specific time label statements can be considered important to some people and it can be misunderstood based on which region of the world you happen to be in/from.
Since we are discussing a US airport developed by an European company, missing any further indications, it's fairly obvious (to anyone, except you, which only tried to be funny without succeeding, and making a fool of yourself in the process, as usual, just thank me I've removed all the posts of others that laughed at you because of this..) any mention of season, by default, indicates the Hemisphere both the US and Europe are.
I think, here, the idea of whether the new construction projects on the actual airport (KLAX) being delayed would affect your (FSDT) release or BluePrintSim's updates to reflect those changes are in questions here.
Already answered in my previous message:
The updated terminal will surely be featured in the initial release, if the real one would be operative by then, otherwise in an update.
This clearly answers both possible outcomes: if the real world terminal will already completed when we are quite close to release the scenery, we'll add it. If not, it will be added in a scenery upgrade.
-
I think you are missing the point of my statement: that there could be "somebody" that *thinks* your are referring to Spring in *their* hemisphere, which may NOT be the same as yours/ours. Which isn’t a joke, but perhaps a supposition on my part?
Also, regarding the *mockers* on your forums…
“Walk with the wise and become wise; associate with fools and get in trouble.” (Proverbs 13:20 NIV)
Now that's a joke! LOL :D but, I think I'll end this discussion here. Thanks for your time. :)
-
I think you are missing the point of my statement: that there could be "somebody" that *thinks* your are referring to Spring in *their* hemisphere, which may NOT be the same as yours/ours. Which isn’t a joke, but perhaps a supposition on my part?
So, now that you failed to prove your previous argument that, since YOU come from an aviation background, it was expected to always see an aviation-related label, like UTC, attached to any time definition, which was clearly out of context, you are now switching version, and it's "somebody else" that might have misunderstood ?
But even assuming that, you would still be wrong, because those living in the southern hemisphere known very well that, when someone from the northern hemisphere is discussing an event happening to a place in the northern hemisphere and is mentioning a season, it's fairly obvious, he's referring to THAT hemisphere.
-
James, why are U doing this? >:( stop provoking
-
Also, regarding the *mockers* on your forums…
“Walk with the wise and become wise; associate with fools and get in trouble.” (Proverbs 13:20 NIV)
Funny, you've been the only one getting "in trouble" as of late. James, just sit back, relax, and enjoy the previews. There isn't much more you can ask or "suggest." All you're doing is irritating everyone.
-
Hehe! I must really admit, that I've come to enjoy these discussions... :)
Sorry, but I can't help pulling a smile when reading this...
In my opinion, it's a really ridiculous discussion! I honestly can't understand, what you (e.g JamesChams) are getting out of this... (except annoy the people reading it... and amusing others).
Anyway - just my 2 cent...
-
I don't understand James. All of these things are totally unnecessary and not funny. Besides, this is an fs scenery development company forum.
-
I think you are missing the point of my statement: that there could be "somebody" that *thinks* your are referring to Spring in *their* hemisphere, which may NOT be the same as yours/ours. Which isn’t a joke, but perhaps a supposition on my part?
Also, regarding the *mockers* on your forums…
“Walk with the wise and become wise; associate with fools and get in trouble.” (Proverbs 13:20 NIV)
Now that's a joke! LOL :D but, I think I'll end this discussion here. Thanks for your time. :)
Stop wasting virtuali's time and go do something productive besides making pointless and idiotic comments.
-
.... Hopefully by spring it will look alot better for Umberto to consider adding a more completed version...
Was that Spring in the Northern Hemisphere or southern one? ???
Just wanted to get an accurate assessment of your assumed timetable for blueprintSim/FSDT, as it might require more time then that for the project to actually be finished - apparently they (KLAX) are having some minor *budgeting* issues and construction is slowing down; or so I hear... ::)
Actually, the issue is a couple of things. First, LAWA is having trouble finding homes for the carrier and ground handling companies which maintain rampside operations offices at TBIT. There are several rampside offices that need to be moved and before the New North Wing can be completed, the old one has to be demoloshed.
The aircraft can go to the remote gates, which is the plan, but the offices can't. Untill they figure a solution, the old wing isn't going anywhere and it's being left up to the handling companies to find where to move. As for budget, LAWA tried to raise the leases on those current offices (STUPID). The airlines are not biting and on top of that the cost to have new offices in the new terminal will be 30% more fer SQ FT then what the airlines are paying now. The airlines are not happy about this. So yeah construction has slowed a little...
LAWA tried to pull a fast one on the lagacy carriers a while back by raising leases and landing fees. UA,CO,NW,AA didn't bite and fought it. I was at that meeting. The funding is secure, it's those little other projects you don't know about they are squeezing funding for. ;)
-
Like blue print has said in the past their scenery is for lowest frame rate impact, cost and its not that bad considering it includes the new Intl terminal upgrade, Hopefully FSDT will include the same if not a future update, I personally own all FSDT scenery and all duplicates of airports for one reason call me picky or whatever words but I fly AES airports to only AES airports Imaginesim to Imaginesim FSDT to FSDT and so fourth, you get the picture, plus the frame rates at Blueprint are great but always prefer FSDT.
Frame rates are not everything, BP sceneries are really cra.....!!! I don't know how people can buy them!
David DD
-
I don't know how people can buy them!
I can not agree more
-
I don't know how people can buy them!
With money. ;D
-
I don't know how people can buy them!
With money. ;D
LOL! :D
Indeed... usually while using a credit-card ... :D
-
I don't know how people can buy them!
With money. ;D
LOL! :D
Indeed... usually while using a credit-card ... :D
Or debit card, Thats BP for ya!!! ;D
-
Here we go again with the bashing of Blueprint. Do you really think they are trying to compete with FSDT? Read their homepage: Accuracy is there main concern.
Two different markets, two different developers. All the bashing in this thread about another developer doesn't make the FSDT community look too good...
-
Do you really think they are trying to compete with FSDT?
They were working on DFW and LAX at the same time as FSDT, and rushed to get theirs out the door first. Sounds like they were competing to me. As for accuracy being their main concern, the product speaks for itself in volumes.
-
I've purchased their sceneries before. RDU and MCO. If no one else makes the sceneries I want and they make them, I'll buy them.
-
I've purchased their sceneries before. RDU and MCO. If no one else makes the sceneries I want and they make them, I'll buy them.
This is what I can understand, because BP sceneries are still better than the default one (even their work is close to FS default). But in case I know a scenery is going to be released by FSDT, FlyTampa, et cetera, I would never spend any cent on a BP scenery. I would sit, wait and relax for a high quality one. But everybody has different drivers and opinions.
-
Do you really think they are trying to compete with FSDT?
They were working on DFW and LAX at the same time as FSDT, and rushed to get theirs out the door first. Sounds like they were competing to me. As for accuracy being their main concern, the product speaks for itself in volumes.
Who said they rushed to get their sceneries out? Since their detail isn't to the level of FSDT, they have a significantly less production time. Do you somehow have some information that I don't have that they were rushing?
-
I'll ONLY buy airports that support AES ;)
-
Who said they rushed to get their sceneries out? ... Do you somehow have some information that I don't have that they were rushing?
Why are you always rushing to defend Blueprint? Team member incognito, perhaps? LOL ;D
-
Who said they rushed to get their sceneries out? ... Do you somehow have some information that I don't have that they were rushing?
Why are you always rushing to defend Blueprint? Team member incognito, perhaps? LOL ;D
Not at all. I just think the criticism they get is unwarranted. And personally, I don't like their sceneries; I prefer more detailed sceneries. But do you have an answer to my questions? How do you know they rushed? Based on the screenshots, they look just like their other sceneries.
-
OMG! It's so obvious they rush their stuff. Just look at how many sceneries they produce every year?? I have worked at LAX for the better part of 11 years and can say without a doubt their focus is NOT about quality. It can't be!! There is no pride at all in their work. Ok let's discuss frames. EVERY other developer out there is finding magical ways to increase detail with out increasing framerates. Blueprint doesn't seem give a damn, they just keep releasing the same quality stuff over and over. They don't seem to be trying to increase the level of quality in their products. I used to feel the EXACT same way about Imaginesim but imagine really is putting pride in their work and it's getting MUCH better with each release. I was quite impressed with WSSS. Just compare that with their first product.
Now compare blueprints KLAX with their first product. Same quality, no pride. I am not bashing, I am stating what is so obvious. If they create respectful products, then I will give them the respect they deserve.
And unless I am on a VFR flight to a GA airport, it had better have AES or I am not going. ;)
Which remindes me, I just activated all those damn Overland airports so I am going to have to purchase my 20th credit pack so I can be ready for KLAX, KSFO, and Athens!! I gots 1 credit left currently!! :o
-
Taken directly from their homepage. Don't shoot the messenger.
Our sceneries are designed following a few simple premises:
We seek to achieve the highest level of aeronautical and geographical accuracy in order to provide the experienced pilot with the opportunity to apply real-life operational and navigational techniques during taxi, takeoff, departure, approach and landing procedures even during CAT III instrument flight (IFR) conditions.
In addition, we seek to render the primary components of the airport environment at the highest level of detail possible for the corresponding version of the flight simulator. We employ unique design techniques that enable us to render each component, particularly passenger terminals, at an unprecedented level of accuracy that in most cases permits one-to-one comparison to the real structure down to the number of windows between two boarding gates. This level of detail is, however, limited to the visible portions of the structures by accessibility to detailed information, the most obvious exception being the ground-level airside facilities in most passenger terminals. As much as we dislike the idea, artistic liberties must be taken to fill gaps left by lack of information.
The primary (or essential) components of the airport environment are, in our opinion, runways including the corresponding visual navigational aids, taxiways, signage, passenger and cargo terminals, and the air traffic control tower.
We give priority to the accurate location and orientation of gates, including jetways and aircraft parking positions, at the passenger terminals over all other features including the complex animations required by moving jetways and vehicles as well as advanced parking alignment aids. Unfortunately, the use of default animated jetways and vehicles is simply impossible at this time as is the possibility of customizing the individual components for each gate.
There are two significant, yet intended, deviations from ideal accuracy in "all" our sceneries. First, we add or modify some features of the airfield in order to enhance, and in some cases enable, the pilot's positional awareness that is inherently limited by the simulator environment. These items include countdown distance signs for all runways, flashing lights at all taxiway/runway interceptions, and oversized parking spot alignment aids. Second, we incorporate the latest airport features including those under development such as new runways and passenger/cargo terminals. Interestingly, the ability to peek into and experience the future is, second to their "accuracy", one of our sceneries' most popular features.
BluePrint sceneries are purposefully designed to be highly customizable. Their modular design is intended to provide the user with the opportunity to add or remove features at will. Each module is contained in a separate file and every file is labeled is such a way as to allow easy identification of its contents. Features/components can be easily removed by disabling the corresponding file. This can be accomplished by moving the file to a scenery-inactive location or by changing the file label extension. Consequently, items such as terminals, concourses, jetways, GA areas, static vehicles, trees, etc. can be easily removed or added to fit individual needs. No secret codes and cryptic labels are used. While this approach makes our sceneries significantly more vulnerable to piracy and theft, we truly believe that our customers deserve nothing less. As long as the customer has the knowledge and skills necessary to add or modify scenery components, our sceneries are not only designed for but in fact expected to be customized to fit his or her needs.
They mention nothing about the need to place useless cones anywhere or making sure every tire mark in in the right place. (Assuming thats what you mean by "detail".)
-
And yet their payware Boston scenery isn't half as good as Geroge's outdated freeware Boston. Now that is funny! I am really beginning to believe you are part of the Blueprint team. The way you defend them here... You don't like their work but the way you defend them... it's uncanny... ???
Cones and tire marks are eye candyfodder. Its the actual texturing of the buildings and ramps I am refering to. The their rendition of TBIT is completely WRONG! They say LAX is their home airport, it seems none of them made the effort of actually going down to LAX to see huge features they left out.
-
I don't work for BP. I just really hate to see one developer get ripped to shreds on a different developers forum. Go to AVSIM, they wouldn't stand for any of this, but this isn't my board, so not my problem.
-
I don't work for BP. I just really hate to see one developer get ripped to shreds on a different developers forum. Go to AVSIM, they wouldn't stand for any of this, but this isn't my board, so not my problem.
Then stop acting like it is... It's too bad Blueprint doesn't have their forum. I am sure the reason is to avoid topics like this from occuring which I am sure would happen. I hope someone from their team sees the posts here and trys to make a better effort into the quality and pride of their work... For their sake....
The thing I love about Umberto's team is the pride! Everytime I hear about the new implimentations into the scenery, I think, that is pride. These guys love what they do and the cost is always well worth it! :)
-
Then stop acting like it is... It's too bad Blueprint doesn't have their forum. I am sure the reason is to avoid topics like this from occuring which I am sure would happen. I hope someone from their team sees the posts here and trys to make a better effort into the quality and pride of their work... For their sake....
If they haven't changed by now, I don't really think they ever will. It's sad because they seem to be doing the major airports! :-\
The thing I love about Umberto's team is the pride! Everytime I hear about the new implimentations into the scenery, I think, that is pride. These guys love what they do and the cost is always well worth it!
Agreed!
-
Then stop acting like it is... It's too bad Blueprint doesn't have their forum. I am sure the reason is to avoid topics like this from occuring which I am sure would happen. I hope someone from their team sees the posts here and trys to make a better effort into the quality and pride of their work... For their sake....
If they haven't changed by now, I don't really think they ever will. It's sad because they seem to be doing the major airports! :-\
The thing I love about Umberto's team is the pride! Everytime I hear about the new implimentations into the scenery, I think, that is pride. These guys love what they do and the cost is always well worth it!
Agreed!
;) :)
-
OMG! It's so obvious they rush their stuff. Just look at how many sceneries they produce every year?? I have worked at LAX for the better part of 11 years and can say without a doubt their focus is NOT about quality. It can't be!! There is no pride at all in their work. Ok let's discuss frames. EVERY other developer out there is finding magical ways to increase detail with out increasing framerates. Blueprint doesn't seem give a damn, they just keep releasing the same quality stuff over and over. They don't seem to be trying to increase the level of quality in their products. I used to feel the EXACT same way about Imaginesim but imagine really is putting pride in their work and it's getting MUCH better with each release. I was quite impressed with WSSS. Just compare that with their first product.
Now compare blueprints KLAX with their first product. Same quality, no pride. I am not bashing, I am stating what is so obvious. If they create respectful products, then I will give them the respect they deserve.
How does that mean they rush? It is amazing how you seem to never be able to understand their design philosophy. They DO NOT want to create something like FSDT. They have stated in the past that they don't wish to go after that market. They are going after the market that doesn't necessarily care about the eye candy and AMAZING detail FSDT and FlyTampa and others offer. They are going for a simplistic representation of people's favorite airports. They want something that is in between the default airports and the quality of FSDT, Flytampa, and others. They have said that themselves.
By the way, we get it, you work at LAX. You don't need to tell us every other post. ;)
Again, the only reason I "defend" them is because the bashing they get on various forums is unwarranted and undeserved. It isn't that hard of a concept to understand (the fact that they are producing at a level they want to produce at) and yet, so many people can't get it through their head. And I'll say it again, I am not a fan of that kind of product (just like I'm not a fan of McDonald's or Burger King), but I get what they are trying to do.
Continuing with that analogy...picture FSDT as some high-quality, five star restaurant. Now picture Blueprint as your neighborhood Applebee's or something. Personally, I would rather the high-quality, five star restaurant but some people are very okay with just a simple meal at Applebee's. Some people are okay with the quality of Blueprint sceneries and obviously there is a market for them.
-
I hope someone from their team sees the posts here and trys to make a better effort into the quality and pride of their work... For their sake....
They've heard it before...trust me. I've emailed them a couple of times about one of their sceneries and even applied to be a Beta tester. Guess what? I was denied my application to be a Beta Tester because I expressed the same view as you; I'd love to see them increase the level of detail in their work. They explained quite clearly that they aren't trying to produced the highest level of detail sceneries out there. They are going after a certain level and a certain market. And since then, I get it. I get exactly what they are trying to do.
-
Based on the screenshots, they look just like their other sceneries.
Exactly my point. New buildings, but everything else is recycled.
...I am going to have to purchase my 20th credit pack...
And I thought having a dozen was bad, now I feel like a light weight. ;D
-
I don't know how people can buy them!
With money. ;D
I LOLed
-
Based on the screenshots, they look just like their other sceneries.
Exactly my point. New buildings, but everything else is recycled.
And? You're probably right. But it isn't as if they are trying to hide that fact.
-
I do understand your points Issac and well said. But I am sticking to my opinions. There really should be more pride in their work. I am not trying to compare them to anyone other than the utter lack of pride in the work. They are just throwing it together in a very cheap fashion and overcharging for it. Now that is their right, and people will buy them if the work is worth it to them. My point is why not try at something better? Why not make the effort to improve your work? Why not have a little pride in what you do? I see their work as just some incorrectly shaped objects thrown together and poorly painted. Jeez, the least they could do is try to match the correct color of the buildings they are trying to replicate... I know their ploicy regarding their quality but when they say stuff like "BluePrint Simulations version of KLAX is by far the most detailed and accurate rendition ever attempted for this important airport." They are opening themselves up to my kind of critiscism. They are saying their version is far better then the Cloud 9 version??? They say things like "We know how our products measure up to others" WTF??? Their products measure DOWN to others. They have this sence of pride like their work is better then everyone elses but try to cover themselves from critiscism by saying crap like they are not trying to make the most detailed sceneries. They are oxymorons. I am not being disrespectful I am only stating how I see them protraying themselves to the community and cherging $17.50 for it. They did not want you as a beta testor for 2 reason: 1. Work that bad doesn't really need beta testing. 2. They think they are so damn good, they dont need your poinion of their flaws in their work. So I wouldn't take it personally. And BTW, I have been working at LAX for the better part of 11 years.
Cheers! ;)
-
They did not want you as a beta testor for 2 reason: 1. Work that bad doesn't really need beta testing. 2. They think they are so damn good, they dont need your poinion of their flaws in their work. So I wouldn't take it personally. And BTW, I have been working at LAX for the better part of 11 years.
Fair enough. You are entitled to your opinion...I obviously disagree but I can agree to disagree. :)
Regarding my application for Beta Tester: 1) They do have beta testers. Beta testing isn't testing for level of detail, but it is testing for bugs. 2) I never said it was flaws in their work. I thought over time they could introduce a higher level of detail but obviously that isn't their goal (as then they'd have to charge more for it and they seem quite content at the level they are at). If I were them, I wouldn't want a Beta tester who disagreed with their level of detail. That kind of Beta tester probably wouldn't be very effective as I'd be more focused at things other than bugs.
Hold on a second, did you say you worked at LAX? For 11 years? Wow, I didn't know that. It isn't as if you've mentioned that before, right? :P :D
-
..as then they'd have to charge more for it..
Have to nominate that one for Joke Du Jour! ;D
For people like me who run both FSX and FS9, they already charge more than FSDT does, and the quality is less than half as good. Charge more... ROFLMAO!
-
They did not want you as a beta testor for 2 reason: 1. Work that bad doesn't really need beta testing. 2. They think they are so damn good, they dont need your poinion of their flaws in their work. So I wouldn't take it personally. And BTW, I have been working at LAX for the better part of 11 years.
Fair enough. You are entitled to your opinion...I obviously disagree but I can agree to disagree. :)
Regarding my application for Beta Tester: 1) They do have beta testers. Beta testing isn't testing for level of detail, but it is testing for bugs. 2) I never said it was flaws in their work. I thought over time they could introduce a higher level of detail but obviously that isn't their goal (as then they'd have to charge more for it and they seem quite content at the level they are at). If I were them, I wouldn't want a Beta tester who disagreed with their level of detail. That kind of Beta tester probably wouldn't be very effective as I'd be more focused at things other than bugs.
Hold on a second, did you say you worked at LAX? For 11 years? Wow, I didn't know that. It isn't as if you've mentioned that before, right? :P :D
LOL!! But good point too! I think having a beta testor who does't like their work could make very good contributions too.
-
..as then they'd have to charge more for it..
Have to nominate that one for Joke Du Jour! ;D
For people like me who run both FSX and FS9, they already charge more than FSDT does, and the quality is less than half as good. Charge more... ROFLMAO!
ROFLMAO@U!
That's nice...good for you. As has already been explained, the majority of people do not run both sims. Most people run one or the other. For those running FS9, they may switch up to FSX and then, you are right, it wouldn't be too much of a deal. But for someone like me who only runs one sim and has no plans in the forseable future of switching, the price for their scenery is excellent.
For someone like me, I could buy FSDT which is 30 USD (and get no use out of the FSX version at all) or I can spend something like 14 USD to 25 USD and get the same amount of usable product. Now, knowing the level of detail provided in each product, I'd be inclined to go with the FSDT product.
-
LOL!! But good point too! I think having a beta testor who does't like their work could make very good contributions too.
Very true, if they were looking to improve the level of detail. In that case, someone like me who isn't a fan of the work would be extremely valuable. But when they are content with the level of detail they provide and do not want to change markets, then someone like me who would focus on the level of detail wouldn't be a great candidate.
-
ROFLMAO@U!
Back at ya, Blueprint fan boy. ;D
-
ROFLMAO@U!
Back at ya, Blueprint fan boy. ;D
Still ROFLMAO@U!
If you were smart, you'd realize I'm not a Blueprint fan boy...if anything, I'd consider myself a business fan boy because what they are doing is extremely smart.
-
LOL!! But good point too! I think having a beta testor who does't like their work could make very good contributions too.
Very true, if they were looking to improve the level of detail. In that case, someone like me who isn't a fan of the work would be extremely valuable. But when they are content with the level of detail they provide and do not want to change markets, then someone like me who would focus on the level of detail wouldn't be a great candidate.
Well hopefully in the future they will desire more from the work they produce. At least that's how I feel about my hobbies and career. Getting better. There is always room for improvement. Hopefully they will at some point decide this too... Or at least start a second product line of high quality sceneries if they are actually capable of doing so... Something makes me feel they are currently working at the best of their capabilities though... Wonder if they will ever show otherwise.
-
Why don't you children drop it!!! This is the dreamteam forum!!
-
Why don't you children drop it!!! This is the dreamteam forum!!
:D ;D LOL - LMAO :D ;D - Now that's another funny joke! ;)
-
...what they are doing is extremely smart.
You're right, charging for default quality scenery is absolutely brilliant. NOT! ::)
-
Why don't you children drop it!!! This is the dreamteam forum!!
This discussion is about the body of work of BP's LAX version and I said this in an earlier post when I saw the screenshots,YUK :P
-
Why don't you children drop it!!! This is the dreamteam forum!!
Retired?? Compaired to you everyone is a child eh? ;D This is a respectful discussion we are having here. Are you from Blueprint??
-
Blueprint begins to airports that are best done before but when
we say that uses the same color to make the terminals and towers
control
-
Blueprint begins to airports that are best done before but when
we say that uses the same color to make the terminals and towers
control
??
-
In my opinion it lacks airports Blueprint color
I think.
-
...what they are doing is extremely smart.
You're right, charging for default quality scenery is absolutely brilliant. NOT! ::)
You're only showing your ignorance, Bruce. It is definitely brilliant. They are obviously making money or they wouldn't still be producing sceneries. So tell me, if you are a business and your goal is to make money, how is what they are doing not brilliant? Before now, there wasn't anyone going after the, what I will call, simple-flyer market. Believe it or not, there is a market for the detail-level Blueprint is producing now. They didn't even have to create the market, like some businesses do (a perfect example, Vitamin Water and a few other brands created a ridiculous "specialty water" market).
And default quality... :D. Their scenery quality isn't impressive but it is most certainly above default. Their one scenery I have...the IAD scenery, has an extremely nice photoscenery ground texture, a perfectly done museum south of the field, and an okay representation of the actual airport. In fact, the only reason I am using the Imaginesim version rather than Blueprint is because I prefer the more realistic textures of Imaginesim.
-
They are obviously making money or they wouldn't still be producing sceneries. So tell me, if you are a business and your goal is to make money, how is what they are doing not brilliant? Before now, there wasn't anyone going after the, what I will call, simple-flyer market.
Well, it depends how you define "making money" and what your expectations are.
We did a scenery for Cloud9 a while ago, KMCO obviously, which still looks very good today:
(http://www.avsim.com/pages/1206/Orlando/c9-kmco-06-default-comparis.jpg)
We used an approach similar to Blueprint's, a default AFCAD (which was *very* accurate anyway, just with a default texture), but we had a good photoreal background and the 3d modeling was very high quality, not much different that what we are doing now, with native FSX advanced materials on buildings, bump-mapping, specular reflections, etc. AND moving jetways, all things that Blueprint doesn't do even today.
We might say it wasn't a drastically different product than BP's KMCO, even if we believe our version still looks better, and it's light years better than default anyway.
JUST the fact that Cloud9 KMCO had a default texture for ground, resulted in sales which are, as of today, ONE TENTH of Zurich or JFK.
So, if Blueprint is making money selling that kind of stuff, then they are much better then we are, at least in marketing skills.
Or, they might simply not care, and doing this like a sort of a glorified hobby so their expectations are lower: we have more than one people in our team who pay all their bills with Flight sim stuff, and not doing any other jobs. If you ask around any Flight sim developer (just try on fsdeveloper.com), is not very common.
Or, is it a question of price ? Do you think if we lowered Cloud9's price, it would surge in sales ? We had several promotions on Cloud9 products in the past were it was possible to purchase everything at 40% less, but people keep buying things like KLAX, KDCA, EHAM or ENBR, which are more similar to what we do NOW. Even the little ENBR, which surely is far less important airport than KMCO, has outsold it...
So, as far our experience is concerned, the overall graphic look has a direct impact on sales, and putting some default elements in a scenery basically killed it in the market, even if the rest of the airport was (and still is) very good.
-
Before now, there wasn't anyone going after the, what I will call, simple-flyer market.
What is your definition of the simple flyer market? ???
To me, the simple flyer is someone who starts up the simulator sitting in the default airplane on the end of the runway with the engine running. Don't use AI other than default, don't use ATC, don't use checklists for realism, and they certainly don't care about payware scenery.
-
They are obviously making money or they wouldn't still be producing sceneries. So tell me, if you are a business and your goal is to make money, how is what they are doing not brilliant? Before now, there wasn't anyone going after the, what I will call, simple-flyer market.
Well, it depends how you define "making money" and what your expectations are.
Right, and that is something I don't know about Blueprint. What I do know is that they are making enough for their expectations. Whether there sales are strong and comparable to Aerosoft or FlyTampa or FSDT (I doubt it), we'll never know. But they wouldn't have started the business if they didn't expect to make money. That's the point in selling products...make money. Otherwise their stuff would be freeware. So clearly, since they are still producing and selling product, I think it is safe to assume they are making enough money for them to consider acceptable...which is all that matters.
Before now, there wasn't anyone going after the, what I will call, simple-flyer market.
What is your definition of the simple flyer market? ???
To me, the simple flyer is someone who starts up the simulator sitting in the default airplane on the end of the runway with the engine running. Don't use AI other than default, don't use ATC, don't use checklists for realism, and they certainly don't care about payware scenery.
Is that all you got out of that? ::)
By that, I meant that there is clearly a market for sceneries of a lower level of detail, or from my point of view, simple. Before now, not many people were selling sceneries for that market. So it seems like a smart decision to me. They may not be making as much FSDT or FlyTampa but they're obviously making a profit so it seems like a smart thing to me.
----------------------------
By the way, a lot of people seem to have a mentality that the level of detail in Blueprint's work is less than that of some freeware scenery designers and that is "deplorable" or somehow ridiculous. If that is the case, take a look at SunSkyJet's KPHL or KLGB (and even some of Shez's old work). Now take a look at FlyTampa. The level of detail is remarkable similar. The only difference is FlyTampa is selling their product and SunSkyJet is giving it away for free. How come no one is complaining about FlyTampa?
-
...they're obviously making a profit so it seems like a smart thing to me.
How would you know they're making a profit if you're not a team member? I think Virtuali hit it, they're hobbyists who really don't care.
...take a look at SunSkyJet's KPHL or KLGB (and even some of Shez's old work). Now take a look at FlyTampa. The level of detail is remarkable similar.
I have several of the FT sceneries, as well as Shez's KPHL, and I don't see them as that similar. I would compare KPHL to sceneries like FRF Studios or Mach1 Design Group. If Shez thought he was comparable to FT, he'd be charging for it and recouping some of his investment.
-
...they're obviously making a profit so it seems like a smart thing to me.
How would you know they're making a profit if you're not a team member? I think Virtuali hit it, they're hobbyists who really don't care.
...take a look at SunSkyJet's KPHL or KLGB (and even some of Shez's old work). Now take a look at FlyTampa. The level of detail is remarkable similar.
I have several of the FT sceneries, as well as Shez's KPHL, and I don't see them as that similar. I would compare KPHL to sceneries like FRF Studios or Mach1 Design Group. If Shez thought he was comparable to FT, he'd be charging for it and recouping some of his investment.
How would you know they're hobbyists who really don't care if you're not a team member? Once again, your ignorance is showing mate. Tell me, if they aren't making a profit, why would they continue to sell their scenery (which costs them in server space, business taxes, etc.) if they could just upload it to AVSIM for free (both to them and the user)? Something tells me they aren't stupid. ::) ;)
And you seriously consider Shez and Ian's KPHL on the same level as Mach 1 Design Group? Both are good but to say they are on the same level is absurd. And no, Shez and Ian wouldn't be selling it just because they are on par with FlyTampa. They don't view it as a business whereas FlyTampa and many others do. They are content with providing sceneries for free as what they do is solely hobby work. FlyTampa and others have taken the opportunity to make it a business. It has nothing to do with the quality of work. It has to do with the mindset.
---------------------------
First image attached: KPHL
Second image attached: KMHT (the latest release from Mach 1)
KPHL (SunSkyJet): just about everything is custom...custom textures, custom buildings, custom vehicles, custom buildings outside the airport perimeter
KMHT (Mach 1): other than custom buildings and a few custom vehicles, everything is default...nothing done outside the airport.
Now, let's discuss the third image. This is KBUF, by George at FlyTampa. Just like SunSkyJet, everything custom and some work done outside the perimeter fence.
So, you still think SunSkyJet is on the level of Mach 1 and FRF? If so, then you've lost every ounce of credibility.
-
Whatever, Mister Blueprint. I'm done with this thread.
-
Whatever, Mister Blueprint. I'm done with this thread.
:D
If defending a developer because they are unnecessarily bashed on countless forums makes me Mister Blueprint, so be it.
-
Whatever, Mister Blueprint. I'm done with this thread.
Admit it. He proved you wrong. :D
-
Here comes a long one guys. This post took 5 minutes from my life. For starters. I do think making a comparison from Shez's KPHL (his work is VERY good though, lacks AES) and FlyTampa is a very big long shot. Just my opinion. Another opinion I will add is about the screen shot from Mach 1. What I will say about Mach 1, is they do a better job with texturing then Blueprint. My next opinion, Shez's work is far, FAR better than Blueprint. Shez puts pride in his work, something Blueprint seems to lack. I use Shez's KLGB and am super happy with it. Again, you can see the pride done in the work. I just think with freeware sceneries like:
http://jgabbert.wordpress.com/
http://www.lkpr-scenery.wz.cz/en/index.php
http://www.sunskyjet.com/
http://www.avsim.com/greece/scenery/index_main.htm
http://www.greekairportsproject.gr/site/
http://dl.flightsim.ro/details.php?file=210
http://lszh.aviation-art.ch/
And that is just to name a few!
These developers produced work far better than Blueprint's quality and gave it away for FREE! To me what Blueprint is doing is no better than if Mach 1 were to start charging $17.50 for their stuff. There would (believe it or not) be folks that would buy it and at least Mach 1 does a better job at texturing their work! My other issue with Blueprint is their disdainful behavior as if they are the best developer on the market. It's their prideful behavior, quality of work, and outrageous price that disgust me. Really, charging for BOTH FSX and FS9??
For those of you defending them, please explain why Blueprint is stating on their webpage: "
"At Blueprint Simulations we are committed to producing scenery add-ons for the Microsoft Flight Simulator of the highest-quality possible..."
That statement is proven untrue!!
"Blueprint Simulations version of KLAX is by far the most detailed and accurate rendition ever attempted for this important airport...
Again NOT TRUE!!
"Blueprint’s version of KMCO offers the most accurate, up to date and detailed rendition ever offered..."
Maybe it is more up to date given the C9 version is a few years older, but that would be the only accurate statement there.
Blueprint is playing both sides of the fence. They are saying:
"At Blueprint Simulations we are committed to producing scenery add-ons for the Microsoft Flight Simulator of the highest-quality possible..."
Then, because people know their work is very bad for the price they charge, they cover their tracks on the other side of the fence by saying: "We did not embark in this adventure to improve or replace what other developers are already offering..." Or that they know how their work compares to others... If their work didn't suck, there would be no need for that statement on their webpage. Yet, for some reason, they seem to be producing sceneries FSDT and other developers are currently working on, or already recenty did. If they are not trying improve or replace other developers work, why do them? Why not stick to stuff no one has done yet? But to create 2 sceneries previously done by Cloud9 and say "BluePrint Simulations version of KLAX is by far the most detailed and accurate rendition ever attempted for this important airport... "Blueprint’s version of KMCO offers the most accurate, up to date and detailed rendition ever offered..."
It sounds to me like Blueprint IS improving and replacing what other developers are already offering... At least by their standards.
If the quality of their work actually reflected how they advertise it, or stop advertising their work in such a manner, I would shut my mouth. Otherwise, I really feel bad for those folks who shoveled out so much in desperation to have an airport they love not modeled in the world of FS at such bad quality. What Blueprint is doing today is barely equal to what Simwings was doing 7 years ago. Someone posted that Blueprint's business strategy is very good idea. I agree!!!! I believe it is Blueprint's marketing strategy to target these people, and given the fact that they roll out so many a year by creating poorly modeled and textured buildings etc. is a great money making strategy with little and quick work. It is obvious which developers are here because they love the hobby and who is here to make money. That is their right. I just feel bad for Umberto, Kappa, George, Martin and several other developers to see competition like this. But no worries, these guys are getting my money. :)
And to Virtuali's earlier post, I bought KDCA last year. It's old and it doesn't have AES sadly, but the quality is DAMN good for such an old scenery. I would like to hear just one person say that about one of Blueprint's NEW sceneries. Even the folks defending them think their work is weak.
-
BTW if it seems like I am angry, please understand it's my passion for this hobby that is speaking not to mention thousands of dollars. I may not be a developer but if I were on Umberto's team, I would be very annoied with all the hard work that goes into KLAX just to see these guys whipp it out so quickly when it was known for such a long period of time that FSDT was going to make it. BP is trying to corner the market. I am not saying what Blueprint is doing is wrong thats capitalism at it's finest it's also very unethical to charge what they are charging for it.
Done.
-
These developers produced work far better than Blueprint's quality and gave it away for FREE! To me what Blueprint is doing is no better than if Mach 1 were to start charging $17.50 for their stuff. There would (believe it or not) be folks that would buy it and at least Mach 1 does a better job at texturing their work! My other issue with Blueprint is their disdainful behavior as if they are the best developer on the market. It's their prideful behavior, quality of work, and outrageous price that disgust me. Really, charging for BOTH FSX and FS9??
I have a question for you...
If all those freeware developers didn't exist - we didn't have all those great works they produce - would you still feel the same way about Blueprint? I ask that because, many people (not necessarily you as the rest of your post explains), complain and their biggest complaint about them is that there is freeware work that is better than what they produce. Well, stop comparing them. All those freeware designers chose not to charge for their work when they could have and if I was them, you can bet I would be.
For those of you defending them, please explain why Blueprint is stating on their webpage: "
"At Blueprint Simulations we are committed to producing scenery add-ons for the Microsoft Flight Simulator of the highest-quality possible..."
That statement is proven untrue!!
I guess it depends on your definition of quality. To them, what they produce is high-quality stuff. Believe it or not, some people don't care about all the realistic texturing and impeccable detail you get with FlyTampa and FSDT (I know I once didn't care about it when I first started simming). But I agree, not exactly a true statement.
"Blueprint Simulations version of KLAX is by far the most detailed and accurate rendition ever attempted for this important airport...
Again NOT TRUE!!
Definitely agreed. It is not the most detailed. The C9 version put out many years ago is far more detailed. Accurate? Well, maybe. I haven't compared the C9 version and the BP version to real life but I know since the C9 version, there have been many changes at LAX and if BP represented those, then that would hold true. But yeah, the statement as a whole is not true. Completely agree with you there.
"Blueprint’s version of KMCO offers the most accurate, up to date and detailed rendition ever offered..."
Maybe it is more up to date given the C9 version is a few years older, but that would be the only accurate statement there.
Again, I agree. It could be the most up to date (I'm not familiar with the airport) but as for most detailed, maybe not. The C9 version is quite detailed and there is a freeware version out there that is also very good (I believe it is Mach 1).
Blueprint is playing both sides of the fence. They are saying:
"At Blueprint Simulations we are committed to producing scenery add-ons for the Microsoft Flight Simulator of the highest-quality possible..."
Then, because people know their work is very bad for the price they charge, they cover their tracks on the other side of the fence by saying: "We did not embark in this adventure to improve or replace what other developers are already offering..." Or that they know how their work compares to others... If their work didn't suck, there would be no need for that statement on their webpage. Yet, for some reason, they seem to be producing sceneries FSDT and other developers are currently working on, or already recenty did. If they are not trying improve or replace other developers work, why do them? Why not stick to stuff no one has done yet? But to create 2 sceneries previously done by Cloud9 and say "BluePrint Simulations version of KLAX is by far the most detailed and accurate rendition ever attempted for this important airport... "Blueprint’s version of KMCO offers the most accurate, up to date and detailed rendition ever offered..."
It sounds to me like Blueprint IS improving and replacing what other developers are already offering... At least by their standards.
If the quality of their work actually reflected how they advertise it, or stop advertising their work in such a manner, I would shut my mouth. Otherwise, I really feel bad for those folks who shoveled out so much in desperation to have an airport they love not modeled in the world of FS at such bad quality. What Blueprint is doing today is barely equal to what Simwings was doing 7 years ago. Someone posted that Blueprint's business strategy is very good idea. I agree!!!! I believe it is Blueprint's marketing strategy to target these people, and given the fact that they roll out so many a year by creating poorly modeled and textured buildings etc. is a great money making strategy with little and quick work.
Again, for the most part, I agree with you. (Surprise Bruce, I'm not a "fan boy." I notice the flaws in Blueprint and I don't defend them over everything.) Their marketing is false and possibly misleading, although they do provide so many screenshots no one can claim you didn't know what you were buying.
I think part of the problem is the definition of "quality." I think to them they think what they are making is high-quality but our definition of high-quality is quite different. And when they saying they aren't trying to improve or replace...again, I think they are trying to express that they know they aren't going to get customers like us that strive for the detail level of FSDT or FlyTampa. They know that and they accept it. But that is just my interpretation.
It is obvious which developers are here because they love the hobby and who is here to make money. That is their right. I just feel bad for Umberto, Kappa, George, Martin and several other developers to see competition like this. But no worries, these guys are getting my money. :)
And that is exactly what you should do; vote with your dollars. If you don't like it, don't spend on it. If enough people don't vote for BP with their money and not enough people do, then they won't be selling their product anymore.
And to Virtuali's earlier post, I bought KDCA last year. It's old and it doesn't have AES sadly, but the quality is DAMN good for such an old scenery. I would like to hear just one person say that about one of Blueprint's NEW sceneries. Even the folks defending them think their work is weak.
KDCA is one of my favorites from the FSDT/C9 crews. Mostly because of the unique location of the airport but they did a bang-up job on that airport and for such an old scenery, it really doesn't show its age.
And no, you don't really sound angry. As you said, you said rather passionate, especially about LAX, which if I recall, you work there right? ;D (Sorry, I had to work that in once more.) You are absolutely right...capitalism at its finest. Unethical? I disagree. I actually think their price point is rather fair, maybe slightly high, but really not as bad as some people claim.
Anyways, hopefully my quoting worked right and I don't have any of my comments stranded in quote tags.
-
Yep you were right on the money. I guess the only thing I can counter with your responce is the quality issue. I would say that BP's definition of quality seems to be different from the current "industry standard" set by FSDT, Aerosoft and their inside/outside developers, German Airports Team FlyTampa, TropicalSim, UK2000, and Simwings. Did I leave anyone out?? So when they speak of their "high quality" this is what it is being held up to at that price. If this were 7 or even 4 years ago, I would be buying their sceneries as other then Cloud 9 which was the highest quality developer besides FlightScenery at the time, BP's quality was the standard then. But as you said, there are screenshots to view prior to purchase so the user knows what their getting despite the false wording.
Cheers ;)
-
A soon to be released by FlightBeam Studios,KSFO :)
-
A soon to be released by FlightBeam Studios,KSFO :)
Wow! You got this from a reliable source? :)
(or are you "just" speculating?)
-
A soon to be released by FlightBeam Studios,KSFO :)
You're a little late...:D
-
A soon to be released by FlightBeam Studios,KSFO :)
You're a little late...:D
I'm sorry, but what exactly do you mean? :)
-
A soon to be released by FlightBeam Studios,KSFO :)
You're a little late...:D
I'm sorry, but what exactly do you mean? :)
From FlightBeam Studios website.....Where did you think I meant >:(
-
A soon to be released by FlightBeam Studios,KSFO :)
You're a little late...:D
I'm sorry, but what exactly do you mean? :)
From FlightBeam Studios website.....Where did you think I meant >:(
Never mind! I sincerly apologize for my 'ignorance'!
(there's no need to put up, that kind of smiley... :) )
-
http://www.myaviation.net/search/photo_search.php?id=01967644