FSDreamTeam forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: fwerff on August 17, 2011, 11:31:49 am
-
Hello,
I vaguely recall Umberto tentatively stating KLAX would be their last FSX airport, depending on the development of MS Flight.
Personally I don't think MS Flight will be out before mid-2012 and even then, I yet have to see what it offers above the current FSX+addons setup and how it will be supported by addon developers before I even consider to migrate to it.
With Hawaii Vol.2 released and KLAX apparently (hopefully) very close to release, is anything known yet on IF FSDT will do another FSX airport and if yes, what it will be?
From the poll that was held last year, KSAN and CYVR were my favorites. For the foreseeable future, I don't see FlyTampa updating their KSAN scenery and the CYVR development by another developer seems to have stopped (no news in about a year...).
Regards,
Frank
-
I vaguely recall Umberto tentatively stating KLAX would be their last FSX airport, depending on the development of MS Flight.
Not really, KLAX *might* be our last FS9 scenery, however this is not even 100% sure right now. There are no plans to stop FSX development after MS Flight is released, the only thing sure is that we'll not do anything new for FS9, after MS Flight is released, because we simply don't have the resources needed to work and support 3 different platforms.
But we still have many years ahead of new FSX products, well after MS Flight is released.
-
I'd like to see KIAH, KSAN, KMEM, KMSY, KMSP or CYYZ.
Of course, I'd love to see an FSDT DTW but Blueprint did it - its an ok placeholder for the freeware one from SSJ but I don't plan to see that any time soon.
Just goes to show you how much everyone hates Detroit - you can have an airport thats virtually brand new, tons of international flights, be a major US hub and be the best large airport in the country and no one ever suggests it except for me and and maybe two other people in the FS community. ::)
-
I vaguely recall Umberto tentatively stating KLAX would be their last FSX airport, depending on the development of MS Flight.
Not really, KLAX *might* be our last FS9 scenery, however this is not even 100% sure right now. There are no plans to stop FSX development after MS Flight is released, the only thing sure is that we'll not do anything new for FS9, after MS Flight is released, because we simply don't have the resources needed to work and support 3 different platforms.
But we still have many years ahead of new FSX products, well after MS Flight is released.
As a comprehensive FS2004 user and dedicated LAGO/C9/FSDT customer I'm pretty happy with this strategy of yours. For FS9 user it's strategically and financially wrong to move to FSX now, assuming that MF is about to be released in 2012 - now matter what hardware is on the market right now. Then, we would start a new life from the scratch. FS2004 is the hit of all times, but it's getting old - time to move on.
-
Just goes to show you how much everyone hates Detroit - you can have an airport thats virtually brand new, tons of international flights, be a major US hub and be the best large airport in the country and no one ever suggests it except for me and and maybe two other people in the FS community.
Blueprint just did Detroit recently, and Imaginesim did it long before them. You want more? ::)
-
Just goes to show you how much everyone hates Detroit - you can have an airport thats virtually brand new, tons of international flights, be a major US hub and be the best large airport in the country and no one ever suggests it except for me and and maybe two other people in the FS community.
Blueprint just did Detroit recently, and Imaginesim did it long before them. You want more? ::)
I don't consider old FS9 scenery (IS) and Blueprint to be competition. The IS version was never released for FSX, FS9 version was a major dud from the get go and the scenery is outdated anyway. Blueprint is not for people that want full featured scenery. They produce basic renditions of airports and they do it really fast. I am sure the SSJ version will eclipse the BP version once it is released. My point was no one ever suggests DTW - even before the BP version was released or before SSJ announced their project and I don't get why.
That being said, I have a list of what I would like to see. It was in the first sentence of the post - you know, the part of my post you didn't quote.
-
...you know, the part of my post you didn't quote.
I saw your list, and Blueprint did four of those airports. Again, you want more? ;D
Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of any developer who charges for freeware quality sceneries, just pointing out that these airports are available to the community. I'd rather see FSDT make something that isn't.
-
Would be great if KEWR is "next up"...!!! ;)
Brgds
Stein-Ove
-
Not really, KLAX *might* be our last FS9 scenery, however this is not even 100% sure right now. There are no plans to stop FSX development after MS Flight is released, the only thing sure is that we'll not do anything new for FS9, after MS Flight is released, because we simply don't have the resources needed to work and support 3 different platforms.
But we still have many years ahead of new FSX products, well after MS Flight is released.
Thanks Umberto for clearing that up for me. Very happy with your strategy. I'm a loyal FSDT customer and you can count me in with whatever airports you create for FSX! ;D
-
I saw your list, and Blueprint did four of those airports. Again, you want more? ;D
I guess my answer is yes to that question. ;D
Whether Blueprint does an airport is irrelevant to me. If I really have to have the airport (DTW for ex), I'll buy something from them but for the most part, I don't consider any of the airports they have released as "done". Its like saying we don't need a 787 because Abacus did one.
-
I saw your list, and Blueprint did four of those airports. Again, you want more? ;D
Its like saying we don't need a 787 because Abacus did one.
Best line ever!!! ;D
-
I am not a fan of any developer who charges for freeware quality sceneries
Don't take this personally Bruce but I cannot stand it when people say this. Who determines what "freeware quality" is? What about SunSkyJet and the rest of Shez Ansari's airport sceneries?
-
Would be great if KEWR is "next up"...!!! ;)
Brgds
Stein-Ove
Heck yea!!!!!
-
Who determines what "freeware quality" is? What about SunSkyJet and the rest of Shez Ansari's airport sceneries?
You're comparing Shez Ansari to Blueprint? Shez produces payware quality sceneries, I would've gladly paid for KPHL.
Its like saying we don't need a 787 because Abacus did one.
I'd rather fill my hard drive with Blueprint sceneries than fly an Abacus aircraft. :D
-
Sorry I dragged us in to the weeds here. Nonetheless, I think FSDT needs to look at airports that have international traffic so they can bring in the $. We want them to rake in the cash so they stay around for a long time.
As I said, I only buy Blueprint stuff when I must have a specific airport. In FSX, DTW is the only one I own (and I have a lot of scenery). When SSJ releases their version, the BP DTW will be uninstalled. I am sure I am not alone with this strategy. Imaginesim's scenery is more advanced and I they can be compared to Tropicalsim. I won't replace their airports unless something really amazing is released AND it is a key airport for me. I plan to replace the TS MMUN with the AMS version when it is released.
The point is FSDT needs to look at its actual competition - Fly Tampa, Flightbeam, Aerosoft (Simwings...) and maybe LatinVFR (yeh, I know). Competing with an existing IS, TS or T2G airport depends on the product and its age. Blueprint should not even be figured in to the equation.
And as I am typing, I think I may backtrack on my comment that ATL wouldn't be a good choice. According to what I said above, it may be a good option. Nonetheless, I just don't know what anyone can really do with ATL - the airport has absolutely no charm - no water, no mountains, no impressive architecture, no exotic AI, no above ground monorail (except for MARTA). Maybe if they put a lot of work in to the surrounding area it could work but I just think it lacks that wow factor that will get people to dump their IS version.
Still, I think IAH is the lowest hanging fruit followed by EWR. I like IAH more because it is on the Gulf Coast - an area that has little add on scenery.
-
Sorry I dragged us in to the weeds here. Nonetheless, I think FSDT needs to look at airports that have international traffic so they can bring in the $. We want them to rake in the cash so they stay around for a long time.
As I said, I only buy Blueprint stuff when I must have a specific airport. In FSX, DTW is the only one I own (and I have a lot of scenery). When SSJ releases their version, the BP DTW will be uninstalled. I am sure I am not alone with this strategy. Imaginesim's scenery is more advanced and I they can be compared to Tropicalsim. I won't replace their airports unless something really amazing is released AND it is a key airport for me. I plan to replace the TS MMUN with the AMS version when it is released.
The point is FSDT needs to look at its actual competition - Fly Tampa, Flightbeam, Aerosoft (Simwings...) and maybe LatinVFR (yeh, I know). Competing with an existing IS, TS or T2G airport depends on the product and its age. Blueprint should not even be figured in to the equation.
And as I am typing, I think I may backtrack on my comment that ATL wouldn't be a good choice. According to what I said above, it may be a good option. Nonetheless, I just don't know what anyone can really do with ATL - the airport has absolutely no charm - no water, no mountains, no impressive architecture, no exotic AI, no above ground monorail (except for MARTA). Maybe if they put a lot of work in to the surrounding area it could work but I just think it lacks that wow factor that will get people to dump their IS version.
Still, I think IAH is the lowest hanging fruit followed by EWR. I like IAH more because it is on the Gulf Coast - an area that has little add on scenery.
"And as I am typing, I think I may backtrack on my comment that ATL wouldn't be a good choice. According to what I said above, it may be a good option. Nonetheless, I just don't know what anyone can really do with ATL - the airport has absolutely no charm - no water, no mountains, no impressive architecture, no exotic AI, no above ground monorail (except for MARTA). Maybe if they put a lot of work in to the surrounding area it could work but I just think it lacks that wow factor that will get people to dump their IS version."
Couldn't agree more on that. KATL may be right now the largest airport when it comes to passengers, but it is just an "ugly hub" where people stay a few hours and then leave to their actual destination. Completely boring. Even with surroundings like Brisbane the airport would be not interesting. Much better would be KSAN (what is more beautiful than this airport), Newark Liberty Intl, Miami Intl, La Guardia( best approaches ever for tube flyers with the NGX), Sault Lake City (very nice with the mountains and the water) or maybe New Orleans Intl as we have the fantastic Aerosoft city scenery for it. :)
Cheers
-
Who determines what "freeware quality" is? What about SunSkyJet and the rest of Shez Ansari's airport sceneries?
You're comparing Shez Ansari to Blueprint? Shez produces payware quality sceneries, I would've gladly paid for KPHL.
No. Not directly, at least. You are making the point that BluePrint charges for scenery that is "freeware quality." That to me is silly. The only people/thing to decide what is and is not freeware quality is the consumers buying in the addon market. If the market sees it as freeware quality, then they wouldn't be buying it. Clearly, as we've seen by posts in many forums, people are buying it (and I believe it is safe to say that people have bought from them and not talked about it in a forum). That clearly makes it "payware quality."
Sure, you may not think it is worth the money but the market obviously does. At least enough people to keep them in business. No business will stay open for long if they aren't profitable so clearly BluePrint is profitable, so again, clearly enough people see it as "payware quality."
And I too would have paid for KPHL. But that was their choice not to release as payware.
-
I agree - KATL, KIAH, KDFW (no offense to FSDT), KPHX, KMSP are boring airports where a single carrier is responsible for 95% of the commercial traffic with no or minimal presence of international and other domestic carriers.
This is completerly different league - KBOS, KJFK, KEWR, KIAD, KMIA, KLAX, KSFO, KORD. And all of them are currently present in a good quality except for MIA and EWR. I think that should be a direction for FSDT.
-
KPHX,
This one actually has two major airlines responsible for most traffic: US Airways and Southwest. But the other major airlines are still well represented at Sky Harbor.
-
The traffic mix isn't as big of deal for me if the airport has a lot a lot of traffic and other interesting attributes. I like DTW because its my home airport, its very modern and its one of the few places in the US you will see 747's and DC-9's.
I think PHX has a lot of good qualities and I would suggest it as well if Flightbeam wasn't doing it. It is in a valley. The area around the airport is densely populated which makes for convincing approaches. Also, depending on the runway that is in use, you will have downtown and a couple stadiums along the approach.
I know I suggested KIAH - mainly because I think it is the most commercially viable option but I do agree that KSAN would be a wonderful choice if FT is not going to redo it. Of course, you would need to beef up the area as well to really do it right (downtown, parking garage, freeway, Coronado...). It would make a great companion to LAX and LAS. With FB's SFO and their eventual release of PHX. I know I would spend a lot of time flying between those 5 airports.
-
...but I do agree that KSAN would be a wonderful choice if FT is not going to redo it. Of course, you would need to beef up the area as well to really do it right (downtown, parking garage, freeway, Coronado...). It would make a great companion to LAX and LAS. With FB's SFO and their eventual release of PHX. I know I would spend a lot of time flying between those 5 airports.
I second this.
-
after KLAX the team will make vancouver or miami?
-
If you want a international airport then a good cantidate would be CYYZ Toronto Canada. The largest airport in Canada.
Another one is KATL. A Delta hub that could use some modern scenery.
I think one of the biggest challenges would be Charles De Gaulle France. CDG would be my second choice after CYYZ.
-
I believe that FSDT should look at an international hub that has never been given the attention of a payware developers talent. I know that many payware developers are not in the class with FSDT, but the airports are still better than default.
I would like to see FSDT focus on one like LIRF Fiumicino Airport in Rome. To my knowledge, this as never had the attention that this classic tourist mecca deserves. Anyone that gets enough pocket change to see Europe, wants to stop in Rome. Chances are that they would be using the services of LIRF.
Let's see the true airport masters create it for FSX.
-
Would be awesome for a FSDreamTeam YSSY to fit with Orbx Australia! Or Auckland International airport, NZAA in New Zealand!
-
I believe that FSDT should look at an international hub that has never been given the attention of a payware developers talent. I know that many payware developers are not in the class with FSDT, but the airports are still better than default.
I would like to see FSDT focus on one like LIRF Fiumicino Airport in Rome. To my knowledge, this as never had the attention that this classic tourist mecca deserves. Anyone that gets enough pocket change to see Europe, wants to stop in Rome. Chances are that they would be using the services of LIRF.
Let's see the true airport masters create it for FSX.
Yeah, it is unbelievable how the addon developers treat Italy as a whole. One of the most beautiful places of the world. Tourism mekka for "the non prole I don't want to go to Mallorca, Ibiza...booze tourist", but for everbody who loves great architecture, art, fantastic food, excellent wine... ;D
-
Yeah, it is unbelievable how the addon developers treat Italy as a whole. One of the most beautiful places of the world. Tourism mekka for "the non prole I don't want to go to Mallorca, Ibiza...booze tourist", but for everbody who loves great architecture, art, fantastic food, excellent wine...
Aerosoft sell a very nice scenery of Florence, which WE made for them before launching FSDT.
It's one of the most popular touristic destinations in the world, it has great architecture, art, fantastic food, excellent wine, the airport features a very interesting approach because of the short runway, which is also beautiful to look at because of all the hills around and the scenery also includes the *whole* city rendered in 3d, complete with all historical landmarks, which is really a visual threat during final approach, since the airport is very close to it. On top of that, the frame rate is really excellent.
If you go to purchase that scenery en-masse, be sure we'll notice it, and we might change our mind about doing Italian airports. So far, it hasn't happened, and most of the US airports we made, sold on the *release day* more copies that Florence in the last 4 years...
-
Yeah, it is unbelievable how the addon developers treat Italy as a whole. One of the most beautiful places of the world. Tourism mekka for "the non prole I don't want to go to Mallorca, Ibiza...booze tourist", but for everbody who loves great architecture, art, fantastic food, excellent wine...
Aerosoft sell a very nice scenery of Florence, which WE made for them before launching FSDT.
It's one of the most popular touristic destinations in the world, it has great architecture, art, fantastic food, excellent wine, the airport features a very interesting approach because of the short runway, which is also beautiful to look at because of all the hills around and the scenery also includes the *whole* city rendered in 3d, complete with all historical landmarks, which is really a visual threat during final approach, since the airport is very close to it. On top of that, the frame rate is really excellent.
If you go to purchase that scenery en-masse, be sure we'll notice it, and we might change our mind about doing Italian airports. So far, it hasn't happened, and most of the US airports we made, sold on the *release day* more copies that Florence in the last 4 years...
I actually have the demo. Don't know why I haven't bought it yet. Most of my rides to Italy lead me to Milano, beautiful approach over the alps and the big Upper Italian Sees, to Rome (always a small side trip to the Abruzzo mountains), Venice, Genoa (very high on my italian wishlist due to its wonderful location at the edge of the hills, town and the Ligurian Sea (though I tink it will never be done)), Naples, Palermo (trip to Stromboli).
I am no expert, but at least Malpensa and Fiumicino could be successful. I think they are not slightly less interesting than Athens which led the simmarket bestseller list for several weeks almost until now.
-
Aerosoft sell a very nice scenery of Florence, which WE made for them before launching FSDT.
They do? I'm not seeing it...
-
They do? I'm not seeing it...
Yes, they seems to do their best to hide it from the website, the only way to find it is to search for it:
http://en.shop.aerosoft.com/eshop.php?action=article_list&shopfilter_category=Flight%20Simulation&s_design=DEFAULT
Screenshots:
http://www.aerosoft.de/_php_projekte/_php_screenshots/screenshots.php?sp=fsx&p=florencex
-
Still not seeing it from your link. That search results in 543 items. If I search for Florence it does yield one result (but only on the en.aerosoft.com site, not the www.aerosoft.com site) It shows me FlorenceX which is no longer available. Says "not in stock" and there is no add to cart option. I'm thinking this has a lot more to do with the poor sales than does lack of interest.
-
Says "not in stock" and there is no add to cart option.
Yes, it says "not in stock", but that's just probably a glitch of their software, because it's sold outside their regular shop, it's on Esellerate just like our own stuff. If you read the product description, there IS a link to Download the Trial version, which is purchased just like our sceneries.
I'm thinking this has a lot more to do with the poor sales than does lack of interest.
Nope, it has ended being neglected on their website only after we already decided the sales were poor. It's a 4 years old product, but it never sold, not even when it was actively promoted by Aerosoft. I guess they stopped advertising it because, after that experience, we decided to start FSDT...
-
Why not add it to your Cloud9 page and see if it sells. Nothing ventured, as they say... ;D