Author Topic: blueprintsimulations with LAX  (Read 49049 times)

Deltalpha

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #45 on: February 19, 2011, 02:57:23 am »
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.

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #46 on: February 19, 2011, 03:19:20 am »
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!  :)

Deltalpha

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #47 on: February 19, 2011, 03:29:34 am »
Quote
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! :-\

Quote
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!

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #48 on: February 19, 2011, 07:07:33 am »
Quote
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! :-\

Quote
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!

 ;) :)

SirIsaac726

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #49 on: February 19, 2011, 07:15:48 am »
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.

SirIsaac726

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #50 on: February 19, 2011, 07:19:38 am »
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.

Bruce Hamilton

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1768
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #51 on: February 19, 2011, 04:40:21 pm »
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
Intel Core i7-4790 Haswell 4.0 GHz EVGA Z97 Classified EVGA Supernova 850 G2 G.Skill Ripjaws 16GB Western Digital 1TB GeForce GTX 780 Superclock

wideloadwhitford

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 237
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #52 on: February 19, 2011, 06:30:15 pm »
Windows 10 64bit
16GB DDR3
512SSD
nVidia 970GTX 4GB

SirIsaac726

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #53 on: February 19, 2011, 07:36:30 pm »
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.

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #54 on: February 19, 2011, 08:30:27 pm »
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!  ;)

SirIsaac726

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #55 on: February 19, 2011, 08:53:15 pm »
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

Bruce Hamilton

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1768
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #56 on: February 19, 2011, 09:10:08 pm »
..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!
Intel Core i7-4790 Haswell 4.0 GHz EVGA Z97 Classified EVGA Supernova 850 G2 G.Skill Ripjaws 16GB Western Digital 1TB GeForce GTX 780 Superclock

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #57 on: February 19, 2011, 09:23:18 pm »
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.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2011, 09:27:45 pm by newmanix »

SirIsaac726

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #58 on: February 20, 2011, 12:44:08 am »
..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.

SirIsaac726

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: blueprintsimulations with LAX
« Reply #59 on: February 20, 2011, 12:45:39 am »
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.