Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

BoazDK
Posts: 220

Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by BoazDK » Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:32 am

Allow me to come with a few suggestions!

We've not seen detailed scenery made for LAX, MIA, JFK and ORD in a long long time! LHR is still a wet dream for me to see you make that amazing airport!

I hope you will consider tackling these mega hubs! They are my personal top destinations in flightsim, but they've lost their charm given the lack of detail in the sceneries I have. 8)
Matt2725
Posts: 2

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by Matt2725 » Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:56 am

Not to be that guy but...

FSDT have a fairly recent LAX which is a very high quality. Drzewiecki Design in the past few months released two NY Airports packages, which include JFK (as well as EWR and LGA) in very good quality IMO.

FSDT's ORD is looking dated but it's there and isn't too bad.

As for MIA, LatinVFR have released a scenery within the past few years which is still decent and is V4 compatible. LHR is also made by UK2000 as well as an Aerosoft version coming soon I believe (both are V4 compatible).
UK2000's LHR isn't the best in my book, but it does fine.

I'd like FT to tackle something we've not seen before instead of releasing scenery we've had fairly recently that are very good or excellent quality already.

Personally I'd like to see something in Africa as it's an area that from what I can tell gets neglected.
Benncpp15
Posts: 162

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by Benncpp15 » Sun Sep 10, 2017 11:44 am

Matt2725 wrote:Not to be that guy but...

FSDT have a fairly recent LAX which is a very high quality. Drzewiecki Design in the past few months released two NY Airports packages, which include JFK (as well as EWR and LGA) in very good quality IMO.

FSDT's ORD is looking dated but it's there and isn't too bad.

As for MIA, LatinVFR have released a scenery within the past few years which is still decent and is V4 compatible. LHR is also made by UK2000 as well as an Aerosoft version coming soon I believe (both are V4 compatible).
UK2000's LHR isn't the best in my book, but it does fine.
FSDTs LAX isn't too bad for now.

BUT Drzewiecki Design NYC Airports. Really? They're absolute shit. Not even freeware quality.
Latin VFR MIA is amateur hour also. Hard to look at.
Stock is better.

FT desperatly need to develop a decent JFK, EWR, LGA, MIA, EGLL etc.
ywg256
Posts: 131

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by ywg256 » Sun Sep 10, 2017 2:47 pm

Benncpp15 wrote:
Matt2725 wrote:Not to be that guy but...

FSDT have a fairly recent LAX which is a very high quality. Drzewiecki Design in the past few months released two NY Airports packages, which include JFK (as well as EWR and LGA) in very good quality IMO.

FSDT's ORD is looking dated but it's there and isn't too bad.

As for MIA, LatinVFR have released a scenery within the past few years which is still decent and is V4 compatible. LHR is also made by UK2000 as well as an Aerosoft version coming soon I believe (both are V4 compatible).
UK2000's LHR isn't the best in my book, but it does fine.
FSDTs LAX isn't too bad for now.

BUT Drzewiecki Design NYC Airports. Really? They're absolute shit. Not even freeware quality.
Latin VFR MIA is amateur hour also. Hard to look at.
Stock is better.

FT desperatly need to develop a decent JFK, EWR, LGA, MIA, EGLL etc.

KLAX is being worked on as is a new KORD by FSDT. FSDT KJFK is fine and performance is fine as well. KMIA - not sure if we will see a v4 but it's not bad for now. KEWR is being worked on already by someone else. As for LGA you have either IS or DD. IS is better but i get bad performance. What you have asked for is being worked on for the most part so hang tight.
Rongor
Posts: 17

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by Rongor » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:40 am

LAX -> FSDT
JFK -> FSDT
LHR -> Aerosoft
MIA -> LatinVFR
ORD -> rework in progress by FSDT

Please don't let us have all the top developers keeping occupied with doing all the identical airports...
Benncpp15
Posts: 162

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by Benncpp15 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:45 am

Rongor wrote:LAX -> FSDT = Just about okay


Please don't let us have all the top developers keeping occupied with doing all the identical airports...
JFK -> FSDT = Crap,
LHR -> Aerosoft = Very Crap
MIA -> LatinVFR = Absolutely appallingly crap
ORD -> rework in progress by FSDT = Needs it
KingMusjo
Posts: 46

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by KingMusjo » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:47 am

Please don't let us have all the top developers keeping occupied with doing all the identical airports...

JFK -> FSDT = Crap,
LHR -> Aerosoft = Very Crap
MIA -> LatinVFR = Absolutely appallingly crap
ORD -> rework in progress by FSDT = Needs it
JFK -> FSDT = Crap, [Your opinion]
LHR -> Aerosoft = Very Crap [Very much your opinion]
MIA -> LatinVFR = Absolutely appallingly crap [Absolutely appallingly your opinion]
ORD -> rework in progress by FSDT = Needs it [/quote]

Please don't project opinion as fact.
Rongor
Posts: 17

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by Rongor » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:12 pm

KingMusjo wrote:JFK -> FSDT = Crap, [Your opinion]
LHR -> Aerosoft = Very Crap [Very much your opinion]
MIA -> LatinVFR = Absolutely appallingly crap [Absolutely appallingly your opinion]
ORD -> rework in progress by FSDT = Needs it

Please don't project opinion as fact.
Well, at least he seems to somewhat like KLAX by FSDT :D
ywg256
Posts: 131

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by ywg256 » Sat Sep 16, 2017 3:49 pm

Benncpp15 wrote:
Rongor wrote:LAX -> FSDT = Just about okay


Please don't let us have all the top developers keeping occupied with doing all the identical airports...
JFK -> FSDT = Crap,
LHR -> Aerosoft = Very Crap
MIA -> LatinVFR = Absolutely appallingly crap
ORD -> rework in progress by FSDT = Needs it
Simple solution dude....How About You work on them if you don't like? Or infuse your own cash as an investment to the developer you want to create each airport.....bitch bitch bitch....
Christopher Low
Posts: 25

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by Christopher Low » Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:52 am

The Aerosoft version of EGLL London Heathrow is nicely detailed, although somewhat heavy on framerates. The only other problem with it in P3D v3 (I still use this version) is the lack of custom runway lighting.
BoazDK
Posts: 220

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by BoazDK » Mon Sep 18, 2017 6:17 pm

Benncpp15 is the only one who nailed it.

all of the sceneries I wish for, exist or do not exist. But those who exist are severely outdated, both in terms of technology and real world airport changes.

FSDT also did LAS and will be updating it, still flytampa is engaged in this amazing project. I would wish all of my airports were made by flytampa and flightbeam.

Besides this, I still stand by my cry for the mentioned airports. My list is longer when it comes to the rest of the world tho... Sigh.
BoazDK
Posts: 220

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by BoazDK » Mon Sep 18, 2017 6:18 pm

Christopher Low wrote:The Aerosoft version of EGLL London Heathrow is nicely detailed, although somewhat heavy on framerates. The only other problem with it in P3D v3 (I still use this version) is the lack of custom runway lighting.
Ok but it does not reflect the current LHR, I fly in and out of there many times a year, recently I was there on September 4th, and they are YEARS outdated.
Rongor
Posts: 17

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by Rongor » Mon Sep 18, 2017 11:35 pm

What I still not understand, why some people seem to only focus on the same airports again and again. Don't you get bored revisiting ever the same destinations? I mean the globe is huge and there could be so much to discover, if people wouldn't concentrate on the airspace between EGLL and KSFO so much and effectively forcing dev studios to churn out the same American/European hubs ever again...
BoazDK
Posts: 220

Re: Since you are tackling much needed mega airports...

Post by BoazDK » Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:27 am

well yes and no, I wish to have as many major airports as possible. But some are more crucial to aviation than others.

LHR, MIA, JFK and LAX are mega hubs for international travel.
Post Reply