Lyon Saint-Expury review is confusing?

[Guest Marick626]

I am confused to see that the reviewer of this scenery stated that one of the big lead downs was the absence of AI aircraft and static aircraft in the scenery. In no place does SimUdesign state that the scenery provide any sort of static traffic or AI traffic. The reviewer also stated that one thing he liked about the scenery is the fact it is framerate friendly, but you should also be aware that by adding static aircraft lowers the framerates.At the beggining of the review the author stated the little number of scenery addons he had. This leads me to conclude that he has little expereince with scenery and scenery design and does not know that there are free programs available at avsim to add static aircraft and AI traffic. Personaly I donot understand why AVSIM would choose someone with little experience atleast in the area of sceneries to make a scenery review, especialy with AVSIM's standards.I suggest that the author reviews products he is more familiar with and do a bit of more reaserch beforehand. I think that a reviewer should put the dissapointments of a product aswell as ways to enhance their enjoyment."This isn

[Guest Gazelle]

Hi, thanks for taking the time to read the review.Firstly, let me assure you that I do have sufficient exoperience in using and therefore reviewing scenery addons, perhaps just one of the reasons I was taken on as an AVSIM Staff Reviewer.Secondly, the review is my opinion. I have had thus far one email pointing out that some people like the lack of static aircraft and of course you are right, it may well be one of the reasons why this addon is frame rate friendly. However, I do not like to pay money for an airport that is devoid of any static aircraft. If I wanted freeware (as you suggest as an alternative) then I'd get freeware. This product is payware, and ought to be of a certain standard. In my opinion, it failed in this particular respect and I said so.That all said, I'm at a loss to explain why you think it was so wrong of me to say static aircraft should be included, but you then contradict your own argument by saying of another feature that "I think most if not all simmmers expect stuff like this in sceneries these days."This is MY point entirely. Whether it's useful or not, if I'm paying for a package, let me have the choice of using a feature or not. If it's not there in the first instance, what exactly am I paying for? Something which is little better than freeware, that what!Regards,Gavin HendrieAVSIM Staff Reviewer

[Guest Pike]

Hi Gavin,As someone who has also contributed reviews to AVSIM in the past, I must echo some of the concern of the first poster. Static aircraft are not only not included in many airport packages, but not desired either. The typical person who would buy an addon airport package, would also likely have some sort of traffic program. I find it surprising that you do not? If you did, I think you would find this airport to have plenty of activity. The decision to leave out static aircraft relates directly to performance when using these traffic programs. It's a smart thing to do, and given the choice between static, never changing airplanes and dynamic AI birds--most I think would choose the latter.And to answer your question, you are paying for airport scenery. you got that. And for goodness sake, if you want aircraft, do like the other 99.99% of us and get a traffic program. The review wasn't bad, but harping over and over about static aircraft was unnecessary. Just mention it, and move on.And your inclusion as a AVSIM reviewer isn't that big a deal. They are looking for volunteers all the time. Your status as a reviewer doesn't make you special, nor give you the right to be rude to folks who critique your review. Next time you decide to crow about your experience, please ensure you at least correct the typos in your post.Regards,Matt Clement

[Guest Gazelle]

Matt,At no point was I trying to big up my 'status' as a reviewer. I did not once suggest I was special, so your attack in that respect is wholly unwarranted. Nor does the perception I was 'rude' give you the right to be likewise to me.I've taken on board the point that many people like the absence of AI or static aircraft. It seems though that some people are unable to hoist onboard the point that I do like it and that the review was MY opinion. Simple as that.As for being a volunteer, you've hit the nail on the head. I give of my free time to do these reviews. As a member of the British Army, and a father of two that's something which is at a premium at the moment, especially as I'm due to deploy on Operations quite soon. As for you the reader, the cost to you is nil and you can read and critique my review at your leisure. Indeed I even encourage this as this process has served as a learning point for me with regard to the wider community feeling on this matter. In short, I give of my free time to contribute something to the community which costs nothing. I'm sure I can speak on behalf of all AVSIM reviewers when I say that points being raised about our reviews is no bad thing. Personal jibes, attacks or digs (such as yours) however does make me wonder why I bother.Gavin HendrieAVSIM Staff Reviewer

[Guest IanP]

My "Avsim Staff Reviewer" tag is long passed, but I also agree with other respondents that I found the review contradictory.It might not have been your intention, but you opened the review by saying you were going to dislike it anyway. You don't buy airport add-ons and prefer freeware. You then go on to list a lot of good points about the airport, two bad (I'm inclined to agree on the lighting!), then suggest people not bother with it unless they specifically want Lyon scenery.Out of interest, how does the airport look with AI enabled? You've not mentioned that unfortunately. I would have thought an AFCAD was pretty important with a scenery - either pay or freeware - these days but unfortunately I don't know whether it even has one or not after reading this.Static aircaft for me, as well, are a waste of space. I delete or turn them off whenever I can. As for gate handling being a waste of processor power? Aerosoft's AES is hovering nicely in their list of best sellers after a couple of months of being out... ;-) - That really is just personal preference, though, as you say.The good news? At least you're getting feedback from the review, which is more than most do! :-hahCheers,Ian P.

[Guest Pike]

For goodness sake sir,No one was attacking you. Attacks are what are faced by our service men in Iraq, not someone taking issue with your tone or supposed haughtiness. I was simply reacting to your response to the first poster. Why is it that when people say anything other than "great job" folks feel like they are being attacked. Jeesh, grow a bit thicker skin sir. If you cannot do that, perhaps reviewing is not for you (it wasn't for me, heaven knows.) If nothing else, point out to me where exactly I was rude to you? On the whole, the article was just not very good. As the poster above stated, you never even mentioned what the airport's FPS performance was with full AI traffic. Considering that AI traffic is something most every serious simmer (i.e. people who even come to AVSIM to read reviews) has, the omission of that information was a mistake. Then to go on about lack of static aircraft only confounds the issue further. You may have received supportive emails, but the forums are clear. Sorry. However:You are a great person for serving in your countries military, I salute you for it. I'm sure you are a terrific father. And a #### of a flight simmer. And have a library full of expensive books permeated by the smell of rich mahogany. Ok, ego boost over, sorry to have had issues with you articles and your post.

[Guest Marick626]

>As for being a volunteer, you've hit the nail on the head. I>give of my free time to do these reviews. As a member of the>British Army, and a father of two that's something which is at>a premium at the moment, especially as I'm due to deploy on>Operations quite soon. Gavin,I respect and admire the fact you are in the army. But that does not mean the readers dont have anything time consuming in their lives neither. Basicaly is that you took up the responsibility of writting reviews and if you are gonna do them, do them correctly or dont do them at all. I am not trying to be rude or anything though.