I've read one or two reviews of BluePrint Simulations FS2004 scenery packages here which weren't entirely flattering. Well, each to his own taste, I suppose. I would like to point out, however, that while no other commercial scenery for FS2004 designers that I know of have issued any new scenery, let alone updated anything they've already released in quite some time as support for FS2004 in general continues to decline, BluePrint's been busy. They've released no less than six free updates for their previous FS2004 scenery releases just since March of this year. These include KJFK, KDTW, KLAX, KIAH, KMCO, and KIAD, with more on the way. And these updates aren't just a matter of fixing issues with previously released versions. In most cases such major updates as removing no-longer-existing terminals, adding new terminals, adding/removing existing runways, and so on have been addressed such as, for example, their addition of the newly opened Tom Bradley International Terminal at KLAX.

 

BluePrint has never gone in for as much eye-candy as some developers, it's true. You won't find dynamic ground vehicles in their scenery, for example, although there are plenty of static ones if the user chooses to install them. They also do not embrace the "starfish" (or whatever it is called) idea of adding fictitious runways in order to make more runways selectable by Microsoft's stock ATC, a practice which I personally hate, anyway. Nor does their scenery require a working Internet connection each time FS2004 is run in order for the scenery to operate correctly or even to be present, as some commercial developers require. Their installer requires merely the entry of a key number which is supplied by email almost immediately on purchase, and which can be used again and again no matter how many times one reinstalls FS2004.

 

I've always liked their products and personally own a great many of them. I can understand why some simmers are perhaps less enthused, compared to some of the eye-candy in particular added by some other developers, but to me, the fact that they are still actively updating--and in meaningful ways--their FS2004 products counts for a very great deal nowadays.

 

If anyone is interested in taking a look, you can find their homepage here: http://www.blueprintsimulations.com/index.htm

Blueprint is the only developer to offer a detailed KMSP so being that this was a suggestion made by me many years ago that they took to heart (KMEM included) these guys can do no wrong in my book.  Their scenery is satisfactory for the airports they cover especially if their the only developer to do these airports.  It's great to hear their continuing their support for FS9 and I look forward to an updated KMSP.

Their scenery is so much better then stock, and are affordable to those who can't spend alot. I have almost all of their products as well as many "top line" products. I would like to see them produce more regional airports both U.S. overseas, that's where I think they could really score.

 

I am a FS9er

I am a FS9er

We know, your in the FS9 forum...

 

Then again you never know as FSXers love to crash the party every chance they get...

I thought if a online college can say I am a ______ I can say I am a FS9er, lol

I wish they'd design some new airports too, a few regional as well as some more major ones here in the States and some overseas as well besides those they've done in South America. On the other hand, I wouldn't want them to extend themselves so far that they couldn't afford the time to keep on coming with the free updates! AFAIK, they're nearly unique in that among commercial FS9 developers, or at least no one else has ever been so consistent about it. And I think it is a fairly small operation, perhaps only a one-man operation. I've emailed comments and/or support requests several times, and each time I've done so I've heard back directly (and within a day at most) from their lead designer himself, so I'm fairly sure it can't be a very large operation.

 

BTW, I'm in no way connected with BluePrint. Never even met anyone who is other than via email. But their commitment to their customers, especially insofar as FS9 is concerned, strikes me as being close to unique, which is what prompted my original post. That kind of dedication ought to be recognized.

I wish them well and hope they will continue to give simmers low cost options of airports that are often ignored by the higher-end developers. But as for the updates, I have never been able to get any of them to install. I have tried numerous times, even doing a completely fresh reinstall. So took them off my hard drive long ago.

Ian

I wish them well and hope they will continue to give simmers low cost options of airports that are often ignored by the higher-end developers. But as for the updates, I have never been able to get any of them to install. I have tried numerous times, even doing a completely fresh reinstall. So took them off my hard drive long ago.

Ian

 

Have you tried running the updates with administrator privileges? There must be a simple, concrete reason why you've had such a hard time with the updates. I've never had the slightest issue with any of them. Another possible reason could be that some of their updates must be installed sequentially, where multiple updates exist. They are usually not cumulative, so that if you had, say, version 1.0 installed, and if updates 1.2.1 and 2.1.1 were each available, the 2.1.1 update would not install unless 1.2.1 had been installed first.

 

If none of that solves whatever issues have been plaguing you, I would recommend contacting them directly for support, which is done from their site via email. I have gotten a very prompt response every time I've done so, and I'm certain they would be more than happy to help solve any issues which might exist.

kiwiflyer45, on 19 Jun 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

I wish them well and hope they will continue to give simmers low cost options of airports that are often ignored by the higher-end developers. But as for the updates, I have never been able to get any of them to install. I have tried numerous times, even doing a completely fresh reinstall. So took them off my hard drive long ago.

Ian

I agree, the updates are a non-issue on my end. If there's an airport that's unique to Blueprint (KMSP for example) that you would like it's best to try again and get support. I usually go by what the majority says in instances like this to see if the problem is unique to me. You'll find very few if any that have issues updating Blueprint's scenery.

It was quite a while ago. Their support people did respond and I tried what they suggested but no dice. It really wasn't and isn't much of an issue for me. I have purchased several payware sceneries over the years that for various reasons are no longer on my hard drive. They were inexpensive, served a need for a while and I have no regrets. But just thought I'd mention my experience in case it helped someone else.

No biggie

Cheers

Ian

I think the ground and building shading textures could be much better. Sure they give you decent layout on airports that other mfgs dont but the rest is quite bland. I would only buy a blueprint airport  if Fly Tampa or FS Dream team or even Flightbeam or even Imagine sim did not make a version. How can you compare KJFK or KLAX to FS Dream Team? Unless of course if money is your soul issue. In that case I would rather buy one KJFK FS Dream team then 3 Blue Print. Plus if you wait long enough FS Dream team and others have sales.Now of course if they improve their rextures to be more realistic then I would change my mind.

I think the ground and building shading textures could be much better. Sure they give you decent layout on airports that other mfgs dont but the rest is quite bland. I would only buy a blueprint airport  if Fly Tampa or FS Dream team or even Flightbeam or even Imagine sim did not make a version. How can you compare KJFK or KLAX to FS Dream Team? Unless of course if money is your soul issue. In that case I would rather buy one KJFK FS Dream team then 3 Blue Print. Plus if you wait long enough FS Dream team and others have sales.Now of course if they improve their rextures to be more realistic then I would change my mind.

 

As I pointed out in my OP, they aren't as big on what I consider to be eye-candy as some other developers. I didn't specifically mention that their textures may be a bit more bland than some other developers offer, but there is some truth in that claim. OTOH, how many of those other developers are still providing free and very substantial updates, especially for FS9? Take Fly Tampa's KSEA, for example. I own that one too, and it's a beautiful piece of work. But KSEA has changed substantially since that was released with the addition of a whole new runway, just for openers, designed to reduce traffic congesting during busy times there. Yet has Fly Tampa even hinted that they'll be offering an update, free or not, so that their version of the airport remains current? I think not. And I daresay the same is probably true of KLAX. Other developers' version of it may be "prettier" to some degree, but how many have offered a version (as a free update for those who've already purchased it) so that KLAX is depicted as it looked last month instead of 2, 3, 4, or even 5 years ago?

 

That was the point of my OP, not that BluePrint's scenery is necessarily prettier than that of other developers, but that unlike any other FS9 developer I know of, at least, they remain actively committed to keeping their products updated, and that they typically do so at no additional charge. Which is why, were they to release a version of KSEA, for example, as gorgeous as Fly Tampa's KSEA is, I'd replace it with a BluePrint product in a hot minute were they to decide to offer one.

 

Just a difference in tastes and priorities, I suppose.

I think the ground and building shading textures could be much better. Sure they give you decent layout on airports that other mfgs dont but the rest is quite bland. I would only buy a blueprint airport if Fly Tampa or FS Dream team or even Flightbeam or even Imagine sim did not make a version. How can you compare KJFK or KLAX to FS Dream Team? Unless of course if money is your soul issue. In that case I would rather buy one KJFK FS Dream team then 3 Blue Print. Plus if you wait long enough FS Dream team and others have sales.Now of course if they improve their rextures to be more realistic then I would change my mind.

 

What I've stressed to all developers is don't do airports others have already done which for a time is what was happening. I challenge you to find a better KMSP, KMEM, KDTW, KIND, KSDF, KRDU or KCLE on the market for FS9 or FSX. Thanks to our suggestions Blueprint has a stable of airports you can't find anywhere else making them by default the best option for these sceneries. I can't figure out for the life of me why they would compete head to head with FS Dreamteam but at least they got most of it right.

Robert: What I got out of your original comment was that although you believe in individual tastes you were not happy with the "unflattering" reviews Blueprint has received. You defended them with the fact that they update and for free. And for you that may be great. It really does depend on what is important to you. I am all about the realistic look. I can handle outdated if I can have the look. Speaking about updates I am no expert at all but my logic tells me that because BP is so simplistic in its realism that it has to be easier to update then say FT FSDT. Plus FT FSDT etc, those people are like real artists...they have their mood swings and yet try to balance customer requests. Its hard to revisit old projects  when you are more intrigued with newer projects. JMHO Yet that said I would of liked a refresher on their legacy airports. OH BTW I do own 8 BP airports but only because there is nothing else.

Dillon: I have Imagine sim KDTW (Detroit right?) hope I am right. If so I am very satisfied with that. Plus I have Dream scenery KIND KMKE that I am happy enough with. But hey your right with KMEM KSDF KMSP KLOV etc because quite frankly there is nothing else out there to compare. If only BP gave us more realistic coloring instead of basic basic then I would be more of a fan. Its all about the eye candy or else all we would need is two parallel lines to land between.

sonebone, on 20 Jun 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

If only BP gave us more realistic coloring instead of basic basic then I would be more of a fan. Its all about the eye candy or else all we would need is two parallel lines to land between.

 

Hey, I go back as far as FS4 and BP is light years away from that... Seriously though I have Imaginesim's KDTW (haven't upgraded it to BP as I don't fly there much, not a big fan of depressed Detroit) and DreamScenery's KIND and I know for a fact BP's offering looks and runs better (based on my experience with KIAH). Dreamscenery's rendition of KIND has the old terminal still active while BP has the brand new terminal active and present in their scenery. I had Simflyer's KIAH and upgraded to BP thinking I wouldn't really notice much of a difference. Not only did I like BP's version better it ran light years faster than Simflyer's (now Imaginesim) rendition. So like I said for what they do much of their work is the only game in town which is how it should be. We don't need five developers doing KLAX. Those that do deserve to fail (Blueprint included) especially if their work isn't up to the standard of their competition.