I had my hopes up that MAYBE this one would be different, but it seems they are still not getting the message. I don't understand WHY they can't create simple things that don't make this scenery not look like it's for FS2000, make custom Apron and Runway textures, custom vehicles and trucks, and make the terminals look like actual terminals and not toys. This is 2013, they need to MOVE AWAY from FS2004, and move to FSX, so they can create more advanced scenery technologies. They need to take some advice from Flightbeam, or FSdreamteam. COME on.. This isn't rocket science.

 

Complete waste of $17, this doesn't look ANYTHING different from the previous version. And on top of this, they can't even provide AES support??

 

Do not buy this scenery, this is the last one I am ever buying from them.

For the record what's possible with airport scenery in FSX can be done in FS9.  Go look at what FlyTampa and FSDreamteam have been doing for years.  Blueprint has their method not because their stuck in the FS2k2 era rather that's how they want to do it.  As KMSP by them is the only game in town for that airport I rather like it (version 1 that is as I don't like how Delta has cut hangers and services at the real airport).  Good luck getting a better version done for FSX...

 

 

For the record what's possible with airport scenery in FSX can be done in FS9. Go look at what FlyTampa and FSDreamteam have been doing for years.

 

That's so untrue it's rediculous. But I really don't want to get into an arguement with you about fs9 vs fsx.

 

When scenery is made with old FS9 polygon code, the performance in FSX is drastically reduced. And that does not make FSX users happy.

Dillon, I may happen in the distant future... KMSP was close on FlightBeams list only to fall to DEN and SLC. I would say maybe next year... If we all vote for it... Take Care...

And that does not make FSX users happy.

 

 

Who cares as your not the only one's buying add-ons.  I wouldn't say this if the attitude wasn't so condescending toward FS9.  The best advice for you at this stage of the game if your having performance problems is to get a better computer (Jetline Systems is a great option).  To expect every developer to discontinue supporting a sim many continue to enjoy is narcissistic to say the least.  

Is this topic meant to be read as a rant? If so I think bashing Blueprint over there products is a little over board, they posted pictures on there site, you can find other pictures on other sites, did you think that if you bought the scenery that you could make it look better than the pictures? I think that it's 100% your fault for buying this airport, as you had resources to look and see if this really was what you wanted. How ever I do agree with you that it isn't up to par.

I had my hopes up that MAYBE this one would be different, but it seems they are still not getting the message. I don't understand WHY they can't create simple things that don't make this scenery not look like it's for FS2000, make custom Apron and Runway textures, custom vehicles and trucks, and make the terminals look like actual terminals and not toys. This is 2013, they need to MOVE AWAY from FS2004, and move to FSX, so they can create more advanced scenery technologies. They need to take some advice from Flightbeam, or FSdreamteam. COME on.. This isn't rocket science.

 

Complete waste of $17, this doesn't look ANYTHING different from the previous version. And on top of this, they can't even provide AES support??

 

Do not buy this scenery, this is the last one I am ever buying from them.

I just looked on Blueprint's web site and the 25 screen shots they show and I am baffled at why you are so disappointed. They make no secret what the airport will look like.

 

I just looked on Blueprint's web site and the 25 screen shots they show and I am baffled at why you are so disappointed. They make no secret what the airport will look like.

Yep! Their screenshots reveal plenty, and that's why I've never been interested in their sceneries.

To answer him, I believe Blueprint probably makes their airports a little more simplistic in order to try to get better performance, even from lower end computers.

It's true that you can see clearly what you are getting before you buy, but I think all that he is saying is that, after seeing it and purchasing it, he wishes they would upgrade their methods of development to bring them closer to a level level with FSDT, FlyTampa or Flightbeam,  I don't think he is trying to "bash" Blueprint.

I suggest to just enjoy the Blueprint airport for what it is, until someone else does it better, then replace it.

For the record what's possible with airport scenery in FSX can be done in FS9. Go look at what FlyTampa and FSDreamteam have been doing for years. Blueprint has their method not because their stuck in the FS2k2 era rather that's how they want to do it. As KMSP by them is the only game in town for that airport I rather like it (version 1 that is as I don't like how Delta has cut hangers and services at the real airport). Good luck getting a better version done for FSX...

What FSDT and Flightbeam are doing with their latest offerings is beyond what FS9 is capable of and why they are going FSX only now.

 

There's also a reason even older airports usually have a list of FSX only features.

 

To answer him, I believe Blueprint probably makes their airports a little more simplistic in order to try to get better performance, even from lower end computers.

It's true that you can see clearly what you are getting before you buy, but I think all that he is saying is that, after seeing it and purchasing it, he wishes they would upgrade their methods of development to bring them closer to a level level with FSDT, FlyTampa or Flightbeam, I don't think he is trying to "bash" Blueprint.

I suggest to just enjoy the Blueprint airport for what it is, until someone else does it better, then replace it.

I think they just aren't capable of better.

 

Performance is fine at much higher quality airports so I don't think that's it.

Dillon, I may happen in the distant future... KMSP was close on FlightBeams list only to fall to DEN and SLC. I would say maybe next year... If we all vote for it... Take Care...

I do not think Mir will be having votes on new releases again, after so many cheated on the last one. Sometimes, simmers are their own worst enemy.

 

 

Who cares as your not the only one's buying add-ons. I wouldn't say this if the attitude wasn't so condescending toward FS9. The best advice for you at this stage of the game if your having performance problems is to get a better computer (Jetline Systems is a great option). To expect every developer to discontinue supporting a sim many continue to enjoy is narcissistic to say the least.

 

Well since the ratio of FSX vs FS9 users is about 10,000 to 100, I would say the majority of people care.

 

I have a very capable computer, but there is nothing you can do to up the performance of a scenery with old fs9 polygons, running in FSX.

 

 

I just looked on Blueprint's web site and the 25 screen shots they show and I am baffled at why you are so disappointed. They make no secret what the airport will look like.

 

I am not saying It's their fault that I bought it, I'm complaining of why they can't do better than they did on it.

The huge lack of detail in their sceneries has nothing to do with whether they made an FS2004 version or not. 

Let's have battles about something new.   :Yawn:

 

ü Scenery devs not developing for FS9:  done. 

ü Complaining about small, low-end, devs not making scenery like the high-end devs:  done.

 

 

Well since the ratio of FSX vs FS9 users is about 10,000 to 100, I would say the majority of people care.

 

 

It's not that big yet. There's allot of dual users of both sims not to mention other sim options as well. Either way you have no right to dictate what people use yet refuse to upgrade your own machine for your own performance issues. Hypocrite to the fullest because in order for these low life FS9 users to enjoy FSX they would have to do what you are unwilling to do (upgrade hardware). Blueprint has an FSX version of their scenery for a reason. They are not asking you to run the FS9 version in FSX. If you having performance issues like always it's FSX and your hardware. You can't find better performing scenery than BP that's why they design their work the way they do.