FSX-MS Seriously thinking to ditch all payware airports...

[carlito777 712]

I agree with most of the things said. I also own a lot of payware airports but I also recently asked myself on which things I want to focus my FS spendings in the future. When it comes to $/€ per minute of enjoyment then payware airports (at least for me) are the worst. Often times, you spend 20-30 € on an airport and then fly in and out of it only a handful of times. The only exception of course is your home base (for me it's EDDF). And there are so many freeware airports which are more enjoyable than the default ones...

 

In that sense, spending the money on aircraft and weather/environmental add-ons gives me the best $/€ value per minute of fun. If you look at it this way even spending more than $100 on a payware plane is much "cheaper" than spending money on an airport add-on. So going forward I will definitely try to spend less on payware airports...

[neumanix 113]

I just remembered the freeware Norwegian airports. It's a good example of what scenery developers could do.

It includes most airports in Norway and the fps hit was quite small if I remember correctly.

Gotta go install it into FSX-SE now and see how it performs...

 

That Zinertek package looks interesting too.

[Patriot3810 182]

i am using the same hd package and its great, as soon as asn and pmdg is working with the steam edition i am gonna wipe my pc and only have the hd package installed along with asn and my pmdg 777 and aerosoft a318-321 only, i am not gonna put all the payware airports i have accept for flightbeam kden and my home airport of kmco and thats it,so i guess i wasnt the only one considering this,less is more in fsx when it comes to performance.

[~Craig~ 10]

Pe11e, et al  -  I took some screenshots, and posted them, but it was just as some other posts were added and they're buried at the end of the previous page (p.2).    

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/460287-seriously-thinking-to-ditch-all-payware-airports/?p=3159251

 

Take a look, see what you think.    They do, essentially IMHO still look like default airports, but they are sufficiently improved to make starting your flight, taxying in/out, etc, a reasonably convincing experience.

[Pe11e 812]

Pe11e, et al  -  I took some screenshots, and posted them, but it was just as some other posts were added and they're buried at the end of the previous page (p.2).    

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/460287-seriously-thinking-to-ditch-all-payware-airports/?p=3159251

 

Take a look, see what you think.    They do, essentially IMHO still look like default airports, but they are sufficiently improved to make starting your flight, taxying in/out, etc, a reasonably convincing experience.

 

Yeah I saw the screens. Thank you for taking the time to capture those! I found that in 80% of every screen of terminals is the same black windows texture, I guess that is FSX fault of using the same texture for majority of default airports.

 

I'm one step closer to wipe out all payware airports in scenery library, free my mind, and start to enjoy FSX a bit more. One huge bonus is higher FPS, that will give me a possibility to use iFly 747 or similiar very demanding addon.

[ryanbatc 12,854]

Part of my flying experience involves taxiing to the runway for departure, then landing and taxiing back in. Not all GA planes go to tiny airports... Sometimes you'll get a long taxi at a larger C or B airport and I actually enjoy looking at the AFD and taxiing out to the runway. If we're simulating flight, there's that "boring" part that comes with RW flying.

 

I admit there's a lot of larger airports I no longer fly to, but I did get my money's worth - I flew to them for online events and did so multiple times.

 

Finally don't forget the tube liner guys love to sit at the gate and do all that GSX stuff like load the luggage and have the food carts come up etc. it's just part of the fun. Doesn't do much for me but it does for others.

 

I agree with some others - Orbx is the worst offender for VAS issues, but only their early stuff. Recent additions like KPSP are pretty efficient IMHO

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

It would be nice to have some GSX-like for GA.  It'd be an awful lot smaller.  A marshaller (one of those guys with flashlights)...maybe a fuel truck driving over and standing by...a guy with a clipboard...a follow-me truck sometimes.

[MarkW 1,491]

I bought it too today ........... I'm pretty impressed.

 

The replacement terminals and buildings are good but there's a lot more to it than that;  vastly improved signage, taxi lines, proper branded catering vehicles, etc.

 

 

 

The highest texture size is 1024, so it's not 'HD' as we'd probably understand it compared to 2048 and 4096 textures, but I believe most default terminals were 512 and 256, so it's a lot more "HD" than those!

 

I do have a small amount of shimmering on the icy runway textures, but I'm 99% sure that's more to do with my set up, etc.

 

I'd certainly recommend it for the money - it will be even better when combined with updated default airport files from the AVSIM library etc.     So that they sort out and improved placements, and then the HD Airport Graphics package sorts out the improved textures.    :Applause:

 

I've got all payware airports deavtivated from the scenery library at this time, and I'm enjoying just flying wherever I fancy, with higher weather and AI settings, and with higher frame rates and smoothness.   This may well be the way forward.

 

thanks for clearing that up.  Looks like a good buy.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

I don't want to derail this thread cuz it's a great topic but, I thought I'd share this thought.  I bought XTreme Cities SouthCentral a little over a week ago.  I had to return it because of VAS issues but it was really cool...flying over reasonably accurate cities.  My point is: it made the airports seem a whole lot less important. 

 

It also pointed out that, with FSX DX9, the VAS issue is a lot worse and more predictable than I'd thought it was. 

[FleaJump 7]

I suspect that Pelle is being just a little tongue-in-cheek when he speaks of contemplating the removal of his payware airports, because at least for me, having methodically surveyed from the R22 helicopter all that spectacular detail rendered by such legendary outfits as FSDT, UK2000, and Fly Tampa, reverting to the bland, generic cereal-box appearance of stock FS9 and FSX scenery would be like parking a clean Porche 911 at home, in order to bounce around in a beat-up Volkswagen beetle.

[Pe11e 812]

I suspect that Pelle is being just a little tongue-in-cheek when he speaks of contemplating the removal of his payware airports, because at least for me, having methodically surveyed from the R22 helicopter all that spectacular detail rendered by such legendary outfits as FSDT, UK2000, and Fly Tampa, reverting to the bland, generic cereal-box appearance of stock FS9 and FSX scenery would be like parking a clean Porche 911 at home, in order to bounce around in a beat-up Volkswagen beetle.

 

Well I don't circle in R22 above and around payware airports.   I just look at some details and terminals when taxiing, that's all. It's all a state of mind, when you will find that eye candy a money well spent, it depends.

[Overload 91]

I'm a fan of UK2000 VFR  airfields. They're a modest but definitely noticeable improvement on the FSX default airfields, and although labelled "VFR" airfields, it includes all the major UK airfields, spread over 3 downloads, Southern/Central/Northern UK.

You get a lot of bang for your bucks - between 73 and 81 airfields per download, so whether your're hopping between grass strips, flying GA to out of the way, but fully equipped airfields, or doing airliners between major cities, there's a huge amount of choice available, at very frame friendly rates.

Not in the payware league, but a pleasant enough experience, I wish someone would do similar for other parts of the world. It's between £30 to £35 for each download.

Here's a link, including screen shots of every single airfield/airport in the collection:

http://www.uk2000scenery.com/vfrairfields/index.html

 

Eugene

[~Craig~ 10]

I'm a fan of UK2000 VFR  airfields. They're a modest but definitely noticeable improvement on the FSX default airfields, and although labelled "VFR" airfields, it includes all the major UK airfields, spread over 3 downloads, Southern/Central/Northern UK.

You get a lot of bang for your bucks - between 73 and 81 airfields per download, so whether your're hopping between grass strips, flying GA to out of the way, but fully equipped airfields, or doing airliners between major cities, there's a huge amount of choice available, at very frame friendly rates.

Not in the payware league, but a pleasant enough experience, I wish someone would do similar for other parts of the world. It's between £30 to £35 for each download.

Here's a link, including screen shots of every single airfield/airport in the collection:

http://www.uk2000scenery.com/vfrairfields/index.html

 

Eugene

 

Yes I have them too and agree they're great.   There was a time, for about 6 months, when all I flew was on the Horizon UK Photoscenery (w/Treescapes) + UK2000 Xtreme airports + the UK2000 VFR airfields.   As you rightly say, within a small geographical area like England & Wales, that's a total of around 240 individually created custom airfields (ranging from Heathrow, to Peterlee, my local skydiving field).

 

And with the Horizon stuff as a backdrop, unlike Orbx FTX, everything is exactly as it is in real life.

 

Heck, I think I might just re-install that combo now! :smile:

[Rocky_53 1,579]

While I agree with the sentiments shared by most, I can't help feeling, from a personal point of view, that my flying would be a lot less immersive if I were to fly from only default airports. Having said that, I too have questioned the logic of having payware airports installed. The main issue seems to be issues with VAS and low frames, while stuttering is  a particular issue with some of my airports. I'm thinking in particular of some of the awful sceneries from a developer that will remain nameless. CDG and Madrid are two examples that spring to mind, which is a shame, because they are capable of creating/publishing some stunning work, such as Skiathos. For me anyway, LEMG is a joke and an airport that I rarely fly from. I have often wondered, why developers place as much emphasis on the backside of an airport as they do on the side which is seen by the pilot. I would have thought textures that are some distance away from the aircraft, or will seldomly be seen could be produced in a lot lower resolution than those which are closer to the aircraft. I'm not a designer, but if this was possible I would have thought it would be a way of clawing back some valuable memory. In return helping with low frames and stutters.

[Clutch Cargo 384]

This thread is interesting. The reasons the OP states for wanting to not use payware add-ons are the very same reasons many simmers "want" to purchase add-ons, ha!