FSX-MS Imaginesim Atlanta 2016

[fppilot 4,384]

No more Imagine for me. Purchased KATL orig version in June of whatever year. V2 was released less than 30 days later. No gratis or upgrade. Only full price. Fully PO'd. Lost sales!

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

I echo many of the sentiments above.

 

I purchased v1 many years ago, then upgraded to v2 and ended up rolling back to v1 due to the horrible runway lights. So money down the drain.

 

As other have mentioned, static jetways that don't even all appear unless the scenery complexity slider is maxed and need AES to work, no thanks. This is 2015 not 2008 and many scenery designers are using the default jetways animations in aftermarket sceneries.

 

I've also sent customer service emails years ago that were never answered and they have no forum to speak to them. Almost all big design houses either have their own forum or a forum hosted on an FS site.

 

I wouldn't mind paying the $35 again if this were FSDT or Flightbeam quality with moving jetways that appeared at normal or higher scenery complexity settings, and they had a fully functioning demo like FSDT or FB that didn't have flashing boxes or missing elements.

 

Right now there is no recourse and no refund if not satisfied and I'm not ready to gamble $35 dollars on it. Maybe if and when we get some feedback on it from a non partial user then I'll give it a shot, until then I'll stick to v1 which isn't that great but better than default.

 

I really, really wish that FSDT or Flightbeam had done this airport.

[MadDog 353]

I haven't owned any of the previous versions... so, unlike most of the posters so far, I don't have any preconceived notions.  I've only tried the demo; but I don't think it's too bad.  I get pretty good frames with decently heavy AI traffic and that's saying something for the world's busiest airport.  Ground textures could be better; but I've seen a lot worse.  I also like how they give you a plenty of configuration options to trade off eye candy for performance... more designers should do that!  I am a bit disappointed that they didn't include the "new" rental car facility and train -- it's not really that new... been here at least 2 years.  I'm going to hold off buying it... but only because it won't be that long of a wait for any potential Christmas sales.

 

Why doesn't anyone want to try the demo?  The boxes don't interfere with evaluating the scenery and you can spend as much time as you want testing it out.  Runway and taxiway lights look good to me... the size seems right on the money.  I couldn't care less about moving jetways... but I seem to be in the minority on that one.

 

M.D.

[garrett_frank 150]

As someone with no experience with Imaginesim, this thread doesn't inspire much confidence in buying KATL when it comes out for P3D. As both a local and a flightsimmer, it never made sense to me that none of the majors wanted to tackle this airport, especially given how important it is...

[Silverbird 115]

I haven't owned any of the previous versions... so, unlike most of the posters so far, I don't have any preconceived notions.  I've only tried the demo; but I don't think it's too bad.  I get pretty good frames with decently heavy AI traffic and that's saying something for the world's busiest airport.  Ground textures could be better; but I've seen a lot worse.  I also like how they give you a plenty of configuration options to trade off eye candy for performance... more designers should do that!  I am a bit disappointed that they didn't include the "new" rental car facility and train -- it's not really that new... been here at least 2 years.  I'm going to hold off buying it... but only because it won't be that long of a wait for any potential Christmas sales.

 

Why doesn't anyone want to try the demo?  The boxes don't interfere with evaluating the scenery and you can spend as much time as you want testing it out.  Runway and taxiway lights look good to me... the size seems right on the money.  I couldn't care less about moving jetways... but I seem to be in the minority on that one.

 

M.D.

 

Was thinking the same thing M.D try the demo first judge it by that I think its unfair to judge them by way older projects, airdailyx will probably show it off soon in one of there live streams, they did improve there artistic talents.

[David Vega 348]

Was thinking the same thing M.D try the demo first judge it by that I think its unfair to judge them by way older projects, airdailyx will probably show it off soon in one of there live streams, they did improve there artistic talents.

An interesting point.  There's expressed dissatisfaction from customers of previous versions when comparing price (no discount for previous customers) to what the new version offers over the last versions.  Imaginesim seems to base their price and no discount policy on development effort and time.  Looks like this effort and time needs to be evident for previous customers.  For new customers, the cycle is just starting.  

[fppilot 4,384]

My question, legitimately, is what is different from the prior version, both in terms of the actual airport and the software?

 

And is that increment of difference worth a full purchase price? For how often you fly into KATL (vs flying over it). Save you $$$ for an airport that has not been done yet.

 

Anyone want to discuss this KATL vs SunSkyJet's KPHL?

[Avwriter 85]

ATL is my home town, and while the default scenery is relatively good, being very familiar with the airport, I would appreciate a more detailed and current version.  For years I have used the fee version from Avsim, which gives me the 5th runway, Terminal F, and the new taxiways.  This helped, and I could not complain about the price, but I have been waiting for a really good professional version of this airport for a long time.  For whatever reason, Imaginesim is the only game in town when it comes to this airport. I have never owned one before, but have decided to give them a try.  I understand complaints about no discounts for upgraders for previous purchase, but since I am buying it on day 1, I figure it will be quite a while before they do another version.  I have tried the demo, and bought and installed the full version. So far I like what I see.I still need to do some tweeks to get the best performance on my machine, but with Traffic 360, which includes an observation platform, for the first time, I literally feel like I am out spotting at the airport, which I do from time to time in real life.  I will report back once I have had more time to play around with it.

[G-YMML1 582]

Did anyone actually BUY it? How about FPS/VAS performance?

[Sartanius 399]

ATL is my home town, and while the default scenery is relatively good, being very familiar with the airport, I would appreciate a more detailed and current version.  For years I have used the fee version from Avsim, which gives me the 5th runway, Terminal F, and the new taxiways.  This helped, and I could not complain about the price, but I have been waiting for a really good professional version of this airport for a long time.  For whatever reason, Imaginesim is the only game in town when it comes to this airport. I have never owned one before, but have decided to give them a try.  I understand complaints about no discounts for upgraders for previous purchase, but since I am buying it on day 1, I figure it will be quite a while before they do another version.  I have tried the demo, and bought and installed the full version. So far I like what I see.I still need to do some tweeks to get the best performance on my machine, but with Traffic 360, which includes an observation platform, for the first time, I literally feel like I am out spotting at the airport, which I do from time to time in real life.  I will report back once I have had more time to play around with it.

 

ATL is my hometown as well.  

 

As was stated above by @cmpbellsjc, "As other have mentioned, static jetways that don't even all appear unless the scenery complexity slider is maxed and need AES to work, no thanks. ..."  Can you confirm if the scenery complexity and AES requirements are true?

[flibinite 18]

Did anyone actually BUY it? How about FPS/VAS performance?

I have both V2 and now V3. Early days yet: It's a moderate graphics upgrade, better than V2 but not top-tier like FSDT and the like. Early impression is it's crisper all around. More atmosphere e.g. surrounding buildings. Some options to turn on and off features like 3D grass. VAS and FPS appear similar to V2, meaning I never had OOMs here and FPS on my 2700 OC'd to 4.8 are in the mid to high teens (some AI enabled).  But the FPS seem smoother than before. Significantly, the approach night lighting bloom has been fixed. The apron night lighting is a little odd - it's illuminated, but the light towers atop the terminals do not have lit 'bulbs'.

[signmanbob 592]

Imaginsim seems to be pretty active on their Facebook page, that may be why they don't use support forums.

https://www.facebook.com/Imaginesim-795499297198912/

 

Maybe some of the questions that are being asked here can be answered by posting them on their Facebook page.

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

ATL is my hometown as well.

 

As was stated above by @cmpbellsjc, "As other have mentioned, static jetways that don't even all appear unless the scenery complexity slider is maxed and need AES to work, no thanks. ..." Can you confirm if the scenery complexity and AES requirements are true?

You can confirm the AES requirements by reading the product page as I did or any of their Facebook posts. They say they are looking into animated jetways for time time in the future, but for now AES is required.

 

As far as the jetways being tied go the scenery complexity slider, I tried to find the page that I read it on so that I could link it for you, but was unable. You could ask them on their Facebook page to verify, but that is how they have done it in the past as well to try to optimize FPS. I don't like that method because if your scenery comply slider is less than maxed out you can land and be directed to a gate with no jet way, which looks kind of odd even if you don't use the jetways.

[Jimm 437]

I'd be curious as to how this stacks up against the competition.  At the price they are asking for it, I would hope it is of good quality and has great performance.  I'd also be curious as to how much better it is compared to the previous version.

 

-Jim

Edited October 25, 2015 by Jim Young
Link to store removed. Advertising.

[flibinite 18]

I'd be curious as to how this stacks up against the competition.  At the price they are asking for it, I would hope it is of good quality and has great performance.  I'd also be curious as to how much better it is compared to the previous version.

 

It is good or beter quality, and good performance. Call it 20% better than V2.  My VA has an Atlanta hub so I bit the bullet.  For users without V2, is it worth the price? Yes, you might feel other developers offer better value but it's not too far off the mark.  Is it worth V2 users to pay full price for V3? No, the gains aren't that great. I cashed in some 'points' from the vendor toward the purchase to give myself the illusion of a discount.