Yeah be careful what you say at the forum over there, they don't like it when you say how it is. The guy posting didn't say anything wrong. If IDS fixes it with a patch great, if not, will ask for a refund, i know, i know, i won't get it, but still. Next time i will think 5 times over before i buy anything from a publisher in question, no matter who makes the addon.

Yeah be careful what you say at the forum over there, they don't like it when you say how it is. The guy posting didn't say anything wrong. If IDS fixes it with a patch great, if not, will ask for a refund, i know, i know, i won't get it, but still. Next time i will think 5 times over before i buy anything from a publisher in question, no matter who makes the addon.

What I don't understand is why Aerosoft didn't check this scenery themselves after the problems with MYNN. Given the number of complaints they don't appear to have done. Curious policy.

It sounds remarkable to me that someone designing some scenery would place literally thousands of objects rather than simply call a few repeats. Keeping the polygon count down to as little as necessary to achieve a decent compromise visually, is one of the fundamental concepts of 3D modelling. I shudder to think what the airport buildings must be like in terms of the actual time it takes to produce them and how efficient they are a loading if, for example, they aren't using stuff such as arrays to construct them.

 

Of course nobody is born with the ability to use 3D modelling programs, we learn that stuff, but anyone who does that kind of thing will tell you that they get better and more efficient with each project they build. So it comes back to what was pointed out earlier in this thread: Aerosoft are merely the brokers for the sale, the developers of a particular product could be massively experienced, or new to it all, and so that's the thing to look for. That is in fact why I tend to go for the UK2000 stuff. Sure they may be prettier sceneries out there, but that guy's been knocking this stuff out for years, and that experience will count for a lot when it comes to constructing scenery that is well optimised and efficient, and indeed well supported should any glitches creep in there.

What I don't understand is why Aerosoft didn't check this scenery themselves after the problems with MYNN. Given the number of complaints they don't appear to have done. Curious policy.

It's not just IDS, it's a complete degradation of quality control over there lately :(

I am still wondering what a "full betaphase" is as that is the term used by Aerosoft concerning Manchester ...

It's not just IDS, it's a complete degradation of quality control over there lately

 

Personally I'm only aware of problems with IDS scenery.

I installed Aerosofts Manchester X and bang an instant OOM on approach. Installed UK 2000 and all was good with the same settings. Maybe Aersofts adds way more detail

One very disillusioned EGCC customer has vented his spleen over on the Aerosoft forum and had his post locked which is the norm. It's going to be make or break time for them with the hotfix planned for EGCC.

 

(...)

 

 

Lol, just got banned myself over there for two weeks for posting a recommendation to start a conflict resolution via the payment provider (PayPay or CC company). Never mentioned a charge back via a bank, but this is what happened:

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/119072-manchester-x-refund/&do=findComment&comment=795790

 

Me:

"Initiate a conflict resolution via your CC company or via PayPal, whoever processed the payment.

 

Sacramento and other I.D.S. customers may also be interested in this:

http://www.avsim.com/topic/501802-manchester-airport-uk2000-vs-aerosoft/?p=3551480"

 

 

Aerosoft staff member:

"And this will get you a complete ban from us and most other flight simulation shops right away.

Rebooking your money via your bank without a legal reason for it is also called theft and will invoke legal consequences."

 

Well, what actually happens in the case of PayPal conflict resolution is:

"As soon as the Buyer files a Claim for PayPal Buyer Protection, PayPal will review the Claim and may ask both Buyer and the Seller to provide additional information to settle the case."

From:

https://www.paypal.com/de/webapps/mpp/ua/buyerprotection-full?locale.x=en_DE

No hesitation in going for the UKXtreme version of Manchester and once again I was not disappointed in either quality or performance. I will buy any UKXtreme product without waiting for a review as their quality is always consistent. Unfortunately I cannot say the same for Aerosoft products, which is a shame as most are very good, and Aerosoft are not doing their own reputation any favours by not checking the products they are marketing from some developers.

 

Bill

UK2000! Forever and always! At least I know I can take the soon to be released PMDG744 in P3D from T2G's MCO to UK2000 MAN and not worry about OOM's.

Did the CRJ fiasco drain all their money? Did all the scenery talent go on their own, left the fs community completely, or get grabbed up by other groups? They used to be a top developer. Are they under different management?

Did the CRJ fiasco drain all their money? Did all the scenery talent go on their own, left the fs community completely, or get grabbed up by other groups? They used to be a top developer. Are they under different management?

I too used to regard them as one of the top developers and, to be fair, most of their products over the years have been very good. Out of curiosity I just counted the number of Aerosoft airports that I have on FSX and I was surprised to find I have around 90 (and this does not include a couple of their small airfield packages), which seems to prove that I was pretty happy with them! Until a few years ago, I would buy an Aerosoft airport on release without waiting for reports on performance but not any more. I also notice that the attitude on their support forums to many people raising legitimate questions about performance issues of some of their products is quite dismissive and at times verging on hostile, which is unfortunate.

 

Bill

After buying Sacramento, I won't sniff an IDS scenery ever again. I had some problems and could never get any support. Not one person from IDS ever responded. Thankfully Aerosoft refunded my money. Stick with UK2000. Gary does very good work, and he treats his customers fairly and with dignity.

Pls. keep in mind that also a number of very skilled developers either have their products published through Aerosoft or at least sold through the Aerosoft shop.

 

Pls. don't let the good guys suffer just because Aerosoft has been allowing a couple of not so ... fortunate devs to spoil their brand (the Aerosoft brand that is).   :smile:

 

I wish, though, that Aerosoft will get a handle on their quality management, as this sort of releases doesn't do them any favour.

Pls. keep in mind that also a number of very skilled developers either have their products published through Aerosoft or at least sold through the Aerosoft shop.

 

Pls. don't let the good guys suffer just because Aerosoft has been allowing a couple of not so ... fortunate devs to spoil their brand (the Aerosoft brand that is).   :smile:

 

I wish, though, that Aerosoft will get a handle on their quality management, as this sort of releases doesn't do them any favour.

 

You make a good point. But as scianor said, I also used to buy an Aerosoft scenery and never thought about negatives, it had good quality and good support and updates. something has changed in the past year.