Anyone Use, Have Thoughts on Icarus KSAN?

[wcschulz3 18]

Hi,

I love flying in and out of KSAN, and am pretty happy with one of the payware versions (Mister X?, not sure) for X-Plane.

I also like some of the payware airports--and would like to know if anyone has tried Icarus' new KSAN via X-Aviation?

Is the upgrade worth $20US?

Thanks

Bill

[Silverbird 115]

Don't own it but the Icarus KSAN was a collaboration with latinvfr.

 

[Jimm 437]

59 minutes ago, wcschulz3 said:

Hi,

I love flying in and out of KSAN, and am pretty happy with one of the payware versions (Mister X?, not sure) for X-Plane.

I also like some of the payware airports--and would like to know if anyone has tried Icarus' new KSAN via X-Aviation?

Is the upgrade worth $20US?

Thanks

Bill

MisterX6 does not have a payware airport, though it does look and act like payware.  He actually has an update to it and it is a bit better than the original.

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/24953-ksan-san-diego-international/

[Airfighter 150]

On 3/16/2017 at 10:10 PM, Jimm said:

MisterX6 does not have a payware airport, though it does look and act like payware.  He actually has an update to it and it is a bit better than the original.

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/24953-ksan-san-diego-international/

Without doubt MisterX6's airport looks very good, as freeware. But since you constantly doubt about the quality, here is comparison shot:

[finkelstein 25]

It looks great. I've purchased your Manchester and Mykonos sceneries and have been very happy with those purchases. I would also love to support LatinVFR's foray into X-Plane. Will the scenery be available through other retailers soon, such as Aerosoft/Simmarket/X-Plane.org store? 

p.s. what you guys are doing with the Avanti is looking really, really good.

[Airfighter 150]

5 hours ago, finkelstein said:

It looks great. I've purchased your Manchester and Mykonos sceneries and have been very happy with those purchases. I would also love to support LatinVFR's foray into X-Plane. Will the scenery be available through other retailers soon, such as Aerosoft/Simmarket/X-Plane.org store? 

p.s. what you guys are doing with the Avanti is looking really, really good.

Thanks!

Re Avanti: This is a long term project, and as you know will be totally free. Eventually will be a very good simulation of the plane, comparable with payware level offerings. Keep in mind, that although is free, is supported by X-Aviation and Gizmo64, and of course from us, as been a payware aircraft. This might tell you something...

Re LatinVFR: I can assure you that they are happy our cooperation, and the are looking forward to bring more of their sceneries to X-Plane. But, to be honest, all boil down to if it does any financial sense to do so. San Diego is a guide, and so far is looking good.

Re Retailers: On this subject, unfortunately I'm bound by agreements/contract/NDAs, to say what I would like to say, to you guys, that after all, with your money are supporting our efforts. It is available exclusively from X-Aviation. I can't say much more, just think if it is better for us the developers, will allow us to do more and better things to do in the future.

Again, thanks for your support!

[Jimm 437]

On 3/17/2017 at 6:26 PM, Airfighter said:

Without doubt MisterX6's airport looks very good, as freeware. But since you constantly doubt about the quality, here is comparison shot:

Constantly, hmmm, please point out where I said that?  Don't put words in my mouth please.

The big difference is $20...either you settle for a very well done attempt by someone who was gracious enough to post it for free or you go the payware route...seems pretty simple.

[Airfighter 150]

14 hours ago, Jimm said:

Constantly, hmmm, please point out where I said that?  Don't put words in my mouth please.

The big difference is $20...either you settle for a very well done attempt by someone who was gracious enough to post it for free or you go the payware route...seems pretty simple.

Here you go: 

May be constantly is not right, but two times this subject in the X-Plane's forum, both threads, in the same day you respond, with same tone.

$20 difference is exactly the difference between the quality of the 2 airports. And check also in the screenshot...same performance. 

X-Plane community is asking for FSX developers to come to X-Plane. We ,Icarus, have brought in X-Plane 2 developers. LatinVFR and Latinwings. And in a way that those sceneries are converted to X-Plane in a professional manner, not like "cheap rip offs", with both FSX and X-Plane developers into play, without one vanishing the other. Is there any other developer doing so?

If there is any critique about our product is welcomed. 

[tonywob 4,768]

Sometimes it makes me wonder if having high quality freeware is off-putting for payware developers. If I was making a payware airport and there was a decent freeware version, then I don't think personally I would put in the effort. I don't have either version of KSAN, but Icarus's Manchester airport is a really fantastic product.

I really do dislike the direct conversions from FSX to X-Plane that some developers do and charge for. The quality is often low and the models are horribly optimised without HDR lighting, etc. Using FS2XPlane is really not a solution any payware developers should be using (Have they lost their original source files for some reason?)

[Jimm 437]

9 minutes ago, Airfighter said:

Here you go: 

May be constantly is not right, but two times this subject in the X-Plane's forum, both threads, in the same day you respond, with same tone.

$20 difference is exactly the difference between the quality of the 2 airports. And check also in the screenshot...same performance. 

X-Plane community is asking for FSX developers to come to X-Plane. We ,Icarus, have brought in X-Plane 2 developers. LatinVFR and Latinwings. And in a way that those sceneries are converted to X-Plane in a professional manner, not like "cheap rip offs", with both FSX and X-Plane developers into play, without one vanishing the other. Is there any other developer doing so?

If there is any critique about our product is welcomed. 

My tone? I was merely pointing out that there are alternatives, not trashing the endeavors of a payware developer, but to help provide options to people who are looking in to add-ons for X-Plane.  As for the cheap rip-offs, to what are you referring to?  There are many talented people in the X-Plane community, providing some great add-ons, and I for one, am encouraged by that, but I have also seen a large uptick in users utilizing programs to port old FSX scenery into X-Plane, yet keeping it to themselves.

As for your screenshots, I did see that your fps count was the same, but that should not be taken as a definitive performance guarantee.  As this has been discussed more than it should have with the other sims and X-Plane is no different right now, performance varies from system to system.  I will say that it is nice to see professional developers getting into the mix right now and it is encouraging, but let us also not discount the hard work of the talented community that exists right now.

[Jimm 437]

9 minutes ago, tonywob said:

Sometimes it makes me wonder if having high quality freeware is off-putting for payware developers.

I see nothing wrong with someone, like MisterX6, for example, putting their talents to work for the good of the community.  Honestly, that guy should be selling his work (which as I understand he will be with his upcoming version of KSLC), but in general, he's given a lot to the community and it is appreciated by a great many people.  Take a look at how many airports have been done and redone by different developers (and independent users) over the years, for FSX?  For that, it was the evolution of technology that helped to transform the "lego brick" style designs to full fledged, detailed airports.

At the end of the day, we vote with our wallets, judging one over another depending on what we personally want in an add-on.  Some of the add-on airports I have seen over the years have a little too much detail and you wind up sacrificing performance for quality.  I had a conversation with a designer of XP scenery a couple of months ago, and we discussed some of his work.  He mentioned how he was trying to get a little more detail into parts of the scenery and I leveled with him, stating "how much time do we, as virtual pilots, spend at any given airport?"  Typically, for tubeliner pilots, it can be 20-30 minutes, with most of that time spent setting up the aircraft and getting on with operations for pushback, taxi and takeoff.  For GA flyers, it's less, and under normal circumstances, they don't typically fly out of major airports, so this brings me back to the subject of "how much is too much?".  Sure, seeing the interior of an airport is cool, but is it worth the performance hit?  Is it worth seeing ground crew walking around, or seeing a large amount of custom traffic on the tarmac?

These are all questions that I am sure users think about before they hit the buy button, but for the developer, they have to consider whether that extra piece of scenery or high resolution texture is worth the time to putting it in if no one will notice it?  As someone here at AVSIM once said "this is a flight simulator, not an airport simulator."   For immersion, it's always better to be docked at an airport that resembles the airport in real life, but whether we need all the fancy extra features, knowing it may hurt performance, is an issue that users need to answer for themselves.

[Desaix 235]

I own both Mykonos and Manchester and Icarus quality is out of question. Details sometimes worth 20$. I'm glad he started a continuative cooperation with LatinVFR and LatinWings because, no matter of how some say, availability of payware addons is what make the user base to increase. The final result is more addons are going to be developed because of the larger selling potential and this is going to benefit all the community.

MisterX moving to payware is the proof that quality in the end must be payed, he built an awesome reputation and now he's naturally trying to cash in all the time spent doing freeware stuff.

My only doubt is about Icarus's choice to distribute his work on one exclusive seller. This is going to make me skip this KSAN rendition but I guess he's done well his commercial evaluation, good luck hoping the next title will sell also on the org.

Terminal interiors is typical one feature that help selling a title, we all agree that it adds little to immersion but in the FSX world I bet you have to resort to something different to boost sales because of the general inflation of addons (just think to how many airports have now more than a different developer).

[alpha12125 213]

43 minutes ago, Desaix said:

My only doubt is about Icarus's choice to distribute his work on one exclusive seller. This is going to make me skip this KSAN rendition but I guess he's done well his commercial evaluation, good luck hoping the next title will sell also on the org.

 

i guess it always boils down to piracy protection, which x-aviation offers the best on the x-plane market. but i guess it is best to just skip the question as it always attracts the wrong crowd and the thread degenerates quickly ;)

[Pascal_LSGC 298]

48 minutes ago, Desaix said:

I own both Mykonos and Manchester and Icarus quality is out of question. Details sometimes worth 20$.

My only doubt is about Icarus's choice to distribute his work on one exclusive seller. This is going to make me skip this KSAN rendition but I guess he's done well his commercial evaluation, good luck hoping the next title will sell also on the org.

I own Manchester, and share your views about the quality,... as well as the disappointment that this one only sells through XA.

Cheers,

Pascal

[Pugilist2 878]

If it's not going to be sold at the org or other retailers, I will not purchase.  I agree, the extra detail on the exterior is worth $20.00, but think modelling the interior is a waste of resources.