3 hours ago, B777ER said:

Look at it from a business perspective. What do you think will generate more money after say a year of development? Me thinks KATL. 

The only reason they rehash the big airports is purely for profit. Matthias from aerosoft has said numerous times people buy airports next to where they live or work.   That's why nearly every captain African city hasn't been done.   Theres alot more simmers in Atlanta than in Kinshasa 

10 hours ago, tooting said:

in one week alone.

 

dd did JFK  already done

flytampa ATL  already done

Orbx Bilbao already done

all we need now is aerosoft barcelona and fsdreamteam Manchester then we have loads of copies of the same airport... oh wait a sec.,,,

+++1

What about other significant international airports screaming to be done.  Bangkok and  Incheon as an example.  Cape Town even.

I couldn't think of a more boring airport for them to have done.  It's just so dull.  We have an Atlanta.This is obviously a sales revenue decision.  

21 minutes ago, ErichB said:

I couldn't think of a more boring airport for them to have done.  It's just so dull.  We have an Atlanta.

That was my first thought...

1 hour ago, ErichB said:

What about other significant international airports screaming to be done.  Bangkok and  Incheon as an example.  Cape Town even.

I couldn't think of a more boring airport for them to have done.  It's just so dull.  We have an Atlanta.This is obviously a sales revenue decision.  

Of course You'll get more people buying atlanta than Auckland it will be interesting to see which they bring out first. 

Once the aerosoft 330 is out I'll be flying my virgin 330 to atlanta and it will be good a high quality scenery is there by flytampa,  but imagesim already did it.  I'd rather flytampa did another destination such as joburg or lagos then I could fly to Africa 

7 hours ago, B777ER said:

Look at it from a business perspective. What do you think will generate more money after say a year of development? Me thinks KATL. 

I have no doubt they've done their homework and made a sound business decision.  For me though i would have bought the other two but wouldn't have a reason to buy this one, so there must be a bit of that to consider when duplicating an existing airport.  Not to mention before they chose ATL they were going to do Haneda...would that have really generated more sales than Seoul or Cancun?  

7 hours ago, B777ER said:

Look at it from a business perspective. What do you think will generate more money after say a year of development? Me thinks KATL. 

I have no doubt they've done their homework and made a sound business decision.  For me though i would have bought the other two but wouldn't have a reason to buy this one, so there must be a bit of that to consider when duplicating an existing airport.  Not to mention before they chose ATL they were going to do Haneda...would that have really generated more sales than Seoul or Cancun?  

48 minutes ago, tooting said:

Of course You'll get more people buying atlanta than Auckland it will be interesting to see which they bring out first. 

Flightbeam is doing Auckland. It will be a long time before that is released. That has had positive feedback, in particular the 777 flyers amongst us.

Maybe FT will do that airport too lol

I've all but got out of the payware airport market. The super smooth performance of freeware and default airports Trump's that stunning eye candy for me.

I want a new Santorini..... But I guess no one cares about what I want, so....

 

Also there are some really intersting airports in Asia which have not been done yet.

For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_International_Airport

7 hours ago, cmpbellsjc said:

Not sure if it will work in P3D but Max Kraus has a great freeware Barbados in the library. Darn near payware quality.

https://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DLID=&Name=Barbados&FileName=&Author=&CatID=fsxscen

https://library.avsim.net/download.php?DLID=153845&Cookie=1

Yes...I had that scenery in FSX. 

I'm quite excited, that FlyTampa has chosen Atlanta... my wishlist for that team would be either Atlanta, Heathrow, Frankfurt or maybe Los Angeles... 

When a high-end development team like FlyTampa, FlightBeam, FSDT decides on an airport, I'm sure there's more to it, than just picking it off the map! There are many considerations to take into account, for it to be feasible viable - or even possible.
It requires photo-shoots - which highly depends on the willingness of the local authorities, airport staff and goverment organizations with regards to (nearly) unrestricted access to the airport perimeter...
Because of this, I'm fairly certain that's why many certain airports are more difficult to do than others. Don't forget, that FlightBeam failed to get the necessary access to Frankfurt, which was then abandoned. 

Also, the main buyers of an airport are the customers who's living in the country of the airport. Since the vast majority of simmers live in Europe or North America, it's natural that the majority of airports which are being developed are from those regions... and why african airports are missing sorely. Also, I can imagine, that it could be hard to obtain the necessary access to the airport in many african and asian countries.

What we really need is a good quality version of EINN Shannon. This is indisputable.

And according to their Facebook page, imaginesim is making yet another ATL. That's a lot of ATLs.

2 minutes ago, sfgiants13 said:

And according to their Facebook page, imaginesim is making yet another ATL.

I saw that this morning.  They sure as heck better not charge existing owners for it again.