Its a valid point of developers just chasing the same buck on the same airports over and over again.

Aerosoft must of thought they could recup the money back and make a profit on joburg. So you might think smaller developer like DD and Mk would see this an opening in the market and on jump on it. 

But no they decided to make another version of tenerife after knowing full well someone else it's doing it in the vain attempt of making a few bucks, rather than take a punt of Joburg, Marrakech, Dalaman,  kelowna,  Lagos, murcia, basel, cancun, Omdw... The list goes on and on.  If DD or MK had spoken to Aerosoft they would of saved themselves alot of heartache as Aerosoft will surely sell more copies of it once they box it and put it on amazon.  It's hardly rocket science is it.  But instead of being a bit innovative and taking a gamble they decided on picking the scraps against aerosoft, of which they cannot win 

19 minutes ago, honanhal said:

Of all his obviously trolling posts, this is the one you take exception to? 

There's a real point he's making here, which is the frankly silly duplication of developers' efforts we've seen lately. We ended up with three versions of Barcelona within a couple of months of each other. That doesn't make any commercial sense, and is prima facie evidence that something has gone badly wrong in the addon market. The fact that we continue to see this sort of thing happen is continued evidence that developers are not doing the basic due diligence to figure out whether a competitor is already making a given airport.

You may not like the way he expressed it, but I for one agree entirely that developers need to stop reinventing the wheel on top of each other...especially when there are so many projects out there that no one's tackled.

James

It's it reinventing the wheel James, it's playing safe to make a tiny bit of money.  Joburg is absolute gift from heaven for a small developer

18 hours ago, Milton Waddams said:

Some just want a no frills airport that is accurate, and don’t care about extraneous stuff like a modeled city or strip and won’t bother upgrading.  

That's your opinion off course, I love seeing skylines on approach. Don't care to much about building interiors but definitely the airport surrounding areas.

3 minutes ago, sbague1 said:

That's your opinion off course, I love seeing skylines on approach. Don't care to much about building interiors but definitely the airport surrounding areas.

I do, infact, I was just playing devils advocate for the people who won’t bother upgrading from FSDT’s version for those reasons.

16 minutes ago, sbague1 said:

That's your opinion off course, I love seeing skylines on approach. Don't care to much about building interiors but definitely the airport surrounding areas.

Indeed.  I own the existing KLAS and yet I'm still looking forward to the upcoming new release with its much enhanced surrounding area and will be buying it.  Looking at FlyTampa's website, it's pretty obvious that a lot of folks feel the same way.

As for the whole "what to develop" thing, some of the criticism here seem to be based on personal desire rather than any real market viability.  Devs aren't going to do airports they can't make money from, plain and simple.  There are a lot of reasons they might feel they can't make money, including things like higher development costs, lack of good airport information and/or imagery or a simple case of the market being too small.  In most cases it's going to be a combination of these things. 

If a given airport is really a slam dunk gold mine, somebody's going to eventually do it.  If an airport has really been over done, developers are going to stop being successful with their new releases and will rethink their strategies.

Scott

The problem with FSDT KLAS is that it's just banally old. Old techniques, old everything and the same applies to their KJFK, KFLL, KDFW, KLAX and PHNL. I'd rather see them redoing brand new KORD (as it's been promised) rather than wasting precious time on KLAS duplicate.

On 12/25/2017 at 1:23 PM, tooting said:

Dont worry Drzewiecki, aerosoft and mk studios will along any minute with another version as well soon enough, meanwhile joburg is begging to be done(after aerosoft canned it) , you couldnt ask for a better golden egg to land on a developers doormat, but they will fight over scraps as normal 

there is a reason developers spend resources on developing airports in the U.S. And Europe......  people fly there...  

 

joburg is kind of in a catch 22, not many fly in Africa probably because there is not much developed for FS there... and not many devs are going to spend resources on a area people don't  fly.

 

I for one would not not buy joburg no matter how well done, for the simple reason that I don't have time to do a 15 or so hour flight to get there from any of my existing add-on airports.  

 

However, I think your your best bet for seeing joburg get done would be after orbx does their landclass for Africa.  

38 minutes ago, tttocs said:

As for the whole "what to develop" thing, some of the criticism here seem to be based on personal desire rather than any real market viability.  Devs aren't going to do airports they can't make money from, plain and simple.  There are a lot of reasons they might feel they can't make money, including things like higher development costs, lack of good airport information and/or imagery or a simple case of the market being too small.  In most cases it's going to be a combination of these things. 

You're assuming that developers are 1) operating with complete information and 2) making optimal decisions. Neither is the case 100% of the time. Not to overflog the Barcelona example, but do we really think it's the case that each of those developers started on that project knowing that two other developers were doing the same thing, did the math and concluded that it was a sound business decision to continue? More likely, at least two of the developers had no idea the others were working on the same project (imperfect information) until they were so far into it that the sunk cost fallacy was in full effect (bad decisions). Who knows if they all made money in the end regardless -- what's beyond doubt is each developer would have made a lot more money if the others hadn't been doing the same airport.

You're right about some airports not being viable to market. I'd love to see, say, Dakar or Libreville done to a high standard. Not going to happen! But Joburg is not an airport in some forgotten third-tier African city. It's Africa's busiest hub, with direct flights to dozens of airports already developed. There's already high-quality freeware landclass for South Africa (courtesy of Aeroworx), and the scenery around the rough area is fairly spectacular. I'd also note that there's a disproportionate number of South African simmers here on Avsim, who would presumably be nearly guaranteed sales. So I find it hard to believe that the biggest obstacle to development is a lack of market viability. Besides, Aerosoft already made the decision that it was viable once, and there's no indication they pulled the plug because they'd changed their mind about that...

James

Back to topic, Boston and Vegas are welcome additions, but so would joburg and lagos

5 hours ago, honanhal said:

Of all his obviously trolling posts, this is the one you take exception to? 

There's a real point he's making here, which is the frankly silly duplication of developers' efforts we've seen lately. We ended up with three versions of Barcelona within a couple of months of each other. That doesn't make any commercial sense, and is prima facie evidence that something has gone badly wrong in the addon market. The fact that we continue to see this sort of thing happen is continued evidence that developers are not doing the basic due diligence to figure out whether a competitor is already making a given airport.

You may not like the way he expressed it, but I for one agree entirely that developers need to stop reinventing the wheel on top of each other...especially when there are so many projects out there that no one's tackled.

James

No I've said it before, including the times he tries to randomly bring up his hatred of a certain religion and refugees "invading" his pure Europe.

Once in a while a developer makes duplicate scenery or airplanes, it happens. Big deal.

4 hours ago, mikea76 said:

there is a reason developers spend resources on developing airports in the U.S. And Europe......  people fly there...  

 

joburg is kind of in a catch 22, not many fly in Africa probably because there is not much developed for FS there... and not many devs are going to spend resources on a area people don't  fly.

 

I for one would not not buy joburg no matter how well done, for the simple reason that I don't have time to do a 15 or so hour flight to get there from any of my existing add-on airports.  

 

However, I think your your best bet for seeing joburg get done would be after orbx does their landclass for Africa.  

 

FSDG , SDG and a few others who have done North African and Madagascar area airports show that if someone does them right, people will buy them and fly there. You are right it is a catch 22 but I believe that the second half of 2017 and the new year is a golden opportunity for developers. P3D v4, Xplane 11 and FSW enable them to push the limit with what they can produce. I've bought some sceneries for places I usually don't fly because I was just so darn impressed with what the developers did and am fully satisfied with my purchase. Business is risk and reward, I hope that developers would take those risks so that the community and they themselves will be rewarded from the added quality and diversity.

1 hour ago, 777200lrf said:

No I've said it before, including the times he tries to randomly bring up his hatred of a certain religion and refugees "invading" his pure Europe.

Well, that's fair enough. I certainly find those views repugnant as well. I guess it's a "stopped clock right twice a day" thing.

James

11 hours ago, tooting said:

Its a valid point of developers just chasing the same buck on the same airports over and over again.

Aerosoft must of thought they could recup the money back and make a profit on joburg. So you might think smaller developer like DD and Mk would see this an opening in the market and on jump on it. 

But no they decided to make another version of tenerife after knowing full well someone else it's doing it in the vain attempt of making a few bucks, rather than take a punt of Joburg, Marrakech, Dalaman,  kelowna,  Lagos, murcia, basel, cancun, Omdw... The list goes on and on.  If DD or MK had spoken to Aerosoft they would of saved themselves alot of heartache as Aerosoft will surely sell more copies of it once they box it and put it on amazon.  It's hardly rocket science is it.  But instead of being a bit innovative and taking a gamble they decided on picking the scraps against aerosoft, of which they cannot win 

Well said Pete. I have to give Kudos to PacSim, for doing airports that have not been done before. And in good quality.

Same with jetstream designs.  Their new Nantes looks good. You see you can choose smaller airports to appeal to people. Their palermo and marseilles are also good.  Hopefully they will make LFSB

You would think Orly is a absolute no brainer  also to be done.