Are “Professional” v4 only Airports really that different?

[Nyxx 6,993]

The airport you bought Ray I disliked it to the point I’ve deleted it.

LIME is a wonderful airport and worth every penny.

Just ask on here before buying an airport you will get all the feedback you need.

As for there “professional” label, well what a joke that is. Can you amazing being new to P3D and your spending a lot of money because you training to become type rated on a A320. You see 2 version FSL A320 or the “professional” A320 from Aerosoft.

They came out with the name just to show it’s P3D v4....well the joke is on them. Better to leave it there lol. Shameful.

 BTW to be fair a lot of the airports they sell, are done my great developers.

Fantastic airports bought through them would include EDDF EDDK to name just two. You just sadly bought a horrible one.

Edited January 6, 2019 by Nyxx

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Having recently bought Milan Malpensa I was hoping for a spectacular airport but if I’m honest I don’t see a huge difference from earlier versions.

I'm not sure about other airports, but FlightBeam's KPDX is that different, they make use a material scripts in V4.4 ... for example when raining the surrounding airport ground textures will change to have a more "wet" look.  I don't believe KPDX is PBR, but other vendors like LatinVFR have done some PBR work on their new releases (CSEL) and other vendors lining up to do new PBR releases.  And of course there is Dynamic Lighting ... if done well this can be rather dramatic to the dawn, dusk, night time look but does require some "tuning" from the content providers to minimize FPS impact (but there are many titles that have successfully added DL support without too much of an FPS hit).  And then their is adding Dynamic Reflection support ... so you actually see correct AI aircraft reflecting off the airport terminal windows and not just some static reflection map that doesn't represent what is actually being reflected.

I can usually tell an airport compiled with FSX exclusively and sold for P3D, it will often stutter and be missing many of the finer details.  Aerosoft have done a great job in some of their Pro series and getting them compiled and working with the P3D SDK and it shows, performance is much better and far few long frames (stutters).  A lot of the work isn't "in your face", it's subtle which is good ... you're NOT distracted by something that doesn't look right.  It's like music, the silence between notes is just as important as the notes/sound.

The "Professional" tag is just a means to market the work for a small upgrade fee ... it takes additional work to convert an FSX lighting system to a P3D one and/or same for reflections.  Conversion to PBR is going to take a lot more work pending the airport and what materials it uses ... i.e. concrete less so, but metal beams and shiny surfaces then more so) so it will be interesting to see if anyone attempts to "retro-fit" titles to "Pro Plus" 😉  I hope they do, I have no problems paying for additional work beyond the products "sold as" specification.  I'm not sure of where the idea that infinite free updates came from originally ... from a business perspective I don't see how that is possible even if "some" updates costs are factored into the original cost of the product ... how is a developer and/or content provider going to know or predict the future of a regularly changing platform?  So it would be impossible for them to determine future costs for "updates".

Cheers, Rob. 

Edited January 6, 2019 by Guest

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

9 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

The airport you bought Ray I disliked it to the point I’ve deleted it.

LIME is a wonderful airport and worth every penny.

Just ask on here before buying an airport you will get all the feedback you need.

As for there “professional” label, well what a joke that is. Can you amazing being new to P3D and your spending a lot of money because you training to become type rated on a A320. You see 2 version FSL A320 or the “professional” A320 from Aerosoft.

They came out with the name just to show it’s P3D v4....well the joke is on them. Better to leave it there lol. Shameful.

 BTW to be fair a lot of the airports they sell, are done my great developers.

Fantastic airports bought through them would include EDDF EDDK to name just two. You just sadly bought a horrible one.

I've never deleted anything I've bought. I don't consider Malpensa 'horrible'. Just lacking in features I would expect for a 64-bit sim.

I've been around long enough to know the decent developers from those who should be avoided. Nassau courtesy of Aerosoft remains the worst I ever bought not helped by the developers continually lying about their intentions.

I shall treat the label 'professional' with caution from now on.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

@Rob Ainscough, good points Rob and looking at KPDX it does have a quality look to it.

Most of the enhancements you mention appear related to lighting. Not always appreciated or visible for daytime pilots. Are you aware of any further enhancements that could / will be introduced for v4.x? Or perhaps the limitations of the underlying ESP engine prevent that.

I'm just disappointed I'm not seeing a ground shift in how airports look after P3D v4 has been with us for nearly 2 years. Just more of the same with improvements more subtle than eye-catching.

[robert young 2,897]

43 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@robert young, I agree to a certain extent with your post. You went on to talk about aircraft rather than airport scenery which was the point of my post.

In regard to aircraft I don't have a problem with "study level". It shows the aircraft has been developed so as to be as close to the real thing as a computer program allows.

The classic example for me is FS Labs Concorde-X. In terms of how accurately it flies compared to the one produced many years ago by PSS it's leaps and bounds ahead. The FSL offering is certain;y study level.

That tag can't be applied to airports. It's always a bit of a gamble buying them as you're never sure of what you're going to get. As the saying goes... buyer beware.

I've just purchased Brussels and Rhodes by JustSim. Both are for v4 only so should have the extra features only available in that sim.

@Avidean, how true!

I agree Ray, and forgive me for slightly diverting your point which was about airports/scenery rather than aircraft. But the salient point is about the descriptions of software which I acknowledge becomes a pressure on all developers to describe their products in a hyperbolic way in order to gain a perceived advantage against other products. I'm sure I have been guilty of this also. It's a drip, drip imperative which in the end is self defeating.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

2 minutes ago, robert young said:

I agree Ray, and forgive me for slightly diverting your point which was about airports/scenery rather than aircraft. But the salient point is about the descriptions of software which I acknowledge becomes a pressure on all developers to describe their products in a hyperbolic way in order to gain a perceived advantage against other products. I'm sure I have been guilty of this also. It's a drip, drip imperative which in the end is self defeating.

No worries Robert. It happens in many walks of life. Harmony range of remote controls included 'Ultimate'. That suggests it cannot be beaten. Then they release 'Elite'. They're stuffed if they need to name its replacement. Ultimate Elite Max perhaps?

[Chock 17,769]

It'll be interesting to see what new superlative they'll be adding to products when everyone is either adding 'pro' to their product name and/or it no longer registers with people. The funniest one I think I ever saw, was for some washing up liquid called 'Optimum', after a while it became 'New improved Optimum' which I'm fairly sure isn't possible, at least in literary terms.

So, here's some suggestions:

'I Can't Believe It's Not Heathrow'

'Utterly Heathrow'

'New Improved Ultimate Heathrow'

'Super Mega God-like Heathrow'

'Now That's What I Call Heathrow'

'Heathrow 2: This Time It's Personal'

'By Golly It's Heathrow'

'This is Heathrow: And We'll Fight Anyone In The Room Who Says It Isn't'

[robert young 2,897]

1 hour ago, Rob Ainscough said:

The "Professional" tag is just a means to market the work for a small upgrade fee ... it takes additional work to convert an FSX lighting system to a P3D one and/or same for reflections.  Conversion to PBR is going to take a lot more work pending the airport and what materials it uses ... i.e. concrete less so, but metal beams and shiny surfaces then more so) so it will be interesting to see if anyone attempts to "retro-fit" titles to "Pro Plus" 😉  I hope they do, I have no problems paying for additional work beyond the products "sold as" specification.  I'm not sure of where the idea that infinite free updates came from originally ... from a business perspective I don't see how that is possible even if "some" updates costs are factored into the original cost of the product ... how is a developer and/or content provider going to know or predict the future of a regularly changing platform?  So it would be impossible for them to determine future costs for "updates".

Cheers, Rob. 

Hi Rob. I broadly agree with your post. However I don't agree that its a small upgrade fee. I won't name names but some developers impose a very high premium for a product that is virtually the same product they describe as "academic".   I cannot see any difference between the two products. I do understand that developers need to differentiate between versions occasionally, and especially when a lot of work is involved, but some developers are clearly using this as an excuse to create a double market without justification (I won't name names again but we all know who they are). I will name another for opposite reasons. To their credit Aerosoft broadly does not have this policy. They do tag on meaningless phrases like "professional" but they also provide global installers that enable installation into any version of any simulator without penalty. I applaud them for that.

In my time at ReallAir we had examples of the Paris Airshow and other airshows throughout Europe, where exhibitors based an entire full motion sim on our product and didn't even let us know they were doing so. They made a tidy sum in profit and never paid us a penny for the sim they handsomely charge the public based on a sim we produced.

But that is rather different from charging an individual sim customer who wants private use of an aircraft or scenery. I am a bit concerned about this tagged on description of "pro", etc, but I appreciate it is probably rooted in a desperation to survive in an aggressively competitive market. I just wish customers would look through the BS and see what they are actually buying.

Edited January 6, 2019 by robert young

[robert young 2,897]

27 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

No worries Robert. It happens in many walks of life. Harmony range of remote controls included 'Ultimate'. That suggests it cannot be beaten. Then they release 'Elite'. They're stuffed if they need to name its replacement. Ultimate Elite Max perhaps?

Indeed so!

[Christopher Low 5,353]

Quote

In my time at ReallAir we had examples of the Paris Airshow and other airshows throughout Europe, where exhibitors based an entire full motion sim on our product and didn't even let us know they were doing so. They made hundreds of thousands in profit and never paid us a penny for the sim they handsomely charge the public based on a sim we produced.

OMG, that is shocking

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

1 hour ago, Chock said:

It'll be interesting to see what new superlative they'll be adding to products when everyone is either adding 'pro' to their product name and/or it no longer registers with people. The funniest one I think I ever saw, was for some washing up liquid called 'Optimum', after a while it became 'New improved Optimum' which I'm fairly sure isn't possible, at least in literary terms.

So, here's some suggestions:

'I Can't Believe It's Not Heathrow'

'Utterly Heathrow'

'New Improved Ultimate Heathrow'

'Super Mega God-like Heathrow'

'Now That's What I Call Heathrow'

'Heathrow 2: This Time It's Personal'

'By Golly It's Heathrow'

'This is Heathrow: And We'll Fight Anyone In The Room Who Says It Isn't'

😂 Great suggestions Alan. I suspect they'll go for 'Now That's What I Call Heathrow' as we're up to at least 100 in the musical equivalent! I'll be long gone by then!

[SunDevil56 183]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

No worries Robert. It happens in many walks of life. Harmony range of remote controls included 'Ultimate'. That suggests it cannot be beaten. Then they release 'Elite'. They're stuffed if they need to name its replacement. Ultimate Elite Max perhaps?

How about Ultimate Elite Super Galactic Pro.. 😁

I may be running a bit short of superlatives here, but there could possibly be a few more...😎

[Guest]

2 hours ago, robert young said:

However I don't agree that its a small upgrade fee.

I was referring to Aerosoft airports primarily as they use the "Professional" term, their upgrade costs are very low ... just enough to recover the development costs.  I think Aerosoft have been VERY fair in their "Pro" version upgrades.  

I'm sure there is some "Pro" leveraging happening from other vendors, I can only hope such "leverage" is being used to produce more P3D V4.4 exclusive content rather than more FSX based content "made compatible" with P3D V4.x.  But you know I keeping push that button and not many vendors are will to use everything P3D V4.4 has to offer if it doesn't work in FSX ... "I guess" revenue is that tight but I honestly don't know since sales numbers are rarely public/shared.

Cheers, Rob.

[Buffy Foster 133]

I had teh Baleric Islands X and the upgrade to "Pro" was real reasonable and looks lots nicer I thought.

[dal330200 216]

I have a pretty extensive addon airport collection, the usual big suspects, and a lot of secondary, tertiary airports as well.  Anything that says professional, particularly from Aerosoft, is just an excuse to charge more for products that will tax my high-end system to the limit.  I'm not all that impressed with a lot of stuff that's come out of that pipeline, although I'm happy to have them nonetheless. 

As developers get more familiar with the possibilities that v4 has to offer, I really hope they get things like dynamic lighting right, and find ways to dial back on some of the saturation that's overwhelming on a lot of objects and runway/taxiway/apron markings.  However, we're moving in that direction slowly, and I'm also waiting with baited breath for KORD to be released as Chicago is my home base.   However, I'm not that impressed with the artwork coming out of FSDT, so I don't have high expectations yet, but I will buy it on release day for sure.