Are “Professional” v4 only Airports really that different?

[SunDevil56 183]

2 hours ago, officercrockey said:

Don't buy LEBL from JustSim, it is awful. This is one of their worst work and I have quite a few of their sceneries. Unfortunately a few of them disappoint and LEBL ist certainly one of them. As I understand, SimWings won the quiality-race on that one... and if you are looking for a sale, you might want to look at LatinVFR's version.

LEBL isn't an airport I fly in to very often, so maybe i'll just scratch that one off my short list of JustSim scenery's. SimWings LEBL does look nice, but I honestly don't need to have views from an inside the terminal perspective, with people queueing up at the jetway entry point, and stuff like that.

At any rate, I already have a freeware version of LEBL, and while it isn't up to payware standards, it's still better than the default.

I've about reached the point where I have all the payware add on airports I need anyway. Famous last words, I know....🤣

Edited January 7, 2019 by SunDevil56

[Rocky_53 1,591]

1 hour ago, Egbert Drenth said:

P3D V4 => 'Professional' add-on series...
P3D V5 => 'Ultimate' add-on series...
P3D V6 => 'Supreme' add-on series...
P3D V7 => 'Pinnacle' add-on series...

You get it....

😁

[Julkensen 47]

In the case of aerosoft they use the term professional to refer to a product made for p3d. 

They said it is to express the fact that p3d is a training platform as opposed to fsx which is for entertainment. 

I think this is a word not allowed excuse to mislead uninformed consumers to believe that their products is of higher quality than a non pro add-on. 

Their Airbus product is the perfect example. It an absolute piece of garbage but because it says professional in the title people are inclined to think it is a quality product. 

Really dishonest practice imo. 

[Rocky_53 1,591]

26 minutes ago, SunDevil56 said:

I honestly don't need to have views from an inside the terminal perspective, with people queueing up at the jetway entry point, and stuff like that.

 

That used to be my opinion also, but to be honest, when parked with at a terminal and you can see through the windows into the departure lounge, it REALLY does add to the immersion, and when the passengers are actually moving convincingly, it really makes you not want to buy another airport with opaque windows! I have Aerosoft's Bergen, it is beautiful, check out what I mean... 

 

[AnkH 2,282]

11 minutes ago, 238932 said:

Their Airbus product is the perfect example. It an absolute piece of garbage but because it says professional in the title people are inclined to think it is a quality product. 

Really dishonest practice imo. 

Somebody using only numbers as an account name and not signing by the given name should not shout stuff about "dishonest practice" imho... Besides that, the Aerosoft Airbus Professional is far from being a "piece of garbage", this is simply not true (again: so much for blaming others to be dishonest). It might be not as detailed as the competitor product, but for people like me with only limited time to learn all systems from A to Z, it is a perfectly working addon providing all engine variants of all A32x busses for a resonable price.

[SunDevil56 183]

1 hour ago, AnkH said:

Somebody using only numbers as an account name and not signing by the given name should not shout stuff about "dishonest practice" imho... Besides that, the Aerosoft Airbus Professional is far from being a "piece of garbage", this is simply not true (again: so much for blaming others to be dishonest). It might be not as detailed as the competitor product, but for people like me with only limited time to learn all systems from A to Z, it is a perfectly working addon providing all engine variants of all A32x busses for a resonable price.

I concur wholeheartedly....😁

[Ray Proudfoot 9,032]

2 hours ago, AnkH said:

Sorry to say, but you have a strange set of expectations from the removal of the 4GB Limit. Isn't it enough that you now can keep all your sceneries in Europe active when flying from A to B and even if you fly over 10 addon sceneries, you will not run into this annyoing OOM?

Not strange but just expecting too much. I did think developers would be excited not to be hampered by the 4Gb limit and make some great airports but maybe the real reason is they need different tools to do that. Reading a post by Gary Summons of UK2000 he will need to develop new tools before he can create true 64-bit airports. And he won;t be giving his products any silly titles to show their 64-bit.

I always kept settings to a reasonable level in P3D v3 and never had OOMs or only very rarely.

[SunDevil56 183]

21 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Gary Summons of UK2000 he will need to develop new tools before he can create true 64-bit airports. And he won;t be giving his products any silly titles to show their 64-bit.

 

Gary is a good guy, and even though his scenery's aren't true 64 bit, they are still some very good scenery's for the UK.

I have 9 of the UK2000 airports, good stuff IMHO..😎

[Ray Proudfoot 9,032]

10 minutes ago, SunDevil56 said:

Gary is a good guy, and even though his scenery's aren't true 64 bit, they are still some very good scenery's for the UK.

I have 9 of the UK2000 airports, good stuff IMHO..😎

Only 9? You must be poor! I trust you have my local airport - Manchester!

[AnkH 2,282]

35 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

And he won;t be giving his products any silly titles to show their 64-bit.

Come on Ray... what should have been done instead? Call the products v3 instead of v2? Would you then not have led the same discussion: "Why calling them vX+1 but not offering any new fatures?"

We both agree that using the same version numbering or name would also not have made anything more clear, then people would have probably bought the v2 only compatible with FSX and complained about the missing P3Dv4.x compatibility, no? Even if it would have been clearly stated in the product description.

In any case, people complain. It was like this already when FSX was introduced... People were frustrated that their FS9 stuff did not work or that they had to pay an upgrade fee. Always the same ol' story...

In the end, if you read at least the product information over at simmarket for all Aerosoft Professional products, it is clearly stated what they differ from their FSX pendants and what they offer more and how much the upgrade price is, when already owning the FSX version. I do not always like how AS is communicating with us simmers, but in this case they really did everything in the most transparent way possible...

Regarding the OOM issue: yes, I also had my settings in a reasonable way to avoid them in FSX and P3Dv3.x days, but now more eyecandy is possible and still no OOM. Just look at it this way around then: you can now use higher settings. Means: even if the product is basically the same, thanks to the higher settings you can use now, it will provide you with more eyecandy than back in the 32bit days...

[SunDevil56 183]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Only 9? You must be poor! I trust you have my local airport - Manchester!

Oh yeah, I have it... Basically if it has jetways I've got it... lol Well, with the exception of Newcastle and Leeds Bradford...😁

[robert young 2,897]

I want to make it clear that I was not bashing Aerosoft. In fact I was praising them for making a lot of their installers (at least for aircraft) global without additional cost for either FSX or P3d. My earlier post was not really connected with cost so much as the silly use of words like "pro", "professional", and other tacked on descriptions which mean nothing. I think it is fine to charge a little extra for proper conversion jobs from 32 bit to 64 bit. I don't think it is right to charge a whacking great premium for virtually the same product on similar but slightly different platforms.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,032]

3 hours ago, AnkH said:

Come on Ray... what should have been done instead? Call the products v3 instead of v2? Would you then not have led the same discussion: "Why calling them vX+1 but not offering any new fatures?"

We both agree that using the same version numbering or name would also not have made anything more clear, then people would have probably bought the v2 only compatible with FSX and complained about the missing P3Dv4.x compatibility, no? Even if it would have been clearly stated in the product description.

In any case, people complain. It was like this already when FSX was introduced... People were frustrated that their FS9 stuff did not work or that they had to pay an upgrade fee. Always the same ol' story...

In the end, if you read at least the product information over at simmarket for all Aerosoft Professional products, it is clearly stated what they differ from their FSX pendants and what they offer more and how much the upgrade price is, when already owning the FSX version. I do not always like how AS is communicating with us simmers, but in this case they really did everything in the most transparent way possible...

Regarding the OOM issue: yes, I also had my settings in a rea sonable way to avoid them in FSX and P3Dv3.x days, but now more eyecandy is possible and still no OOM. Just look at it this way around then: you can now use higher settings. Means: even if the product is basically the same, thanks to the higher settings you can use now, it will provide you with more eyecandy than back in the 32bit days...

I'm not sure why you picked up on that part of my post. It wasn't a criticism of Gary. I agree with him these names are silly.

My argument is with products described as for P3D v4 only. Not ones that are compatible with FSX and P3D v1-4. I wouldn't expect any of the latter to have any special features as they are clearly compatible with FSX so will look the same in that sim as P3D.

But where a product is for v4 only then not to add any special features other than dynamic lighting feels like a bit of a con. If like me you rarely fly at night then what difference is there in that v4 only release compared to the earlier one? SODE jetways are now part of GSX Level 2 so that can't be used as a feature. I feel some are rushed releases to cash in. They should spend more time adding new v4 features but perhaps I'm expecting too much.

[FalconAF 213]

12 hours ago, Johnny19 said:

Good marketing, or how to get more money for the same thing over and over again. 

Heck, that's been around since Telemarketing began on TV.

"Buy our (grill that uses disposable bags...or our razor that needs replacement blades...or whatever we can sell you that you will need to buy replacement parts of it that wear out or you throw away) and we will send you FREE replacements for LIFE! Yes!  FREE FREE FREE !!!  (Just pay Shipping and Handling, which we hope you don't realize the shipping and handling cost we charge you is incredibly higher than OUR cost for the replacement parts and our ACTUAL cost to mail you the items to begin with).

Consumers are gullible.  Marketers have known that for a long, long time.  You can get them to pay for just about ANYTHING as long as you tell them it's "Free" or "New and Improved", etc.

I'm not surprised SOME (not all of course!) flight sim addon developers have taken the same marketing tactic.  I'm waiting for one of them to try this...

"Buy our airport for FS9 and we promise to give you FREE Upgrades for ANY future version of flight sims you may buy!!! Just pay our low (*cough* *cough*) Shipping and Handling Bandwidth costs for the download!!!"

I'm positive many flight sim users who refuse to pay for an airport upgrade from say FSX to P3D would jump at that sales pitch.  😎

(For anyone who doesn't see the "satirical" part of this post, please don't respond to it)  😉

[vgbaron 3,705]

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

But where a product is for v4 only then not to add any special features other than dynamic lighting feels like a bit of a con.

The first thing that comes to my mind is that it is 64bit. That's enough to warrant a "V4 only": title and, in some cases, can be a significant task to convert. I find it perfectly acceptable to make that conversion and not add any other special features initially.

Vic