6 minutes ago, okupton said:

They did that to future proof the product. Ord is still going through extensive construction. I get why you may not like it, but I appreciate that they produced and ord that should be accurate for several years. 

Well, I did not really say I did not like it, but to me it could be a bit confusing while flying online. I cross check Rwy and taxiways with charts while taxiing and it can be misleading. They did not just add one future Rwy, the also added plenty of future taxiways based on posted diagrams in DD forum.   

I got similar response from the developers and they say that new Rwy just can be ignored. Well, true, but I wish the future rwy(s) would be as an option. Other than that I have many DD sceneries  and I don't have major problem with them. Thanks   

2 minutes ago, Drumcode said:

They did it to KSEA too. It's purely a business decision to not have to update it later. There's nothing wrong with it. 

Again, nobody said here it is Wrong. I have just expressed my opinion and I wish it would be optional. I pay $$ for their products so I have a right to ask if they can add some options. Thanks 

18 minutes ago, skysurfer said:

Well, I did not really say I did not like it, but to me it could be a bit confusing while flying online. I cross check Rwy and taxiways with charts while taxiing and it can be misleading. They did not just add one future Rwy, the also added plenty of future taxiways based on posted diagrams in DD forum.   

I got similar response from the developers and they say that new Rwy just can be ignored. Well, true, but I wish the future rwy(s) would be as an option. Other than that I have many DD sceneries  and I don't have major problem with them. Thanks   

Understood and it’s a fair argument. 

1 hour ago, okupton said:

Agreed on the fsdt textures at night. I am not a fan and have stopped flying into fsdt airports at night because of this. 

Agreed, FSDT night taxiway, ramp and rwy textures look bad. Even their latest, KSDF.

Edited June 7, 20197 yr by B777ER

I will wait for FSDT ORD truly built for P3Dv4+ with the latest SDK, DD built for FSX P3D FSW.

2 minutes ago, rjfry said:

I will wait for FSDT ORD truly built for P3Dv4+ with the latest SDK, DD built for FSX P3D FSW.

Well said. Completely agree.

I went with DD out of impatience.  I needed to fly in and out of ORD and wouldn't do it with default scenery.  This will buy me time until FSDT comes out and if the reviews are good in terms of visuals and performance, I'll likely buy it.  But I too agree that the night texturing is horrible.  Hopefully they will fix that.  With that being said, DD along with Chicago City X is very good in my opinion.  Performance for me is good so I am happy overall. 

How does the DD night lighting look in the city (Street lights, auto gen buildings, etc) as well as airports? I haven’t seen any night videos on YouTube yet. I think DD Ord looks great during the day based on the videos I’ve seen. 

3 minutes ago, okupton said:

How does the DD night lighting look in the city (Street lights, auto gen buildings, etc) as well as airports? I haven’t seen any night videos on YouTube yet. I think DD Ord looks great during the day based on the videos I’ve seen. 

It looks really good actually. I've done at least 5 or 6 VFR trips around downtown already from PWK. Go west towards Rt. 53, then follow it south to I-290 and head east. It's a pretty cool trip. 🙂

Bought cause I got tired of waiting for FSDT.  They have been teasing us with their sneak previews for too long and stated that they had other priorities first.  DD's Ohare is really great visually and when landing or taken off, it hits the spot, plus you have MDW also I have their Chicago.  I am not going to purchase FSDT's version of KORD.  DD's is sufficient.  I like FSDT and have other airports by them, but I think they missed the boat by not having it come out sooner.  I see that some are going to have both versions, that's your choice.  You can only fly at one at a time and to me that's a waste of money.

Gnacino

17 hours ago, Greggy_D said:

Then don't use the runway!  My gosh, the things some of you complain about!

In a year the complaint will be that the "current" version is outdated again. It's been this way for 20+ years. 😉

Robert Catherall Sceneries are good. I have his ORD and everything looks pretty much current, Even though this is redesigned default scenery but at least this is an option for those who still cannot make a decision which one to take either from DD or wait for FSDT. I use his ORD and I fly to and from ORD online all the time. WOrks fine for me so far.  

Edited June 7, 20197 yr by skysurfer

FSDT. Ive always found DD's scenery leaves a lot to be desired texture and feature wise. His cities are pretty good but the airports themselves are not the best. 

7 hours ago, broncoblair said:

FSDT. Ive always found DD's scenery leaves a lot to be desired texture and feature wise. His cities are pretty good but the airports themselves are not the best. 

I remember when FlyTampa completely revolutionized the entire city+airport idea with the release of Kai Tak - still my all time favorite in the market.. I would really welcome the idea of DD collaborating with FT to release a city+airport package... :) 

cc: @DrzewieckiDesign

Edited June 8, 20197 yr by Drumcode

17 hours ago, ZLA Steve said:

In a year the complaint will be that the "current" version is outdated again. It's been this way for 20+ years. 😉

I agree even LTBA Istanbul is now a cargo airport and the new airport will not exist in P3D for some time I suspect, and with Devs updating there back catalogue, and airports that do not exist in the sims go untouched, and now we have it even worse as Devs now doing other Devs airports.