https://latinvfr.com/collections/frontpage/products/latinvfr-madrid-lemd

 

Didn't see it mentioned here yet and was curious if anyone had purchased and could offer any feedback?

Tested the scenery and performance was excellent! Night lighting is nicely done and photo scenery is sharp even with low res setting.

I highly recommend it if you don't  have the Simwings version. They are both very good, but fps are better in LatinVFR's version on my system.

Jose

I'll be short. I own both simwings pro version and now latinvfr. Ricardo made a great add on. 

Thank you both for your responses. The Simwings version is currently on sale but it sounds as if I'll go with the newer LatinVFR version. Thanks again!

I wasn't going to get the LatinVFR version because I already have the Simwings, which I like a lot. However, looking at the screenshots I might pick it up when it goes on sale, sometime in the future. I'm glad to hear performance is good, as Simwings' rendition is a little hard on my rig. I was also very happy to read about the huge photoreal coverage in LatinVFR's scenery, and also exciting is the advanced use of SODE and P3D's scripting engine to activate lights and change seasons. Sounds like a truly modern addon!

Why on earth are devs doubling up on airports ? Stupid, really stupid.

It seems that LatinVFR continuously catches up to the top league which is imo represented by FlightBeam and FlyTampa (in parts).

4 hours ago, ZKOKQ said:

Why on earth are devs doubling up on airports ? Stupid, really stupid.

I have to agree with you there. Hopefully this behavior stops when Microsoft's new sim is eventually released. At any rate, given that I do not currently own the Simwings version, I will be purchasing LatinVFR's version as it represents the most up-do-date methods/details.

7 minutes ago, Bigt said:

Hopefully this behavior stops when Microsoft's new sim is eventually released.

How exactly?

Do you think any new Sim will stop developers from creating really fully detailed airport content? if you guys believe the new holy grail simulator will have such level of details by default as 3rd party airports can offer at the moment for other simulators you will be heavily disappointed.

I guess we all will need to wait until release date so you guys finally realise the true.. it looks amazing and it will be amazing, all true. But there is no way it will have the level of details you all are expecting for each single airport in the world. And to be clear I am talking about current users expectations:

• Accurate taxiways / signs as the current real world airport.
• Accurate building looks and layouts as the current real world airport.
• Accurate gateway numbers, gateway locations and parking positions.
• Vehicles around the airport.
• Runway seasonal texturing.
• Airport seasonal texturing.
• Etc.

Hell I have seem comments of certain users sometimes complaining about the colour of taxiways, grass, etc... people are very hard to please 😅

S.

7 minutes ago, simbol said:

How exactly?

I think you have  mis -understood BIGT reply, we are referring to doubling up of airports, not that we won't need addon airports in FS2020.

Edited November 7, 20196 yr by ZKOKQ

7 minutes ago, ZKOKQ said:

I think you have  mis -understood BIGT reply, we are referring to doubling up of airports, not that we won't need addon airports in FS2020.

Ok. But then if a developer creates a content and another creates a better version of it. Would you not like to have the opportunity to choose the one that fits your "desired" looks instead?

Competition is what keeps pushing the boundaries and limits of what we see today. For an instance I know people ask developer to create version of airports that already exists just because they like / love the way Developer A does things more than Developer B.

So on this instance, it is very possible LatinVFR has been developer to accommodate current customers requests.

S.

Edited November 7, 20196 yr by simbol

"Doubling up" on sceneries? As in creating sceneries that another developer has already developed? If so, then it's because developers are seperate competing businesses. It's not like there's central committee that doles out sceneries for development.

1 minute ago, simbol said:

Competition is what keeps pushing the boundaries

I embrace competition, just like you, I think we need it, but if the Simwings version was rubbish, I would welcome LVFR too. But it's not. So to me a waste of time IMHO.

Look how many versions of Barcelona there are ?  Justsim will do a Madrid next lol

The only way that "doubling up" on airport sceneries could be avoided is if all developers stated which airport they were going to develop right at the start. Clearly, this is not going to happen. As Andre has stated above, developers are separate competing businesses. They do not discuss their plans with other developers, and they generally do not reveal what they are working on until a significant amount of research and design has already been done.

Yes, I know it is frustrating when two (or more) developers release the same airport, but it can't be avoided. That's life, folks!

Edited November 7, 20196 yr by Christopher Low

9 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

The only way that "doubling up" on airport sceneries could be avoided is if all developers stated which airport they were going to develop right at the start. Clearly, this is not going to happen. As Andre has stated above, developers are separate competing businesses. They do not discuss their plans with other developers, and they generally do not reveal what they are working on until a significant amount of research and work has already been done.

Yes, I know it is frustrating when two (or more) developers release the same airport, but it can't be avoided. That's life. folks!

That's fine, as long as the sales are adequate to justify the development time. They could very well put themselves out of bushiness. We are not exactly a huge market.

If they built an airport  that was not done, or to replace an airport that was way out of date, the return on their investment would be very good. By LVFR doing Madrid, they have lost at least 50% of potential sales. One thing we don't want is any decent developer going under, that is the last thing I want to see.

 

Edit:

I understand they don't tell each other what they are working on, but some of the top shelf devs do, like FlyTampa and FSDT and Flightbeam.

Edited November 7, 20196 yr by ZKOKQ