6 hours ago, Reader said:

What is the motive behind posting here, when one can speak directly to the developer,
the one who can do something about your observations, here:
Digital Design | Facebook

 

I am always very happy to hear opinions about developers and I wouldn't hear them, when people are just reporting to the developer.

The only opinion is that the developer is the poorer because he has made some
specific errors in the product.
Once again, the more constructive path would be to approach the developer, ask for
the perceived errors to be addressed, then the opinion might well change from poor
to good.
In my world, one's own opinion is of more value that that of someone else, of whom
one knows nothing.
 

 

 

 

Edited November 19, 20214 yr by Reader

9 minutes ago, Reader said:

Once again, the more constructive path would be to approach the developer

Correct, however, if one does not use Facebook, how does one contact the developer? 
This is a circular argument. 

Not really, there are two options, use facebook to conact the developer or do not.
Despite the opinions on facebook posted here, there is little more risk in using
facebook than a developer's support forum. 

 

Hi @guenseli, you have to turn photogrammetry on. Then those ugly satellite aircraft pics and the colours will be all gone (and much better). The airport is just fine, good solid quality (not ground breaking mind you).

EDIT: I was talking about EDDP of course.

Edited November 19, 20214 yr by Fiorentoni

10 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Hi @guenseli, you have to turn photogrammetry on. Then those ugly satellite aircraft pics and the colours will be all gone (and much better). The airport is just fine, good solid quality (not ground breaking mind you).
EDIT: I was talking about EDDP of course.

See what can be found at facebook.

Reader aka Zuckerberg? 😆

1 hour ago, Reader said:

Not really, there are two options, use facebook to conact the developer or do not.
Despite the opinions on facebook posted here, there is little more risk in using
facebook than a developer's support forum. 

 

reader, drop it already...are you off your meds again?! What is wrong with you?!

The essence of a discussion is that different points of view can be put forward.
Disagreements are permitted in a normal discussion.
Personal attacks serve no useful purpose.


 

 

6 hours ago, guenseli said:

Yes, my intention was not to give the dev some constructive hints what he could do better.

I'm very sure he has enough knowledge and for sure he had enough time to fix things. If you see the aerial airplane leftovers at EDDP you will know clearly that he has no interest to deliver better quality. Or if he can't it is pointless anyway.

So, if anyone is interested in one of these two sceneries he could decide before (however, regarding LOWS there's no choice currently as far as I know.)

Guenter,

I have to say that your thread surprises me a bit. First of all: We have an official support forum which you can find here:
http://forum.simrussia.com/index.php?/forum/199-english-speaking-community/
However, I noticed that we need to add the link to the ORBX page, as only Simmarket lists it. Thus, my apologizes for the inconvenience.

But if you have showed up there or contacted us via email, Evgeny or I could helped you with your issue with Leipzig. But as other users already said: Photogrammetry needs to be turned on. Yes, no scenery is free of bugs. But we are not total fools and would not dare to release such stuff you have seen due to wrong settings to our customers. 🙁

The same applies to LOWS:
The screenshots you have posted of the aerial do not represent our product. I assume turning on photogrammetry should fix this for you too. I have include a screenshot of the same area. Nonetheless, I have noted down the issue of the wind sock. But even with enough time available we can only fix bugs that we are made aware of. The reason is simple: Would we have noted it before, we would have not released it that way. Lights are a bit tricky. as the SDK tools are still a bit sensitive. Evgeny tries his best to do them as tidy as possible. But the truth (at the moment) is: It was a tad easier to create HD custom grounds for P3D.

Lastly, a personal opinion that is not specifically directed at you. But we try our best to evolve with every release and do not just recycle old assets. For example, Evgeny is updating at the moment most of the buildings at Leipzig. But in the end, it is still a flight simulator. The question needs to be raised what level of detail the user can expect for a certain price level. Hangar 7 at LOWS, as another example, is not the usual destination and most users park on the opposite end of the airport at the passenger terminal. Commercially, it would have not made much sense to model a fully detailed interior. Would I have liked it and have we discussed it internally? Yes, actually multiple times. But instead, we opted to model landmarks like Hellbrunn Palace, which is a visual reference point for the approach. With MSFS, new details and possibilities are introduced to the sim. Uses rightfully expect them but most are also now used to lower prices. We need to find a balance here and in my opinion we found a fair compromise were even old FSX users (i.e. for EDDP Leipzig) can update their product to MSFS for only 10,- EUR.

Edited November 19, 20214 yr by Wolkenschreck

9 minutes ago, Wolkenschreck said:

 

Is the controller tower not lighted in purple anymore?  Thanks.

1 minute ago, Jeff Nielsen said:

Is the controller tower not lighted in purple anymore?  Thanks.

Jeff,
At which airport?

Just now, Wolkenschreck said:

Jeff,
At which airport?

EDDP.  I thought it was in the P3D version.

[deleted]

Edited November 20, 20214 yr by F737NG

Hello @Wolkenschreck

 

thanks for your answer and let me apologize that I haven't had indeed no knowledge of your support forum. Was not able to find it via Google.

However, my statement remains, because LOWS is released now exactly since one year ago and there was not one update for it. The double windsock is not easy to overseen ...

And I have not said you have to completely model the HANGAR 7 with its interior. Just like to have a bit more modern materials, higher resolution etc. simply to bring it on par with the modern grafics engine of MSFS. This is nothing I would call 2020/2021:

 

 

And regarding your screenshot of the texture tiles: from your angle I also do not have these tiles! But on every angle below.

And yes, photogrammetry is on.

The one screenshot I made close up of the apron is not about the lights, it is to show you the big, unrealistic bump in tarmac, left and right of the runway. Also a thing, which could be avoided with a bit of quality control before.

 

Regarding EDDP: yes, you are right, at the point of the installation of your EDDP scenery I indeed had photogrammetry disabled coincidentally. I checked again and the satellite errors are gone. However I do also not understand how could this be overseen before release and why have you not edited the satelite images?

 

So, I have vented my frustration now and I'm glad to get a response here. I was just a bit frustrated as I expected some updates with LOWS since a long time now. And then I got EDDP and had discovered the ugly satellite images and was completely frustrated and angry. Take my apologize if it was maybe to harsh!

There is a bit of bitter taste left, unfortunately, as I still have the opinion, that the quality and diligence of Digital Design was better before MSFS. But I hope, that with this little discussion here things move forward and will improve.

 

So, thanks again for coming back to me!


p.s. if you consider now to make an update finally of LOWS, make just one parking spot at Hangar 7, please 😉

Edited November 20, 20214 yr by guenseli