Scenery Gateway has Started

[Stearmandriver 2,210]

Disk space would be my only real concern.  Regional scenery updates seem optional now, so hopefully it remains like that. 

[ryanbatc 12,775]

Most airports are KB's in size...maybe 20 MB tops from what I've seen - assuming they use default assets.

[Twenty6 692]

1 hour ago, haskell said:

Except that’s not how it works. It would be moderated and each would have to be approved. I don’t understand, don’t you have to deal with the sim loading all the lame, incorrect airports now? You aren’t able to ignore airports or planes that don’t interest you now. 

Correct. But I still don't understand why this is needed in the first place. The Avsim Library, Flightsim.to and many other freeware (and payware) outlets already supply simmers with beautifully crafted sceneries and airports without the needing to force me to add it. As others have already mentioned, there's a lot of really good freeware out there and also a lot of crapola. I don't see this as being any different.

[fppilot 4,339]

7 hours ago, pmb said:

I suppose it's kind of a singularity

+1 on what Ryan said.

[NZ255 309]

18 minutes ago, Twenty6 said:

Correct. But I still don't understand why this is needed in the first place. The Avsim Library, Flightsim.to and many other freeware (and payware) outlets already supply simmers with beautifully crafted sceneries and airports without the needing to force me to add it. As others have already mentioned, there's a lot of really good freeware out there and also a lot of crapola. I don't see this as being any different.

It would mean everyone, even those without knowledge of FlightSim.to, would get enhanced airports, without having to download and install it. 

It means you could go anywhere in the world and potentially have a more accurate airport to land at, and people online would have the same one. They’d be on the same taxiways, parking etc. People flying online on vatsim would have the real world taxiway names so controllers don’t have to specify the real name and also the MSFS name  

And there’d be nothing to stop you installing a better one from FlightSim.to etc. 

[Mike S KPDX 597]

13 minutes ago, NZ255 said:

It would mean everyone, even those without knowledge of FlightSim.to, would get enhanced airports, without having to download and install it. 

It means you could go anywhere in the world and potentially have a more accurate airport to land at, and people online would have the same one. They’d be on the same taxiways, parking etc. People flying online on vatsim would have the real world taxiway names so controllers don’t have to specify the real name and also the MSFS name  

And there’d be nothing to stop you installing a better one from FlightSim.to etc. 

I agree with you a 100 percent on this.  I think a lot of the folks here fundamentally really understand what this is and how it works.  For those of us that come from the Xplane world, this type of thing is a huge benefit.

[Tuskin38 6,449]

2 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

Disk space would be my only real concern.  Regional scenery updates seem optional now, so hopefully it remains like that. 

If they’re only using default assets they wouldn’t be very big at all

[fppilot 4,339]

38 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

If they’re only using default assets they wouldn’t be very big at all

If so I sincerely hope for more default hangars with doors open.  Most of these great freeware user-created airports still lack an important element of life because the doors are all closed.

[himmelhorse 1,276]

10 hours ago, superspud said:

I'm dead curious about this. 

I will be curious if I am not dead before this is perfected.  I am still advocating that MSFS and Asobo get the core right before updates and other projects.

I live in hope

Tony  

[jarmstro 2,402]

10 hours ago, haskell said:

 

It would improve the BASE program. As all these amazing artists build accurate airports, they would be added to the sim at the next update. Of course, if you choose to find airports and add them to your Community folder those would take precedent. But as each of those was uploaded they would be included in future updates. What would that hurt? 

Hopefully that's how it will work. Rather than as per the present with regard to Asobo improved airports in the Official folder which you have to physically uninstall if you wish to use an alternative freeware or payware product.

[carbonbasedlifeform 179]

How does this compare to flightsim.to?

[Mace 1,902]

12 hours ago, carbonbasedlifeform said:

How does this compare to flightsim.to?

No comparison at all.  With .to you decide, and do it yourself.  With this "gateway", someone else decides, and does it for you.

"Newer and greater in every way!"   LOL 😀

[superspud 450]

21 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

Disk space would be my only real concern.  Regional scenery updates seem optional now, so hopefully it remains like that. 

Surely the only way this'll happen is by the usual streaming just like the existing standard airports, which is why they'll only allow stock library assets. 

At least I hope so as no way am I going to download thousands of airports as additional downloads. 

[Stearmandriver 2,210]

2 hours ago, superspud said:

Surely the only way this'll happen is by the usual streaming just like the existing standard airports, which is why they'll only allow stock library assets. 

At least I hope so as no way am I going to download thousands of airports as additional downloads. 

Yeah, makes sense. That plus using only stock materials, with no custom objects or textures, would mean no space concerns. 

[irocx 292]

I can see how this might be a proficient means of updating airports in the hope of making them user/AI traffic friendly, but aren't there more pressing issues with the sim at the this time? 

Also, with the current poor implementation of the actual marketplace regarding developer admission/vetting/release/updates, why does Microsobo think this will be any different? I mean after a short year, Jorg has already stated they want to revamp the marketplace.