REVIEW: MK Studios Rome Fiumicino (LIRF)

[FilbertFlies 980]

Evening all,

I'm on a bit of a roll, or rather I was... I think the roll has ended for now. But anyway, here's my review of MK Studios' LIRF. 🙂

Cheers,
Filbert
 

 

 

[CFIJose 5,485]

IT WAS On my wish list. 😀

Edited February 25, 2022 by DJJose

[Fiorentoni 4,068]

Come on, they've been working on it for like 4 years and that's the result? I cannot understand how a company, that has developed methods for e.g. ground texturing on other airports, is not able to simply use that method on another airport of their own. What changed between Dublin and Rome?

[Jeff Nielsen 1,385]

I said in other thread I thought it was good and worth the buy, but I do agree with Filbert, that their quality has certainly gone down.  I disagree with Filbert about EFHK.  I thought EFHK was really subpar by MKs usual standards, especially compared to their P3d sceneries.  Since then, they just haven't improved much, IMO.

[FilbertFlies 980]

10 minutes ago, Jeff Nielsen said:

I thought EFHK was really subpar by MKs usual standards

Oh really? To be honest, I've only flown there once since I got it. I shall give it another look. I mostly remember being impressed by the terminal.

[F737MAX 5,493]

Oh, dear. It seems we're back at their original standard at which they first started out (Canary Islands for P3D).
I wonder if MK Studios have either seen one of their better developers leave, or they have just given up on the quality and gone back to being average. This is yet another release that is nowhere near as good as their Keflavik or Dublin sceneries.

[Jeff Nielsen 1,385]

1 minute ago, FilbertFlies said:

Oh really? To be honest, I've only flown there once since I got it. I shall give it another look. I mostly remember being impressed by the terminal.

I think the terminal was the area I least liked.  I'm loading it up again also...lol.

[FilbertFlies 980]

1 minute ago, F737NG said:

I wonder if MK Studios have either seen one of their better developers leave

Yeah, I wondered that.

[Jeff Nielsen 1,385]

Yeah, at EFHK it's actually both the ground textures and the terminal that seem off to me.  The top of the terminal has regular flat textures that clash with the lower half.  It loses that volumetric feeling.  The ground textures seem weird to me as well with bright orange-red'ish stripes on top of the weathered surface.  Anyways, there's a bunch of other things also that aren't really deal killers, just personal preference I suppose.  I have to think they can improve these things, which is one reason why I just went ahead and bought them.

[SP2472 2,285]

It's really a shame, I really like the architectural style of Rome Fiumicino.

Darryl

[aniiran 428]

yeah MK has really fallen off.

[GSalden 4,651]

Landed at LIRF yesterday and while it is not perfect it is way better than default and the freeware version.

As I have a full-size 737 home cockpit I don’t care about the interior of a jetway and that the glass looks different from inside.

The sane about about textures on the entry of a terminal.

And I do not go inside the control tower as I am sitting in the cockpit.

The “blurryness” of the ground textures (taxiways and runways) only took my attention after Filbert mentioned it in his vid. 
When taxiing I did not notice it ; I was moving and finding my way to the terminal.

The airport is quiet heavy on a system compared to other larger airports so that might be a reason that some textures being further away than where you would daily come are smaller in size.

So for what I need an airport for it is quiet good. 
Someone who wants to look inside buildings, checking how a jetway connects to the inch, checking quality top-down, it might be less perfect

Hopefully for everyone interested in this scenery improvements wil be made.

Edited February 26, 2022 by GSalden

[aniiran 428]

I got it. It's pretty good, it could have been better. Colors are little off/drab.  Modeling is good.

AIG Traffic works well, good immersion. 

Disappointing at night... that's the the biggest negative.