So most likely it's a "getting back in the saddle" catalogue.  That can still work well for them if they produce good stuff - there's still a proportion of sales they can aim for, and it puts their name out there for future offerings.

The MSFS version in many ways looks like the old T2G KMCO. I've often wondered if parts of it weren't from the T3G version. It's good, but it has lots of flaws in the parking spots, taxiways, and a few other things.

T2G KMCO was my favorite add on in FSX. I got it working in P3D (there were some hoops to jump through IIRC) and it was still one of my favorites. It was the first airport that I bought for FSX that actually made me feel like the area it was representing. The way that they put sand, tall grasses, palm trees, and other details into it made me feel like I was really in Florida (I visit there frequently). I saw some pictures of their Pointe-à-Pitre Airport (TFFR) and their work certainly looks very nice. It has a lot of detail and nice looking textures. I'm really looking forward to seeing what they can do with KMCO. If they don't they totally screw the pooch, I'll probably buy it right away.

I'm a HUGE fan of having multiple devs doing the same airport. In every airport I've ever bought, there's something that either annoys me, or that I wish were done differently. With multiple choices for the same airport, I could at least pick which annoyances I have to live with. I'd love to see another developer take a whack at KBWI. LatinVFR's is good, but not great. The jetway link alignments are a mess and the gate numbers get blocked by them, and taxiing around is like riding a roller coaster. Just about every taxi path has a lumpy lump section in it. And the blue windows. Yuck. I wish they were all clear like some of them are in the gate areas.

 

 

What's that noise ? We haven't seen any airport from Taxi2Gate for MSFS yet. They woke up really late. Compared to P3D, the creation and quality of airports is at a very high level. Even well-known brands sometimes fall short of high quality. Let's wait for the first release and get back to the discussion.

@Flying-Hare  It's a forum.  Nothing wrong with discussing this before as well as discussing after they release.  

4 hours ago, Dillon said:

This is crazy.  Why do an airport that's already done in great detail by default when airports like KTPA, KMSP, KPHX, and PHNL are still undone.😕  This common since with some of these developers escapes me.😣

^^^^ this...

for crying out loud, really Orlando and Seattle??  and still Salt Lake International isn't even on anyone's radar.  Said it before and will say it again, apparently we need at least 2 KLAX's, a few KORD's and probably another KJFK just.... well, just because (sarcasm off)

1 hour ago, micstatic said:

@Flying-Hare  It's a forum.  Nothing wrong with discussing this before as well as discussing after they release.  

I meant that the subject of discussion is not yet available.))

1 hour ago, Mike S KPDX said:

^^^^ this...

for crying out loud, really Orlando and Seattle??  and still Salt Lake International isn't even on anyone's radar.  Said it before and will say it again, apparently we need at least 2 KLAX's, a few KORD's and probably another KJFK just.... well, just because (sarcasm off)

PacSim is doing Salt Lake City and from what I've seen it's almost ready.

9 hours ago, micstatic said:

agree.  To me the only compelling one they could produce would be KMCO.  But they would need to spend a good amount of time on the new terminal.  What turns me off about T2G is that they for months/years at a time and provide little support.  Typically they release an airport then a very quick update usually a couple weeks after.  Then they go back in their bunker. 

 KTPA: Being done by Vertical Sim

KMSP/PHX: Being done by flightbeam

PHNL: I think still being done by FSDT

Those sceneries have been promised for such a long time now other developers with this kind of wait time, the community collectively relegated those efforts to vaporware.

In short, I'll believe it when I see it...  Major freeware efforts have long since been released in less time than these established developers are taking to get work they previously developed in older sims:

OKBK

KNZY

KLGA by DanialsJam

KCMH

To name a few... 

Just now, Dillon said:

Those sceneries have been promised for such a long time now other developers with this kind of wait time, the community collectively relegated those efforts to vaporware.

In short, I'll believe it when I see it...  Major freeware efforts have long since been released in less time than these established developers are taking to get work they previously developed in older sims:

OKBK

KNZY

KLGA by DanialsJam

KCMH

To name a few... 

Wait...Am I reading that right?  You're saying FlightBeam and Vertical Sim are vapor-ware?

32 minutes ago, Jeff Nielsen said:

Wait...Am I reading that right?  You're saying FlightBeam and Vertical Sim are vapor-ware?

The effort is taking so long it's like it's Vaporware, not the company itself.  There's no reason freeware developers can produce a quality airport like CYOW and a major developer takes years to do one airport.

Edited February 12, 20233 yr by Dillon

1 minute ago, Dillon said:

The effort is taking so long it's like it's Vaporware, not the company itself.

Vertical Sim is getting close from the looks of it on their FB page.  FB is doing KDEN first.  Just because they announced their road map doesn't mean it's gone vapor...lol.  They're completely re-doing those sceneries for the most part.  It takes time.  That's a lot of projects.  I highly doubt someone is going to be able to do those sceneries at that high of a level before they will.

Edited February 12, 20233 yr by Jeff Nielsen

23 minutes ago, Dillon said:

it's like it's Vaporware, not the company itself.  There's no reason freeware developer can produce a quality airport like CYOW and a major developer takes years to do one airport.

Tell me you're trolling?!

Of course it takes a developer (especially a one-person dev) a long time to create a huge airport. With all the respect and admiration to freeware developers for their sceneries, there's an attention to detail on the modelling, texturing and optimisation that Flightbeam offers, which is levels above what even the better freeware developers can manage.

3 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

Tell me you're trolling?!

Of course it takes a developer (especially a one-person dev) a long time to create a huge airport. With all the respect and admiration to freeware developers for their sceneries, there's an attention to detail on the modelling, texturing and optimisation that Flightbeam offers, which is levels above what even the better freeware developers can manage.

I'll concede the point if the payware developer is a one man shop.  But those with bigger teams the turn around time makes no sense.😐  

2 minutes ago, Dillon said:

I'll concede the point if the payware developer is a one man shop.  But those with bigger teams the turn around time makes no sense.😐  

I don't think FB and FT have that many people.  I know just because Ini-scene has been cranking out sceneries lately it may seem like that., but I think that's the exception, not the rule for scenery makers.

T2G makes great sceneries. Their MCO in P3d is top notch as is their lfpg.  Im sure that their msfs sceneries will be top notch as well.  The only downside from them as mentioned earlier in this thread is lack of customer support which has always been an issue.