6 minutes ago, EnSnellHest said:

Really tempted in buying this.

Were going to wait for FB's version, but it depends on when it is going to release. Im not going to hold my breath for much longer.

Where does the 3 weeks - 2 months window come from?

Facebook I think. Keep in mind BMWAmsim‘s KMIA is the worst performing scenery in flight sim history according to those poor lads that bought it, it‘s worse than iniBuilds on a very bad day. I‘d assume similar for KSFO.

I open a debate here: after Flytampa being undercut on Montreal, it’s now Flightbeam to be undercut by BMWorld.

Contrary to the old time of FSX & P3D, MSFS is a shark tank and the good time of the private gardens are long gone. Every developpers are fighting for the same markets and don’t hesitate anymore to fit in someone else shoes.

And it might become a real problem for developpers like FlyTampa or Flightbeam: they are so small and their sceneries are such master pieces that it takes years to be available so the risk to be undercut is bigger than ever.

Contrary to FlyTampa who often lack communication, Mir took the time to release frequent updates about KSFO but at the end it didn’t prevent someone else to come with it’s own version of KSFO.

I don’t own any BMWorld sceneries so I won’t judge it’s quality but it seems enough good to steal some promised sales from Mir. Myself, I’m a loyal custumer to Flightbeam and I will wait for it’s version. But I might not represent the majority.

The main question now is: does FlyTampa or Mir went too far with quality? They have a small team and it takes years to produce their masterpieces with the risk to be undercut. Is it necessary after all? It’s nice for screenshots but do we really enjoy those details and that perfection during a flight? I mean, do we enjoy a flight less with developpers like Mk-Studios, Inibuilds, etc that still produce good sceneries but with a few less details and are able to produce sceneries in a quicker way?

I fear that soon or later if FlyTampa or Mir are undercut more and more, they might give up. Or they might concentrate on smaller airports with less risks to be undercut. But sorry, I only voice my opinion, but I’m not interrested by airports like Humberside.

 

Edited May 22, 20242 yr by sdirand

3 minutes ago, sdirand said:

I open a debate here: after Flytampa being undercut on Montreal, it’s now Flightbeam to be undercut by BMWorld.

Contrary to the old time of FSX & P3D, MSFS is a shark tank and the good time of the private gardens are long gone. Every developpers are fighting for the same markets and don’t hesitate anymore to fit in someone else shoes.

And it might become a real problem for developpers like FlyTampa or Flightbeam: they are so small and their sceneries are such master pieces that it takes years to be available so the risk to be undercut is bigger than ever.

Contrary to FlyTampa who often lack communication, Mir took the time to release frequent updates about KSFO but at the end it didn’t prevent someone else to come with it’s own version of KSFO.

I don’t own any BMWorld sceneries so I won’t judge it’s quality but it seems enough good to steal some promised sales from Mir. Myself, I’m a loyal custumer to Flightbeam and I will wait for it’s version. But I might not represent the majority.

The main question now is: does FlyTampa or Mir went too far with quality? They have a small team and it takes years to produce their masterpieces with the risk to be undercut. Is it necessary after all? It’s nice for screenshots but do we really enjoy those details and that perfection during a flight? I mean, do we enjoy a flight less with developpers like Mk-Studios, Inibuilds, etc that still produce good sceneries but with a few less details and are able to produce sceneries in a quicker way?

I fear that soon or later if FlyTampa or Mir are undercut more and more, they might give up. Or they might concentrate on smaller airports with less risks to be undercut. But sorry, I only voice my opinion, but I’m not interrested by airports like Humberside.

 

I think there are many new people in MSFS and they will only learn over time what devs are to be trusted and which produce good looking stuttery messes. So over time the upside for FlyTampa and Mir is better. But ultimately it‘s the market that decides. So you and me.

For now I am going to hold off for the FB SFO. Mr. Mir mentioned released before the summer started and Summer starts 6/20/24. We have gone this long with no SFO I can hold off a little longer. Sad part is SFO will get released and shortly after so will MSFS 2024. I have several BMWorld sceneries and the ones I have are great. I really wish someone would tackle ATL  Imagine sim cannot even get the update to the update correct. Oh well such is life will FS lose sales Yes how much my guess is up to 1/3 of total sales will go to the one released 1st. 

2 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Facebook I think. Keep in mind BMWAmsim‘s KMIA is the worst performing scenery in flight sim history according to those poor lads that bought it, it‘s worse than iniBuilds on a very bad day. I‘d assume similar for KSFO.

all BMW Amsim have terrible performance/  Ini build sceneries improved a lot  the performance with the update and have much more details than BMW Amsim

2 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Facebook I think. Keep in mind BMWAmsim‘s KMIA is the worst performing scenery in flight sim history according to those poor lads that bought it, it‘s worse than iniBuilds on a very bad day. I‘d assume similar for KSFO.

don't forget Newark Kewr from Drzewiecki, that performance is the worst.... however I wait for KSFO from Flightbeam, knowing his scenery is always something special, and with passion. Have the feeling that this KFSO is factory work, although it could be nice it will never be as special.

Same with KSEA, KPHX and KMIA, it's nice to have but not that special. I do think these dev's can do it but are pressing out sceneries too fast.

 

Hope that Mir will show some more screenshots Soo I know why I was waiting!!😁

I just don't want another slide show!!! Inibuilds KJFK

I for one don’t spend money on a scenery unless it is pretty high quality. Flightbeam always delivers on quality & performance so if I know they’re doing a scenery, I’ll wait for them. So yeah, high quality still matters to some of us.

A surprise, for sure. But I got it and I think it's great. And I would love to see more like this from the big names. This fits in nicely with the Humber Bridge scenery I got recently, and there are dozens of good quality RAF and civil airfields available in the area that make this a fascinating place to explore low and slow. I dare say if you're a tube flyer it is a bit of a wasted exercise, but there's plenty of non-tube flyers around who will love this.

7 minutes ago, andy1252 said:

A surprise, for sure. But I got it and I think it's great. And I would love to see more like this from the big names. This fits in nicely with the Humber Bridge scenery I got recently, and there are dozens of good quality RAF and civil airfields available in the area that make this a fascinating place to explore low and slow. I dare say if you're a tube flyer it is a bit of a wasted exercise, but there's plenty of non-tube flyers around who will love this.

Wrong thread?

35 minutes ago, andy1252 said:

A surprise, for sure. But I got it and I think it's great. And I would love to see more like this from the big names. This fits in nicely with the Humber Bridge scenery I got recently, and there are dozens of good quality RAF and civil airfields available in the area that make this a fascinating place to explore low and slow. I dare say if you're a tube flyer it is a bit of a wasted exercise, but there's plenty of non-tube flyers around who will love this.

Interesting take on San Francisco 😄

4 hours ago, sdirand said:

I open a debate here: after Flytampa being undercut on Montreal, it’s now Flightbeam to be undercut by BMWorld.

Contrary to the old time of FSX & P3D, MSFS is a shark tank and the good time of the private gardens are long gone. Every developpers are fighting for the same markets and don’t hesitate anymore to fit in someone else shoes.

And it might become a real problem for developpers like FlyTampa or Flightbeam: they are so small and their sceneries are such master pieces that it takes years to be available so the risk to be undercut is bigger than ever.

Contrary to FlyTampa who often lack communication, Mir took the time to release frequent updates about KSFO but at the end it didn’t prevent someone else to come with it’s own version of KSFO.

I don’t own any BMWorld sceneries so I won’t judge it’s quality but it seems enough good to steal some promised sales from Mir. Myself, I’m a loyal custumer to Flightbeam and I will wait for it’s version. But I might not represent the majority.

The main question now is: does FlyTampa or Mir went too far with quality? They have a small team and it takes years to produce their masterpieces with the risk to be undercut. Is it necessary after all? It’s nice for screenshots but do we really enjoy those details and that perfection during a flight? I mean, do we enjoy a flight less with developpers like Mk-Studios, Inibuilds, etc that still produce good sceneries but with a few less details and are able to produce sceneries in a quicker way?

I fear that soon or later if FlyTampa or Mir are undercut more and more, they might give up. Or they might concentrate on smaller airports with less risks to be undercut. But sorry, I only voice my opinion, but I’m not interrested by airports like Humberside.

 

I have KSEA KMIA and KPHX but they are absolutely not even on the level of Flightbeam. This KSFO is a rushed release, it's not even finished look at the signs in the interior buildings it says that will be finished later.....

14 hours ago, Andrew2448 said:

For a lot of people this will probably be "good enough" and it beat them to the punch.

Worse still...I find the default one good enough!

Bought SFO last night along with PBI.  There is a promotion going on, so PBI was 50% off after purchasing SFO.

...back to SFO

I taxied around for a while, just admiring the sights.  The textures looked great, but most importantly, everything was fluid on my modest system.

There is a LOT to see here.  Detailed rolling stock, nice looking detailed buildings and hangers, blast walls, lighting, fences, storage, baggage facilities.  The entire place feels big.  My first impression is good.  It has plenty of detail and performance was smooth.  I held short for several heavies, then rolled out and climbed, banking over the city through some SF murk and took a lot of parting shots of the airport.  I expected stutters, but it was very smooth.

I did notice that the download size of SFO wasn't a monster ...under 1GB on both titles (700MB or so if memory is right?)  Overall, a very pleasant 1.0 experience from my side.  There was a conflict with GSX Coulti.  I ended the task knowing that someone else had reported it.  

As I touched down in Burbank at another fairly small payware airport, the small stutters began.  I found it ironic that such a small layout caused a performance hit while SFO was buttery smooth.

For the minimal cost and experience so far, I have to call it bargain.

Just my opinion.

 

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, pilotter said:

It’s nice for screenshots but do we really enjoy those details and that perfection during a flight?

This is truly a good question because the only angles I see from an airport is either it´s roof and huge runways and car parking space from above and the tower a mile ahead, or some enormous terminal wall or hangar door in front of the cockpit windshield while parking and starting her up.

But it feels good knowing to have all this details, knowing one is able to look into the illuminated interior of the airport while taxiing next to windows or glass walls, the good feeling of having bought something really special with utmost attention to detail 🙂

Edited May 22, 20242 yr by JetCat