Jump to content

Benjamin J

Reviewer
  • Content Count

    3,792
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

699 Excellent

1 Follower

About Benjamin J

  • Rank
    Member - 3,000+

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://thralni.ermarian.net

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    San Francisco, CA
  • Interests
    Besides flight simulator I'm interested in music of diverse genres, history and culture of Europe, middle east in ancient times and pre-US Americas, among other things.

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

9,951 profile views
  1. Hey all, Was hoping to get some input on Double T's RCTP. It's currently on sale at Simmarket. I have repeatedly looked at it, wondering whether to buy it, but every time looking at the screenshots I found really serious issues with accuracy, to the point where it seems to represent RCTP really only in the shape of the terminal and perhaps not much else. For instance, the textured windows on the terminal are often both the wrong color and dimensions. There are apparent jetways that are twice as tall as the buildings they connect to. And on and on. However, I don't know if these screenshots are entirely accurate - maybe updates already fixed the worst of issues. What do you all think. is it worth it? Would love to hear that it's better than it looks...
  2. I wholeheartedly agree with what @Fiorentoni said... They came to be in large part because there were no 'realworld' AI solutions, but now that we have the likes of AIG, please include an option to turn the statics off. I personally find them rather annoying, though I realize some like them and might want to keep them.
  3. I have their VVTS and VVNB and thought they were quite nice. I also have their RJBB. Like others, as soona s Technobrain's RJBB goes on sale, I ill not hesitate to get it and replace Dominic's version. Recently I've looking at getting more of their airports, but I've been staring at the screenshots on Simmarket for many of their other airports, and unfortunately have come to find that a lot of them have some major deficiencies, some of them being talked about in the reviews. I was pretty stoked that they did Lima for example, but the columns that populate the lower half of the terminal are not right. They modeled perhaps 33-50% of the amount of columns that should be there. Apparently they also have some Brazilian advertisements and Australian airport signage in place of the *real* ones. So I have come away with the impression that Dominic Designteam makes airports that graphically look very nice at face value, but actually have some significant issues that, unfortunately, I'm not sure will ever get fixed. This has really but a damper on my enthusiasm for their stuff. I might still get their Chengdu and Lima, since I don't see those airports anywhere on the horizon, payware or freeware, but will probably the extent of what I buy from them.
  4. Thanks for the heads-up. I've seen indeed that their reviews are not stellar... I'll wait and see if and when it comes on sale, perhaps I'll get it then.
  5. Hey all, I just saw that MXI released Tirana LATI. I quite like flying in these parts of the world because of the beautiful, mountainous terrain. Also gives me additional destinations to fly to from Athens. I was wondering what people think of this rendition of LATI, and, more generally, of MXI? https://secure.simmarket.com/mxi-design-lati-tirana-nene-tereza-msfs.phtml Curious to hear your opinions.
  6. I had no idea there was a KSNA freeware - thanks for bringing that one up, those that did! Frankly, for me KSNA is not a majorly important place to me, so the freeware might be sufficient. That said, having compared the screenshots, I think UK2000's rendition is much better than the freeware. I do think their airport sin MSFS have not ben as good as the competition, though I liked their stuff in P3D. I agree that the last years they were starting to get a little long in the tooth. But this KSNA looks very nice to me, definitely better than their British airports for MSFS thus far. What surprised me was that LatinVFR didn't release their P3D KSNA for MSFS a long time ago already... Theirs was a nice rendition.
  7. Man oh man... Like I said, aggressive much? To each their own, some care about the buildings being default and others not. Read through the thread and you'll see both sides. No reason to get so worked up about it. Happy for you that you have what you want...
  8. Jeez, aggressive much...? I can't ask a question to confirm? This personal attack is entirely uncalled for.
  9. Arent all these buildings still default? Just a reorganization in their layout? When I saw the title of this thread I was hoping somebody actually made custom terminals, like SunSkyJet had done back in the day…
  10. I know this has been mentioned before but I do want to highlight this statement again and again. I've been blown away by the amount of freeware airports that are of top notch quality. Having been with P3D since what feels like forever, I have experience how slowly slowly the pool of quality of freeware has essentially dried up. You have to go bck to the days of FSX to see tons of freeware releases, and even then only a subset of those were really good. Now, with MSFS, the amount of really good freeware airports has been brilliant. Honestly, as somebody who started developing addon airports but got bogged down by the complication of some of the processes, I'm in awe of what so many other people have been able to do. It's not easy!
  11. This thread is actually inspiring me to visit some of the default airports that I haven't visited yet! I should definitively revisit KATL and SEQM, if they are that good! But I do not agree that the default not enhanced airports are good... I really don't like that uniform grey looks all the terminal buildings have. In some cases, like Juneau for instance. it seems that the default look actually comes somewhat close to the real deal, but often it does not. So in those cases I will still be happy to get a third party addon to replace the default. I'll add another point as well: sometimes I'll replace default enhanced airports with a payware for one simple thing: custom jetways. Personally I deeply dislike those weird, stumpy default jetways. OrbX is currently working on a new Stockholm Arlanda, and I'll probably get it, despite the default's models being actually very nice (as somebody pointed out before). However, ESSA is my 'Scandinavian hub', so to speak, and I do want to see custom jetways there... I'll pitch in another airport: Cairo HECA. I was so happy that they included that one... Actually much better than essentially all third party versions I have seen.
  12. I still buy quite a lot, but I limit myself to buying the addons I want when they are on sale, with some notable exceptions. For example, I recently got FlyTampa's Las Vegas and Toronto, and will probably get their Boston when it's released. Their quality is always top notch and with the price, especially at the lowr-than-P3D price point that they release addons for MSFS. Other developers, particularly of airports that are not my focus, I'll get on sale. Recently I bought a slew of OrbX airports during their March Madness sale, for instance. I do feel, as others said, that the default airports are sometimes of sufficient quality, particularly if it's an airport that is not super important for me, that I don't really feel the need to get a payware addon for it (freeware of course is a different story). But that's really only true for the default enhanced airports. The likes of Atlanta, Orlando, Zurich... these are all good enough for me, although I'd like to get rid of those default jetways at some point. The default not enhanced airports I still find quite bad, in general, and will buy addons to get better representations for those. BEcause for me having an okay terminal layout is not enough. I do want to see a model that actually looks like the airport I'm flying into.
  13. This is nice! I like a topics such as this, giving some positivity and love to the default stuff. Having seen the sim since the days of FS98, I‘be been very pleasantly surprised with the overall quality of the default enhanced airports. Even back on FSX the default enhanced airports were really not very good. In MSFS it’s at a point where sometimes I skip on the third party sometimes because it’s no noticeable improvement over the default. but, that said, I have not seen all of them, but if the ones I did I was rather taken with Zurich.
  14. P3D had an app that did this, I think it was called Dynamic FFTF, by… FSPS…? There was a variable that could be changed on the fly called FFTF, or fiber frame time fraction. That app would change it automatically along parameters that the user could set, allowing for smooth departures and arrivals, and good visuals at cruise. I would be surprised if MSFS didn’t have a similar set of variables that apps could make use of, given the shared history between these platforms, unless, of course, this is something that LM made accessible on the fly only in P3D.
  15. I do remember seeing this, but I only saw it ever happen at third party airports. That said, there's some bias here because I hardly ever visit default airports unless they are the enhanced versions by Asobo. But, it's still worth to ask: do you see this happening at default, non-enhanced airports at all? Because that's what I would consider 'base game'. A third party airport, even using default textures, I would not consider 'base game'.
×
×
  • Create New...