Jump to content

Benjamin J

  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

748 Excellent


About Benjamin J

  • Rank
    Member - 3,000+

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • 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
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

10,879 profile views
  1. Me too, which is why I started a custom Google Maps to keep track of all of them, as well as routes that I’d like to fly between them ☺️
  2. LatinVFR already stated in the Facebook thread where they announced these products that they are investing ‘heavily’ in upgrading the avionics and will not allow modding, so no Horizon for any of these aircraft.
  3. Since we are talking about what FB scenery will next be scooped, it’s KMSP. BMWorld/Amsim just posted a preview on Facebook that I’m pretty sure is KMSP https://www.facebook.com/100066830710698/posts/pfbid031U63MF9A2CkoudHvn5XDNTAkMGRg1Fs5DbErzKfF2jAFAPi2WPr4ELTViybmWtZAl/
  4. Interesting… I was already wondering why I saw so many Iranian carriers around Teheran today… it seemed strange to me that fsltl would include them. Must have been from AIG then, since they do include all those airlines.
  5. I did see the Hawaiian 717s, and also saw several at the Interisland terminal! I use FSLTL.
  6. Very excited to saw this released and bought it. Taxied and flew around it yesterday night. On the whole I really like what I’m seeing. I for one do not particularly care for the military parts and don’t really know what they are supposed to look like - I do wish for a little more love at terminal 1. I’m not exactly sure why but I find with many developers that window textures are a little lacking. The interisland part of terminal 1 has this very reflective, blue window texture that looks unlike anything I’ve seen at the actual airport, while the international part of terminal 3 seems to have no windows at all? I hope iniBuilds spends some more time on this, especially given how nice the rest of the terminals look. Then there were some areas here and there where the pavement could use a little closer look but on the whole minor stuff. Really happy on the whole with this scenery and for me performance was fine, but I run settings on medium since my computer is several years old…
  7. It seems to be in the default. LVFR is fine.
  8. Also, I’m pretty sure that the Flightbeam scenery that’s being mentioned was not made by Mir, but by Dreamflight scenery (or a company with a name sort of like that), or at least is the product of some collaboration. Given that Dreamflight did update a bunch of their sceneries, I was hoping SEQM but be brought to MSFS as well, but so far nothing…
  9. Fantastic! So happy to finally see this out. It looks beautiful. Pacsim usually only does their own website and the MSFS marketplace, nowhere else for as far as I know.
  10. Been reading this thread, and feel as though this is one of few actually useful points. Somebody who has seen the product and has some insight into its development. Thanks for sharing!
  11. Personally still buying. Like others said, we have some assurances that things will remain compatible or be made compatible by the developers. And I’d like to think that developers releasing stuff right now know that FS2024 is coming.
  12. I flew around Dallas just a week or to ago and the PG looked fine to me overall. Don't remember seeing those artefacts you describe, but it does seem consistent with a slow connection or incomplete download of the PG data. I do agree with @edpatino on this: for cities I frequent I search for external landmarks packs. There's tons on flightsim.to. They typically enhance the city a lot. That said, I always fly with PG on, landmarks or not.
  13. I agree they look good! But in all honesty I've generally noticed that Dominic's airports tend to look great on screenshots, and then turn out to be wholly inaccurate when comparing to real life pictures. Their Lima scenery, for example, had many errors. And so I tend to be rather skeptical of them... Anyway, I already bought MKS' KPHL because they tend to be quite good, and so far I've enjoyed their scenery. Curious to hear from others how cKPHL is, though.
  14. From what I've seen, it seems as though, as others said, people that 'need to be aware of it' usually are, and will scrounge the forums for any hint of release. And if it's an important enough addon, somebody will post about it on Avsim, such as happened with KIAH and CYYC in the last few days. Personally, looking over simmarket and Flightsim.to is my morning routine while I have breakfast. And in that routine, I have noticed many 'smaller' developers releasing kind of whenever... T2G being one of those.
  15. It seems we are in full agreement, so I'm not sure why you repeat my words. Perhaps my phrasing was unclear. My only point is that the combination of a satellite background image with a top-level 'high-detail' layer is a common developing method that has been used at least since the days of FS2004 by both FSDT and many other designers, and that, indeed, there are examples where it was done well, and those where it wasn't. And yes, it will be easy to change. But, there's always going to be somebody that complains, because there are different tastes. I already bought the scenery and like it so far overall. I mean, it's 9.99... Can't beat it for that price...
  • Create New...