Posts: 1


Post by FlyinBlind » Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:49 pm

I can't just sit by any longer and not say anything..

This airports along with other airports are just straight GARBAGE! Why are there gates missing? It is said in advertisements that these airports are suppose to make the real thing feel some sort of wayz.. In fact whoever designed these airports don't have a clue because if they did they realize that the gates are not numbered correctly or just not there. I only have to bing an airport to get a terminal map that allows me to peep where the actually gates located relative to the airport. I literally mock real flights in real time. So it is very AGRAVATING when the real flight is departing from a gate which one does not have and have to rush and find an equivalent. What makes it worse is that there should be a warning that either terminals or gates don't exist before purchasing the airport add-on which there is none.. Can't depend on the trial because one doesn't get enough time to really fully use the airport to discover such inconsistencies before the airport disappears. I would not waste my energy, time, or funds investing in incomplete projects in which my 10yr old son could do a better job at. I have been flying various different airlines and coming upon my first flight with American Airlines had me discover that the entire terminal 2 is there, however, does not have any gates what-so-ever.. The flight I happen to be mirroring is departing from a gate out of that terminal. How should one feel knowing they invested their hard earned money in good faith that they person or company providing the add-on has not done enough on their part to ensure a product with very high quality standards? I'm a student pilot so I'm not using this as a game but a real time training device. I have over 20k in student loan dept to prove it. This lack of diligence on the part of the developer is quite sad. I'd be embarrass to develop such crap if I was a developer knowing folk are depending on a quality product from which I claim to make very well.. What is even more sad is that there isn't an update to this very very very outdated product.. It would take me to fly an American flight to discover this after all this time.. This is not the only add-on I've encountered this problem with. This seems to be an ongoing issue with a lot of developers. IT NEEDS TO END!!! I'm sure when the same developers go to buy a car and get home to find out there are controls to an air conditioner that really doesn't exist in the car would be extremely and very highly insulted and would want they full refund back..
Posts: 104


Post by Flukey » Thu Jul 04, 2013 9:06 pm

This is a joke right?

Before you come on here blasting Flytampa about outdated scenery and that they should research Airport layouts a bit better or update their scenery, did you at least do "your research" before purchasing a product in 2013 designed for FS2002/2004???

I'm sure if you did you'll notice that there is reference (through the bing search engine) of a new KSFO designed by Flightbeam, for FS9 (& fsx) which is a more up to date version (includes T2), even the flytampa forums make reference to this in a sticky thread, viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4665.

While on the product page for FLYTAMPA KSFO and over at simmarket , did you fail to notice the picture with no gates showing at terminal 2, as I can see that there are no gates at T2 as well as terminal 1A still existing in those said pics which has been removed today in real life, and again both product pages make reference to it being designed in October 2004!! Which if you want to get technical, back in 2004 and up to 2011 T2 was closed with gates removed for renovations, so technically the flytampa KSFO was up to date at that time!!

Just because people decide to design airports for the flightsim community and charge a fee for their work doesn't mean they are obliged to update them 10 years down the track when changes to airports have occurred and data for those airports is different to those used when designing the fields at that time. Seriously you should be thankful people like flytampa, FSDreamteam and others take an interest in wanting to make a plain and default Microsoft flightsim a better place for us to fly!!, Look at flytampa Dubai, Montreal and Buffalo as an example, just awesome design work....

Boy if this annoys you, next you'll be trying to get a hold of phoenix simulations and blowing up at them for not updating their old payware B777 to a 2013 version in offering electronic flight bags because you need it for flight training!!!

So before you decide to invest your hard earn money again, do the smart thing and "research" products yourself so you know what is on offer rather than just jumping in and expecting a product made in 2004 to be up to date in 2013, I'm sure you don't dive right in when buying a car!!!
Posts: 206


Post by SpeedbirdATC » Thu Jul 18, 2013 11:13 am

+1 :D