What about AI parkings and flow, don't forget this..... 

Edited February 25, 20224 yr by pilotter

One other observation - purely from that review video - was the overly textured roads. I'm guessing it is the PBR or something similar that makes then look like cobblestone streets instead of a flat tarmac. Effect just seems way over done to my eyes.

Even if in your opinion, and i totally understand your point of view, EGLL isn't the best airport so far, it's not garbage. Yes, it's not like some other brillant product such as VHHH & ZSPD (similar size, but way more details...), it's still good, even if it doesn't have interiors ETC. Some areas need to be improved ASAP, and devs are already working on it, and some should be improved in the future. 
Maybe it was rushed because of the hype around it, maybe they should have wait a bit, but overall, with the intention to make the product available for EVERY simmer, even one with low specs, and not only you, with your 3080ti and you home cockpit (jokes), it's not garbage, but no perfect.

Next time, try all to make a constructive critisicm as Flibert did, it'll be a better way to improve and "force" devs to improve things 🙂

10 hours ago, iniBuilds said:

HI @DaWu,

Thanks for your question.

Simply to put, we have no control over their satellite imagery, so we're forced to use our own if we want to make changes or a higher-resolution image than what's available.

Custom satellite imagery is still part of the process for any high quality scenery in MSFS, the quality and tangibility of it won't suffice to our needs, since we don't have control over removing lines, windsocks, aircraft on aprons and lines and so on and so forth with the in-sim bing data.

From a developer's perspective and for an end result of a major payware development, it just isn't good enough by default. This also factors in the fact that there are users who don't use the Bing Imagery streaming, and the airport will look strange for them when not paired with a satellite image it was designed for.

Thank you.

Ok thx for the explanation 

3 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I appreciate the performance considerations that need to be taken into account for such a large airport in such a high density scenery area as London, but......can you imagine how awesome a fully modelled and lit Terminal 5 interior would look based on that photo posted by Blueshark747?

Agree with this.. Terminal 5 done really well could be the big selling point.

I was really looking forward to the UKs premier airport coming to MSFS as currently I over use the excellent freeware Gatwick & Stansted airports when landing in the South of the UK. I would have been quite happy to pay circa £20 including VAT for a product in line with Gatwicks quality but what I have seen of the video has left me somewhat underwhelmed. I am not bothered about the interiors of an airport of this size but my overall impression is that it looks so grey and washed out. Now I have not visited Heathrow for donkeys years so this might be what the buildings look like in real life which cannot be blamed on the SW developers but the architects. One of the charming aspects of flying into the UK in real life is the green grass, especially as I now live in Spain, but even this looks washed out in the video. The tarmac roads seem to have been constructed by somebody who offered to do the job with some tarmac left over from another job nudge nudge, on the cheap and I had to stop watching the video about two thirds of the way through as it was depressing me. I truly hope that after an injection of cash from initial buyers, the developers continue to enhance this product but at the moment it is definitely not one I can feel justified to spend my kids inheritance on.

15 hours ago, iniBuilds said:

We'd love to hear your thoughts on the "garbage" aspects of the scenery, so we can strive to improve for future updates. We will be continuing our entry into the scenery market with many more releases planned to come throughout the year through iniScene.

I apologize for my off-color comment. I was having a very bad day yesterday and for some reason this set me off. On closer inspection, this is a promising effort. It does need some work and you guys do seem committed to improving the scenery. I actually don't think the night lighting is that bad. It's a little dark, but still very usable. Performance for me is just fine, better than the default EGLL even. As long as the listed improvements are implemented, I think it'll be worth the asking price. One of the reasons I was very skeptical was that I feel like I got burned on the Origami Studios (published by iniScene) EGKK. They said there were many improvements coming but months on there hasn't been a single update released. There were quite a few things that needed to be fixed/improved but work seems to have stopped. I went back to freeware version after a couple of weeks. 

I bought IniBuilds EGLL yesterday, and took the precaution of removing my Asobo EGLL from the folder and putting it safe outside MS2020. Is this correct?

I loaded the new scenery when arriving into EGLL from Geneva, and found that my frame rates were dropping to between 10-17fps both on finals and also when exploring the airport in drone view after landing. I normally have no frame rate problem, MSFS and Nvidia having optimised my settings to between c25-30fps. Hoping things will improve once the cache has kicked it, but I don't want to have to lower my settings if at all possible.

For those suggesting addons like the BigJet TV van in the field before 27L, it's worth saying that Jerry is maybe more often to be found on the roof of some of the hotels on the North side. But it would be a fun and topical addon, alongside the improvements that Inibuilds have outlined. 

Well, this has generated a lot of discussion! I'd like to add a few more opinions of my own based on what's been said. I don't think this was rushed, or a cash grab, or released 'unfinished'. I think that it was painstakingly made, with skill, by people who wanted to produce as faithful and accurate a version of Heathrow as they could. It's not garbage by any stretch of the imagination.

As I said in the video, I feel really guilty about being critical of an add-on that has had as much work put into it as this clearly has. I think, because this was less positive than a lot of my recent reviews, it's very easy to focus on the negatives. This is, as I said, a "pretty solid representation of the airport" and "has plenty to recommend it". It's not the Heathrow of our dreams, but that doesn't mean it's bad.

Finally, it's really commendable that @iniBuilds have taken on board so much of what has been said by me, by others in this thread, by people in the YouTube video comments and by people on their forums, and are actively working on fixes and improvements. There aren't very many developers who are that responsive and that keen to improve a product after release.

 

5 hours ago, AceAirstream said:

I bought IniBuilds EGLL yesterday, and took the precaution of removing my Asobo EGLL from the folder and putting it safe outside MS2020. Is this correct?

I also removed Asobo's EGLL. I don't think this is necessary, but I figured it might just be sensible and could reduce the sim's workload ever so slightly. I don't know if this is true or not. It certainly shouldn't have had a negative impact on performance.

Edited February 25, 20224 yr by FilbertFlies
typo

If this attempt at EGLL was perfect it would not be playable and also see KSFO in your fav sim.

It's about choices with scenery.  You don't want to be accused of choosing poorly.

ns

Edited February 25, 20224 yr by bean_sprout

1 hour ago, FilbertFlies said:

Well, this has generated a lot of discussion! I'd like to add a few more opinions of my own based on what's been said. I don't think this was rushed, or a cash grab, or released 'unfinished'. I think that it was painstakingly made, with skill, by people who wanted to produce as faithful and accurate a version of Heathrow as they could. It's not garbage by any stretch of the imagination.

As I said in the video, I feel really guilty about being critical of an add-on that has had as much work put into it as this clearly has. I think, because this was less positive than a lot of my recent reviews, it's very easy to focus on the negatives. This is, as I said, a "pretty solid representation of the airport" and "has plenty to recommend it". It's not the Heathrow of our dreams, but that doesn't mean it's bad.

Finally, it's really commendable that @iniBuilds have taken on board so much of what has been said by me, by others in this thread, by people in the YouTube video comments and by people on their forums, and are actively working on fixes and improvements. There aren't very many developers who are that responsive and that keen to improve a product after release.

 

 I have to admit I was a little critical of the scenery from what I've seen on a few videos. I eagerly anticipated the release and my expectations were high, but a few areas let it down for me. I appreciate that a lot of time and effort go in to producing scenery, especially as large and complex as something like Heathrow. I certainly do not think it's garbage, far from it, and it is certainly better than Asobo's scenery.

 There are a few developers out there that have spoilt us with their renditions of airports, and I for one have been accustomed to some really great addons, but for me, Heathrow needs just a little bit more work and love put in to. From my understanding @iniBuilds have taken on board some of the issues raised and are working on them, and I will be purchasing the scenery based on their response and commitment to improving the scenery.

 I really appreciate honest reviews like yours, too many Youtuber's (influencers) focus on the good points, and don't mention the bad points when doing reviews. Keep up the good work.

I believe I am right in saying that the wonderful freeware Gatwick airport has different versions available so that those who are not lucky enough to have fairly high spec PC's can choose to install a lower spec version which gives them better FPS. Perhaps @iniBuilds and those who have been suggesting that a better version would cripple their PC could bear this in mind and perhaps consider offering two versions for sale in the future?

Menu settings are there for a reason. I was under the impression that users with lower specification PCs reduced scenery complexity settings to achieve acceptable performance? That being the case, the detail should be there for anyone who wants it/has the power to render it.

The fsimstudios CYHZ also has pretty poor performance when having less than 8GB VRAM, I wonder if that's also related to the custom sat map imagery.

 

  

10 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

Menu settings are there for a reason. I was under the impression that users with lower specification PCs reduced scenery complexity settings to achieve acceptable performance? That being the case, the detail should be there for anyone who wants it/has the power to render it.

Yeah, but that would mean changing your settings whenever you decide to use this airport, if other airports have perfectly fine performance.

Edited February 26, 20224 yr by Tuskin38