- Boston Logan International (KBOS) airport V4 Rebooted - High Resolution 2k Terminal Textures - 3D Tunnels, Bridges & Airport Island Coastlines - Advanced Specular & Normal Mapping shaders used on Airport surfaces - Dynamic Lighting & optional FX Lighting for slower systems - Animated & Static Vehicles - Animated Ramp People - Stunning Wet Weather & Snow Effects - Volumetric Grass - Animated Jetways at all gates - Optimized thoroughly with use of LODs - Configuration tool to help customize your experience - Compiled with latest Prepar3Dv4.2 SDK
Wunderbare Szenerie, die sehr detailliert umgesetzt ist. Mit dem umfangreichen Konfigurator um alles für sich selbst anzupassen. Die Performance ist ebenfalls top. Alles in allem klare Kaufempfehlung.
It's FlyTampa, so why 3 stars? Simply because the performance of this scenery is abysmal. It looks the part, don't get me wrong there. But I hate to fly in and out of it as it's the only scenery in my collection crushing the frame rate to a slide show. As a result I avoid this otherwise wonderful airport. Other FlyTampa sceneries I own run super smooth, just like other premium sceneries like those from FSDT or Flightbeam. Setup information: i7 7700k@4.8 GHz, GTX1080 8GB, P3Dv4.
As usual, Flytampa has delivered an amazing product.
At least, when it comes to detail and realism.
However, the performance is - again - very poor. Copenhagen, Toronto, Amsterdam, and now Boston, they all seem to be very, very FPS demanding. This one is the worst so far. Having a relatively robust system, I experience no performance related issues anywhere - including similarly detailed or even more complex airports. Unfortunately, Boston forces my powerful system down to its knees. Sure, I have maxed this scenery out in the configurator however my P3D v4 does not run maxed out and once again, I do not have performance issues elsewhere. Parking my nice study level A320 at one of the gates, the FPS is in the very low twenties, occasionally dropping to as low as 19. To compare, at KMSP, KSFO, KSEA, KIAD, KMIA, EGLL, PANC, ESSA, KSEA, VHHH, etc, I get well over 30, often over 40.
In my humble opinion a quality product should not only deliver outstanding visuals but also above average performance. This one indeed is top notch visually but very, very poorly optimized. Flytampa should seriously review their modelling methods since their newest products are awful when it comes to performance. That is one thing that they modelled even the telescopes on the observation terrace at one of their products but I am wondering how important it is meanwhile it's difficult to actually land due to horrid frame rates.
Quality visuals should not come at the cost of performance. And it is obvious that there is a way since other companies successfully released numerous, bigger and far more complex airports without causing such an FPS drop. Disappointed.