Jump to content

Is EHAM ok now ?


Waleed

Recommended Posts

I want to know from owners of eham as to whether it is stable enough now?

Should I go for it or not?

Thanks for any insight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, still a lot of minor issues left... The developer is responding very slowly, last update is almost half a year ago now. I still needs a fix. Look at this post and this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Aerosoft

Well, still a lot of minor issues left... The developer is responding very slowly, last update is almost half a year ago now. I still needs a fix. Look at this post and this one.

There is no updated planned at this moment, but later this summer I'll have another discussion with the developer about Schiphol.

(Keep in mind that the boxed retailers don't really like updates a lot as it means the boxed product they sell is outdated etc. So we tend to be a bit reluctant when there is a lot of boxed stock in shops for a given product).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Keep in mind that the boxed retailers don't really like updates a lot as it means the boxed product they sell is outdated etc. So we tend to be a bit reluctant when there is a lot of boxed stock in shops for a given product).

Are you serios? Sorry, but this makes me a bit angry. A boxed v1.0 is worth the same money than a boxed v1.1, if the patch is free to download. And as a customer I'd like to get the same support for my boxed software as I get for my downloads. Never heard of such a point of view. Please reconsider your strategy.

Back to topic: Schiphol is a bit hard on framerates, but I personally have no issues with this scenery. Approaches may sometimes be a little bit stuttering (about 15 FPS sometimes), but I get along pretty well. :rolleyes: My advise: get it (but only if the guys at aerosoft promise to support boxes :lol: ).

Regards,

Marius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Aerosoft

Are you serios? Sorry, but this makes me a bit angry. A boxed v1.0 is worth the same money than a boxed v1.1, if the patch is free to download. And as a customer I'd like to get the same support for my boxed software as I get for my downloads. Never heard of such a point of view. Please reconsider your strategy.

We would gladly think different about this, but it is the boxed resellers that 'cause' this. It is a well know effect of course, nearly every software distributor has to face it. It forces us to create smaller batches of DVD's so we can update them faster. But that increases the price a lot.

Just look at how Microsoft handles many boxed sales.... Because updating the original Windows 7 DVD to the latest version would mean a 600MB download they do not pack the DVD anymore, there is just a bit of paper with the code and you download the whole thing. That's a lot easier for them then to face the angry customers who buy the dvd and then have to download 600 Mb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a load of rubbish, of course. I just bought Amsterdam X and its frame rates are so poor it's very near to unplayable (yes, even with the 1.04 update installed and yes, I've got quite a powerful computer). This scenery has still got a very big performance issue and you should be trying to fix this (or make the developer fix this) as soon as possible, insead of hiding behind the developer and your retailers. You decided to publish this scenery under the Aerosoft flag and as a customer I'm paying you for this scenery, so you are responsible for the quality of the product. If you are not prepared to take this responsibility, you shouldn't have released the scenery in the first place. You should at least release an update online, so the buyers of a boxed version can update their copy after their purchase and existing customers can enjoy the airport as it should have been when it came out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's still ###############, wait till they iron out the bugs, last time i flew into EHAM there were no papi lights & frame rates droped through the floor, didn't improve much even after dissableing the road traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an I5 760 3.1 Ghz procecor and an ATI HD5770 + 4GB DDR3 RAM and I have between 10-15 fps but at other sceneries like Frankfurt and London I have over 20 average.

I'm planning on buying a water cooling h50 and OC my procecor to 4Ghz and see if there's any difference.

But since FSX is the worst coded game ever, the developers should try to make the best out of and by that I mean making them more performance friendly on most computers. Especially since I am above the required system requirments.

Wll I have learned that when it comes to simulator games (especially FSX) you can't really trust the specs required. I mean: just look at the FSX box, it's redicalus!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wll I have learned that when it comes to simulator games (especially FSX) you can't really trust the specs required. I mean: just look at the FSX box, it's redicalus!! :D

Take the triple for simulators and the double for the addons, then you're fine ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Sorry for the late reply. I've got an AMD Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition processor running at 3,5 GHz, 4GB DDR3 RAM and a GeForce GTX260 896MB graphics card. When I'm lucky I'm able to achieve 10 fps with that at EHAM, but mostly it's 7 or 8 (when looking at the terminals, that is). Everywhere else FSX runs very smoothly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im running it on fs9 with no real hits on frames anymore that the cloud9 scenery, however there are a lack of taxiway signs that can make it hard to navigate around the ground unless you either know where your going or taxi with a good map at hand.

its a shame that the developer does not...ehmm cant be bothered to finish off his work, it sounds to me that now he has the money he has got what he wanted and he's going to leave it as it is as it will cost him some money to put it right...im stunned that areosoft are condoning this unfinished work as acceptable

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such a shame an important European airport like EHAM was done in this manner with so many issues and complaints. They should get a new dev and redo the whole thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scenery is not that bad, but if you compare it to Munich for example... The bridges, compatibility with UTE...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We would gladly think different about this, but it is the boxed resellers that 'cause' this. It is a well know effect of course, nearly every software distributor has to face it. It forces us to create smaller batches of DVD's so we can update them faster. But that increases the price a lot.

Just look at how Microsoft handles many boxed sales.... Because updating the original Windows 7 DVD to the latest version would mean a 600MB download they do not pack the DVD anymore, there is just a bit of paper with the code and you download the whole thing. That's a lot easier for them then to face the angry customers who buy the dvd and then have to download 600 Mb.

Well Mathijs this scenery has serious FPS issues and bugs.

I have a lot of Aerosoft products but want to file a official complaint.

Have sent a more detailed PM to Shaun...

Waiting your reply,

Kind regards,

André

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also experiencing very low FPS in EHAM. Normal add-on scenery i'm at 20fps (locked at 20fps externally). In EHAM I experience 12fps while at gate G heavy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hello Folks,

Mathijs and I will see what can be done about these problems.

My problem with this airport is the AUTOGEN EXLUDES for miles outside the permieter of the airport. Since I bought this scenery I used it for 10 minutes and found numberous problems, because of all this I WILL NEVER BUY from this particular develpers EVER again. Aerosft has some badass airports but the standard across the baord is terrible, it's sooooo hit or miss. There needs to be a standard set ouit by Matheijs that the develpers MUST follow or at least publish the name of develpers out in the open so I will easily know when and when not to buy. I holestly wish you guys would have left EHAM alone, for if you have, another develper would have done it and done a better job, thats the honest truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm using a Core i7-2600K CPU 3.40GHz-3.40Ghz 8GB Windows7 64B, Nvidia GeForce GTX 550 Ti card 1GB, SSD 100GB plus 1 terrabite harddisc.....

Even with this.....EHAM and EHRD gives me not more then 11/15 FPS this is indeed rediculous,i thought with a new system it would be fixed....tweaked FSX but still no result...

Also using REX in top condition, when im in another area it can go up to 99 FPS (unlimmited selected)..witgh real weather down to 6/7 fps (see attached file)

Please make a perfect update...

Thanks upfront...

Best regards,

Ray

post-11951-0-65483600-1312111131.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldnt mind a patch either to improve the performance overall of this scenery, Altho i finally obtained acceptabel frames with EHAM, Needed to tweak FSX like hell to get acceptabel frames on Schiphol. Pretty riduclous.

aerosoft EHAM loaded with a pmdg md-11, ASE, REX, and NL 2000 with UT2

eham.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Indeed, Aerosoft should take full responsability for publishing a product that is not working well. I said in an earlier post that they should give a compensation in any form to anyone who has bought this product as it seems they are not able to produce a patch that solves all the issues and complaint. European law is enforcing this! When you deliver a bad product you have to give buyers their money back or compensate in any form if you are not able to solve the problems.

So: money back is a bit too much it seems to me, as parts of the product work well. But reduction an a next to buy product seems fair.

Or better: a perfect patch!

Tompie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, Aerosoft should take full responsability for publishing a product that is not working well. I said in an earlier post that they should give a compensation in any form to anyone who has bought this product as it seems they are not able to produce a patch that solves all the issues and complaint. European law is enforcing this! When you deliver a bad product you have to give buyers their money back or compensate in any form if you are not able to solve the problems.

So: money back is a bit too much it seems to me, as parts of the product work well. But reduction an a next to buy product seems fair.

Or better: a perfect patch!

Tompie

There seems to be an issue here with what your saying, what is classed as not working and what is working! Example; As Microsoft are always updating there products especially there Operating Systems with updates and fixes, at what point is the customer entitled to compensation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

There seems to be an issue here with what your saying, what is classed as not working and what is working! Example; As Microsoft are always updating there products especially there Operating Systems with updates and fixes, at what point is the customer entitled to compensation.

I think it is fairly clear, when I inform myself through the Dutch consumers organisation. And I wish the developer or publisher would come up as quick as Microsoft does with this patch in which all collected complaints so far (see Erik's separate post) are solved :)

Tompie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use