Sunday, March 24, 2013

UK 2000 Leeds : Our own screenshots

FS9/FSX. And another British airport.. Some of us have been waiting this one for a long time. It's a matter of taste, but i am rather pleased by the good matching between UK 2000 EGNM and Orbx EU England actually. Great amont of details, great lighting. If only we could see some improvements on terminal's textures, in Luton, for instance. That would be great.

Screenshots taken with ATI card HD6570 / Best quality settings.
Some Ai aircrafts are from MyTraffic Light utility.






















Airdailyx, March 2013


Anonymous said...

Great screenshots Dom! If you look at your 3rd and 4th image and compare them to the real airport area though, you will notice quite a large area "missing" from this scenery:

I'm quite amazed that an area so close to the runway was simply left out, as this area can give significant visual cues on approach to Runway 14!

Markus Lanzemeier said...

Just a question to you all or is it simply me who wants too much?
Is this also an airport you do not like due to that bad "work"?
For example third picture:
- The road simply stops in nowhere.
- The part which is missing on the aerial and in the scenery which the poster above mentions.
- The parking areas where you can see the aerial image of the parked cars under the placed cars (and sometimes not).
- Blurried terminal textures
- Misplaced building (building on the road) last picture
- overall bad working on textures.

Please help me on this!

Mason Dominique said...

Well, i agree on the textures. But it's not an issue, not a bug. When i take off from Leeds or land there, i am only staying 15 minutes or so. And i don't have time to check too much the surroundings. It's always a problem to get a perfect match between 2 sceneries too.
Are you just pointing out the negative ?

Anonymous said...

Dom how can you gloss over below standard textures and call them "not an issue". The previous poster raised valid critique of the airport which simply does not match the likes of FlyaTampa, FSDT, Orbx etc yet you defend it saying you'll only spend 15 minutes at a time there? If a product has flaws and is not of a high standard then you should be more objective about it and not gloss over missing features and poor textures.

Longyear said...

I agree with above. It's not a valid argument for the product, simply to state "I only stay therer 15 minutes". If there is an issue, there is an issue. And knowing Garry Summons I am confident he will address it and release a v1.1 or service pack. I have to be honest; I own ALL UK2000 Xtreme UK airports and this one does not look to be at the same standards as most others. One of his best is EGNT (Newcastle) with the working Metro Rail system and amazing texturing. EGNM does not look to be of the same standard.

Anonymous said...

As pointed out in this image - - the whole Budget rental car area etc. has been left out. To make matters worse, there is actually a small heliport on Harrogate road:

Why would you create an airport, yet leave out such a great heliport?

In the past, without Bing and Google us users used to accept scenery at face value, we had no choice. With the advances in technology and being to pay almost any location a virtual visit, we no longer have to accept poorly made scenery!

So all I can say is sorry, but this scenery just doesn't meet my expectations. In my opinion EUR 20+ scenery should be better made, in particular not leave out valuable detail such as a rental car park and heliport!

Anonymous said...

They missed the heliport next to the rental car area!

Anonymous said...

Funny ... I don't see ANY notation of the above criticisms on the UK2000 Leeds Xtreme forum, the logical place for them I would think.

What's going on here? The politics of envy perhaps? Personal grudge?

Anonymous said...

It seems clear that this scenery doesn't live up to the standards of scenery costing around the EUR 25 mark. If you look at this scenery and compare it to other developers scenery like that of Flightbeam, Flytampa and Orbx, then it's as clear as night and day that this just isn't up to scratch.

Anonymous said...

No envy or grudge, just healthy criticism of scenery that is overpriced and under par quality wise.

Markus Lanzemeier said...

First of all thanks guys here for giving me right in my opinion. To be honest I will due to the above mentioned "issues" not buy the scenery. (Also Leeds is not really a real destination for me.) However I must say, that I do not want to compare this work to FlyTampa, FSDT, Orbx since this scenery is a lot of levels below the above mentioned however when looking at the price for this (sorry but personally I think so) little shitty regional airport, then we can compare it and then for sure Orbx, FSDT, FlyTampa will get a crown but this scenery does not even deserve a look. I do not blame Garry for doing shit or so, however I think he is getting over himself with UK2000. In the past UK2000 was for me a developer where I could buy something without looking at the scenery and simply enjoy it, however since a few releases it is getting really bad. He does not really put that power in as he did before and for me it seems like this is his money-cow which he milks every 3 or 4 months. I have no problem with his work nor with his price however compared to what I get elsewhere for that price I am really disappointed if not furious about what he delivers (if you know what he had done in the past with EGLL for example).

In addition and sorry for this AirDailyX Team, however it is my personal feeling and I want that you can get better so I write it to you in all honest: I think you are a bit glorifing several scenery/aircraft/expansion developer. For sure you do not want to loose your news delivering source, however I think that you should be above every developer and act as an own company (if we can say this). I always see such glorifing of a product which is in fact a piece of crap. For example several Aerosoft products, UK2000 ad for sure Orbx (which is in fact more or less the top thing in FSX scenery design) however you are touting products of these companies like they were the best thing in FSX (For sure this counts for Orbx, FSDT, FlyTampa, however I do not think this is still valid if you look at UK2000 or Aerosoft). For me this looks like you are getting the products for free but you then need to write a positive comment/review for them and personally I think this is not the right way to continue.

(I am more or less sure this comment will be censored, however we all know that sometimes it comes to a point where...)

Chaders said...

The caravan storage area and secure parking are indeed missing but to say these area's can give "significant visual cues on approach to Runway 14!" is pushing the point somewhat.

As someone who operates out of Leeds I have to say that Gary's done a great job. The fact you get a bit of the surroundings for just £17 is great value IMHO.

Anonymous said...

Not to mention the missing heliport, an integral part of the airport!

Anonymous said...

I have all UK 2000 airports and I think I will get this one, too. But 25 Euros is a little bit too much for those regional airports. The only reason Orbx can demand this price for their regional airports is the huge surrounding area they pack with the product. There is simply nothing special that justfies this Megaairport price.

Mason Dominique said...

We did not glorify Erfurt airport. And my review of Wales was pointing out some weaknesses. We would be glad to talk more of FSDT, FLY TAMPA and Flightbeam. But they onyl release 1 or 2 products/year.

Mason Dominique said...

We did not glorify FSDT VAncouver neither...

Markus Lanzemeier said...

I did not specifically say that it is this or that airport, however when I read your news or your reviews this all sounds for me like a glorified product which I do really need. Due to this I am not reading anymore your review all alone but I try to get another view of it also. Don't get me wrong mate, I really like the work you do here and what you have reached until now, however sometimes I think we should connect the price of a product to its quality and we should get rid of the pre-opinions we have that for example FlyTampa does an amazing product or FSDT is one of the best things. Everyone does some mistake and we should take a look objectively. A little example:
ADX-Review of Aerosoft Airbus X Extended: In your conclusion you say: "And a really fair price for those who already bought it at that time."
So basically you say that 57.9€ (37.95€+19.95€) is a cheap price for that airplane? (Including all the problems it had when it came out?) I mean the PMDG 737NGX (with a lot more of functions and a deeper system costs 53.68€ actually and it has to my knowledge everything included what you need to make a leg from point A to B but that with the AXE you are still missing the managed descent. So far there goes your authencity. Do not forget critizising is not saying: "Ahh look there is a shadow where it shouldn't be one". It is about a clear statement what you expect and what you finally get. I am sure I am not the only one who has this view since personally I feel very addicted to ADX and a day without it would not be a day, however when I read reviews or news where the product is as praised I am asking myself why I take the 5 minutes per day (or maybe more) and surf to ADX. I do not say you are not bringing enough news of FSDT, FlyTampa or anyone else, I mean you cannot change the PR of a company, however I am trying to show you that how you bring the news is not like a "independent" news page should do it or am I totally wrong?

Post a Comment

Comments are now deactivated. Please visit our new website:

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.