Thoughts after about 20 hours...

[lefteris 70]

Well, Michael J.,it's a well-known fact that you're NEVER pleased... ;-) After all, the 737NG is the best-in-the-business when it comes to your biggest pet-peeve (the flight-director), but when that came out, you found another thing to complain about ("I don't fly heavies anymore").Now, it's the "cartoony" panel. What's next, the empty seats in the back? I mean, we'll do THOSE too if you say so!!! (Just get ready to pay for the extra hardware required to display all those extra polygons!)We are sure GLAD to have you around, though! You really keep us on our toes! ;-)Cheers Mate!

[michal 44]

>>We are sure GLAD to have you around, though! You really keep>us on our toes! ;-)>>Cheers Mate!Cheers Lefteris !!I am GLAD to see your TEAM enjoy this TREMENDOUS success. More power to you. As to your 'toes' or 'pleasing' me - forget it. I haven't even started FS9 in the last 3 months. Busy sorting out a lot of personal stuff and also a bit 'burnt out' FS user. Yeah, I still like to read forums but spend more time these days playing with my dog than thinking about simulators.But I will be back - eventually.Michael J.

[Guest Thomas K]

I agree 100% with Colin.I believe Tero summed it up very well in his post also, so I don't have anything to add to what Colin and Tero has already said. I like the PMDG 737, but I strongly dislike the 2D panel layout and graphics. Cartoonish panels, lack of proper pilot's perspective, to name a few things.To those who say this is as good as it gets, and it is impossible to replicate a real cockpit any better in FS: a better solution is possible. Look at Dreamfleet's panels as an example. http://atr.flight1.net/2dpanel.htmlThomas K.

[Mike S KPDX 597]

Thomas, I very much appreciate your thoughts. However, what you said, "lack of proper pilot's perspective" I cant figure out. I have taken the liberty of ripping the images from the respective sites for discussion purposes.I have to say that both are very comparable. Window posts, 'seat' height, window area, glaresheild height, ect... I find both products to be very well done in this 'pilots view' concept. Granted there are variations with nuances like reflections and highlights.thoughts?DF panel (level flight)http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/61143.jpgPMDG panel (climbing turn) - slightly lower reshttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/61144.jpg

[Guest tbirdsport]

I'm with Mike on this one. Although relatively inexperienced (FS2004 only) I prefer PMDG's graphics to the photo panels for the simple reason that they blend in better with the scenery.I own the Cessna 310 which is a great plane but I find that the stark contrast of photo panel and computer graphic scenery distracts from the immersive experience.I think the above screenshots illustrate this point and the pilot perspective very well. At the end of the day its like previous posts have said, unless you have a huge viewing area you can only SIMULATE the experience and you can't please everyone at once unfortunately.But then again what do I know :-).

[Guest Thomas K]

Mike,I think the keyword here is "proper" pilot's perspective.The PMDG737 does offer a pilot's perspective, but to me, it's not one that I would consider great. It seems like a rushed last minute addition, done as a way of silencing people who are vocal about the need for "proper perspectives". There are differences between the 2 screenshots you posted above, whether or not you see them I think depends on your artistic senses and your spatial abilities and intelligence. I can say right off the bat from looking at the comparison above that the PMDG perspective is lacking in aesthetic appeal.And I quote from Colin, "The alternate or captain's view is a good start. But the window post is so heavy that the sensation is overpowering and not immersive. It also wipes out any sense of peripheral vision."Speaking of the PMDG737, in my opinion, I believe that giving the user 4 alternative and highly viewpoint-varied main panel views is not a good solution (e.g.,the whole MZAL idea). It's all simply too aesthetically confusing- In one view, you're way back in the jumpseat and the gauges are far too small to see properly; in another view, you're seeing things from a pseudo captain's perspective (which, like Colin said, is a good start, but the perspective is implemented poorly); and in another view, you have 3 artificially enlarged instrument displays across the entire width of the panel, which destroys the realistic configuration and layout of an authentic 737NG panel (which already looks cartoonish to begin with). In the end, you have 3 highly different and compromised perspectives which is not only confusing, but each of them are less than satisfactory. I know developers don't like to hear criticism about their work so that's all I wll say about this. Apart from the aesthetics of the 2D panels, I must say that PMDG has done a very fine job with the 737. Thomas K.

[Mike S KPDX 597]

point taken about the left side of the above PMDG panel (a bit large). I am going to snoop around airliner.net to see what I can found out. I actually think that things look like this in the real aircraft. And in fact the window frame is both large and at a relativly severe slope that it indeeds cause this 'oversize' optical effect.Kind of like holding you left arm straigt out, bending it up to a 45 angle from the elbow, now rotate your forearm to the right about 4-5 inches and then flatten your hand out level with the horizon (like your frozen in the middle of saluting). At least this is how it was described to me by an NG pilot for Alaska Airlines.BTW; he said that he would try to get a digital photo shot for me soon, we'll see.