The Wilco A320...

[mackintosh 0]

I'm sticking with PSS. It might not be the most realistic, but when it came out it definitely was and the visual models are quite well done by any standard. I'm surprised how many PSS-bashers there are around too (not in this thread, but in general). If anything, PSS should be worshipped for their efforts on that bird. At least they gave us a working Airbus well before anyone else :)

[Guest]

I've always thought the PSS bashers all sound remarkably alike, and they always surface shortly before a competing product is to be launched...There will always be people who don't like a product, and they'll always be louder than those who do like it (especially with commercial stuff, with freeware you hear people screaming how good it is even when it isn't in fear of the creators quitting because they get no recognition sometimes).When 767PIC was released that one had a lot of problems, yet noone flamed Wilco about it.When the DF737 was released that one too had a lot of problems, yet Dreamfleet wasn't flamed.Whenever PSS releases something they are consistently flamed for the smallest imperfection (not saying there were no problems in their initial release, but I didn't experience them).I've never purchased Wilco stuff (the Airport series look nice but performance is reported to be poor and the mix of airports in the boxes doesn't work for me either, the 767 is the wrong kind of aircraft for me) and I'm not starting now. I am quite happy with the PSS Airbus, so why spend more money on another one (even if they do fix the visuals which is somewhat unlikely seeing the visuals on the 767)?

[LAdamson 240]

>Is this something from a Disney filum ? A bit off topic.................. But "Walt Disney" himself, was quite a perfectionist. But then he died in 1966 and some things have got out of hand since then. Most of those "old" Disney films are well done classics.L.Adamson

[Guest]

Ahh, the old ones are the best..

[Guest]

bmp

[Guest kdfw]

767PIC had problems? On my setup, I didn't have any problems on FS2K when it came out. They only made it better w/ the patches and now it's the standard of quality in this hobby.It's definitely not for those who want to fly "toy" airplanes or are fixated on the external model.A320 may be another good product. I'm keeping an open mind, regardless of the possible shortcomings in the external model.Pat

[Guest A32X]

interior turbulance - you fly through some nasty CBs and you view point alters. I imagine you'll get it on hard landings too.

[Guest DreamFleet]

"Is this something from a Disney filum ? What a joke, it shows to me what contempt commercial developers (not just wilco) have for the buying public.Another insulting, and generally inaccurate statement about commercial developers. Will these cheap shots ever end? I don't seem to see them coming from commercial developers; sort of a one way street eh? I guess we're the easy targets because we charge money, and folks think they deserve our "first born" for $29.95. Frankly, whether Wilco or anyone else, I would not be so quick to criticize something that is still "beta".I saw FS2002 when it was first beta, very basic, many bugs, trees floating in the air, grass where water should be, remnants of old scenery on top of new, etc. I am sure that some of you, if having seen it in its first beta version, would have suffered heart attacks because you would have thought that is what they were planning to release it, the truth was far from it. It was amazing to see the sim come to life / get put together before our eyes. Did you ever think Wilco is allowing you the same with such previews?Many make the mistake of thinking that a beta is a "release candidate", it is not, far from it. It is just the first version the developers want to get into the hands of outside testers, and this is done while development and refinement continues. Such was the case with FS2002, with our own products, and I am sure with Wilco's / their developers products (Wilco is essentially a publisher, not a product developer).I think they deserve better than this, and commercial developers in general deserve better than the offensive and inaccurate statement made above. Of course, we're used to such cheap shots, but every so often I will make it a point to respond to such remarks. We are human beings afterall.I for one put in about 12 hours a day, six days a week into my commercial FS work, and I do not view that as having contempt for anything or anyone!Well, my 12 hours is up for today. Time to go for a Martini, with a contempt chaser! :-lolRegards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F..._FORUM_LOUd.jpg

[Guest Daniel Pimentel]

No kidding. It's totally WRONG to insult people's work like that, and threads like this just show how rude and ungrateful people can get sometimes. I have seen MUCH worse stuff and people go gaga over it, and now comes this, introducing new stuff to the FS world, and people b**** about it. Oh well. Ungrateful people. We should try not doing anything and leave you people with default planes and scenery, see if you still feel like bashing. :-lolCheers,http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d68c1fb7d97da8c.jpgAA RULES!!! :)Download my semi-photoreal AA 757!:http://ftp.avsim.com/library/sendfile.php?DownloadID=16882Aerolineas Argentinas A330-200 NOW AVAILABLE!!http://www.thevivcorp.com/~fyarepaints/MyR.../posky332ar.zipChrome AA 767 NOW AVAILABLE!!http://www.thevivcorp.com/~fyarepaints/MyR...osky767aaV1.zipDominicana de Aviacion 727-53C NOW AVAILABLE!!http://www.thevivcorp.com/~fyarepaints/MyRepaints/dom722.zip______________________________"Whenever you find yourself in the side of the majority it's time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain

[01pewterz28 117]

Is it me or does it seem like Wilco is taking a step back with the graphics of the panel itself. With the advances of FS we have seen PIC 767, and the DF 737 that photo real panels are the way to go. You can have crisp looking graphics and place the gauges into the panel. This is one of the reasons why I never caught on to Fly the panels just look to cartoonish. Wilco IMHO could have taken/obtained real photos from all angles and turne the VC into an amazing looking panel. Looking at this photo http://www.wilcopub.com/nonfls/a320_06.htm you have a very nice looking AP buttons, and FMC yet the rest of the cockpit panel looks too cartoonish it's a shame. The other thing I an not real happy about is that Wilco is limiting the use of the panel. We all know Wilco has never been able to make a good looking visual model look at A2k_v1-3, as well as the PIC visual model not the best offered. It's sad that the product for now cannot be used in the PA A320 series as I happen to really enjoy the PA 320.John

[LAdamson 240]

>This is one of the reasons why I never caught on to Fly the >panels just look to cartoonish. >And then I'm one who actually likes the majority of FLY panels but not all. I prefer there "crispness" of lines, and 3D effect of corner shots of the 2D panel.I do not have the DF737 or PIC767, but I do like the way that Lou (Dreamfleet) has taken panels such as the Archer and Cardinal, then used a combo of digital photography and artwork.I'm also a big fan of FS2002, but I did post some FLYII screenshots yesterday. In these shot's I'd give it "high" marks for one of the most realistic "outside views". Note: This senery is limited, a large download, and best from altitude, but it sure looks good, even the panels. Yesterday's screenshots....L.Adamsonhttp://ftp.avsim.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboa...ewmode=threaded

[michal 44]

>Is it me or does it seem like Wilco is taking a step back >with the graphics of the panel itself.John,I happen to agree with this statement. At least this is what these screenshots look today to me. This clearly may change when time goes by and more work is performed. However some people here clearly think that expressing such opinions is being "ungreatful". Not sure whether to laugh or cry. *:-*Michael J.

[Guest]

767 PIC is THE standard, period. The crappy visual model had nothing to do with the 4 PIC team guys (Eric, Wade, Pedro, and Laurent); ask Wilco about that. When the PIC panel is merged with the POSKY 762/3, you have damn near perfection. The early Airbus screenies confirm that Wilco's modeling skills haven't improved. Except for some gimmicks, what will this add-on have that PSS didn't already have 6 mos ago?

[Guest flightpro08]

The whole package is a joke. I just flew on a America West Airbus A320 a few days ago in the real world and the interior and exterior of the Wilco A320 is a completely different aircraft than the one I flew on. The colors in the cockpit are dead wrong and the model looks like a model made from a first time GMAX user. These statements are harsh, yes, but Wilco needs to 'sharpen' up their bus, especially if they're going to charge for it.Ryan-Flightpro08 :-coolVATSIM Pilot/ControllerZLA ARTCC Controller 1 (C-1)SAN TRACON Lead [link:www.taxiwaysigns.com]Taxiwaysigns.com Scenery Designer-----------------------------My "Home Made" System Specs:Intel Pentium 4 2.2GHz ProcessorTurbo Gamer ATX Mid-Tower with 420W Power SupplyEPoX 4G4A Motherboard with Intel 845G ChipsetVisiontek XTASY GeForce4 128MB Ti4600 (Det 30.30 Drivers)512MB PC2100 DDR RAM40GB Matrox 7200RPM Hard DriveWindows XP Home Edition*No CPU or GPU Overclocking*3dMark2001SE Score: 10346

[Jay R 0]

Ummm, has anyone paid attention to what Lou has said? Looking at the statements below, it seems the words are seen but just before reaching the common sense thingumabob, the words make a bee line for another yet unkown destination!!! :-rollThis bashing of a product NONE OF YOU HAVE EVEN SEEN YET, is apalling and just wrong. I see a project "IN THE WORKS"!!!! :-newburnAnyway before I say more, let me go drink some more iced tea (yes the good stuff!) and keep my eyes open to read some more. :-outtahttp://www.forefrontgrp.com/jayssig.jpg"There is an art . . . to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss!"