Dreamfleet-Politely :)

[Guest]

I realize that Dreamfleet has been around and has produced exceptional products, and that most of their customers are happy. I myself was satisfied with the overall product, mainly because of the fantastic 737 cockpit. However, I wasn't completely satisfied because I felt that 1) I was misled 2)the FS2002 "eye candy" wasn't being utilized to its full potential (I understand why)as you commonly see in "freeware" FS2002 aircraft today on the net.I would like to elaborate on my two points listed above.I felt that I was misled in the advertisement of the "Greatest Airliners-737" because I was under the impression that I was purchasing a DF737 for FS2002, even though the package says FS2000 & FS2002. When I installed the aircraft, I quickly realized that the model was not an original GMAX 737, it turned out to be the FS2000 DF737 with the FS2002 update. There isn't anything on the package box nor the advertisement itself expressing that the model being used for FS2002 users is not GMAX and is the original FS2000 model. This is where I felt I was misled. I don't have a problem with the product, most, if not, every problem can be fixed by visiting their forum.I don't think I need to elaborate on the second point, "eye candy" because I'm sure most of you understand that part and realize the difference between aircraft effects in FS2000 vs. FS2002.In closing, I apologize for coming off to everyone as immature and pure childish. My original post (in the DF forum), although wasn't rude, shouldn't have been expressed the way it was. I have been very frustrated because I posted before I used my intelligence and the results were not very successful, especially in the DF forum. I do undertand that Dreamfleet offers refunds to unsatisfied customers and I think that kinda says alot. Thank you for taking my head out of my a#@ :)Regards,Fausto (happycapt)

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Just about any time you see anything advertised for FS2000 and FS2002, that should right away suggest that the product is not a GMAX product. FS2000 didn't support GMAX. In the absence of such a label, we have to take responsibility as consumers to be aware. The DF 737 has been out forever. If you've known where to post your concerns (such as this forum), you should have seen countless threads on the subject. So I wouldn't qualify anything about that product as misleading--yours is the first post I think I've ever heard. I have never taken issues with products enhanced for FS2002, as long as they cite their FS2000 roots. Those enhancements can take other forms, such as a redoing of the aircraft.cfg so the aircraft slides into FS2002's new organized structure. But whenever FS2000 and FS2002 are used on the product package, I take that as a flag to expect something different than an "only for FS2002" package.If you want a visual model that does meet FS2002 standards, I suggest the GMAX 737 from Ariane. Combine that with the panel from DF, and I think you have a pretty solid aircraft in all respects, except for no V/C being present.-John

[CF104 0]

Hi Fausto,In defense of Dreamfleet on your point 1. Nowhere does it say on their site that they upgraded the model to a GMAX model. Most developers will spell it out quite clearly if they used GMAX in the model design.Just thought I'd add that point of view ;-)Cheers,JohnBoeing 727/737 mechanic

[Guest]

Thanks John.Is the Ariane 737 available as freeware here at avsim, or do I need to go somewhere and purchase it?Yes, I should have seen the flag (Fs2000 & Fs2002), however, Dreamfleet should change this. All it takes, with my luck, is one person (me) to be misled. This, in my opinion, would be good business practice on behalf of Dreamfleet, so that it(misled) doesn't happen again. I do plan to email Dreamfleet once I get an email address from them. I do not feel comfortable asking Dreamfleet to change this aspect of their advertisment, in their "public" forum, I don't want any more problems in there. Regards,Fausto (happycapt)

[Guest]

We are still not at that stage where you can just asume that the plane is made with GMAX.GMAX is still a selling point that is always put in bold and on a prominent place on the web page. So for now if it doesnt say its a GMAX plane then it is not a GMAX plane.CheersBIK

[Guest]

John:I realize this, however I was under the impression because it does say FS2002 and so I was thinking that they were offering an FS2002 GMAX -today's standard. I should have just used my own common sense (like you said)Regards,Fausto (happycapt)

[Guest Van]

In regards to your Ariane 737 question, the Ariane GMAX 733 and 734 are payware, but well worth the money and they do go very well with the Dreamfleet 734 panel. I've been using the Dreamfleet panel since it first arrived on the scene and am still very pleased with it. I was very happy when they upgraded it to be FS2002 compatable and even more staisfied when they added TCAS to the EHSI, even Wilco's PIC didn't include the TCAS feature with their upgrade to FS2002 compatability. I would have happily paid for just the Panel from Dreamfleet as I can always find good GMAX 737's to merge it with.Regards,Van LatendresseYeoDesigns Panel/FDE designer

[Guest]

The panel may be converted to work with many different freeware and payware 737 models - GMAX and otherwise. I myself have it working with the Project Freeware models, others have converted it to Ariane and other packages. I've always thought its selling point is its cockpit environment and most GMAX features (in fact all bar one) are invisible from the cockpit anyway , which is where you're supposed to be to do this product justice. I'm not a switched on simmer, like so many in this forum, but even I know that box art that states "FS2000 & FS2002" suggests a product developed for the former, converted for the latter. After that, its no secret to find out what you need to know to make an educated purchase decision. All the information was found via the official forum which you have already found. Chas

[Guest KenG]

Buyer beware. If you had asked Dreamfleet or those in the DF forum prior to the purchase, they would have told you the truth. Instead you assumed it did (and we know what happens when we assume) and so probably didn't think to ask. It is a bit confusing so I can see how someone would potentially make that same assumption. However, as has been said here, the fact it said "for FS2000 AND FS2002" and it didn't explicitly mention GMax, it was unlike it was a "full" FS2002 model. That GMax tag is still an important selling point for most developers. Oh well, as you said it is a great little plane.

[Guest]

I was under the impression that the 737 was described as 'FS2002 compatible' i.e. it will work fully with FS2002. If that's the case, then I would have to say you were not at all misled.The new 727, being newly developed, will of course feature all that 2002 has to offer, is designed in GMAX, and will feature things never before seen is Flight Simulator :-)All the best,http://www.blandreynolds.btinternet.co.uk/DF_PG_sm.gif

[Guest flightpro08]

As others have pointed out, whenever you see an aircraft that works for FS2000 and FS2002, you should know right away that it won't have all of the FS2k2 "eye candy." Gotta do your research before buying any product, as it's not the company's responsablity to research it for you. ;-)Ryan-Flightpro08 :-cool VATSIM Pilot/ControllerZLA ARTCC Senior Controller (C-3)SAN TRACON Lead ASRC (Advanced Simulated Radar Client) Beta Tester-----------------------------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 SP1*No CPU or GPU Overclocking*3dMark2001SE Score: 11298-----------------------------Click [link:ftp.avsim.com/library/esearch.php?DLID=&Name=&FileName=&Author=Ryan+Fretwell&CatID=Root]Here to Download my American Eagle POSKY CRJ-200!

[pbenoit 0]

Fausto,Stand back for a minute and think of how many times anyone who is advertising ANYTHING says what their product is NOT. Good grief Man.Timex or Citizen don't say, "Here's our watch, it ISN'T a ROLEX, but it does keep time and looks cool."Someone said it succinctly above ... Caveat Emptor .. buyer beware.Always remember the the components of the word ASSUME.Cheers and

[Guest]

While it may seem obvious that a product labelled as being for FS2k and FS2k2 will not feature some of the new bells and whistles for FS2k2, I think that happycapt may have a small point here. Put yourself in the position of a newcomer to Flight Sim. You recently bought FS2002 and you're quite impressed. But you want to fly a nice 737 and the default 737 in the product doesn't really cut it. So you head down to your local store to see what's available. You see the Dreamfleet product, see that it's compatible with FS2k2 and buy it. I can understand being a little disappointment when you get it out of the box and its not as shiny as you'd expected. It's a little like going to MacDonald's and comparing the photo of a Big Mac on the menu with the actual burger you get. You can see that they're similar, but the real thing bears little relation to the actual product. But that's marketing for you! Marketing people don't actually lie, but their version of the truth borders on the insanely optimistic.Modern life is rubbish.It's a pain in the #####, but the only answer is to painstakingly research every product before you buy. That is why I get annoyed when people come on here and rant about products in such a mindless fashion. AVSim is a great way of finding out about other people's experiences with a product before you buy, and a small but incredibly vocal minority wailing and gnashing their teeth about something makes it that much harder to form an objective opinion about something. I'm ok, I've got enough cash to waste some on the odd duff product - it's people that are at school or college, or are retired and only have finite resources that I feel sorry for.

[Guest]

If a beginner in flight simulation truly bought the DreamFleet 737 wouldnt that be an example of caveat emptor? It's a product aimed fairly and squarely at the top end of the market, isnt it? I know it took me months to get to grips with it.Chas

[Guest]

Am I the only one who is getting tired of these threads? No one will ever release a product that will satisfy everyone. There will always be someone with unrealistic expectations, someone who values different product attributes or someone who simply didn't do their homework. I think it would be good to remember that the payware producers are small and relatively young, often formed by a bunch of men and women who love coding airplanes and panels who simply want a small return on the thousands of hours invested in their creations. I don't think anyone is getting rich out there coding virtual 737s.That fact alone puts the real onus on the consumer to do their homework before getting out the credit card. Know who is taking your money, know whether they will respond to legitimate questions and know what you are buying. There is enough information on this forum alone to build very accurate pictures of the business practices and products of every company releasing payware today. In fact, there is so much one cans safely dismiss the 20% of posts that are simply rants or over-emotioinal raves, and focus only on those giving thier objective and useful feedback. There are a lot of smart, mature people here - enough to educate even the newest of consumers. And to our friend above, I am sorry you are disapointed. I hope it won't ruin your enjoyment of what I believe is one of the best products out there, even though it isn't in GMAX. The model may not be up to Ariane's standard, but nobody but Dreamfleet gives you such a realistic pilot's perspective (you are not sitting on the jump seat like so many of the MSFS free and pay planes)coupled with a very accurate rendition of one of the industry's real workhorse aiplanes including a nearly full-functioned FMC. It still gets the most hours in my log book, and I've had it from the day they released their 2002 version. Not bad for an industry where the average play time for a game title is 20 hours.Happy holidays to all, and may Santa fill your stockings with Airbuses, DeHavilands, Boeings and Pipers. Colin