Why don't add on developers care to make quality VC's?

[Guest]

Why is it add on developers can't/don't make a quality VC like Real Air does? Shockwave makes one that is almost as good as Real Air, but nobody else comes close, and we know it can be done. Real Air does not even charge more than the guys with the lesser VC's, so it can't be said its not practical or possible to make them that nice. Is it just lack of skill?

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"Is it just lack of skill?"I can just sense the flames coming--I think this is a pretty broad condemnation in terms of add on VC quality and I don't feel it speaks the truth. I've sat in Cessna's and flown 'em, I've sat in Pipers. Carenado does a fantastic job with their virtual cockpits. I can almost smell the Avgas.I've flown the Challenger microlight. And the Luscombe. Bill Lyons has created freeware aircraft that are dead ringers for both. I've never sat in the cockpit of a BAC-111 but I believe most members here will tell you David Maltby's work is as real as it gets.Those are just a few....Anyway, I've tried to be civil in my answer and I hope others will too, because there's a lot of ways your question can be taken, most that don't show a deep respect for the work people do on these projects.Regards,John

[maxter 0]

VC's are really a matter of personal opinion IMHO.By way of a couple of examples, Carenado make some great VC's, visually they are stunning and functionally they are brilliant, but in the main they represent fairly basic aircraft and in my own uninformed opinion I would guess the gauge functionality behind them would be reasonably uncomplicated.FSD on the other hand do make brilliant panels. IMHO while they are not as visually stunnibg as the Carenado one's, their complexity and functionality for GA A/C are hard to beat and in the main work very well. It's all horses for courses.As I don't have or fly any heavy iron, I don't have an opinion on offerings such as thos from PMDG or LevelD, however their prowess in that genre is enormous as is evidenced by their amazing following by those who fly by the book.Cheers,Chris Porter:-outta

[Guest]

>"Is it just lack of skill?">>I can just sense the flames coming--I think this is a pretty>broad condemnation in terms of add on VC quality and I don't>feel it speaks the truth. You are probably right as I having only been in the add on scene for a few months, and if my comments are condemning than I appologize as that notion is probably based on limited information. For example I read one developer in particular humbly delare he is not the best at what he does, and that he is thankful people appreciate his work. I greatly respect a comment like that, and will buy from him again.Instead of saying why don't they make "quality VCs", I should have said "higher quality" VC's. This forum doesn't let you edit your words when you get a chance to come back online and see what it was you wrote earlier. I havn't seen a cerenado product so I don't know what kind of quality they have, as I am into military planes. I guess its not fair to say the work out there is not quality, as it is, but when one compnay sets a standard for quality I have a way of looking up that standard as the very definition of "quality". From what I have read the VC is one of the most common dissapointments in add on aircraft, and I have to wonder why? Even something with an amazing model like the Plane Design Spitfire gets complaints on the VC. If RealAir an Shockwave can reach a certain level of quality, why not Plane Design? Why not others? There has to be a reason and I'm just wondering what that is. I would have to guess either its not worth their time to put the extra effort into the VC, or they just lack the skills to do what other developers have done. Personally I respect the guy that lacks the skills more than the guy who could do it but choses not to. Seems to me if they have the skill any developer can make a VC like that of Real Air, though instead of that quality being the norm its the exception, but why?

[alsummers 0]

I really struggle to think of any examples that justify your question. Perhaps I just haven't seen them, if there are.99% of the payware addon aircraft I own has an amazing VC. Aeroworx B200, Digital Aviation Dornier and Cheyenne, Sibwings Saab Safir, Level-D 767, PMDG 747, ALL the Carenado aircraft...the list goes on.Not to mention the INFINITE quality of VC's in David Maltby's BAC-111, and Trident...and these are freeware.If its only military aircraft you fly, then perhaps you own Alphasim aircraft, and similar. If this is the case, then yes, you probably are seeing a differing quality in VC's. They throw out an aircraft every couple of months it seems, and whilst I am sure they are fun and enjoyable to fly, the downside is that the VC's and so on, are not at the absolute cutting edge. Realair on the other hand, have only done a handful of aircraft...thus more time and energy is put into the modelling, and thus the end product is of a far higher quality.Regards,Al.

[G7USL 117]

If your into military aircraft, grab that Cloud 9 Phantom while it's going cheap.I paid full price for it and considered it MORE than worth it. I hardly fly military but have always had a soft spot for the Phantom.

[Guest jgreth123]

You want to see some quality VC shots?Overheadhttp://www.airlinerxp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=163http://www.airlinerxp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9Pedestalhttp://www.airlinerxp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1533#1533The bar is being raised. :)

[virtuali 4,419]

Why don't you try the Cloud9 MB339 and Phantom ? They both have trial versions, and are on 50% sale right now.

[Paul Golding 92]

I wish I hadn't looked now. I really don't like buying add-ons (nothing personal :-) ) because I just don't have the time use them. They tend to get installed and flown a few very short flights and then forgotten about due to lack of time.................and then I see yet another comment about that bloody Phantom!!!I mean, it's a Phantom. I don't know how many different plastic F4 kits I made as a kid, but the temptation to get a FS Phantom is probably too much to ignore.................now if I could land it on a deck somewhere as well :-yellow1 Greatest Airliners - DC-8Greatest Airliners - 727 Whisperjethttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg

[Guest Mesa]

Can't you engineer some kind of swap deal? A Phantom for a 727 seems like a good deal to me! I do think you'd like it though. It's the quickest way to heaven on my PC, in more ways than one!

[hmar 0]

Hi,Some make excellent VC's: all airplanes from "RealAirSimulations", Saab 91 from "Sibwings" and not mentioned already the Yak 40 from "Suprunov Design".Regards,Hugo

[Guest]

>If its only military aircraft you fly, then perhaps you own>Alphasim aircraft, and similar. If this is the case, then>yes, you probably are seeing a differing quality in VC's. >They throw out an aircraft every couple of months it seems,>and whilst I am sure they are fun and enjoyable to fly, the>downside is that the VC's and so on, are not at the absolute>cutting edge. Well I guess this sums up what I'm getting at, as far as different quality VC's. From what you guys have said it seems most devs out there have a nice VC, and I don't own anything from most of those companies listed so I guess I wouldn't know that. Since Alphasim turns out so many aircraft I can see where there would be a downside to that in the VC quality. The airlinerxp shots above are amazing. I'll just have to look around a bit more and see whats out there, as it seems clear I don't know a whole lot about the guys with the nice VCs. Thanks for the info, and I appologize if my comments where insutling to the add on market.

[Ricardo41 5,935]

Post Deletedricardo

[G7USL 117]

>You want to see some quality VC shots?>>Overhead>http://www.airlinerxp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=163>http://www.airlinerxp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9>>Pedestal>http://www.airlinerxp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1533#1533>>The bar is being raised. :)Jeff thanks for posting the 'url's' for the Airliner XP. It looks fantastic. I know it's still being developed but it's already got me VERY interested.Seems you might be ending your 'low and slow' period soon eh Jeff? ;-)

[RobdeVries 28]

Wise decision Richardo...Rob "Holland&Holland" de Vries http://fool.exler.ru/sm/fly2.gif"To go up, pull the stick back. To go down, pull the stick back harder"