B757 Captain Sim

[LAdamson 240]

>I do not have any Captain Sim products myself but after>reading all of these threads about them, I never plan on>purchasing one. From seeing screenshots, they do look like>very detailed and great aircraft but just like others said,>that doesnt matter. What does matter is the way they seem to>be treating their customers. Be it a company that produces>flightsim aircraft or a car company, no company should be able>to promise something to their customers and then not go>through with it or provide poor customer service. It seems>that this isnt just a problem with Captain Sim though. Many FS>companies seem to be thinking "Oh we are selling products for>flightsim so that doesnt mean we have to provide complete>support or live up to our promises. Its only a game." Frankly,>that attitude doesnt fly with me. Like I said before, it>doesnt matter what the company is selling, it matters that>they are selling something. That something should be fully>backed up with company support and also no empty promises, be>it a $40,000 car or a $40 dollar 757 for flightsim. Just my 2>cents. Have a happy 2008!You can probably assume that there are also hundreds, perhaps thousands of happy customers too. But as with just about any product, the un-happy are the most vocal. As to promises; I've been around flight simming for close to 20 years, and a lot of hopeful addons have never materialized, although the developer had good original intentions.And speaking of promises........Is the word "promise" actually used by the developer? Perhaps it is, or perhaps it's just in the mind of those who envision the words such as "lies", "deceit", and "no intention".The bottom line, is to know what your getting up front. That's the way I've done it, and Captain Sim has fullfilled it's "promise" to me; just as Flight1, RealAir, Carenado, Dreamfleet, and others.CS got me the product I expected, and with no hassle. That's what counts!L.Adamson

[Guest Reed203]

You can probably assume that there are also hundreds, perhaps thousands of happy customers too. But as with just about any product, the un-happy are the most vocal.As to promises; I've been around flight simming for close to 20 years, and a lot of hopeful addons have never materialized, although the developer had good original intentions.And speaking of promises........Is the word "promise" actually used by the developer? Perhaps it is, or perhaps it's just in the mind of those who envision the words such as "lies", "deceit", and "no intention".The bottom line, is to know what your getting up front. That's the way I've done it, and Captain Sim has fullfilled it's "promise" to me; just as Flight1, RealAir, Carenado, Dreamfleet, and others.CS got me the product I expected, and with no hassle. That's what counts!L.AdamsonGood point on the unhappy customers being vocal. I do agree with you there. They do have a right to be though. Captain Sim gave them a half baked product. They said there would be avionics released at a later date because they were in development. In my mind, that is "up front". People went into this addon thinking they would get the whole deal eventually but then got left in the dust by CS without a reason. That is just poor business. There is a difference if a promised addon never materializes as opposed to a part of an existing addon being released necessary for proper operation. (avionics). The difference is that people payed in the second case as opposed to a standalone product just never materializing. Hopefully im not being too confusing in my writing. If you are happy with your CS products and disagree with me, then that is fine. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. Have a happy new year!

[mgh 89]

If the add-on was "necessary for proper operation" why did people buy the aircraft without it? They could have waited until it was available.

[mgh 89]

As I said previously, you don't know and I don't know what CaptainSim's original intentions were, but you assumed that it deliberately set out to deceive and lie from the begining. An equally likely explanation is that it simply couldn't deliver for a range of possible reasons. Add-on developers are tiny organisations in relation to firms like Microsoft, Adobe, Autodesk etc and just don't have the in-depth resources in terms of staff, equipment and finance to cope with the unexpected. Consider the Vista/DX10/FSX saga - only a major company could have coped with that.The basic point is that you and others wanted an aircraft with an FMC but chose to buy one without an FMC. You'd have still been in the same position if CaptainSim had gone belly-up and stopped trading. You deliberately chose to take a risk which hasn't paid off so far.

[Guest edwardpat2004]

That's exactly the point. We all should not be doing business with risky people like Captain Sim, because they seem to lack resources to undergo difficults things like advanced avionics, FMC, systems, etc.I still think that CS did not fulfill their promises, even if they knew they did not have the resources. That's why I think they "lie" in some way.

[LAdamson 240]

>That's exactly the point. We all should not be doing business>with risky people like Captain Sim, because they seem to lack>resources to undergo difficults things like advanced avionics,>FMC, systems, etc.>I still think that CS did not fulfill their promises, even if>they knew they did not have the resources. That's why I think>they "lie" in some way.>>That's like saying........---Never buy an add on that doesn't have the smooth instruments of Reality XP or RealAir.---Or never buy an add on that doesn't have the exterior graphics of Carenado or Captain SimBut that's silly, because every developer in this industry has their special "niches". I don't know of any, that cover all bases, all the time.One other thing. Many developers DO have the resources to begin with, only to loose a particular talent to some competitor, sickness, family, change of life, etc. And this happens all the time.I've been around flight simulation for close to 20 years, and well know this phenomenon.And when you speak of advanced avionics & FMC, be very thankful, as a real life simulation of the Garmin 1000 can cost around $250 (all by itself) from "big time" operators such as King Schools.L.Adamson

[Guest edwardpat2004]

Other FS sofwtare developers, like PSS, PMDG, Level-D, F1 and FeelThere don't make promises of "future blocks" and deliver good graphics with good systems, avionics, FMC, etc, right from the beginning. I would rely more on these kind of developers in the future, given the unfortunate experience with the CS B757.

[LAdamson 240]

>Other FS sofwtare developers, like PSS, PMDG, Level-D, F1 and>FeelThere don't make promises of "future blocks" and deliver>good graphics with good systems, avionics, FMC, etc, right>from the beginning. I would rely more on these kind of>developers in the future, given the unfortunate experience>with the CS B757.Forget all that "old fashined" stuff...Modern jetliners will be going the route of those larger screen Garmin 1000 PFD and MFD displays, that we see in todays simple Cessna 172's.As soon as desktop flight simming gets around to providing a full fledged and working Garmin 1000 with terrain/obstacle warning, traffic monitoring, real time XM weather, XM music, and Jeppeson airport mapping.................then I'll be a happy camper!If it comes with just a basic real life Cessna 172, let alone a full fledged Boeing 787, then why can't I have it all, now? :-hah L.Adamson

[Guest bstolle]

How many people don't buy PMDG planes?I bought the 757 for FLY! from PMDG ONLY because they promised to do a much improved cockpit for the 757. It never happened, they just stopped any support for FLY! at all.Nevertheless I bought all the planes for fs9 from PMDG.Cloud9 is never going to fix their Phantom for fs9 either.Concerning the CS 757 'block' design.I'm very interested in the md80 and I of course do have the coolsky md80.I would LOVE to get the LAGO md80 as well but as I fly only from the VC it's a nogo for me because it doesn't have a VC.It's 'promised', so what. Until then I will have to wait. If it never happens, no harm done.Same for the Digital Aviation Fokker. They are not going to release it with a VC initially, so I'm not going to buy it. It's that simple.If you are interested in four engined turboprops and don't buy the CS C-130 you don't know what you are missing. LOLFor my part I enjoy the CS Herk very much. RegardsBerntCapt 767

[Guest edwardpat2004]

I agree with your comments on the CS C-130, but comparing the case with the one of the Lago MD-80 is wrong.

[Guest edwardpat2004]

I'm not talking about modern airliners that will be ..... I'm just talking about B757's, B747's, B767's, B777's, my friend, which have what you call "old-fashioned" stuff. Good luck.

[huntr 0]

I agree with Edward in all this. CS have lost credibility and my custom for the future. They had previously produced several excellent products which I have enjoyed. I trusted them to follow through with the Block system. I am not prepared to use the CS-757 without an FMC - which is to be expected at the quality CS aspire to be associated with - and I do not believe that I was taking a risk in buying on the block system. They promised, I expected, they have my money and they haven't delivered to the expected or the standard that they have previously. CS have lost their credibility and it will take a long time for them to get it back. I don't even visit their site any longer!Happy New Year to all!

[Guest NWilkinson]

I think it's reasons like this why I develop freeware only...Though I do want to side with all the people here who have been mistreated and what not... I would want to stress that most likely the majority of developers with CS have a personal life, a full time job, and a family... with that being said, even if I were to develop payware products, my life, my job, would be put priority slot 1 and 2, respectively, with developing FS products in a distant last... as I believe that's how it should be. What's really going on at CS? I don't care, and it doesn't bother me, I've never owned any of their products ( I don't agree with paying 30 bucks for an aircraft to be flown in a game that costs 50 bucks). But as far as I can tell, there was no written contract in a bill of sale saying that any updates were promised, guaranteed, or even hinted that there ever would be one. Having it advertised on a website is not a document set on stone, it must be on either a contract or a bill of sale, or invoice. I'm going to assume that no one's receipt says anything about that update. On a 3rd note, I will easily bash payware companies due to crappy products, and I feel sorry for anyone who lowers their standards unknowingly to purchase products like those.. but the flight sim community is an international group.. and there is no 1 set of laws or governing structure to control the actions of any 1 group. Thinking that any countries governing organization could file a lawsuit against a FS company is completely ridiculous, as you paid for a product "as-is," and you received the product, "as-is." This isn't something like a lemon law in the United States.. Purchasing from the internet comes with it's own risks and I am sorry to say this.. and please do not be offended.. but everyone here who is complaining about lack of updates should have done more research in the beginning. Every payware product out there from a well-known designer has at least 3 or 4 reviews done on it shortly after it is released. If the review is untrue, then the problem lays with the individual performing the review. It's a well-known fact that many reviews are more biased in the direction of payware products... and then there are literally thousands of internet chat forums.. I have lost count on how many new users register with forums that I frequently visit and ask opinions on payware products... and you all should have done the same instead of jumping the gun and buying it when it first came out.It is a shame that CS did say they would make it, and failed to follow up with it.. but no one really has any right to expect them to actually do it, since this is a talent-heavy industry and there are far more people who just use the product instead of build the product. Finding designers is actually hard to do, and that's one reason why FSFrance and Project Open Sky (and any others I do not know about) help out with other learning builders... I would not be surprised if there were fewer addon companies in the future because of this.

[Guest]

The FS aftermarket is at a near collapse at this point... i guess all the subpar developers are starting to close doors.The rest are trying to juice money out of things they made years ago (pmdg, CS). leveld havent released anything and i doubt they would ever but at least they are still providing free support. they still have my respect.airlinerxp bailed out on their project and now are making corny comments on their forums about flying real planes and not caring about FS and all that.. we see where this one is going. oh well, its just a game. less money on it means more money on other things, such as real flight time. snap! see how this works guys? as far as CS is concerned, regardless of everything nobody can touch them in the modelling and texturing department.. wasn't this why people bought the 757 (me inclusive), because it is the best one ever for FS in terms of model inside and out? So i dont buy it for one second that people bought the model because of the systems... there were no systems!! how can you buy those?! besides you didn't... you bought the plane. for what it was worth, which was like 20$. you didn't spend 69$ on something incomplete. They can release block F for FSX, but it's a dog... useless and they know it. Their planes are so polygon ladden they can only be used in FS9 really..... the customers know this, cs knows it but denies it.