Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

tf51d

Unbelievable Captainsim

Recommended Posts

What amazes me is that through all these years they just trundle on no matter how they're stepped on - I'm impressed :-hahI suppose the candy man CAN after all.regards,Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>What amazes me is that through all these years they just>trundle on no matter how they're stepped on - I'm impressed>I suppose the candy man CAN after all.Same here. No matter how many warnings some people are given, they will continue to throw their money away on vendors who are less than reliable. Amazing indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will never ever buy a item from Captainsim. They don't deserve mine or anyone else's cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think that after the 727, they just went down hill like going down a slide.My 707 still have too many bugs to fly with... That's a shame.Vincent---------------------------------------VincentE67503G DDR2 Ram8800GT OC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I admit I played with the thought to buy the 757 from>Captainsim. But after reading through their forums, I find it>rather a scandal what Captainsim does there.>>If someone reports an issue in their "report an issue" forums,>the default response is the phrase "to ensure accuracy of>proposed data please provide reference quotes (scan or a>table) from a real flight manual even if you are the type>rated pilot or engineer".> >Firstly, I cannot understand how someone in the FS universe>can seriously think that some simmer owns a real aircraft>manual, be it in electronic or printed form.> >Secondly, to request an excerpt from such a real world manual>would certainly be a case of copyright infringement. It would>be interesting to hear how the laws treat both parties,>Captainsim as the requester and as such a kind of "agent>provocateur", and a customer on the other hand who gives out>copyrighted information.> >Furthermore, the phrase Captainsim uses implies that personal>real world experiences, even if they exist in reality and are>not written down in some book, are completely irrelevant.>Instead of trying to understand what people say in their>forums, Captainsim holds itself as in posession of the only>valid truth by telling people that if they think Captainsim is>wrong, it's the users' duty to prove this, and if that cannot>be done (what is very likely given the requirements Captainsim>accepts as legitimate proofs, see the section on copyright and>airplane manuals above) the way Captainsim did their product>is the right one. Some dictator couldn't do it better.> >I find it interesting that so obvious topics like a wrongly>pointing HSI needle or misbehaving VNAV climb are grounded by>Captainsim and not worth a 2nd thought. The 757 doesn't do it>different from all the other modern Boeing planes out there,>it accelerates to a certain (usually FMS calculated) speed or>250 kts below FL100 during climb and disregards v/s.>>I asked Captainsim for a statement, so far I simply cannot>accept how they act and will not buy from them.>>AndreasThat's not even the half of it.In the 707 forum (the thread still may be there), they had 2 FEs with thousands of hours in the 707 cockpit telling CS that the 707 never flew with a certain type of AP (Sperry I think), noting that it appeared that they just copied the AP from the 727 and said it was a 707 AP. CS, in its holier-than-thou attitude insisted that they (meaning CS) were right, and basically blew the experienced FEs off.Speaking of blowing off customers, where is the rest of the FSX 727 CS "implied" was due out shortly after they finished exterior? Not a peep in over a year, and according to them, other projects should not interfere with its timeline because they've said many times and I quote "We have many developers/programmers working on individual projects, not just one team working on one project." when constanly asked why they lied about releasing the 757 FMC before the fsx C-130 (and space shuttle, fsx 727, etc.). People in the 727 forum keep asking CS, and they keep getting ignored. Typical CS customer non-service.And what was one of the reasons again why CS constanly told us that blocks D/F were taking so long??? Wasn't it something about they wanted to put out a virtually bug-free product....after months and months of "beta testing" the product goes out the door with some of the most obvious bugs that are being reported now? Either yet another lie, or they are inept in their beta process, or inept in their ability to progam those items and they were hoping nobody would notice, and if they did, make them prove they are a 757 captain or engineer with 10,000 hours in type before they'd take their bug report seriously. Yeah, CS has an answer (excuse) for everything.Regards,Steve Dra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Captainsim responded to my initial posting on their forums, but without going into any detail, the answer was again vague and Today, I asked them to explain more detailed if it wouldn't be better if they give their 757 a chance. It was positive criticism, no word of damnation or trying to upset them somehow.Guess what? The entire thread I started has now disappeared from the CS forum.I think that speaks for itself. A company where threads are locked for obscure reasons (e.g. some user reported a HSI bug to Captain Sim and added screenshots where even the most uninformed can see that the needles don't point where they should. CS locked the thread because the user didn't deliver "original tables" or excerpts from a real world AOM) and entire threads get deleted is surely not acceptable.I can only warn users to start a business relationship with Captain Sim after all I saw there and experienced myself. I somewhere read that the people behind CS are Russian. Maybe it's because of the lack of any democratic feeling (Russia in reality is no democracy) that influences CS's perception in a very negative way.I can only hope that CS people one day "convert" and change their minds, currently I can only hope their still existing customers discover the true face behind CS and cease buying from them. I think the FS world doesn't need another dictatoric "black sheep" vendor...Andreas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unbelievable!Many months ago, I purchased the basic CS 757-200 and was very disappointed that the FMC was an ornament only (In their defense, I may not have read everything correctly), but was still disappointed.After all of this time, the mystery to me is that anyone buys their products. Maybe they just don't know and have no knowledge of the multitude of forum posts similar to this one.However, with an LDS-767 panel merge to the CS aircraft mentioned above, it gives birth to a dandy bird which I enjoy very much.Happy flying:RTHEdit: Including in FSX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andreas,>> are Russian. Maybe it's because of the lack of any democratic feeling ermmm, I also find the Captainsim behaviour quite weird to put it mildly, but connecting this to any country is way off IMO.There are many examples of pathetic support in the FS scene, let me mention FSQUALITY or LAGO or many more. For my two examples : Does that qualify for any generalized statements about Austria or Italy then? I don't think so.And regarding locked or deleted threads that are not to the liking of developers : Well, you don't have to look that far from here. Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And regarding locked or deleted threads that are not to the liking of developers : Well, you don't have to look that far from here.That's not a fair statement! The only reason threads get locked here, is if they get to be personal attacks or vulgar language is used. AVSIM goes out of it's way to remain developer independent, to the point of with the exception of a brief introduction to a product, not allowing them to rant and rave about it here, or post promotional screen shots.As for CS, their main problem is communication. They come off rude, and abrupt, but I mark this down more of a cultural issue. They do take along time in things they promise, but in the case of the 757, and C-130 lines, they do eventually come through. From most reports (with few exceptions) over in their forum, it looks like they did a very good job on it, and they seem to be supporting it, they already released an update, and another is scheduled. One thing I see that they are doing, which can be seen as a good or bad thing, depending on your point of view, (I think it's a good thing) If you report a problem on the behavior of the 757, they want real world backup that it's not behaving as a real 757 would, not just your feeling it isn't before they fix it. This approach while on the surface seems a bit arrogant, will reduce the chance that things don't get changed that shouldn't. I myself won't be buying the BLock F for FS9, as I never reinstalled FS9 after my previous system meltdown. I have been flying with the CS757 with a LDS 767 panel merge for quite a while now in FSX. You can see it in action on a few of my YOUTUBE videos. Works pretty good. If the FSX version of their Block F is as good or better than the FS9 version seems to be, I'll be getting that. I'll also get the LDS-757 when that ever gets released. One thing that the CS757 Block F comes with that the LDS doesn't is a weather radar. I hope Level-D decides to put one in their 757, but so far there is no indication that they will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>> That's not a fair statement! The only reason threads get locked here, is if they get to be personal attacks or vulgar language is used. AVSIM goes out of it's way to remain developer independent, to the point of with the exception of a brief introduction to a product, not allowing them to rant and rave about it here, or post promotional screen shots.Was not my main intention to blame avsim.com, unfortunately I find threads locked or removed in many developers fora, they seem to become more and more thin-skinned. And yes, happens here too. I remember quite civilised threads complaining about PMDG bundling their FSX747 with an FS9 update some months ago. All these threads got locked or deleted. However, I did not at all want to defend Captainsim.But Captainsim is not 'THE Russians', similar as LAGO isnt't THE Italians. Just that was my intension to say.Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deleted by Admin.You can freely tell your opinion about a product but stupid racist comments are not acceptable.Your scornful post will be the last here.David Roch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, guys. I've searched many forums but only here I see so many bad comments, and what is more interesting - from those who do not even own the aircraft!I have also purchased their 757 blocks and have been waiting more or less patiently for systems block. Then they have released it, them in a week released quick and helpful patch for it. I read their forum and decided there are no showstopping bus. Less then one page of bugs at forum for one week - I think it is not too much for such a complex product.And I purchased it.In fact, I like it, really. I also own PSS version but do agree with opinions on other forums - CS variant is far more realistic. Not to mention it looks much, much better! Am I the only one here thinking like this?As to the bugs.. I doubt there has ever been ANY MSFS addon without bugs. And do not see any problem with CS asking to confirm each bug with real life data. The majority of us users think we are aces and know for sure how this or that aircraft should behave. But our feelings are not the cause for patches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>As to the bugs.. I doubt there has ever been ANY MSFS addon>without bugs. And do not see any problem with CS asking to>confirm each bug with real life data. The majority of us users>think we are aces and know for sure how this or that aircraft>should behave. But our feelings are not the cause for>patches.Fair enough all products have bugs, but to require the average msfs user to provide a scan from operating manuals when he complains of anything whatsoever is a convenient, draconian copout.regards,Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark, all I wave seen them asking was 'ALL numbers (EGT, FF, V, N% etc) must be supported by reference quotes (scan or a table) from a real flight manual' when people called some numbers to be incorrect. Not sure if anything is wrong with this particular requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a lot wrong with that particular requirement. I would assume that CS themselves have all the required data at hand from a multitude of official manuals as the serious developer they claim to be . Or are they simply just too lazy to verify the wrong data on their own???S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites