Jump to content

Archived

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

Dougal

Eaglesoft Cit-X (Again)

Recommended Posts

I'm so, so torn whether or not to keep this birdLike all other Eaglesoft aircraft, it does, whithout doubt 'feel' absolutely wonderful to fly, especially by hand. The system representations in the FMC are IMHO some of the best to date for FSX - even I haven't been able to break/crash it yet :( I've no idea if the sounds are acuate as per the real CX, but they are indeed great to listen to with the sound & bass cranked up! The spooling up & down is just magic. I've been sitting on the tarmac simply doing that :( and ignoring my takeoff clearance.If other posts are correct, then there are no doubt other great features I haven't yet discovered.BUT..... It's just that VC. I've seen it described as more representative of an FS9 addon than FSX and, sadly, I must agree.Have a look at the two together. Surely, that could/should have been improved upon?She is truely a 'high fidelity' piece of 'art' in other area's, and were it not for the VC, would IMO justify the price.


Windows 10 (x64) - X-Plane 11 - M/B: Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero - CPU: i7 7700k (@5.0GHz) - RAM: 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 @ 3200MHz - Video: GTX1080ti - Cooling: Custom water loop (EK 140 Revo D5 pump/res combo, EK EVO CPU block, EK XE360 Rad)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess my pics were too big eh?


Windows 10 (x64) - X-Plane 11 - M/B: Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero - CPU: i7 7700k (@5.0GHz) - RAM: 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 @ 3200MHz - Video: GTX1080ti - Cooling: Custom water loop (EK 140 Revo D5 pump/res combo, EK EVO CPU block, EK XE360 Rad)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 413X3

am I looking at the same low quality VC that v1 had? Really? I could have sworn they were claiming during development to make the VC higher resolution and easier to read. Looks to me like most writing is almost illegible, including the most important panel, the auto pilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
am I looking at the same low quality VC that v1 had? Really? I could have sworn they were claiming during development to make the VC higher resolution and easier to read. Looks to me like most writing is almost illegible, including the most important panel, the auto pilot
You would be completely wrong. That picture was taken with the 'camera' moved back and set at 50% zoom. Then the image was reduced significantly in size. It is not an accurate representation of the current VC at all.

Ed Wilson

Mindstar Aviation
My Playland - I69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
am I looking at the same low quality VC that v1 had? Really? I could have sworn they were claiming during development to make the VC higher resolution and easier to read. Looks to me like most writing is almost illegible, including the most important panel, the auto pilot
No, you are actually looking at a very low-resolution screenshot that's been completely compromised by the size and JPG compression process. You really MUST see this in the actual sim on YOUR monitor to detect the huge differences.Even this cropped image does not do justice to what is seen in FSX on your monitor:cx20vc01.jpgShot at 2009-11-08

Fr. Bill    

AOPA Member: 07141481 AARP Member: 3209010556

Interests: Gauge Programming - 3d Modeling for Milviz

Many Thanks to All That Donated To Our Server Drive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My issue is with the 'depth', not the resolution. There is no 'feel' of being in the cockpit like some other VCs achieve. It all just seems so 'flat'. No feeling of 3D at all.I would think that's a design issue rather than one of resolution surely?....and team Eaglesoft, please don't think i'm trashing your work. I'm not. As a previous customer, I generally love your aircraft, I just don't like these particular graphics in FSX is all.


Windows 10 (x64) - X-Plane 11 - M/B: Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero - CPU: i7 7700k (@5.0GHz) - RAM: 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 @ 3200MHz - Video: GTX1080ti - Cooling: Custom water loop (EK 140 Revo D5 pump/res combo, EK EVO CPU block, EK XE360 Rad)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We chose to not model all switches and knobs as 3D due to performance concerns.Had we modeled them and the frame rates tanked.... you'd be seriously upset.In short, we can't win no matter what. :(


Ed Wilson

Mindstar Aviation
My Playland - I69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the lack of 3d switches and I understand the trade off, but I think a little more depth in the textures or some weathering could really improve things.


John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We didn't model used... you bought it new.As for depth... go look at a photo of a real one. :(


Ed Wilson

Mindstar Aviation
My Playland - I69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We didn't model used... you bought it new.As for depth... go look at a photo of a real one. :(
Ed that's just the point. It looks too flat - like a photograph.
Ed that's just the point. It looks too flat - like a photograph.
Ouch! That probably hurt, sorry!

Windows 10 (x64) - X-Plane 11 - M/B: Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero - CPU: i7 7700k (@5.0GHz) - RAM: 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 @ 3200MHz - Video: GTX1080ti - Cooling: Custom water loop (EK 140 Revo D5 pump/res combo, EK EVO CPU block, EK XE360 Rad)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok... maybe this will make it clear.By modelling all the switches in 3D... your flight would have been a slideshow. That clear it up any?


Ed Wilson

Mindstar Aviation
My Playland - I69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My issue is with the 'depth', not the resolution. There is no 'feel' of being in the cockpit like some other VCs achieve. It all just seems so 'flat'. No feeling of 3D at all.I would think that's a design issue rather than one of resolution surely?
3d is 3d. It simply cannot get "more 3d" than it is. Notice that every instrument on the panel has 3d depth. In fact, they have the precise "depth" as the real instruments.. Notice that the eyebrow extends a full 5" beyond the main panel...Dougal, you wrote: "She is truely a 'high fidelity' piece of 'art' in other area's, and were it not for the VC..."The same graphics artist created ALL of the bitmaps used in this aircraft... :(

Fr. Bill    

AOPA Member: 07141481 AARP Member: 3209010556

Interests: Gauge Programming - 3d Modeling for Milviz

Many Thanks to All That Donated To Our Server Drive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok... maybe this will make it clear.By modelling all the switches in 3D... your flight would have been a slideshow. That clear it up any?
It's not about the individual modelling of switches for me. It's the overall look. It looks 'harsh' - no softness anywhere that natural lighting gives. Sharp corners where there would be shadowing - that sort of thing.I'm not going to get into comparing it with anything else to show what I mean 'cos that doesn't help and, rather than risk further offence, I'll stop at that (I can't help my opinion).Bottom line is you're right..... 'You can't please 'em all'

Windows 10 (x64) - X-Plane 11 - M/B: Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero - CPU: i7 7700k (@5.0GHz) - RAM: 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 @ 3200MHz - Video: GTX1080ti - Cooling: Custom water loop (EK 140 Revo D5 pump/res combo, EK EVO CPU block, EK XE360 Rad)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 413X3
No, you are actually looking at a very low-resolution screenshot that's been completely compromised by the size and JPG compression process. You really MUST see this in the actual sim on YOUR monitor to detect the huge differences.Even this cropped image does not do justice to what is seen in FSX on your monitor:cx20vc01.jpgShot at 2009-11-08
I stand corrected :) Thanks for posting that, off to purchase her!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Zenra
I stand corrected :) Thanks for posting that, off to purchase her!!
For what it's worth, I believe you are making the right choice. I do not understand a lot of the comments regarding the visual appeal of Eaglesoft's Citation X. For my money both the 2D panels and VC are very good, especially where it counts - the gauge displays. Fonts and all information is crisp and readable in the VC from all kinds of angles and different levels of zoom. I run at 1920x1200 32 bit using the WS displays and get very reasonable FPS in all situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...