PMDG 737 NGX: PMDG's attitude toward realism

[cmpbellsjc]

This makes zero sense.

I agree. Seems "Zach" can't seem to remember his last name either since it was Ankoroy on July 30th and today its Barnacle, lol.

Well there seems to be a discrepancy with the configuration on the lower levels of developing a design that will functionally serve the needs required by a select few of us users. That is, to say, that the origins of development are pre-existing on a far inferior level, or what we would assume is negligent. Please re-think your values, so that we may better adhere to the new principles of user compatibility.zach barnacle.

oh man... im gonna need a super computer 4 this beast... please oh please include a vc only model.-zach ankoroy

Sean Campbell

[MMartinov]

-1.I would find it awkward to use the old style 2D panels, when I have a great 3D environment .... I still remember the good old times downlodaing the freeware 2D panels, but that time is all gone. Now if the 3D is not good I am not satisfied enough, even if the systems are perfect (example - Maddog MD82 which VC is hopelesly outdated). Gent's we are one step further to the virtual reality. The fact you need to make effort to look in the right direction means you will really know where the actual switch is...Better think about investing in a large widescreen LCD and a TrackIR. You would not be dissapointed.

[thefsxflyer]

I agree. Seems "Zach" can't seem to remember his last name either since it was Ankoroy on July 30th and today its Barnacle, lol.Sean Campbell

Also zoop martinson LOLFail! There are a lot of people not signing their name here.

[windshearDK]

Also zoop martinson LOLFail! There are a lot of people not signing their name here.

So Troll confirmed indeed.The weird part is, that everyone knows that this is the jet everyone is going to be flying for at least the next 6 months(until PMDG releases their 777 ).Even then I think the NGX will be the most flown jet out there, simply because of the shorter routes it offers to virtual wanna-bees.PMDG will do yet another major leap forward with this release, the pictures are stunning, as RR pointed out there is real depth perception and colour variations that will make it all pop out. And the true to life LCD experience will knock the socks off any virtual pilot. Even those who already swore to Aerosoft's pretty, but dumb, airbus(dumb meaning not 100% simulated according to their own statements).PMDG has set the bar ever since they made their final adjustments to the first NG. PMDG might laugh at their first NG, but as far as screen displays go they set the standard forever! And after the Queen got released, simming has never ever been the same.

[Da Flyguy]

Since this will become PMDG's most complex aircaft programming and systems wise,I am just really hoping this NGX will not stutter to death in FSX.Really hoping for above average performance.Best of luck with the project.Cheers, Rick

[badderjet]

Thats FSX lighting limitation. Nothing can stop the light, everything is transparent. For that reason i dislike flying at dawn or dusk. Because with the sun from behind the panel lights up as if it's sun bathing.

I 100% understand what you say. Still, if you look at the metal part in between the pedals, it gets darker on the top part. Obviously, and just as you said, not due to FSX's 'great' lighting, but simply because the texture itself gets darker. So it's not a simulated shadow but one baked into the texture (which is perfectly reasonable). Or also, look at the top part of the main panel, which gradually and very subtle darkens down right under the glareshield.Now I was just wondering why they didn't do the same to the parts behind the pedals. I mean darken them down to almost black, as if they were in darkness which usually is the case back there. I think this would be needed because, again, FSX will certainly not take care of casting a shadow there. (Yeah I know, just a detail - anyways I thought it was worth to become brought up because I found it to look at bit weird at current stage - again, meant as constructive criticism!)

[Jeff_B]

-1.I would find it awkward to use the old style 2D panels, when I have a great 3D environment .... I still remember the good old times downlodaing the freeware 2D panels, but that time is all gone. Now if the 3D is not good I am not satisfied enough, even if the systems are perfect (example - Maddog MD82 which VC is hopelesly outdated). Gent's we are one step further to the virtual reality. The fact you need to make effort to look in the right direction means you will really know where the actual switch is...Better think about investing in a large widescreen LCD and a TrackIR. You would not be dissapointed.

I have a widescreen and good graphics card but i find it frustrating as the hand for changing dials/controls flicks between open hand/closed hand/pull knob etc etc and spend minutes trying to get the hand in right config to pull/push dials.

[Guest wims]

I have a widescreen and good graphics card but i find it frustrating as the hand for changing dials/controls flicks between open hand/closed hand/pull knob etc etc and spend minutes trying to get the hand in right config to pull/push dials.

Me too. A 3d cockpit is not really more realistic, its just another representation of the cockpit on a 2d screen. It does look a bit better tho, but its way less functional. For me functionality is more important than looks

[percylee]

A lot of builders do use more than one monitor and do require a good 2D panel.percy clapp

[MMartinov]

Me too. A 3d cockpit is not really more realistic, its just another representation of the cockpit on a 2d screen. It does look a bit better tho, but its way less functional. For me functionality is more important than looks

Well, I guess it is a matter of personal preference at the end of the day.Clicking and switching in 3D takes some time to get used to but once you're there, there is no coming back.The only sim I'm actually glad has 2D is the Concorde X, as there is no way to throw that look on the cramped FE panel... :Hypnotized:But anyway there is no harm if NGX has the 2D panels. I presume that will help the home cockpit builders too...

[AA762]

Okay guy. This is kind of stupid because PMDG has already stated they ARE going to make one, so this is pointless. Infact they have said that they are making one numerous times. It doesn't really matter if you like to fly in the 2D cockpit or VC, I use BOTH, since the VC has better visuals, and the 2D is better with FPS, and it is quicker to get to find things. I am probably gonna use the VC more because they put ALOT of time into it, no other developer has put in so much detail. As long as the FPS are like the default or similar, better would be nice as well. :( I'm sure it is well passed default quality, because the Overhead isn't a comlete Fail, aswell as the MIP and Pedestal. They even have an FMC! So that is awesome, along with the HUD.Thanks for making such a great aircraft already PMDG, cause she is already amazing.

[windshearDK]

Just saw this cockpit shot on A.net: ID#: 1789917Wish links to A.net was allowed by avsim...As you can see the atmosphere and depth is very close to the standards of PMDG

[Paul_Smith]

Me too. A 3d cockpit is not really more realistic, its just another representation of the cockpit on a 2d screen. It does look a bit better tho, but its way less functional. For me functionality is more important than looks

I'm sorry, but that is just nonsensical. First, it is a virtual cockpit, not a 3D one, so put your fancy specs away. It is representing what the pilot can see, not what is most convienient for the simmer, and since the pilot must move their viewpoint to see different things, it more realisticly simulates the pilots workflow then 2D views ever could. As for functionality, as someone who has made the transition from 2D to VC, I am curious to know what functionality you think I have given up?

[Big_Les]

The graphics goodies look very nice, hope the systems logic as as good.So having being exposed to the Leonardo Maddog for a few weeks while I wait for the NGX, I can't help but worry that the NGX won't quite tick all the boxes when it comes to realism:This is what I've got used too:Functioning CB'sEngines that melt if you over stress them.Gear that doesn't come down if you don't have the hyd pumps on highHyd system logic that actually simulates diagonal functionality (Hyd 1 system inop = RH thrust reverse doesn't work)Acceptable differed defects log (Or whatever you civvies call it)The problem is the maddog is sometimes infuriating to fly and it can be a bit temperamental and buggy, the VC is **** (Not very good) and support is practically non existent. I'm after the best of both worlds really, very accurate (bordering on anal) systems, beautiful VC, good docs, fine exterior model and no critical bugs. Please allay my fears and I'll be eternally grateful. :(

I'm sorry, but that is just nonsensical. First, it is a virtual cockpit, not a 3D one, so put your fancy specs away. It is representing what the pilot can see, not what is most convienient for the simmer, and since the pilot must move their viewpoint to see different things, it more realisticly simulates the pilots workflow then 2D views ever could. As for functionality, as someone who has made the transition from 2D to VC, I am curious to know what functionality you think I have given up?

I took some convincing when I switched from 2d to VC. Track IR is an absolute must, you sort of get used to it after a while. Going back to a 2d cockpit for me now would be unthinkable.

[kamaz74]

I'm sorry, but that is just nonsensical. First, it is a virtual cockpit, not a 3D one, so put your fancy specs away. It is representing what the pilot can see, not what is most convienient for the simmer, and since the pilot must move their viewpoint to see different things, it more realisticly simulates the pilots workflow then 2D views ever could. As for functionality, as someone who has made the transition from 2D to VC, I am curious to know what functionality you think I have given up?

Relax people, this bickering about what is better and who is right is so annoying.