the colors, the ratios and the fonts are SOOO "Non-Airbus"...

 

I have to say that this one bugs me as well. I understand why developing any Airbus post A300/A310 for FSX is a significantly more difficult task then a 737/757/767. But I don't get why no one has bothered to get the visuals right. The Airbus font is very distinct, and for some (admittedly stange) reason it's absence bothers me a lot more then flexing wings, the stated limitations of the auto flight system and the absence of failures. Maybe it's because I'll be staring at them for hours :wink: .

 

Dont get me wrong, I'm likely to pounce on this bus once it is eventually released, and there seems to be a lot to like here, but the visuals of the displays are a slight disappointment to me. I can only hope FlightSim Labs will make a better effort once their release date comes around I suppose.

 

Speaking of release dates: I'm not sure if this has been mentioned above but Aerosoft has pushed the release to the 13th of September (+10 days).

Funny... Not impressed at all with the AirbusX VC.

Especially the gauges (DUs) : the colors, the ratios and the fonts are SOOO "Non-Airbus"...

Then, no dimmable vc lighting and DU brightness for the AirbusX... This is a no brainer for me. The NGX still is much better graphically and in fonctionnality...

 

Of course, this is just me...

 

They claim to have modelled the aircraft they photographed to the detail. If the plane they photographed happened to look like this, then that's what you'd end up with in the sim

 

EDIT: *cough* I think i misunderstood, thought you meant the colours of the panels (the various blue hues), but I now understand you specifically meant the colors on the screens. Sorry!

Funny... Not impressed at all with the AirbusX VC.

Especially the gauges (DUs) : the colors, the ratios and the fonts are SOOO "Non-Airbus"...

Have to agree there the fonts and colours look really different to the ones in the actual Airbus, they bear very little resemblance.

 

Remember though, the Airbus X is a cheap add-on intended for use by simmers who aren't interested in full on detail and only want to be able to fly simple real world routes, and simulate what the flight deck would be like 70% of the time, for simmers who don't know what an MEL is or who don't want to fly an NPA. It's intended for those who just want to pick up and fly, and don't care about fonts, colors and such, and who probably wouldn't recognise the difference in font... That's why it's going to be cheap compared to other add-ons, it wasn't intended on competing with them, so lets cut Aerosoft a little slack.

 

Regards,

Ró.

Yeah Aerosoft know their target market, they're very smart

 

Personally I'll think I'll wait for FSLabs. Not to take anything away from Aerosoft , just my preference.

 

Lee

 

 

Sent using Tapatalk

i love airplanes.

Not sure why many still insist on comparing a $45 add-on to a $70 add-on. Is the $70 add-on more detailed and accurate than the $45 add-on? It sure as hell better be, otherwise you got ripped off. It is reasonable however to state your opinion and what you want out of an add-on so I'm not knocking that. Let's just compare apples to apples if we must compare at all.

 

BTW, will FSL be $45 when/if it is released?

Don't think the price is known yet

 

 

Sent using Tapatalk

I would pay anything for the FSL addon. dont tell them that though. tell them that we will pay $24.95

At this point my questions are: (1) Will Aerosoft EVER realease the Extented Version? and (2) Is FLS still in business;or better yet... are they really going to release an Airbus someday? (And, will that "someday" be within the next 5 or 10 years- or more? :lol:

Funny... Not impressed at all with the AirbusX VC.

Especially the gauges (DUs) : the colors, the ratios and the fonts are SOOO "Non-Airbus"...

Then, no dimmable vc lighting and DU brightness for the AirbusX... This is a no brainer for me. The NGX still is much better graphically and in fonctionnality...

 

Of course, this is just me...

 

Fully agree with you...

Greg

That note on the fonts in use is there since the first previews of the basic version. I think you folks have a point on the 'other' impression and I wonder what holds back the Aerosoft devs from changing it. I can relate system details and setups to the product price, but since they put so much work into a good model and VC atmosphere, the 'wrong' font really puzzles me.

 

Well, as others have said, I still think this extended version looks very promising. From now on, I will write like this.

FS lab ( too long waiting) or airbus X V2?

(...) simulate what the flight deck would be like 70% of the time, for simmers who don't know what an MEL is or who don't want to fly an NPA. It's intended for those who just want to pick up and fly, and don't care about fonts, colors and such (...)

 

Then i'm out of the group. I can't stand looking at an Airbus deck with a random windows font. I don't know how they let this one through, i always thought it was some sort of placeholder so it would be "fixed" upon release. Cheap addon or not, this is something that had to be there. Dimmable lights, flexible wings, all that stuff i agree it should be part of a high end addon (and even me who likes high end addons find these useless), but the look of the cockpit where i spend 99% of the time when flying, has to be an accurate rendition. Alas, even Wilco got the font close enough.

Can't wait to get proper Airbus... So far I have been using feelthere/wilco buses and they have been nothing but trouble all the time, sometimes drifting off the route and also problems with flight dynamics especially with Wilco A340 which seems to be never able to climb over FL320 without having severe rocking.

Not sure why many still insist on comparing a $45 add-on to a $70 add-on. Is the $70 add-on more detailed and accurate than the $45 add-on? It sure as hell better be, otherwise you got ripped off. It is reasonable however to state your opinion and what you want out of an add-on so I'm not knocking that. Let's just compare apples to apples if we must compare at all.

 

BTW, will FSL be $45 when/if it is released?

 

The FSL Concorde is €50,- ($60). I wouldn't expect the A320 to be any cheaper when released.

 

That note on the fonts in use is there since the first previews of the basic version. I think you folks have a point on the 'other' impression and I wonder what holds back the Aerosoft devs from changing it. I can relate system details and setups to the product price, but since they put so much work into a good model and VC atmosphere, the 'wrong' font really puzzles me.

 

Well, as others have said, I still think this extended version looks very promising. From now on, I will write like this.

 

Fonts, like many other things in this world, can be under copyright. My guess is that Thales (the company that builds the Airbus FMC, amongst many other things) wants too much money to license the font to Aerosoft, or doesn't want to license it at all.