Captainsim 777

[Boeing or not going 578]

People complain about CS bashers, but the reason I see CS bashers and I myself sometimes bash them, is because their defenders go out of their way to sugar coat everything. From comments like "the systems work fine, you just need to read the manuals to learn them" or comparing it to PMDG. It's understandable why people will be so quick to bash them. They keep pumping out new products without finishing their last ones, ignoring major bugs and user complaints that lead to people having to create user edited packages like for the 727. I hope they concentrate on the 777, fixing bugs and making the vc a little more framerate friendly. But my moneys on them either re-doing a previous airplane and selling it for full price, or announcing a brand new half finished product for sale.

 

I personally wish they would concentrate on classic airplanes. There are so many that need quality FSX versions. The classic 747 series. The DC-8. I guess they don't sell as well as the 767 and 777 but CS are better at less system complicated aircraft. Glass cockpits are not what they are strong at.

[FlavioSSA 44]

Yes, you can put any .gif or .jpg nav file in the EFB folder and it will show in the cockpit. It´s a very nice feature. If you´re going to bash CS product at least do it right.

[peter197 1]

Why do you think PMDG's 777 will have good FPS?

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

Yes, you can put any .gif or .jpg nav file in the EFB folder and it will show in the cockpit. It´s a very nice feature. If you´re going to bash CS product at least do it right.

 

 

I think you're right. Flavio: What the EFB in the 777 Captain is capable of (or not) is well explained in the CS manuals. I have other complaints on the 777 v1.0 than that ...

[Christopher Low 5,359]

Well, I can't comment about the 777, but the VC and flight dynamics of the 707 are superb.

[anden145 2,285]

Fair enough...

 

My apologies... I quite honest wasn't aware that you could do that...

Thanks for that info...

 

On another note - I'm not bashing the product... They have products which are very good. But I don't understand that they release a 1.00 version (which they claim is a finished product), when it's obvious that there's much missing.

 

Cheers!

[Boeing or not going 578]

Why do you think PMDG's 777 will have good FPS?

 

I am sure it will be better than their NGX, and their NGX is better than CS's 767 and 757.

 

But even if it isn't at least I know what's going on under the hood and the depth of systems is worth a framerate hit.

[peter197 1]

The CS 707 is great fun. Love it.

[Boeing or not going 578]

Well, I can't comment about the 777, but the VC and flight dynamics of the 707 are superb.

 

I agree, that's why I wish they stuck with old analog airplanes. DC-8, 747-100/200/300, even a 737-300/400/500

[peter197 1]

I think an FPS friendly 777 is impossible, but I guess we'll find out in due course. Hopefully it will, but who knows.

[jbassue 181]

Why do you think PMDG's 777 will have good FPS?

PMDG claimed, [Don't hold me to it, maybe not an official statement] that their 777 will be on par, or a little bit better than the NGX performance, not sure if this has changed.

However it's not just bad FPS on CS 777's behalf, but, it's extremely clunky, and a pain to operate, I'm at 4.6Ghz and I am struggling to go above 15FPS at default LAX. I've been in a situation on the VATSIM network where I was being vectored in for an ILS approach, and the controller gave me a specific heading to fly on, so I reached for the heading knob on the MCP. Lo and Behold the heading knob starting spinning around, in complete 360's. Do you know how embarrassing that is while connected? I think customers should be immune from this type of uncertainty factor. We should know that we can fly this aircraft without ever worrying about making it to our destination because of an issue that isn't the pilot's fault.

This analogy goes for real world operations. You see how the 787 Teams were pressured to fix their issues? We should also pressure CS to fix their problems. Because let's face it, CS isn't going to do squat as long as they make money. Want proof? -Laughing- While we are struggling to keep the T7 under control CS has pushed out the 777 300, implying that they have been completely focused on another project while we can't even get or 200's airborne. Christ almighty.

[Johnny767 40]

I am neutral when it comes to payware as everything has some good points (except maybe abacus), but honestly I think quite a few people are giving a one sided opinion. I notice that a significant amount of people complaining about the cs products have their avsim profiles covered in PMDG owner banners. The simple fact is not everything is going to be the quality of PMDG ( except possibly Level D) and that's because PMDG pull in all the experts and engineers, as well as examining the plane, top to bottom in the RW. I love my PMDG products for their realism and graphics but I also love my CS products for they're beautiful graphics. In the ending picking a payware product is down to your personal opinion, whether you love realism or graphics, or both. Its no excuse to say horrendous things about CS when they provide an amazing graphical representation of the aircraft.

 

If I had to comment on a poster. I could not let this pass. I hadn't read such a wonderful post in along time. :im Not Worthy:

[peter197 1]

MAybe CS are trying to get realistic operations and the problems faced by pilots. Just joking. The weird thing is I get 25FPS or more on my rig at 4.4Ghz quad.

Pete

[bukeyolacan 24]

FPS has nothing to do with CPU speed

[peter197 1]

I think that CPU speed certainly helps.