DA CRJ- It's actually coming

[Tatave 57]

It's been a while since I visited the Aerosoft forums, and today I found this thread about the DA CRJ. Mathijs Kok posted a few piccies on Thursday -

 

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/33966-aerosoft-da-crj-preview/page-45

 

Go down to post #1764.

 

Looks good, hey?

[Cortez 2]

Finally, just when you think the project is dead. Great to see!

[SMITI07 53]

Am I the only one who thinks the textures are a little too cartoonish? While they are clearly of very high quality, they lack something, they are just a bit too bland and uniform over the whole cockpit. their airbus is the same.

 

Wont stop me buying it if it's good though. CRJ will be a nice fit in my hanger, 

[Kimo 14]

Still waiting for the fokker 100 virtual cocpit.

[simbio 56]

Am I the only one who thinks the textures are a little too cartoonish? While they are clearly of very high quality, they lack something, they are just a bit too bland and uniform over the whole cockpit. their airbus is the same.

 

Wont stop me buying it if it's good though. CRJ will be a nice fit in my hanger,

I wold say it's more flat then cartoonish but the 3d looks good if the aspect rationis good you can still work on modding the texture.

 

Still waiting for the fokker 100 virtual cocpit.

Me too but also some small bug with the CDU would help

[Spook 96]

Think they need to go back to the drawing board...

 

Over 4 years to get to this stage...if not longer.

 

And to me it looks old already and its not even been released...

 

Trying to sell 2009 build quality in 2013 wont go far.

 

An expected release date was given for late summer of 2010..Ok, problems always arise..but 3 years late??..

 

To me that shows the lack of interest in the DEV to get the job done and out the door...whitch leads to the question of how long would a service pack take to come once monies have been exchanged?? ( and it will need 1, or 2 no dout)

Lets not even get started on the Fokker VC....

( ^^ see, DA, you can hide behind curtains, but these things you PROMISE and FAIL to deliver dont get forgoten and have tarnished this release for you..if you ever get it out, that is)

[JoshuaC 61]

Think they need to go back to the drawing board...

 

Over 4 years to get to this stage...if not longer.

 

And to me it looks old already and its not even been released...

 

Trying to sell 2009 build quality in 2013 wont go far.

 

An expected release date was given for late summer of 2010..Ok, problems always arise..but 3 years late??..

Not going to comment on the promise thing, but its ridiculous to say that just because its four years old it wont go far.

 

PMDG 737 NGX sure was more than 3 years old when the model/textures were first done, are you saying it didn't go far?

[xplanery 250]

Trying to sell 2009 build quality in 2013 wont go far.

For example Level D 767 has its roots in years before FSX was even released, yet I'm quite sure it has sold pretty well and is still widely used in 2013. As long as systems are well modeled it doesn't matter if Digital Aviation CRJ isn't graphically as good as Airbus Extended or PMDG 737NGX for example, it will still be very successful. 

 

Personally I really don't care much for all tiny eye candy detail and such, systems, flight dynamics, sounds, the overall look, only those matter. 

[Spook 96]

Not going to comment on the promise thing, but its ridiculous to say that just because its four years old it wont go far.

 

PMDG 737 NGX sure was more than 3 years old when the model/textures were first done, are you saying it didn't go far?

 

The diffrence is, Josh, regardless of when the textures were done for the NGX, when it was released, or preview shots given, it looked up to date with todays standard. The CRJ fails misserably in this regard.

[RudiJG1 172]

Such strong opinions based on a couple of screenshots!? It isn't out yet, so it hasn't had the opportunity to "fail miserably".

 

[xplanery 250]

 

 

The diffrence is, Josh, regardless of when the textures were done for the NGX, when it was released, or preview shots given, it looked up to date with todays standard. The CRJ fails misserably in this regard.

Nope it doesn't, it looks good enough for me and many others. 

[Nuno Pinto 1,454]

They should have finished the Fokker instead of going forth with this CRJ thing. I bet it would sell more.

[Spook 96]

Nope it doesn't, it looks good enough for me and many others. 

 

Well matter of opinion...wont be going round in circles with you..seeing as i was talking to Josh in the 1st place..      ?? 

 

Its was good when it was announced many years ago...but its taken so long to come its aged before its left the paintshop. ''plane'' and simple, outdated.

[jason74 143]

Its not Digital Aviation is it?????????????  They dont finnish their  products im still waiting for the VC Cockpit they promised for the Fokker 100/70 many years ago. I bought the Fokker to later be told they no longer had time to finnish the VC  and where closing shop. Come on guys Do the right thing for all the Fokker Customers and Finnish the Fokker before you start the CRJ :angry:

[FloG 148]

Still waiting for the fokker 100 virtual cocpit.

Me too, I had hoped that Aerosoft would complete it when I heared that they take over DA.

 

Some might say the VC looks not as good as we might be used to from the newest releases, but I still find it looks excellent - definitely a huge improvement over the default CRJ.

 

Its was good when it was announced many years ago...but its taken so long to come its aged before its left the paintshop.

That's probably only because the responsibility Aerosoft took was only to complete the visual model when DA split up, and Hans, the only one who remained from the original DA team, programs the systems, works on this project only as a hobby, hence the slower progress.