Impact of PMDG's B777 on X-Plane-community?

[MarioDonick 752]

Yep apart from the Saab it seems very quiet on the complex aircraft front in XP. For modern airliners the only quality offerings that stand out to me are the CRJ and the FF T7. I am very much looking forward to the FF 757 but that seems to be on hold for now, all the other stuff that has come out uses simplified avionics with the default FMS. The ATR was a wasted opportunity - fantastic model married to Fisher Price avionics; imagine how that would have been had Philipp & co done the FMS and systems. Let's not forget the JAR A320 which admittedly does get better with every release but is effectively unfinished and in public beta (à la Blackbox). Peter's 'buses are fantastic but most are lacking 3d 'pits and are just crying out for a proper MCDU. He and JAR should get together that would be good.

 

As you mention FMS: The real Saab 340 does not have one, so the simulated one hasn't one, too. But I can already see some trolls complaining about that

[deetee 164]

As you mention FMS: The real Saab 340 does not have one, so the simulated one hasn't one, too. But I can already see some trolls complaining about that

Yes I just found that out over at XPilot. I'm not really familiar with this a/c type but it's no big deal if they're like that in real life. I guess their more traditional avionics suit the routes they fly.

[starflight 8]

I think many users are hoping that either the P3D EULA will get more friendly to non-professional / non-academic users, or that PMDG will change their mind and publish their products for P3D.

 

From what I've read, this is a restriction imposed by Microsoft, as they still own the rights and Lockheed is merely licensing it from them under a pro/student-only agreement themselves. Meanwhile, PDMG refuses to develop for or support a "pro" platform. Deadlock...

[Jessica Bannister-Pearce 120]

What the pmdg 777 does for X-Plane is a good question. In Thoery, nothing. The two are seperate platforms and as such the one doesn't affect the other. In reality though we all know that isn't true.

 

Personally what pmdg has done is raise the bar, again. But not just for fsx, but for XPX as well. If developers want people to leave fsx and the new 777 behind, then they have to raise their own bar to match, or even exceed what's on offer. The upcoming saab 340 should help build XPX's study sim credentials.

 

In short, pmdg upped the ante, now its time to go all in or go bust.

 

Best wishes,

Jess B

[Lawyer+Pilot 126]

Hi to all

 

What do you think? Will PMDG now, since the released their newest B777, have more time to build aircrafts for X-Plane, as they announced a long time ago?

 

Cheers

François

Let's hope not! They have a 747 v.2 to tend to.

[CarlosF 1,239]

.it's a hump which X-Plane struggles to overcome.

 

+1

 

I couldn't agree more....unfortunately!

[MarioDonick 752]

+1

 

I couldn't agree more....unfortunately!

 

 

Part of the problem is maybe that there are too many payware producers who have not the resources to get it really right, and that reviews on websites are too forgiving. This was true for the "old" xsimreviews (when they still did XP stuff), it is also mostly true for asn-xp (although they had a good critique on the Blackshape Prime). (Are there any more English review sites?)

 

There is a tendency that aircraft get positive reviews just because they look good visually, that they may be fun flying -- and sometimes that they exist at all. But visuals and fun are not what flight simulation is about primarily.

 

From the wonderful British television series "Life on Mars", I learned the saying "God is in the detail" (in Germany we only know the pessimistic "The Devil is in the detail" ... ) but this detail is missing too often. Even an aircraft that is deliberately light systems-wise and using standard systems only can be done thouroughly, but it is too often not -- maybe because people buy it anyway, or maybe because there is just no awareness about the importance of this.

 

That's why I am so positive about the Saab 340 -- they took their time (3 years) to get it right, and I am sure it will show. (If not, well, then I'll be seriously sad.)

 

But reviews only rarely talk about this. It is even rare that reviews go deep in the sometimes difficult questions of flight behavior and systems, for example by checking flight characteristics against the numbers in the manual, or by really checking if the instrument readings make sense under variying circumstances. So many small bugs slip through.

 

 

So... what do I want to say?

 

We get the planes that we -- as users and maybe reviewers -- deserve. If we are content with medium quality aircraft whose only selling point is their good visual quality, we get these.

[Longranger 148]

If PMDG has the same approach as other developers who publish for both platforms, I guess they have a dedicated team for X-Plane and I don't think that the FSX team(s?) will do much support there.

I think you are wrong. The PMDGs are too complex for such a method. In such a project you have some people that are really working deep down with the OS and the simulator, while most ofn the normal staff uses higher level interfaces that hide the internal complexty.

The main target for X-Plane will be to use as far as possible the same interface for X-Plane.This won't be always possible and they will have to reinvent several key components, but this won't happen overnight.  .

[MarioDonick 752]

I think you are wrong. The PMDGs are too complex for such a method. In such a project you have some people that are really working deep down with the OS and the simulator, while most ofn the normal staff uses higher level interfaces that hide the internal complexty.

 

The only thing the normal staff can do is graphics, sounds, manuals etc.

 

If PMDG convert an existing plane (which we don't yet know, do we? I can't remember.), they already have graphics and sounds which they can re-use. Sure, here they could get some assistance by the existing artists.

 

But the main work (the working around X-Plane's limitations) would have to be done by dedicated X-Plane experts. And I don't think that the 777 release frees resources that could have any impact in this area.

[Longranger 148]

The only thing the normal staff can do is graphics, sounds, manuals etc.

Not quite. You are thinking to much in the way of plane maker. You totally miss the point wherePMDG really rules: Every sytem is interconnected with each other and they will probably simulate compüonents that X-Plane doesn't know anything about. These components primarily interact with each other. I think in the long run they will even replace most of the flight physics with their own systems.

In fact, they will probably have to rework all their sounds and graphics due to different capabilities and standards.

[Phantom88 3,287]

I Hope they're working on DC-6 for X-Plane.

[ohsirus 241]

I'm just amazed no one has started a T7 comparison thread yet  :wacko:  

[MarioDonick 752]

Not quite. You are thinking to much in the way of plane maker. You totally miss the point wherePMDG really rules: Every sytem is interconnected with each other and they will probably simulate compüonents that X-Plane doesn't know anything about. These components primarily interact with each other.

 

I admit that I don't know much about the internal architecture of PMDG aircraft. If they use FSX mainly as environment (or maybe just user interface) for their own simulations (and this is what your statement sounds like for me), you may be right.

 

I think in the long run they will even replace most of the flight physics with their own systems.

Hm, really? Flight physics is the only thing where X-Plane has some (small) advantages, and I hope they would respect that.

[LAdamson 240]

Hm, really? Flight physics is the only thing where X-Plane has some (small) advantages, and I hope they would respect that.

For the end result in helicopters, yes. For planes, it's up to the programmers ability and knowledge of actual flight physics...... for either sim. There are a few X-Plane derived physics, that as a RW pilot, I have certainly not been content with.

[jcomm 5,930]

I'm with Jessica. This PMDG777 is another AMAZING product released by PMDG. It raises the bar once again in the history of the best add-ons ever released for any civil flight simulator, and shows what a $90 add-on should really be about!!! It is worth every single penny!

 

For me getting it ( the Mighty PMDG777 ) was even easier since it was offered by a friend :-), who is also an X-Plane user, but as a RL pilot feels somehow discontent with the bugs that plague X-Plane's flight models and turn them useless for him to practise IFR scenarios for instance, or the pooer scenery coverage of his area of the World, and, just as many of us, can't really take the plunge yet...  

 

Products like this PMDG777, the recently released ORBX FTX Global, are unique, and the truth is, we stiull do not have anything that compares to them in the X-Plane world.

 

My only hope right now with X-Plane, in the GA area are the Carenados and the older models by X-aviation, in the commuter the upcoming Saab 340, and anything from Felis, but honestly, it is FSX I have been playing lately, and although recovering from a surgery, I have spent this morning experimenting with PMDG's 777 what nothing in XP's add-on world comes even close to - I'm sorry to say! - in as far as airliner simulation goes.

 

Also the reason why I believe that, unless P3D v2 comes to play, and really brings something remarkably worth the migration, FSX is still the most stable platform for 3pds to develop for.