Far be it from me to harangue, harass, belittle, besmirch or otherwise embarrass our fine membership here... Ah what the hell, sure I will!!! Guys!!! This is what the Member Reviews are for! Buy that product and share your experience with others in our Reviews section. That way, you can get your impressions of the product noted, allow your fellow users to read yours and they can reply with theirs in a system that makes it easy to find those reviews by thousands of your fellow members. Come on! Take 20 minutes to write up a review and share it with your fellow simmers so that they are fairly warned or encouraged, whichever the case may be!

 

Noted.  I was kind of the under the impression that the reviews were somewhat reserved for the experts or needed to be in the long format type of an official review.  Thanks for the explanation and reminder.

mostly diappointed with CSL1011....downloaded, installed and boom...crashes FSX each time i try to use it...ticket with captainsim and status is always pending for review by developer....

 

emann

 

First I have heard of this, works fine for me.  Have you posted your problem in the official and/or unofficial forums. Maybe someone can help. 

@markW...yes...posted in the official CS forum and submitted a ticket...just today received an update....wait until new installer is out....well i will wait...

@JoshuaC - I personally don't think the above two negative reports about the Airbus A318/19/20/21 products are anywhere near being representative of how most people feel about them, or even the upgrade.

 

For me, the upgraded Aerosoft Airbus's were amongst the best releases of 2014, and the upgrade fee was very modest and appropriate.

 

But as we know, you can never please everyone   :smile:

 

Hi Craig,

 

I completely agree with your points above. As you say it appears that some people are never satisfied anyway. To be mentioning what I believe is one of the best add-ons released amongst comments about the CS777 and Blackbox Airbus is just ridiculous.

 

To the specific points:

 

Paying to upgrade to the same thing - complete nonsense, check the list of enhancements/additions. Also as JoshuaC says, if you believed this to be the case why would you then go ahead and upgrade anyway??

 

Poor FPS - As I appreciate this can be very dependent on individual systems, as can all performance. All I can say is that I always had 25+ with Airbus X and its even slightly better now. I receive no stutters and never have. I have not really been hung up on this anyway as long as the motion is fluid it doesn't matter if the FPS is 15!

 

I purchased the Airbus X in the early days and it has been developed into quite simply the best Airbus add-on available.

 

Regards

Mervyn Edwards

 

 

For me, the upgraded Aerosoft Airbus's were amongst the best releases of 2014, and the upgrade fee was very modest and appropriate.

 

+1...you won't hear a single complaint out of me especially considering the price per feature/quality.  This isn't meant to be a PMDG level simulation and the very reasonable price reflects that.

Not related to 2014, but biggest disappointment over years in flight simming, that is still ringing in my ears is a purchase of FlyLogic Switzerland X for around hundred bucks! The ugliest scenery all around, as I said numerous times before. Used it for few days when I bought it and couldn't stand the colours  of photo textures anymore.

 

Also biggest disappointment in 2014 is Aerosoft A318/319, on par with original AXE. I bought it with huge expectations that FPS is better with no stutters, but... still so hard on frames on my system, worse performance than NGX easily, with even more pronounced stutters. Tried various support and fixes, nothing helped, even a tiny bit (starting with weather radar fix). I'm, so happy with NGX luckily, so I don't have to bang my head over Aerosoft Airbus anymore.

 

I am very surprised about your comment on FlyLogic's Switzerland scenery, because I have used is happily for many years already. Yes, this scenery is almost 7 years old and considering it's age it is still quite good. You might try with different settings and also experience the nicely done four seasons. Give it another try!

 

Regarding the Airbus 318/319: My experience with this addon is completely different. For me this little Airbus is brilliant and absolutely equivalent with the 737 NGX as long as I don't want to activate the failures. Apart form the missing failure simulation (which I don't really miss) the Airbus is beautifully made and a joy to fly. I don't have any FPS issue in spite of my very modest system (compared to yours). You may check Aerosoft's tips for the settings to get a better perfomance. Give it another try!

Only dissapointment is not having Outerra turned into a flight sim yet.

 

Other than that, I'm not buying much stuff as I'm still waiting for some slow adopters to release compatible P3Dv2 versions of their addons.

I must fill the holes in my earlier post, I wrote it in a hurry.

 

So yes, I'm disappointed with Aerosoft A318/319, but that doesn't mean that I didn't spend circa 14-15 hours in it. I mean for some games you pay more bucks than for A318/319 upgrade, but you play them like 10 hours, they are short. So it was worth it, especially because of an immersion that Aerosoft Airbus bring (cockpit ambience, copilot, checklists...).

I was disappointed mostly because I saw that 98% of people are seeing better and smoother performance on their system than in AXE, and for me was vice versa. I've lost decent amount of my free time to make experience at least smooth as in NGX, but no luck. I've lost literally last bit of interest to make the Airbus work as it should on my system. I'm now in love with a Boeing and NGX, so I crossed the point of return some time ago.

I mena don't take me for granted, I've reinstalled newest Airbus for at least 5 times in the last two months, tried EVERY single tweak out there, and after all I didn't had any luck. Maybe my GPU is just not good for it. 

 

The people of Naav'i said once:

 

It's hard to fill a cup that's already full

 

For me it's P3D.

Every version I think, "This is the one that will work for me!". 2.3? Nope. 2.4? Nope. Flying around NYC at 5-9 FPS just isn't cutting it. I've asked for help in PMs. I've read a ton of posts on what works for others.Still the poor performance.

 

P3D is fantastic for most, but right now I'm the little kid in the corner, watching everyone happily playing their P3D, saying, "Mines must be broken..."  :(

- P3D. It's not half of what could have been. They should have made it x64 from day one so that everyone could start porting their software to 64-bit and rely even more on the graphics card.

- Carenado. Everything they put out looks stunning but flies like a rock.

- FSLabs. I guess it's just taking TOO long for that A320 to come out. And it's only the 320, the A319, A318 and A321 were lost in the middle.

 

 

- Carenado. Everything they put out looks stunning but flies like a rock.

 

My experience with Carenado is completely different. Most of their younger aircraft have very believable flight dynamics and are a joy to fly. As long as you can live with some system limitations, you get a decent value for your money, when you buy Carenado.

Drzewiecki-Design FS9 UUEE.

 

The only other company that made me feel so not only disappointed but shafted is Ariane. (and that was many many years ago with some airport scenery)

 

I want to say AES …but that is more frustration than disappointment. Support for this excellent add-on is way too slow IMHO.

I've reinstalled newest Airbus for at least 5 times in the last two months, tried EVERY single tweak out there, and after all I didn't had any luck. Maybe my GPU is just not good for it. 

Well, if you ever want to give it a go again then submit a ticket as I said earlier. Lots of people who had problems sorted it out in the forums/tickets.

@Mervyn, Craig, Ryan and Felix,

 

Thanks for your comments. I was simply pointing out to the guy earlier regarding the upgrade price so its all clear.

For me it's P3D.

Every version I think, "This is the one that will work for me!". 2.3? Nope. 2.4? Nope. Flying around NYC at 5-9 FPS just isn't cutting it. I've asked for help in PMs. I've read a ton of posts on what works for others.Still the poor performance.

 

P3D is fantastic for most, but right now I'm the little kid in the corner, watching everyone happily playing their P3D, saying, "Mines must be broken..."  :(

 

This pretty much sums up my experience with P3D2.4 too.   Utter disappointment merged with frustration and a lot of wasted time.   I have no doubt that if I had a nVidia card (and my next one will be), I'd be having an entirely different experience with P3D2, but with ATI cards, this sim is a pig. Sorry, but that really feels like the truth to me.   AA and AF looks dreadful compared to in FSX (on the same settings) and performance is abysmal.

 

There is a very knowing lack of attention to ATI users by LM in their development of P3D2, and until this changes, P3D2 is, in my opinion, pretty much off limits to ATI card users.    Exactly the same goes for X-Plane 10 64bit;  horrible performance and visuals under an ATI card.

Drzewiecki Design New York Airports and Moscow UUEE.  They do not seem to be made by the same developer of all of the Polish Airport sceneries.  They just look terrible, especially the runways.  They also perform terribly.  I hope he doesn't screw up Warsaw.

 

Next would be no announcement that the NGX is getting priority for a version 2.

I hope he doesn't screw up Warsaw

 

That indeed would be a nightmare! :Nail Biting:

I really hope Jakub Paczek (the guy behind the best Polish Airports) will make it.