FSX-MS BlackBox Simulation- Airbus A330/40

[nam1394 10]

I bought it because I wanted to support them and I did not have high expectations.

But, I wouldn't advise anyone looking for a finished product or someone expecting regular updates to buy it. Unless they are desperate for the airbus widebody. As for the a320, i would strongly suggest the aerosoft airbus over BBS.

[gmoneyprs 2]

the people who support BBS have actually bought the product, while those who are attacking and doubting them have not. 

 

A good lesson in correlation versus causation. The latter, I suspect.

 

I just don't need some person I don't know questioning my judgment. Am I so dumb that I didn't think about the company or the product before plowing money into it? Realize that insinuating that very scenario is offensive.

 

All parties involved in this BBS topic are mired in a debate of semantics. BBS themselves hates the term "beta" and insists that a "prologue" is different. Simmers--myself included--largely reject that notion. The paradox, however, is that all of the BBS naysayers keep clamoring on about paying for an unfinished product, no matter what you call it. Sorry, but how many crummy products have we all bought that we regretted? Stick a v1.0 or v1.2 label after it if it makes you feel better. I've bought airports and aircraft that were marketed as finished and as being full releases and they were anything but. So buying an aircraft that is blatantly a v.802--we can debate all day what to "call" it but let the version number speak for itself--seems like the buyer knows what he or she is getting into.

 

 

I bought it because I wanted to support them and I did not have high expectations.

But, I wouldn't advise anyone looking for a finished product or someone expecting regular updates to buy it. Unless they are desperate for the airbus widebody. As for the a320, i would strongly suggest the aerosoft airbus over BBS.

 

Imagine that: someone that's kept it reasonable. Wanting to support a product in development--while keeping expectations of both the product and the company in mind--is exactly what many of us are doing. Well put, Naif.

 

Again, Naif is on point: as it stands right now, if you want a fun, well-simulated Airbus, head on over to Aerosoft.

[avgaskoolaid 292]

 Realize that insinuating that very scenario is offensive.

I guess I should have worded it differently. I didn't mean to imply that you don't do your research, and I apologize if I offended you. What I was trying to point out was that those of us who bought the product, especially when we know what we're getting in to, tend to like it. Again, I'm not really trying to change your opinion. I'm trying to offer an alternative viewpoint based on my own experience with the product so that the people who may be reading this thread who are unsure about whether or not to pull the trigger can be fully informed. 

 

Anyway, I've made my point and said what I've had to say about the aircraft, so I'm done discussing it. I'll be waiting patiently for the v1.0 version. The thread that will pop up when it does will certainly be interesting to read. 

[gmoneyprs 2]

 

 

I apologize if I offended you

 

Lol, my previous post was not pointed at you. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[ACAJS41 2]

I bought this product at V.66 like a fool hoping for a good A330 sim, waited for V.80 and continue to kick myself in the rear for supporting this company.  The VC looks like it was developed with a crayon, and all of the switch positions (well the ones that work) are all messed up and almost un-flyable from the VC.  The FMGC, FBW, and vertical NAV either have extreme flaws or just don't work. The fuel burn profiles are also totally screwed up.  The load manager, well ha ha is about all I can say about it.  We will never see V1.0, these guys will take the money they've earned so far, and run off yet again.  I cant believe they actually put "the very best Airbus simulator available" on their website, its clearly the worst, and its just another lie these two crooks come up with. If you want an Airbus sim that looks nice on the exterior model, and don't really care how it flies or works, then this is the add-on for you. 

I'm not gonna tell anyone what to do with their money, but my "advice" is to stay far away from BBS and the A330/340.  I'm uninstalling the A330/340 right now, as it is total garbage and a complete waste of my money.  Ill stick with Aerosoft while I wait for FSL... Good luck to anyone who chooses to buy this mess.

 

I also could don't care if its a one man or 20 man team, if I'm paying high end add-on prices then I expect regular updates and a high end product... right now this is a subpar product that should have been released as freeware. 

[gmoneyprs 2]

I'm perpexed by all of this excitement for FSL. How long has that thing been in development?

[nickpap89 2]

I'm perpexed by all of this excitement for FSL. How long has that thing been in development?

Since 2010! It's ridiculous.

[mgh 89]

I'm perpexed by all of this excitement for FSL. How long has that thing been in development?

 

But, as far as I'm aware, the difference is that FSL isn't taking money for its Airbus?

[MachTwo 386]

Since 2010! It's ridiculous.

 

Oh - did you program an A320 study sim for FSX in less time? Or know anyone else who has? I'd love to see it.

[qqwertz 772]

Aerosoft is making progress on the A330 it seems

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/92340-a330-preview/

[dc3 2]

Couldn't have said it better Greg. Bravo

[gmoneyprs 2]

But, as far as I'm aware, the difference is that FSL isn't taking money for its Airbus?

 

Non sequitur.

 

The only conclusion that can be had from that is that purchasing the BBS model is more risky.

 

But even that conclusion is shaky: again, I ask: suppose a developer releases a 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, etc. that still contains bugs (I can think of one aircraft developer that does that incessantly) and then decides to either stop supporting it, shuts down, etc.

 

Lots of products and services can be inherently risky purchases: most construction projects are funded from the beginning (and can suffer an innumerable amount of delays and defects), a manufacturer can claim that warranty work is circumstantially not covered, etc.

 

I say all of this because the industry dynamics are important here: some (read: few) larger sim developers (Aerosoft, PMDG, ORBX) have the cash on hand to internally fund a project through the 1.0 release. As we all know, the sim market isn't huge and it's also predominantly occupied by a developer base that, on average, consists of only a handful of full-time staff that may be occupied on one product (i.e. one cash flow stream) for quite a while. To me, personally, I'm aware of and sympathetic to this. Thus, I decided to fund the project's development via purchasing the 0.80 release. In all actuality, I installed the product and messed around with it for, in aggregate, maybe 2 hours. Was a little let down, to be sure, but development continues. Not worried at all. Am I guaranteed or assured it makes it to 1.0? Nope, not at all. But I took a calculated risk and am able to sleep just fine. Spent my money on a lot riskier/dumber things...

[CaptKornDog 281]

Anyone remember Airsimmer?  :rolleyes:

 

Never again.

[mgh 89]

Anyone remember Phoenix Simulation Software (PSS)?  :rolleyes:

 

Never again.

[out 769]

Anyone remember Phoenix Simulation Software (PSS)?

 

To be honest I had a great time with their airbuses and 777 in my FS2002/FS2004 years.

But that certainly does not convince me to buy the latest BBS creations, especially in pieces.

 

And their VC looks so ugly (I'm judging from screenshots and videos) for the 2015 standards.

They have definitely lost it there without Alex Bashkatov (and PMDG have won!).