FSX-MS Flysimware MU-2 Released.

[CoolP 283]

What Carenado lacks this has, and vice versa

True statement. Still planning to get the MU-2 since their C441 is a very good release. Must not be on day 1 (I was already late on the C441) but I think the unique plane and system detail (they usually put in) justifies the purchase.

 

They also come in very friendly and helpful on the service side of things. :smile: And I cannot complain about how they design the instruments (sharp) and clickspots (good size and logic).

 

I bought a beta version of the Carenado Hawker for $50

I see what you did there, Jose. ^_^

[hangar 661]

 

 

I feel the opposite.Eye candy gets boring, you need good sounds and system modeling to keep people coming back.

 

yes it does, I agree...and so does pushing an engine start button after awhile. The point of the post is not about eye candy or systems per say, but rather about competitive value. Just like Carenado they are pricing themselves outside of the "discount" market, which is dangerous if your product doesn't have a very good balance of all things (which it clearly does not, YET).

[ryanbatc 12,855]

Honestly I've come to realize I simply do not have the time I used to for simming.  (two kids+1 coming hehe)

 

Maybe I am just an eye candy phan boi....

 

I rarely have a chance to fly longer than 1 hour at a time.  I think this is why I'm swinging from my desire of  "uber systems" to "uber eye candy."

 

Oh well, I've got some mods to the hawker that make it enjoyable now, maybe SP1 will help too.

 

It's funny - FSX had no turboprops.... now they're everywhere!

 

I'm ready for the dawn of bizjets developers!

[Boeing or not going 578]

Honestly I've come to realize I simply do not have the time I used to for simming.  (two kids+1 coming hehe)

 

Maybe I am just an eye candy phan boi....

 

I rarely have a chance to fly longer than 1 hour at a time.  I think this is why I'm swinging from my desire of  "uber systems" to "uber eye candy."

 

Oh well, I've got some mods to the hawker that make it enjoyable now, maybe SP1 will help too.

 

It's funny - FSX had no turboprops.... now they're everywhere!

 

I'm ready for the dawn of bizjets developers!

and how long do you spend flying eye candy only airplanes? do you spend a year flying the same addon with nice eye candy but lacking systems? Not everyone has the money you do to buy every new airplane every few weeks. I want airplanes I can keep coming back to, not that is eye candy only and I get bored after a few weeks

[hangar 661]

Hey Ryan - similar thing with me, regarding the shorter flights nowdays. Years ago I only used to fly the large commercial jets with fmc, sids/stars, Vatsim atc, etc. the whole shebang. Then as life priorities changed so did my flightsim habbits...so I switched to mostly flying GA now. I'm stuck often times having to do some very short flights :-)

 

...but I'm very happy about it just the same since it's forced me to find an entirely new appreciation for GA stick/rudder/pilotage type flying!

[twharrell 38]

I'm not sure why people think $40 (and lately $50) for nice textures and crappy systems plus the same ol' bugs is good buy, yet good systems and FDE, and decent textures (not to mention great customer support) for the same price is not worth it. To each his own, I guess.

[CoolP 283]

Then as life priorities changed so did my flightsim habbits...so I switched to mostly flying GA now.

Shows how lets say versatile the flight sim hobby is. There's room for everyone and every habit and the market is far from dead.

[ShadowHawkPrime 0]

Yes!

 

I'm still loving the 441 and have been waiting impatiently for the MU-2. I'll definitely be flying it this week!

[davenicoll 104]

Come on gents...

 

What do you want for $42.00 ??

 

Dave

[hangar 661]

Hi Todd -so you're saying that RealAir, A2A and Flight1 products offer "crappy" systems (They DO fall into the $40-$50 range)?

 

Heh, I don't think the majority would agree with that, at all...in fact I believe most would say that their systems are pretty good for GA...I also think that most would agree that their textures are actually a step or 2 above what you'll currently find in the Flysimware products.

 

...but that's just a guess :-)

[Alan_A 1,650]

 

 

I rarely have a chance to fly longer than 1 hour at a time.  I think this is why I'm swinging from my desire of  "uber systems" to "uber eye candy."

 

With you on the time constraints.  My current solution is to find my way to aircraft that have authentic but uncomplicated systems - the A2A GA line and some of their single-seat warbirds (the Spitfire is perfect because you absolutely have to get it off the ground fast before it overheats).  I also keep some jump-in-and-fly aircraft handy.  Unfortunately my hard drive is littered with study sims that I just can't get to because I don't have the time to master them, and long-range aircraft that don't fit the less-than-one-hour mission profile.  I wouldn't say eye-candy is my personal solution, but I understand simmers who feel that way.  I hope developers will find a way to keep us in the game. 

[flyforever 267]

I am cleaning out my basement after 20 years. It's amazing to think how much junk one can purchase. Tools that I thought were cool were used only once and then put away. So much stuff. When I go to lunch with a friend, I easily find myself spending $30.00. Sometimes I am satisfied with the quality; sometimes I eat it and decide that it's the last time that I'll eat there.  

 

As someone who has been flight simming for 20 years, I am astonished that for 50 bucks I get to play with something new for a hobby that I enjoy.  Sometimes I get lucky; sometimes, I don't.

 

I flip flop between easy planes and complex planes for purely emotional reasons.  A MU2 is romance for me, and sometimes that's good enough for me to take a spin with it.

Unless a plane is purely junk, I live with the "flaws", but still am having a lot of fun. I hope developers can justify being in this little hobby of ours.

tony

[pmanhart 176]

 

 

-so you're saying that RealAir, A2A and Flight1 products offer "crappy" systems (They DO fall into the $40-$50 range)?

 

I think Todd is speaking frankly of Carenado when he makes that statement, and I would agree with him.

 

There are some in the thread who are justifying spending $50 on a Carenado release with buggy and/or incomplete systems, but balk at spending $42 on a system-complete aircraft but without the Carenado quality texture and modeling.

[Jimmy RFR 406]

With you on the time constraints.  My current solution is to find my way to aircraft that have authentic but uncomplicated systems - the A2A GA line and some of their single-seat warbirds (the Spitfire is perfect because you absolutely have to get it off the ground fast before it overheats).  I also keep some jump-in-and-fly aircraft handy.  Unfortunately my hard drive is littered with study sims that I just can't get to because I don't have the time to master them, and long-range aircraft that don't fit the less-than-one-hour mission profile.  I wouldn't say eye-candy is my personal solution, but I understand simmers who feel that way.  I hope developers will find a way to keep us in the game. 

 

Completely agree.  I love in-depth simulations, yet I find I rarely have time to indulge in them when they require large amounts of time.  Whereas, you can have an in-depth simulation of a relatively simple aircraft, such as the GA planes produced by A2A, or my current favorite, the DA20-100 by Marcel Felde, which successfully manage to be complex yet non time consuming at the same time.  The Bronco or the Twin Otter from Aerosoft also successfully scratch that itch as well, albeit a slight bit more involved.

 

It's also worth mentioning that developers that manage to create easy to use shortcuts for those of us with time constraints get an extra high five... If it can't be started with CTRL+E, it's extra awesome when a developer makes a panel that allows us to shortcut the procedures and get flying quickly when desired.  A2A is superb in this respect, as is Cerasim. I don't always use the option, maybe 10 - 20% of the time, but it's nice to have there.

 

Back to the aircraft at hand, while some of the cabin textures aren't the greatest, those sharp instruments on a black panel look decent enough for me.  I'm currently rebuilding my sim PC (not by choice), and thus have blown my simming budget, but it looks like it's worthy of another look once I'm flying again.

[N405GJ 36]

I'm not sure why people think $40 (and lately $50) for nice textures and crappy systems plus the same ol' bugs is good buy, yet good systems and FDE, and decent textures (not to mention great customer support) for the same price is not worth it. To each his own, I guess.

I can't agree more. There were some bugs with the store software on launch early this morning. Mark with Flysimware stayed online with another customer and I in the wee hours of the morning to make sure things went smooth. Then, he stayed on and chatted with me while I sat in the cockpit, setting up EzDok cams, and we had a great conversation.

 

Are the textures 4096? No. But from what I can tell so far, this will be a fantastic product. These guys are on my short list of trusted developers and I can't wait to see what they come up with as time goes on.