For the visual I'm sure feelThere is the winner and if they release the 777 with similar details as they CRJ I think I rather get their plane. They just released some VC screenshot recently. I think the images are speak to themselves no comparing to PSS is needed... http://www.popcircle.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2990Quantsluvr

>That's exactly what I meant, but apparently Erick doesn't>understand that.>He does seem to think it's an aircraft spotting simulator.>>I'm btw not saying we should go back to the days of FS95 with>4 sided engine pods on 8 sided fuselages, but the amount of>detail some people seem to think is a fundamental requirement>these days is laughable and sadly increasing the cost of>addons and the hardware needed to run them to a level which is>wholly artificial.Hmm, if that's the case, I wonder why they bother to create all of those liveries?Bob

FT's vc is phenomenal looking :( , but alas the developer states that corners will be cut systems wise, it's to be enjoyable for the 'average'armchair pilot.We'll see I suppose.regards,Markhttp://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/markrey/lds1.jpgXPHomeSP2/FS9.1/3.2HT/1GIG/X700pro256

The 2D panel is excellent, I wish PMDG had such panel graphics on their 744.....___________________________Best Regards,Bodo M

With the greatest of respect - those that press for dumbed down models are using the WRONG SIM - period. MS Flight Simulator is developed and marketted as a GAME, full of ever improving EXTERNALS - scenery, weather, terrain, models (cough) and dumbed down SYSTEMS so as to invite the average person to experience flight on their pc. It is 3rd party developers that have, with MS help and encouragement, morphed it into what we all know and love in terms of systems. More power to them, I'm as 'guilty' as the next guy, but hello - based on their own words LDS, PMDG, PSS have to go outside the fs envelope to accomplish these incredible panels.You want systems - why not hammer PS1 for a 777?regards,Markhttp://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/markrey/lds1.jpgXPHomeSP2/FS9.1/3.2HT/1GIG/X700pro256

We'll see Mark... :-)

Alex:Do you know WHY we have so MANY freeware aircraft models available for download but to FEW high fidelity VC or 2D panels? Its because developement of the visual flight model, no matter HOW COMPLEX, is much easier to do than the flight deck. If not, then the Avsim Library would be brimming with Hi-Fi panels and all visual models would come with hyper-accurate flight decks for free. But the contrary is true...MelJet, POSKY, etc, put out the most beautiful models around, but no flight deck.Methinks you have it backwards here. The 2+ years it take to make PMDG type packages is due to the research and complex programming of the flight deck instruments, gauges and modes of operations, not the visual model.At this stage in 3rd party FS development, it has been shown that it is possible to deliver the "whole package" to the end user. That package being, stunning visual model, accuarate flight models, stunning photoreal VC AND functionality that rivals multimillion dollar simulators. This is no longer a pipe dream! It IS THE BAR that has been set by PMDG, LDS, DreamFleet and others. It is also the expectation of the vast majority of FS users. The proverbial "genie" is out of the bottle and it is decidedly hard to put it back in.The total package is what most simmers want because it has been proven possible in every sense of the word. If that were NOT the case why are the POSKY and Meljet visual models so insanely popular?The only reason I can muster is because they look D@mned good! And judging by their download tallies, many people are more than happy to balance a beautiful flight model with a decent cockpit to try to balance form with functionality. If it were all about the VC or 2D pit, none of which are included then...well you can fill in the rest.At this stage in the game (no pun intended) where expectations have been raised to the level of PMDG or LDS, can one go back to hand-drawn flight decks and mediocre visual models? Sure one can. There's no law against it. AND surely, more than just a few don't care about the model or what the cockpit looks like as look as they can flip buttons accurately. There's nothing wrong with that.However, PSS, undoubtedly, is one of the pioneers of the high-fidelity aircraft and cockpit. Seeing what they did for FS2000 and FS2002, many were expecting to have their socks blown off, especially following the LDS and the PMDG offerings. So, at the end of the day, there are only a handful of screenshots on which to base our initial impressions. But as the old saying goes...first impressions are lasting impressions. Undoubtedly, the general concensus while still anticipated, and hopefull, is lukewarm at best.Regards,Mike T.

That's basically what I'm saying here. Some people just like to make themselves feel bigger, for one reason or another, though the root cause is usually the same as the fellow who decides he needs a huge car for himself...And no, I don't think it's a spotting sim, I just get kinda irked when I pay for a part of the package that they didn't put a decent effort into. Some people like to have a nice model to look at as part of the whole package. And if you want to go the realism route, try this:Lots of people use third party addon utilities like Active Camera. Isn't the walkaround part of every preflight? Honestly this 'i'm too gud 2 look outside cuz I'm t3h hardk0re lolz my systemz rulz0rz urs #####' business is just annoying. Get off your little superiority complex and accept that the majority (who is the bread and butter of their sales, not you) does not agree.

for textures???its kinda like flying in the default lear... the textures are near the same... but like i said, love the bird...

I don't think you got what I said. I never said the visual model took that long to develop, reread what I said, stop putting words in my mouth.You are disappointed, why? Because you don't like the visual model. How would you get your socks blown off otherwise? Unless you can magically use the panels through the screenshots, you have no idea how the systems and panels will function so all your judgements are based entirely on the model itself.As I said, the model is the least important to many people. I am one of them. I do not fly without a VC so I have never downloaded the SGA models for example. I am sure they are great looking, but as this dicussion has come around before, I can't look at a restrictive post card and fly without having the great vision you get in the VC.

The 2D panel is excellent, I wish PMDG had such panel graphics on their 744.....:-lol Wow, what shots are you looking at? Because they can't be the same ones I'm seeing, and I don't think the 744 panel graphics are bad at all (maybe the perspective is what you don't like, but the graphic quality is top notch).Daniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

Two words..."Alpha code"That applies to the cockpit, VC, and model.

Well reading their website it clearly stated they were headed into Beta testing; unless PSS beta is different then theyve locked the development meaning what you see is what it is.

Daniel,the PMDG panel graphics are anything else than top notch because they are much too dark and portions of them too hard to read. The worst are the throttle console and the overhead panel.If you remember PSS' 744 panel back in 2001, their graphics were bright and clear compared to PMDG. I hope they will "upgrade" the panel graphics for the 744F release similar to what they did for the 737-800/900 upgrade...___________________________Best Regards,Bodo M

I think thats very much a mattter of opinion; I very much like the panels of the PMDG thats what the flood lights and night lighting is for. ive never had an issue seeing the panels.