Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rightseat

Objective review? You be the judge.

Recommended Posts

Guest Grizzly_Air

>Well, it's hard to take someone seriously, who, after>extolling the virtue of the product, then goes on to admit>that he "didn't fly it much either.">>And, please, are you seriously suggesting that a badly>written, hastily put together 30 page "manual" qualifies as,>well, a manual?>>There is no RTFM since there is no manual to read!>>ricardo>I hardly think I was extolling the virtues of it, but AS I SAID, I am not much a judge since I didn't fly it much. So I guess I can agree with you since your argument was to agree with me(?) There were additional materials released by the community that were a big help, but the manual was more than 30 pages. Was there not a 3 section manual for the 707 as well. I'd have to go dig it out. I never had issues with flying it, it did just fine, you just couldn't plop down and expect to get FSNav to fly it for you. I never flew the 707 or even rode on one, so this is as close as I will get to it. But again, I dunno, I didn't like it, so I didn't fly it much, but I didn't see any problems when I did. It flew just fine. http://www.captainsim.com/user/dl/c130/c130-testpilot.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand corrected.Captain Sim Legendary 707.Flight and Training Manual, Part 1: Systems ManualThis manual clocks in at a tree-killing 17 pagesFlight and Training Manual, Part 2: Operations ManualAt a hefty 24 pages, you'll have trouble lifting this baby off the floor. Sum total: 41 pages. ricardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Grizzly_Air

>I stand corrected.>>Captain Sim Legendary 707.>>Flight and Training Manual, Part 1: Systems Manual>>This manual clocks in at a tree-killing 17 pages>>Flight and Training Manual, Part 2: Operations Manual>>At a hefty 24 pages, you'll have trouble lifting this baby off>the floor. >>Sum total: 41 pages. >>ricardoLOL touche'http://www.captainsim.com/user/dl/c130/c130-testpilot.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jaguar XJ6

Always is, seemingly.Best wishes,Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noted over the last few years that allnodesbusy.com's reviews and information are available and "customizable" for the right price. In fact, you'll never hear a peep about an fs product that doesn't advertise with them. So that lets you know a little about how the site is run, and how "unbiased" their news and opinions/reviews are. Your best bet is to stick with AVSIM where they try to present the facts regardless if the company is paying them to advertise or not. Kudos to Tom and AVSIM on that one. ;>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Justflight has nothing to do with Flight1 except for being their agent for selling CD releases of F1 products. Justflight also sells CD releases for products by other manufacturers/publishers, like CaptainSim.fs.com has a longstanding relationship with CaptainSim (and maybe Justflight).You've just learned what I learned years ago: reviews are not to be trusted on their own merit (but then, neither are forum posts, and to an even lesser degree).Especially reviews on fs.com I've over the years come to mistrust severely as they're always biassed towards products fs.com sell themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Flightsim.com has done is pure misrepresentation. You expect reviews to be reviews, but, as you point out, that most often is not the case. There are lies and then d*mn lies. On forum posts, a lot of times you get just ignorance, or, at worse, lies. When a site such as Flightsim.com posts a review, the average readership expects that he or she is reading a critical, objective review and will often times base his or her purchasing decision upon that review. When the supposed review turns out to an advertisment for financial gain, cloaked as a review, what you end up with is a d*mn lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Erick_Cantu

MOST reviews are that way.The people here just happen to not like the developer this one is about (for good reason).Trust me if the same things were said about developers the crowd here worship disregarding similar faults and complaints (which the crowd here would jump on you for mentioning, the pack mentality here and elsewhere is rather ridiculous), you'd all be praising it as gospel.My advice? Think for yourself, look for what suits you, disregard reviewers (honestly, so few of them have any idea what they're talking about), and remember: ultimately, the only way you can decide if a piece of software works for you is to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 707 is such a classic bird. It's too bad CS could not finish the job and get it right.RH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...actually, I think the reviews here on Avsim are pretty on the spot, detailed and not biased at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ashleigh Davidson

Sorry to have to say this but overall any review lately by Andrew Nerd is to be taken with a pinch of salt, not worth the readers time. As from where I sit, his reviews are extended advertisments for companys who funnily enough, advertise heavily on Flightsim.com. I think there are enough people who frequent these forums who are owners of both the 707 and 727, (many who are credible in my opinion). These same are united in the fact that the 707 and 727's, though pretty, are in fact rubbish.As far as Justflight, well again, I would not believe one word of the hype they put out. For a so called respected publisher to distribute known iffy product gives me an indication of what the contempt they have for "customers". (The emphasis being on spin, a poor trait of many in this industry). To back this up, look at the screenies on the Justflight 707 page, note the awacs..the F/O has taken off with his window open...to quote the blurb "The level of detail is massive and authentic", tell me, when did you last see a take off with the cockpit window open ? I only ever purchased one product from them and never again. I also have serious doubts about any company who rubbish competitors (be they good or bad) like kids in the playground.Ash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what its worth I've noted a long time ago that allnodesbusy is totally biased. I was one of the forum members who had their account deleted (10,000+ posts) under the reign of the Cap'n who I see is still active on their forum. The whole perfect flight fiasco shed light on how things work over there.. and still no one can talk badly about a sponsoring developer/product without their post being removed and their account in danger of being deleted. The reviews.. they're a joke, what makes me annoyed is that people who go to that site exclusively might be bought in by these.After explaining my forum account removal to none other than Nels Anderson himself.. he insisted on defending Cap'n Mason,Long live avsim ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Most are. In contrast to fs.com the people here don't make money from running the site and selling the stuff they review.On simflight, you can generally trust reviews by occasional contributors (they don't get paid either, in contrast to the core staff), on fs.com I'd not trust any review unless it matches other reviews in general tone.Of course reviews here and at simflight still reflect the personal opinion about a product. Maybe the reviewer has different priorities than do you.For example I don't consider minute external details in aircraft to be a major factor in deciding whether I like the product and therefore won't judge a product based on that.Someone else will rate a product very poorly if a landing gear strut is a few pixels too tall or the windscreen windows are a fraction of a degree too steep (yes, I've seen those mentioned as core reasons to drag a perfectly fine product through the mud).Worst example of a biassed review though must be a review of a lens for photocameras I read a few years ago in a (supposedly) quality magazine.They compared a very poor (in my experience and that of everyone I'd ever spoken to) low price consumer grade lens with its professional high quality equivalent from another brand.Image quality, durability, etc. etc. were never mentioned.The poor lens won out easily though in the review based on:1) it's cheaper (doh!)2) it's smaller (since when does that matter?)3) it's lighter (just means it makes a poor paperweight which is the only thing it was useful for)Of course on the next page there was a 2 page spread ad for that same lens, and on the page next to that a fullpage ad for a camera brand competing with the manufacturer of the professional lens (who did not have any ads in that magazine).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...