LevelD 767. Really THAT good?

[Guest bobsk8]

>... unless you are not particularly into 767s, in which case>the 747-400 or 777 will no doubt be the better option. I find>no real showstoppers in the former, glad I am not a devotee of>the 777 in relation to the latter.>>Tend to agree that PSS handling characteristics are not what>they were in the PSS heyday.>>MichaelSounds like, with alot of work, the 777 might one day be as good as the FS9 default 737

[G7USL 117]

Sounds to me that, you don't have the Level-D 767 becuase someone has told you that it's the same as the FS2000 '767PIC'?The PSS777 isn't in the same league, I can assure you that, PMDG and Level D currently reside!There is a saying that goes "Don't knock it until you have tried it".Carry on with your down the drain drinking hobby, we'll be enjoying our software for many years to come.There..............I bit it as well.Dave T. .........On the lovely warm Devon Riviera and active 'FlightSim User's Group' member at http://www.flightsimgrpuk.free-online.co.uk/

[Guest bobsk8]

>>>It's ok, by modern FS 2004 add-in standards. >>>>>>Problem is, it simulates a pretty old (and, I believe, soon>>to>>>be discontinued) aircraft that now hovers uncomfortably>>>between these days and the olden days.>>>>>>The earlier incarnation for FS 2000 - 767 PIC - was a>better>>>overall product for desktop PC users. Bags of innovation>and>>>entertainment there. Same can't really be said for the>>current>>>LDS version.>>>>>>If I could be bothered with 767s, I would still use 767 PIC>>in>>>FS 2000 (but not FS 2002, because much of the product>>>functionality was not updated for the latter).>>>>>>Michael>>>>OK, I'll bite, what do you own that you think is better than>>the LevelD 767? ( this should be interesting :))>>>>>>767 PIC (amongst others).>>MichaelAnd I thought you were trying to be serious.... Oh Well!;)

[Guest Jaguar XJ6]

>Sounds to me that, you don't have the Level-D 767 becuase>someone has told you that it's the same as the FS2000>'767PIC'?Sounds to me like you have jumped to an incorrect conclusion.>The PSS777 isn't in the same league, I can assure you that,>PMDG and Level D currently reside!I did not say it was.>There is a saying that goes "Don't knock it until you have>tried it".Sound saying, in many contexts.>Carry on with your down the drain drinking hobby, we'll be>enjoying our software for many years to come.I thought that I was one of the few who enjoys the MSFS software. Glad that there are others.>There..............I bit it as well.Ouch!Regards.Michael

[Guest Jaguar XJ6]

>And I thought you were trying to be serious.... Oh Well!Time and a place for that! MSFS is fun in my book, and bit educative as well.But I still think 767 PIC was better as an overall product, in many (but not all) ways.Regards.Michael

[Guest jerrycwo4]

A lot of people here with the LevelD-767. In your opinion, what is the best way to learn to program the FDC? At my age, I need all of the help that I can get. Any other helps arond to make this a little easier? jerrycwo4

[Guest jennifer]

Ben W wrote:- "...Look at it like cooking, PSS's 777 is still frozen in the middle and needs more time in the oven, PMDG's 744 is cooked but the gravy sauce isn't quite perfected yet, LDS's 767 is the filet mignon - cooked to perfection and the one to have!....!"If Avsim start to do comparative reviews then I think that they should hire BenW. That paragraph sums it up concisely, eloquently and entertainingly. Nice one Ben :-)

[Guest JIMJAM]

I dont know about that.Reading some reviews already make me feel like spending money.All I need is them to make me hungry as well.Then I would be fat and broke!

[greggerm 312]

The Level-D Simulations 767 was created by the same people who designed the original Pilot-In-Command (PIC) 767 for FS2000/FS2002. It maintains the reputation of it's pedigree by being the uneclipsed best airplane in the virtual skies at this point. The rights to PIC767 (old) were sold to I believe Abacus for distribution, so they couldn't use the same naming. When they decided to recreate it for FS2004, they formed a new company and employed Flight1 for distribution. But on to your question...If you had to spend money RIGHT NOW:Purchase either the LDS 767 or the PMDG 747, with the 767 getting my overall highest rating for an addon airplane. The useability and depth of the simulation is top notch. The PMDG is right behind it, if only because of its relatively young age and slight lack of maturity (bugwise), but that will only effect the most stringent of users. Additionally, 767 will take less of a performance hit on your computer than the 747. Also of note, I'd classify the 767 above the PMDG 737NG series as well. Again, the 737NG is a great product that I enjoy to fly, but the LDS 767 just outshines it. Where is the 777 in this right now? Sidelines. Watching. Bobby Boucher-style. It's too immature (needs some fixes), and impacts performance more than the other two. This is not to say it is a product that cannot be enjoyed, but straight out of the "box" the 767 and 747's present a better enjoyment value. The 777 is done in classic PSS style - that being a fairly deep simulation, but keeping it light enough for the casual user to enjoy. The 767/747's go deeper, allowing the armchair pilot more complexity if they so choose. If you do NOT have to spend the money RIGHT NOW:Stick it out - at that point, you'd want to purchase the airplane which best suits your flying styles! Again, I would choose the 767 first for me, as I don't do a lot of trans-oceanic flights and if I do, they are mainly east-coast USA to europe - a market dominated by the 767. If you are drawn to the 747 or the 777, go that route when the time is right. Invariably, the PSS folks will fix up the 777, and computer technology may step up to provide you with a better experience than some are having right now.Overall... - - - - - - - - - - - - - The analogy to food was spot-on. At this point in time, the LDS 767 is in fact the perfectly cooked filet. Not a single problem with it, and the plate presentation is fantastic. This dish defines how food should be cooked. The receipe was made by the same folks who created the PIC767, the platnum standard addon for FS2000/2002, which still has a following today. The PMDG 747 had to be sent back to the chef once, but turned out to be yet another stellar dish. Great looking, great tasting - no aftertaste, but you DO need a fairly empty stomach (aka: powerful computer) to enjoy it to the fullest. The PSS 777 is new to the menu. Right now, it is still a little raw in the middle - not quite cooked to taste. The chefs are working on bringing it up to the current standards. From the looks of it, the dish will satisfy a great many diners, from those just in off the street to those who are psudo-critics. Seems as though it might not need as empty of a stomach, but right now the NY Times food critics cannot give it two forks up.And to answer your base question, the Level-D 767 is that good - if not moreso. :)-Greg

[Guest dolb]

'What is the best way to learn the FDC'I'm assuming you meant FMC. LDS has many tutorials :).

[Guest bobsk8]

>A lot of people here with the LevelD-767. In your opinion,>what is the best way to learn to program the FDC? At my age, I>need all of the help that I can get. Any other helps arond to>make this a little easier? jerrycwo4Besides all the free tutorials you can get on the 767, there will also be a brand new Book going on sale next month that has everything you would ever want to know about the LevelD 767... I saw part of this at the Avsim Convention this year and I am ordering it the day it goes on sale. http://www.flight1.com/products.asp?product=FL1-76M-001

[Tony G 0]

Oh now that is just too cool! I might be right behind you in line for that :) http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...s/Goodale01.jpg