Good and Bad, Amazing, Awesome, Lacking

[Guest-475 81]

I think many people expect  "good" aircraft addons to be study-level sims with almost all of the systems modeled and with a flight model as close to reality as possible. I am not  saying that this is bad, because I also like to fly study-level sims and rarely purchase intentionally simplified planes.

 

But let's be honest: 90% of the time (judging from recordings, live streams and forum posts) people only use 10% of the systems and couldn't even tell if all the indications they see on the displays and gauges are realistic values, or if the flight model is within an envelope which could be expected in the real world. I am not blaming them, I probably don't do it any different.

 

To put it shortly: People (I, we) want addons as close to the real thing as possible, but in the end they (I, we) don't even remotely make use of all of this. Even if we follow those fancy real-world cold&dark procedures and feel great when caution light XY gets lit when it's upposed to be.

[yidahoo 365]

I think many people expect  "good" aircraft addons to be study-level sims with almost all of the systems modeled and with a flight model as close to reality as possible. I am not  saying that this is bad, because I also like to fly study-level sims and rarely purchase intentionally simplified planes.

 

But let's be honest: 90% of the time (judging from recordings, live streams and forum posts) people only use 10% of the systems and couldn't even tell if all the indications they see on the displays and gauges are realistic values, or if the flight model is within an envelope which could be expected in the real world. I am not blaming them, I probably don't do it any different.

 

To put it shortly: People (I, we) want addons as close to the real thing as possible, but in the end they (I, we) don't even remotely make use of all of this. Even if we follow those fancy real-world cold&dark procedures and feel great when caution light XY gets lit when it's upposed to be.

 

I think you absolutely hit the nail on the head.

[MarioDonick 752]

 

 

I think many people expect "good" aircraft addons to be study-level sims with almost all of the systems modeled and with a flight model as close to reality as possible.

 

Well, then indeed 80% of all X-Plane addons are not "good", but just mediocre or even worse. But isn't this nearly the same for FSX/P3D? There's much more than A2A, PMDG, FSLabs or RealAir there, too.

 

I was always considering A2A, PMDG etc. to be a least "very good", not just "good" (And "good", in turn, is in my understanding something that is enjoyable for a lot of users, even if it's more a toy than a deep simulation. But maybe I'm wrong?)

[Guest-475 81]

I don't think that you're wrong. It's just when people ask for a "good" flight sim addon (e.g. "recommend me a good *random plane* for *random sim*"), they actually mean "what's the best/most realistic *random plane* for *random sim*".

 

And of course the majority of FSX/P3D addons are just as incomplete or simplified as most X-Plane addons. And there's a market for this.

E.G. Mike Wilsons "entry-level" 707 will have it's customers just like Flyjsims study-level rendition.

[MarioDonick 752]

 

 

It's just when people ask for a "good" flight sim addon (e.g. "recommend me a good *random plane* for *random sim*"), they actually mean "what's the best/most realistic *random plane* for *random sim*".

 

You are probably right...

 

 

Great that you mention Mike Wilson. The review I'm currently writing for my blog is his DC-8. It's for sure in the "beginners" category, except maybe if you add the CIVA (then it might be of interest for some advanced users, but these in turn maybe would go directly to FJS' products). I've made a lot of enjoyable flights with the DC-8 (but after that had to go to something more deep again). It's like McDonalds vs. a good restaurant. I like both.

[uwespeed 497]

I think many people expect  "good" aircraft addons to be study-level sims with almost all of the systems modeled and with a flight model as close to reality as possible. I am not  saying that this is bad, because I also like to fly study-level sims and rarely purchase intentionally simplified planes.

 

But let's be honest: 90% of the time (judging from recordings, live streams and forum posts) people only use 10% of the systems and couldn't even tell if all the indications they see on the displays and gauges are realistic values, or if the flight model is within an envelope which could be expected in the real world. I am not blaming them, I probably don't do it any different.

 

To put it shortly: People (I, we) want addons as close to the real thing as possible, but in the end they (I, we) don't even remotely make use of all of this. Even if we follow those fancy real-world cold&dark procedures and feel great when caution light XY gets lit when it's upposed to be.

 

This !!

 

I remember, long time ago, when I bought a (quite expensive) radio for my car, because of its numerous capabilties. I played with this feature, that function, ... and was proud and happy, having bought this radio. After some time ... I used the on/off button, volume up/down, switching the radio stations, play/pause of the cassette player (it's this long ago) and fast forward/rewind.

But I could claim "Hey, look ... I'm a big one, I could not live with a cheap radio having only on/off, volume up/down, ..." and felt sooooo goooood .

[MarioDonick 752]

 

 

But I could claim "Hey, look ... I'm a big one, I could not live with a cheap radio having only on/off, volume up/down, ..." and felt sooooo goooood .

 

It's like those people who (sometimes illegally download and) use Photoshop for cropping one image once in a year.

[uwespeed 497]

It's like those people who (sometimes illegally download and) use Photoshop for cropping one image once in a year.

 

:smile:. Using the builtin drawing program of the OS for such things is for loosers .

[rdb 44]

But let's be honest: 90% of the time (judging from recordings, live streams and forum posts) people only use 10% of the systems

 

I have to admit i've never been a fan of and get the idea behind streaming. Everytime i watch a random flightsim stream i have a hard time believing what my eyes are seeing. Majority don't care if they bust flap speeds, fly unstabilized approach or do a barrel roll in 747 on final. What counts most is the amount of subs and donations. Yet, i hope it's not representative of an average flight simmer

For me flight sims have always been source of satisfaction. Entertainment factor is a "side effect". Think that's why we call them simulators, not games right? If it wasn't for these selected few developers who came up with more and more complex, realistic add-ons, simming would become boring too soon and i would have never ended up in real aviation, propably ...

To make matters worse, my previous job was in computers (still coding in my free time for fun). This makes my evaluation of every new payware add-on i buy and install very instant and strict. Usually if i don't find anything out of place or buggy in the first 5 minutes, chances are high it's an exceptional add-on (wish it would happen more often!)

 

Seeing how much praise good developers (minority) get on the forums i think it's not all lost yet. The key - in my humble opinion - is for the customers/reviewers to call a spade a spade.

 

[MarioDonick 752]

 

 

Think that's why we call them simulators, not games right?

 

One would think that, yes. But far too many games are called "simulators" nowadays -- in the gaming industry it has become a general term for "here you can pretend to do job xyz", regardless if it's really a simulation in the technical or scientific sense. On the other hand, a lot of customers speak of FSX/XP as games (such as in "I bought X-Plane, but the game does not run. What to do?" support requests)

 

Finally, regardless of simulation or gaming, in an anthropological sense we are all playing.

[tonywob 4,769]

I think the big difference between FSX/P3D addons and X-Plane is "polish"

 

Agreed and I think one big reason is that the tools and documentation for FSX development are better and developers are more experienced. I'd love to make my entire airport in 3DS Max or Blender easily like one can do in FSX (including the mesh). One advantage though of X-Plane is that the developers are active and will help out or add features for devs if they can.

 

 

But let's be honest: 90% of the time (judging from recordings, live streams and forum posts) people only use 10% of the systems and couldn't even tell if all the indications they see on the displays and gauges are realistic values, or if the flight model is within an envelope which could be expected in the real world. I am not blaming them, I probably don't do it any different

 

Very much true and for me at least, as long as it looks good and flies near enough to my own experience then I'm generally happy. I'm not one to complain if a certain circuit breaker doesn't work or if a specific reading is off. I generally put eye-candy above functionality (within reason of course), but I know other users (uninstaller and ladamson come to mind) like accurate flight-models.

[Humpty 751]

The problem is people comparing stuff which has  already been developed against ones still under development. e.g. IXEG which is still being developed and comparing it with the likes of PMDG is a joke ,  The kind of resource and time it would take to even do a good J3 Cub is too much. New platforms new designs new programming etc....

 

There are so many freeware / donatioware stuff for XP10 is just amazing, e.g. for airport ENHA by Tony or the Alaskan ones by Rdesign (freewares and paywares) . And quite a few more and also good aircraft.

 

I go for visuals first and the FM and systems come later.

[tonywob 4,769]

@humpydumty Exactly, they have 0 experience in X-Plane, it's a different platform and development process and PMDG are not veterans of development on X-Plane, in fact if anything (despite their reputation), they have a lot to learn and to catch up with. I didn't purchase their X-Plane product as it really is not something I'm personally interested in, and I don't think I would pick up the 737NG either unless it was an improvement over the IXEG737 (despite being different aircraft). I would like to see them release the 777 or MD-11 though, and would be first waiting with my credit card to purchase.