TheFlightSimGuy

If you want to see a credible and sane review, here it is

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Yes, that is certainly similar to my initial experience..  a few nice things, and lots to be worked on..

The blue engines look absolutely gorgeous out the window in the Seneca!

The flight model is good, and the sim is smooth.. that is the good stuff, and is important since it is the base for everything else.  :biggrin:

The avionics are not just buggy, they are incomplete and disfunctional in places..

try the G500 and STEC in the Seneca, as an example.  This is disappointing.  :huh:

Much depends on what the development team produces next..

Thank goodness that i still have FSX to use as FSW gets completed!  :cool:

Share this post


Link to post

Doesn't Jessica have a link to PC PIlot, who in turn are hand-in glove with DTG? So, much as I have a great deal of respect for the talents of J B-P, I would hardly call it totally an impartial review.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

I found that she addresses the issues fairly. Jessica is surely acting as a journalist, free of ties. Just because someone produces for a particular publication does not automatically imply that they have to "tow the party line"...

The review is perhaps one of the least vitriolic and least utterly praising. She has managed, in my mind, to highlight the positives and negatives and then provide a conclusion. Based on all that I have seen and read, Jessica sums it up nicely for me. Thanks to her for taking the time to write her review. It, with others, will save me the money (albeit not much) and above all effort to install and come to terms with it.

As I see it, FSW is going to have to mature a lot before I "jump ship" from FSX. When the time comes to upgrade my PC in the late autumn hopefully, I currently see P3D as my option. FSW was a potential, but the massively limiting interface is a problem for me.

 

A

Share this post


Link to post

Nice and fair review indeed. Usually I find Mutleyshangar's review a bit too positive but this one seems quite realistic. 

I really do wonder though why a lot of basic options have been removed from FSW. As the review says you can't pick a parking location and I have read elsewhere the options for time of day are limited too (?) but what's even more weird is that you can hardly change a thing during a flight: no weather, time, airplane, season, nothing! I find that very odd. Yes, yes, yes, this is early access but I find it odd that things actually have been removed! You would expect at least all the basic options of FSX to be there and that new things will be added during EA but not this. Also the lower LOD is disappointing. And that autogen is still popping up. Somehow you would expect that after working in the FSX for a few years DTG would have been able to give at least the FSX basics and a few improvements (similar to P3D) but it seems they mainly left things out and added raindrops. I am really curious to why they did this. It feels like a step back from FSX instead of being on par or in front of it.

The future of addons also looks a bit grim if you have to believe Aerosoft. All in all I do wonder who DTG is targeting with this sim. If they were hoping to get a strong following among simmers they seemed to have made some wrong choices for this EA-version. But well, the future will tell how this all turns out. 

Share this post


Link to post

It`s a good review, however i`m at a loss as to how DT intends to turn this sim into something more than an Arcade style light GA fly around, i`m sure all of you have read that developers comments on the limited complexities this FSW can offer us as consumers and third party developers, so where can this go? I`m somewhat confused!

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, aentwis said:

Just because someone produces for a particular publication does not automatically imply that they have to "tow the party line"...

You'd like to think so but, as an example, when FSX:SE was released, PC Pilot made a lot of misleading and unrealistic claims about it in their review - double the FPS of boxed FSX and that it was "VASTLY smarter at allocating workloads" between CPU cores to name just two. I emailed them with my observations of the review and received a reply telling me that I was either just wrong or didn't understand what I was taking about. They even misquoted DTG to reinforce their arguments. The FSW review by Jessica Bannister-Pearce seems fair but my personal experience means that I now treat anything from PC Pilot or it's contributors with some suspicion.

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

You'd like to think so but, as an example, when FSX:SE was released, PC Pilot made a lot of misleading and unrealistic claims about it in their review - double the FPS of boxed FSX and that it was "VASTLY smarter at allocating workloads" between CPU cores to name just two. I emailed them with my observations of the review and received a reply telling me that I was either just wrong or didn't understand what I was taking about. They even misquoted DTG to reinforce their arguments. The FSW review by Jessica Bannister-Pearce seems fair but my personal experience means that I now treat anything from PC Pilot or it's contributors with some suspicion.

Much as I have a great deal of respect for J B-P's journalistic professionalism, and fair comment on her review, Andrew, and Rick66, however, vortex681, has more or less echoed my 'suspicion' of 'my publication will have to sell this at a later date'.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd tend to agree with most of that review, however, stating that the nav data for FSW has been 'updated' is misleading; at best it has been 'somewhat updated'. When I can land and take off from an airport in FSW which has, in the real world, been closed to air operations since 25th August 2011 (i.e. EGCD Woodford Aerodrome) and which is in fact now the location of a new housing estate (Woodford Garden Village), that is certainly not indicative of nav data being even remotely current with the real world. And I'm willing to bet this isn't the only example which could be found.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Hmmm, will search our good old LPCV, destroyed by political interests... the Cathedral of Mountain Flying in Portugal for decades...

But one thing is for sure - many small airports that aren't even available in freeware for FSX or X-Plane are there, and I see in nearby airports I know well that the buildings have suffered a considerable update. they aren't true to real, but a lot closer to reality, like Cascais - LPCS - near Lisbon...

Share this post


Link to post

Forget airports. 

See if the JAN VOR still exists near KJAN.

Its been out of commission and replaced by Magnolia VOR for a decade but obviously still present in FSX. That'll be a good test as to whether they actually updated the navaids.

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, J van E said:

I really do wonder though why a lot of basic options have been removed from FSW. As the review says you can't pick a parking location and I have read elsewhere the options for time of day are limited too (?) but what's even more weird is that you can hardly change a thing during a flight: no weather, time, airplane, season, nothing! I find that very odd. Yes, yes, yes, this is early access but I find it odd that things actually have been removed! You would expect at least all the basic options of FSX to be there and that new things will be added during EA but not this. Also the lower LOD is disappointing. And that autogen is still popping up. Somehow you would expect that after working in the FSX for a few years DTG would have been able to give at least the FSX basics and a few improvements (similar to P3D) but it seems they mainly left things out and added raindrops. I am really curious to why they did this. It feels like a step back from FSX instead of being on par or in front of it.

They've redesigned the whole UI menu system to use Flash (found in the new swfMenus folder) instead of custom widgets (found in the old Dialogs folder). I think they're just still in the long process of re-encoding all the different options screens into Flash.

Share this post


Link to post

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