Sign in to follow this  
Bluescaster

Is this true about the PSS Concord???

Recommended Posts

After reading such a glorified review of the PSS Concord I have one question that kept me from buying this 5 star product in the first place (well maybe the lack of support for the FS2k4 updated A320 helped my decision not to buy as well) . Is the VC fully clickable or not??? I mean like the Koch Concord, is the main panel, upper, and engineers panel clickable??? For a 5 star review this basic function should be available in the VC. For 5 stars I should be able to fly fully from the VC. Just like I can with the PMDG 737NG/B1900, Feelthere CRJ/ERJ, All DreamFleet products, FSD, Ready For Pushback, CaptainSim, Koch, Eaglesoft, and last but not least even 'Perfect Flight'. All these development houses have addressed this basic concept in all their FS2k4 add-ons. Most of these developers have never received a 5 star rating for their work and I frankly find it hard to believe a product can get a 5 star rating without providing the basic technology that everyone else is doing. Furthermore not offering anything revolutionary is disturbing as well...I read (and I could be wrong) that the VC in the PSS Concord is not clickable. If I'm wrong then I'd gladly go buy it for the simple fact I don't like manually adjusting the fuel in the Koch Media Concord. If the VC isn't clickable then we have a major problem with the reviews around here.There was a very recent discussion about the review of the PSS Concord (that's been moved to another forum). No one addressed the shortcomings of the add-on to further justify the point that the review was a little biased. If it's true the PSS Concord doesn't have a clickable VC (much like all FS2k2 add-ons of the past) and this thing was developed for FS2k4 then 'Houston we have a problem'... Please guys tell me the PSS Concord has a fully interactive VC... :-hmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

it'll not be Houston that has a problem,nor me,but you,as you'll have to keep manually adjusting the fuel in the Koch Media Concord.from what i've seen,the PSS product does look promising.and,having a not really superpowered puter,i don't give a rat's behind about a clickable VC.ofcourse,if i did have a cray,i would not care either.2d panel anytime,for me that is.i do however suspect the PSS Concord does have a clickable VC.because there's people that,like you,hate 2d panels ;)and they would loose sales if they did not have it.tataJP.

Share this post


Link to post

Whether you prefer the 2D panel or not is not the point here (and I don't want to make it the point either). The fact is that clickable VC's are standard in every add-on (worth talking about) released for FS2k4 these days. You can

Share this post


Link to post

another reason it will almsot certainly have a clickable VC: the 330/340 has one and was released quite a long time before the Concorde :)

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn't count on it jwenting nor will I hold my breath...I just hope all this is a mute point and this add-on has a clickable VC so I can go buy it. I've heard some great things about it otherwise...

Share this post


Link to post

Surely THE point must be to allow the reviewers to express THEIR opinions on whatever it is they are reviewing; then make the conclusions THEY see fit. Now, you may not like their opinions, least alone AGREE with them, but they MUST be allowed to express them.Afterall....... opinion is a very personal thing:-)Regards Blue

Share this post


Link to post

Hey Dillon, Not to be a stinker but it clearly says right at Phoenix's site:PLEASE NOTE: DUE TO HIGHLY COMPLEX NATURE OF CONCORDE SYSTEMS AND THE USE OF MANY CUSTOM VARIABLES, THE VC IS NOT "FULLY CLICKABLE" Just how much is clickable I really can't tell you as I don't own it yet. Jay Eklund

Share this post


Link to post

Given that PSS don't implement every button and switch in their panels (just the ones that actually do something and not just make a clicking sound), that's probably what they mean.

Share this post


Link to post

But it's unfair Blue to be hardcore on most developers and biased to others. Conveniently overlooking key features that should be standard fair is sort of misleading when a product is given such a high rating. I would go as far as to say be fair all the way around (look at the basic things others have got slammed on in the many

Share this post


Link to post

Tell exactly what you want to know is clickable, and I will check in the sim.Dan.

Share this post


Link to post

Like I said Jay, '4' stars would have been appropriate here considering Koch was able to do this feature better than PSS....Jwenting, no one is saying dummy switches should be modeled (actually if their in the plane there's nothing wrong with that) but when you've missed the whole overhead and engineers panels, there's a problem. Is it too much to ask Jwenting to be able to look over your shoulder at the engineers panel and see how much fuel you have left in your tanks??? Is it too much to ask to be able to look up and turn on your landing lights once under 10,000ft???By the way does anyone know what is modeled in the VC??? I'm at work now but I think once I get some time I'll head over to PSS's website and see what's modeled in the VC (and what's not)...

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Dan,Is the Overhead and Engineer panel clickable???

Share this post


Link to post

Jwenting,>Given that PSS don't implement every button and switch in>their panels (just the ones that actually do something and not>just make a clicking sound), that's probably what they mean.Unlike some of their previous releases every button, switch and knob works in the PSS Concorde. Nothing there is "eye candy". It's by far the most detailed and realistic panel I've seen (and I've seen quite a few).Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post

As a regular user of the PSS Concorde, I don't think it is worthy of 5 stars. I think you have to be very careful when reviewing with regard to giving a product full marks, as it is saying that nothing will ever beat this item.I enjoy using the PSS offering fine - I think it is a very well put together aircraft, but there are a few things that detract from the overall enjoyment. Minor things, but certainly things that would prevent me from giving 5 out of 5.I've also used the Koch/Altitude Concorde quite a bit, and I think if a product was ever made that combined the positives from both, it would certainly be worthy of a higher rating than the PSS Concorde. How would we rate that then; 5.5 stars out of 5?I don't use VC, but I can see how a VC where you can't click on anything on the engineers panel or the overhead panel can be a BIG BIG minus point for those that do like their VC's.-Phil

Share this post


Link to post

Ray you must be talking about the 2D panel right??? My point with this whole thread has to do with the VC (lacking capability) and the 5 star rating....

Share this post


Link to post
http://www.avsim.com/pages/commercial_rating_system.html"STARS Description5 At the Edge of That Even Conceivable Today 4.5 Far Exceeds Natural Progression 4 Natural Upward Progression From State-of-the-Art 3.5 Positive Tweaking of Today's State-of-the-Art 3 Today's State-of-the-Art - Where to Begin a Rating 2.5 Below The Current Norm or Expectations 2 A Step Backwards In the Genre 1.5 Not Worth Your Consideration" http://www.avsim.com/pages/aoe_system.html"The AVSIM Award of ExcellenceIn addition to garnering the elusive 5-Star rating, any product that maintains a 5-Star Rating following the overview of the AVSIM Editorial Review Board is also automatically eligible for the AVSIM Award of Excellence. The AOE is the Ultimate honor a product can receive from AVSIM Online. It is reserved for those products that exemplify the finest qualities of computer based flight simulation. In the end, the product is of such distinction that the very nature by which we will judge future products is forever changed. Once a review has formally received a 5-Star rating by the Review Editor, that editor will draft an Award of Excellence proposal. In this proposal, the editor provides the Pros and Cons for awarding an AOE. This is distributed to the members of the AVSIM AOE Committee for a final look. If the product gets a super-majority of the cast votes it qualifies for the AOE. There are some requirements the developer must agree to for final awarding of the AOE, but at this point the ball is in the court of the developer."Kurt M

Share this post


Link to post

Blimy, i ain't seen it called Concord since the 60s, i can't remeber excatly when the name Concorde was first used by all parties, but i do remeber back in the 60s it was called Concord in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Again All..... my point was (and is indeed made here by others in their offerings...) that one persons "5" is anothers "4" or "3" or what ever.... some will be content NOT to have this or that feature, considering it a minor or VERY minor part, whilst giving much more attention and credit to other parts of the sim. that others would dismiss. In all events .... it is ONLY an opinion and, unfortunately life is not always fair nor are humans completely impartial... if they were an OPINION would not be an opinion but a fact.Cheer up in any event..... I don't usually use 3D cockpits, but have bought the RealAir Spitfire knowing it only has 3D. In my opinion it is brilliant!! (albeit taking some getting used to ... the cockpit that is, not the plane, that's just dandy!!)Best Regards, Blue

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Dillon,Yes, I was referring to the 2D panel. Out of curiosity I loaded the VC version and then I realised why it wouldn't be possible to make the Flight Engineer's and two overhead panels clickable. The viewpoint is static from the left-hand seat and by the time you're panned upwards the overheads are only visible from the side so everything is more or les unreadable. Likewise for the FE panel. You'd never be able to make out the switches and gauges.VCs only really work for the panel in front of the pilot. I personally wouldn't ever use a VC because I need the clarity of a 2D panel but to each their own. I just wanted to give you good reasons why I think PSS couldn't reproduce a clickable VC for Concorde.And I wouldn't deduct a point because it didn't have a VC clickable panel. On simple panels it might work - it certainly wouldn't on a complex panel like Concorde which has a lot of smallish analogue instruments.Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post

A bunch of satisfied Active Camera 2004 users will beg to differ with you Ray... I've set up every one of my VC's with an AC config file that lets me move to any view I need - my PMDG 737 overhead view for instance is the exact same view as the 2D, almost indistiguishable. Saying they couldn't make the whole VC clickable because only the forward view is usable is a complete cop-out IMO.

Share this post


Link to post

Blue, I agree, people, all people, have likes and dislikes, I doubt the reviewer was biased towards or against a certain company but rather just really liked this plane. Dillon likes VC's so he is biased against any product that does not have a VC, or one that does not have the functionality that he desires. This is not a bad thing, it is just human nature. In this case the reviewer got a hold of a plane that he probably really liked so he scored it high, if Dillon had done the review it would have been scored much lower because of his likes and dislikes. I have downloaded planes because of a review or because many people have said that it was absolutely fantastic only to be left puzzled by what others had seen in what I thought was a piece of garbage. The same goes with several models that people said had an awesome flight model, when I got in the cockpit I came to the conclusion that those people have never been in a real plane in their lives. :-lol Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it is very subjective, so telling others that they are wrong or complaining about it is not worth while since they think they are right. When I read a review I expect to get someone's opinion on what they are reviewing, nothing more, so I know there is room for me to disagree with them. Now if a review is done with many people and the results are based on all of their opinions then I think that the review will be closer to fact than an opinion. In closing, would I agree the PSS Concorde is worthy of a 5, probably not, but I also do not think the reviewer was either wrong or biased. I do think that Avsim does a pretty good job of maintaining a professional look at the industry, they have been more than fair with most everyone. Agree with this review or not but it is a source of information that can help us to choose whether or not to buy this product. Philip OlsonI'm the luckiest man in the world, my girl friend has a yoke and rudder pedals! Eat your hearts out!http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/supporter.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

Well if active camera users disagree guess how much the TrackIR 3 users with Vector expansion disagree :).Hopefully Vector expansion will encourage developers even more in creating fully functional virtual cockpits because it make life so much easier for us VC pilots :)Active Camera is of course great as well but if it wasn

Share this post


Link to post

I guess there's no hope of Tom and the gang at Avsim changing the rating on the PSS Concord to be more reasonable concidering the what the competition is doing. It's very misleading because all around that aircraft is not state of the art (either with their external textures or VC). I just bought the new Lago MadDog and after flying it around I would have given that package higher scores than the PSS bird. The MadDog still needs a patch to correct some issues but all features are present and working. You have a nice 2D panel, a fully interactive Virtual Cockpit, a nice visual external model with all lights and animation working correctly, a great FDE, and a great sound set.If all the basics are there, that's a '4 or 4.5'. Now to go beyond that would be what Lago did with it

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
Sign in to follow this