P3D v4 64 bits 737NGX Beta

[gregmorin 199]

41 minutes ago, downscc said:

I would just as soon you remove the product and not be bothered by it, and just "let it go."

 

I agree! I think the PMDG 737NGX  is a great product with a fantastic immersion factor. If folks do not like it; un-install it but please stop complaining over something about which you have no control and zero chance of effecting a change.

Greg

[Pilot53 544]

1 hour ago, downscc said:

I would just as soon you remove the product and not be bothered by it, and just "let it go."

 

Im just giving my,opinion.  I love pmdg and I love the ngx, but its my number one issue with the product.  Doesnt mean I cant enjoy it.

[Mack84 61]

6 hours ago, blaird22 said:

Why do people care so much about "geometry"?  Are they real life 737 pilots that are that offended that a couple things aren't replicated perfectly?  Alan's response makes perfect sense from a logical and technical standpoint.  PMDG has a well-deserved reputation for making quality and accurate models, why even question them in the first place? I just don't get what the big deal is

Irony much

[Pilot53 544]

2 hours ago, gregmorin said:

I agree! I think the PMDG 737NGX  is a great product with a fantastic immersion factor. If folks do not like it; un-install it but please stop complaining over something about which you have no control and zero chance of effecting a change.

Greg

Its exactly the opposite, I love the ngx, and the b737 so much that I want to see the addon improved.  If people didnt ask for more detail we wouldnt still be stuck flying the wilco 737.

[ComSimPilot 623]

I think we should accept both opinions and at the same time accept PMDG's choice. I also would prefer a correct geometry without a HUGS display, which I never use. PMDG chose to change the geometry for a working HUGS. Some would applause PMDG's decision, some will be against. PMDG is not the holy bible, and everyone can like something they did or not. Unfortunately for the people being against, nothing can change. That's life, we can't have everything sometimes. I accept it. My hope is that in the new NGX version, whenever this comes, they may have found a way to do it. 

[anden145 2,285]

3 hours ago, Daedalus said:

I think we should accept both opinions and at the same time accept PMDG's choice. I also would prefer a correct geometry without a HUGS display, which I never use. PMDG chose to change the geometry for a working HUGS. Some would applause PMDG's decision, some will be against. PMDG is not the holy bible, and everyone can like something they did or not. Unfortunately for the people being against, nothing can change. That's life, we can't have everything sometimes. I accept it. My hope is that in the new NGX version, whenever this comes, they may have found a way to do it. 

+1... Life is full of little disappointments... 

11 hours ago, Pilot53 said:

...
To ruin the flightdeck of a pmdg airliner for an option that not all airliners use is silly imo.  
...

Isn't that a bit extreme to state that is ruined the flightdeck? 

I just looked at some pictues, and quite honestly I can see a difference... but it's not a huge difference, IMO... but then again, it's all in the eye of the beholder, I guess...

[Pilot53 544]

1 minute ago, Anders Bermann said:

+1... Life is full of little disappointments... 

Isn't that a bit extreme to state that is ruined the flightdeck? 

I just looked at some pictues, and quite honestly I can see a difference... but it's not a huge difference, IMO... but then again, it's all in the eye of the beholder, I guess...

Perhaps a bit extreme yes, I take back to word ruined, its still a great addon either way.

[anden145 2,285]

1 minute ago, Pilot53 said:

Perhaps a bit extreme yes, I take back to word ruined, its still a great addon either way.

Fair enough...

I can see some difference... but it's really hard to see clearly, since the photographic evidence is hard to judge and compare - and in general it shouldn't. The angles, lighting, zoom, position etc isn't the same, so it's really hard to tell exactly how much bigger/smaller the windows and geometry is...

[Pilot53 544]

5 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

Fair enough...

I can see some difference... but it's really hard to see clearly, since the photographic evidence is hard to judge and compare - and in general it shouldn't. The angles, lighting, zoom, position etc isn't the same, so it's really hard to tell exactly how much bigger/smaller the windows and geometry is...

I guess my curse is that I fly in VR only now, and use the 737's in xplane which do have the correct cockpit size.  While it is not a huge difference numerically, it seems quite significant visually when I come back to the ngx.  But I agree, just looking at pictures it is pretty hard to tell.

[Chock 17,769]

11 hours ago, Anders Bermann said:

Fair enough...

I can see some difference... but it's really hard to see clearly, since the photographic evidence is hard to judge and compare - and in general it shouldn't. The angles, lighting, zoom, position etc isn't the same, so it's really hard to tell exactly how much bigger/smaller the windows and geometry is...

It is noticable when you compare side by side shots, but I personally don't mind the difference since it was for an understandable reason. For comparison, here's three pics...

Here's the real thing:

Here's the PMDG:

And here's the iFly NG, replicating the 'real' geometry in a VC, and presumably what the PMDG one would look like with similar dimensions:

[WotanUK 289]

The iFly doesn't look exactly right to me either, it appears to be too narrow, even accounting for perspective.

[JMoyam 25]

Guys actually all photos are diferents you have to consider the angle, the lenses, aperture and the focus used in the real photo,,, in the sim we have  a 2d flat NO parameters applie screenshoot. 

[JMoyam 25]

Well this is the real situation 
i take a screenshoot close than the real one its not perfect for many things like the point of the foto between a 2d monitor but works
in the realife gc232 used the canon G7x with a 8mm lens with aperture f2.8

ok here is the deal i correct the simphoto in photoshop with the same  canon gx7 with 8mm and f2.8 here  the results  

now

 

 

[anden145 2,285]

How can you be sure, that you're the same distance, height and zoom level when the photo was taken?!

[JMoyam 25]

Look the noobs and flaps indicator its dificult and lower PFD  i try to did my best :P