>Nothing wrong with having "lite" versions, but at what cost? >I don't get it? If you want freeware quality or you're happy>with "lite" packages, then why slam complex add ons and make>an issue of it?>>Someone said "...finally someone speaks clearly about the>Hobby." Well, you don't speak for me, or the majority of>people I see posting on various simulator web sites. I don't>feel the hobby is flooded with complex payware planes. If>anything, it's the opposite IMO. I personally feel the reason>most people complain about the complexities of payware is that>they're lazy. I don't care to see people buying PMDG, then>asking for the default GPS. It is very easy to learn how to>fly these planes properly (e.g., programming FMC, turning on>the right switches) and you don't have to know the systems on>the level of a real pilot. You think I have any clue how the>internal workings of a 747 work, or what one does if a system>fails? No. >>>You say you're too busy or can't be bothered learning the>basics to fly complex add ons, well stop buying them, or maybe>consider a different hobby. Fact is, you can learn these>planes in steps, no one is forcing you to learn them>overnight. Most tutorials don't take all that long to go>through and they get you on the road to successful flight just>fine. >well developers learned that they can get away with selling freeware quality addons, just the way microsoft is trying to sell console type arcade game as a simulator. it's the future of things to come. developers who make complex sims are not really helped since the development cycle is so long they hardly can see a return on it. after all, as long as "lite" sells, no need to make the "complex"

No matter what, I use the mouse 98% of the time to interact with the MCP or any other panel on the plane. I use a CH Yoke which I have programmed to work flaps, gear, trim, reverse thrust, and speedbrake. It's simply a button push and a dial away to make those changes.

Say you want to descend from FL 180 to FL 100, and slow down from 300 to 250 KIAS at FL 100. Lets assume you're being vectored, there's traffic, and that the FMC is not flying the aircraft, that you are going to transition to the MCP. How do you guys make the changes? FL 180 - re-set the MCP altitude with the mouse (you can use the middle mouse on PMDG's planes for this) to FL 100 and push FL CH/LVL CH depending on aircraft type (s).Slowing from 300 to 250 manually - Planes usally have a difficult time descending and slowing at the same time - one needs to use the tools availible to achieve this. In this instance I would use the speedbrakes or (Which can be deplyed differently with different add-ons), if in level flight to hold altitude and manually decrease power. You can also cheat with gear but will not go into detail there ;-) but never use flaps to slow. Anyways I think what you are asking is how much workload is there invloved? I don't think there is much to a few mouse click and drags. ...............Randy J. Smith................CAUTION! My views represent no one but my own. While I do help companies test products - this in no way means I represent them in ANY fashion.[h4]Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations[/h4]

I wouldn't get the Wilco 777 even if it was freeware. ;)As for those saying it cannot be judged by meerly looking at a couple of shots... it can very well be judged, as resizing is supposed to make it look prettier... and it's not pretty at all.I mean, I look at the discussion around these downright horrid payware products, and think to myself: why not sell my stuff as well? It's admittedly a lot better, and my work is going to be appreciated too -- just 'cos it's gonna be payware.

>As for those saying it cannot be judged by meerly looking at a>couple of shots... it can very well be judgedI'm going to throw my weight into this point as well.If you argue that you can't judge the external model (which is part of the product you are buying) from 'a couple of shots' - then how many shots do you need to 'judge' the product?by the time you buy the product and realise it is not as good as what you've expected - it'll already be too late.I'm not referring to this or any payware product - but merely at your suggestion that you can't use a couple of shots to judge a product.Isn't that why developers (freeware or payware) release preview pictures?Cheers,

But see, that's just it Randy, the irony of all of this "as-real-as-it-gets" philosophy pushing the development and cost of payware, and you are relegated to having to use your mouse and keyboard to work it all. That's fine, as long as you don't mind, but that's not how it's done in a real Boeing. I would just rather turn real knobs and push real buttons on my GoFlight MCP and radio stacks, and use a real landing gear lever - my choice as it is more immersive to me. I never set out to bash any of the talented developers out there, merely to point out the irony of more detailed products becoming even more dependent on your keyboard and mouse to operate them. Just doesn't do it for me that's all. People become so defensive here about their payware, that it tends to stifle discussion / debate that is suggestive that payware is not ALWAYS the software panacea of this hobby. Not all individuals are driven by the mighty dollar, and some people measure success in terms other than money. Enough said on this topic, at least for me.http://www.graphics-free.com/animations/tr...ges/plane_6.gifAlex ChristoffN562ZBaltimore, MD

I think you're misinterpreting the topic a little bit. Of course, 99% what you do at home on your simulator is not done in 'real life'. We're merely simulating and the excitement of more detailed and complex planes is not necessarily to be as real as it gets in the traditional sense, when it comes to pushing buttons and dials, but more to simulate the flying a, for example 777. Some people, including me, just enjoy the workflow tasks, checking the systems, programming the FMC and trying to learn and interpret the systems to fly the plane as safely as possible. Thus, the more realistic the systems, the more there is "to do" in the cockpit.With a 'light' add-on plane, you can just sit on the runway, turn on the GPS and just watch the plane flying along a pink line.With a more complex plane, you really have to follow the tasks almost religiously to perform a successful flight. Monitor the weather, use tools to calculate the fuel/payload, decide what flaps to use upon takeoff, divert for weather, keep the passengers happy (FSPax), interact with the co-pilot and crew (FS2Crew).So, it all boils down to personal preference, because with thousands of different add-ons, you can make out of this hobby whatever you like.Fly safe!

Yes, you can judge from screenshots, but I think that some entoustiasts take it a little too far. I think I stopped caring about those posts when I saw a complaint that curtains were not modelled in the interior model.Noone seems to complain that none of the cheaper Abacus add-ons resemble even remotely the original cockpit, but people are up in arms, if the turbines rotate in the wrong direction or the cargo compartment opens up in the wrong direction for an add-on that costs $10 more and has a wide variety of more complex systems modelled.

Its like a feeding frenzy and just about anything is being tossed in the water.People are diving in head first fighting to get their hands on chum, foaming at the mouth for more.A couple screenshots, some flashy advertising,their eyes widen,jaw drops,eyes glaze over and CA-CHING$$$$$It doesnt matter,alpha,beta,bugged,unfinished aka "blocks". Nice freeware call it "lite" and charge $40. They make it, we buy it.You can buy water. Want the sun to be brighter,buy it. Colored blotches on the roads"cars?,glowing orange buildings at night,want to hear that ai jet take off,maybe a program that adds some weight to your plane when you pull up to that cardboard cut out looking truck? Its all for sale.And IMO getting out of hand.But as long as people are buying it, I see lots more chum coming.

"but people are up in arms, if the turbines rotate in the wrong direction or the cargo compartment opens up in the wrong direction"I don't get your point... :-hmmm No matter what the price is of an aircraft add-on or a shooting game like Half Life, basic things that are obvious shouldn't appear backwards. Look at is this way, if freeware can get it right certainly payware should do the same or more... Imagine running around in a game like Half Life shooting a gun pointed backwards. Why shouldn't someone say something about that??? Their supposed to... If someone is modeling a 737 it shouldn't takeoff like a Helicopter. If someone is charging PMDG prices and billing the add-on as state of the art, I wouldn't fault anyone for asking,

"Why would I settle for an oversight like that?"Because it's a minor and non-essential oversight for my piloting experience. I fly the plane and don't look at the engines out of my cockpit. And unless we have a simulated initial 'walk around' where I could find squished birds between in turbines or be able to identify a partially closed pitot tube, I don't care. What I do care about is accuracy in the cockpit and flight dynamics, but even as a hobby pilot, I don't have the means, time or interest to verify, if all the systems of a Level-D are modelled in the EXACT same way as the big bird.And, what's wrong with the Wilco 777? Ever tried it? Where is the constructive criticism? I really would not consider it to be a cardboard model and/or on the same level as a Perfect Flight/Abacus plane. It is a "light" aircraft add-on, that claims to have some accuracy and a more complex and detailed model and cockpit than the stock aircraft. FeelThere is known as one of best developers around here.I have been around since FS5.1, have a PPL licence and have flown almost any add-on aircraft available. I don't claim to be an aviation expert, but I do know how to fly a plane and can differentiate between a Boeing, Airbus and CRJ.Where did I say that I don't want advanced avionics? Why am I in this forum? It is the "General Discussion" forum. Sod off. Childish post like yours truly tick me off.

...or a Project Airbus add-on, which has been annouced quite some time ago and will probably never see the light of day. I think I'll pass and stick to the PMDG one.Sorry, but that statement of mine was on the same level as yours.What is wrong with those screenshots? Last time, I checked in the FeelThere forums, please were in awe about the visual model.It's like judging a book by its cover. Sheesh.

Point Im making is this.I really do not count rivets,stare at the engines or care if the toilet water is blue.But if people pay good money for a product and do not complain or point out obviously sloppy work or things they do not feel are right, developers might,do tend to get lazy.The engines are backwards,tires are way out of scale but nobody said nothing last time, aahh let the fuzzy unreadable overhead slide. they do not care.When developers let a buggy,quickly tested plane out the door and nobody posted on their forums and complained and pressured them into fixing it, what urgency and priority do they have to fix the next one before release?I just had some rooms painted and it looks great. However there are aome places where they painted past the floor molding and got it on my wood floors. A few other spots I found drips and they hit my ceiling a few places. You would never see it unless I pointed it out but it shows they were sloppy and probably have gotten away with it before.This was a reputable outfit, I paid top dollar so I wanted it right. I complained, they fixed it.Some might not care if something is not right or maybe are accustomed to sloppy work. Alot of us do care.

Good point. Don't get me wrong. I would also like to see a perfect simulated model, VC and cockpit. What I don't get is that some people dismiss an entire product as rubbish and make a big deal about it, if a minor, really non-essential detail might not be accurate. The moment of joy when I realize that a turbine rotates the right way lasts for maybe one second for me. I have more long-time fun with a correctly simulated FMS and flight dynamics. I just feel some people set the wrong priorities.If I find an inaccuracy, I point it out and, well, maybe it'll get fixed. That's not a reason to flame the entire product, like some of the people have done here in this thread.

"But if people pay good money for a product and do not complain or point out obviously sloppy work or things they do not feel are right, developers might, do tend to get lazy."That's exactly the point and this is where FeelThere is at. The PIC 737 package would have been allot worse if it weren't for key people pointing out things in the beta process. Some of those beta testers and consultants are no longer with the team and it shows in the 777 project. They weren