Is it worth buy FSLabs a320

[philipp00sk8 6]

it's worth every penny...FsLabs is in the same league of PMDG...

 

Philippe Tremblay

[Dean_EGTC 57]

The first thing that struck me when I loaded the AS AB was the ridiculously oversize and wrong font on the MCP (correct verbiage? can't recall) display.

[Jude Bradley 659]

I raised this and they said it's the correct size, but this looks different 

https://static.airbus.com/fileadmin/backstage/Asset_management/A320-cockpit/index.html

 

[Jude Bradley 659]

If you are happy with the Aerosoft product, then don't buy the FSL's offering, otherwise you will be comparing both and not fly the Aerosoft one anymore. The little things like push-buttons have animations that look great on the FSLabs one, where they don't exist on the Aerosoft one. (autopilot, ILS,FD) etc etc.The only thing to be aware of is the FSLabs one requires quite a hefty machine to run, whereas the Aerosoft one runs quite nicely on an average system. 

It's a tradeoff between looks and performance. 

[Chock 17,769]

2 hours ago, krazyk said:

I truly believe that Majestic and now FSL have created works of art stemmed from a passion that surpasses every other developer in the business of making aircraft add-ons.

Couldn't agree more.

It's a bit of a toss up as to which is the more impressive of the two between the Majestic Q400 and the FSL A320, they both have very impressive functionality, and I'd throw in A2A's efforts at GA aeroplanes too as ones to be similarly impressed with. I am certainly of the opinion that A2A, FSL and Majestic are the top three developers for P3D add-ons. Nevertheless, it's probably the FSL A320 which is the most impressive of the bunch from a purely 'making it happen' programming standpoint, since the A320 is an inherently more complex aeroplane than either the Dash 8 Q400 or any GA aeroplane.

Relating that to the original thread question, there is little doubt that these kind of products certainly are 'worth it' to anyone who wants that level of sophistication and realism, and I don't even think you have to be that familiar with the real things to appreciate this sort of thing either, it's really rather obvious that you've got something a bit special in your hands when you crank up the FSL A320, it just stands apart from every other simulated jetliner in either FSX or P3D, as the Majestic Q400 does for turboprops and the Piper Commanche from A2A does for GA aeroplanes..

As some people on this thread have already pointed out, the FSL A320 feels almost alive; it's difficult to put your finger on exactly what it is that does that, probably a combination of all its microscopically detailed, obsessively accurate features, and certainly its audio is a big factor in that too, but whatever it is, one can hardly fail to notice it, that's for sure.

[qqwertz 772]

1 hour ago, Jude Bradley said:

If you are happy with the Aerosoft product, then don't buy the FSL's offering, otherwise you will be comparing both and not fly the Aerosoft one anymore. The little things like push-buttons have animations that look great on the FSLabs one, where they don't exist on the Aerosoft one. (autopilot, ILS,FD) etc etc.The only thing to be aware of is the FSLabs one requires quite a hefty machine to run, whereas the Aerosoft one runs quite nicely on an average system. 

It's a tradeoff between looks and performance. 

Right, it depends on the computer you have. I bought both, compared them, and now exclusively fly the Aerosoft A320. I don't simulate failures, and the compromises I have to make with scenery settings to make the FSL work nicely on my rig are taking away more immersion than I gain from having more system depth.

Peter

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

22 hours ago, Guevorkyan said:

It's not only the systems that put FSL's apart. It feels like and airplane, it really does. 

It's like it's breathing, you feel every rivet stretching and the thrust pushing. I haven't felt it that way with any other airplane.

This says it all. No other simulation does this. It's another level.

[DrumsArt 270]

3 hours ago, krazyk said:

The Aerosoft bird is fantastic if you want a beginner's Airbus that does most of the face value items quite well. Things like the texture & model work, variants, shared cockpit (still a WIP, I understand), FMS, etc. These are things the average simmer would interact and enjoy without questioning the underlying functionality or basis of the simulation because it gets them from point A to point B but it won't do anything else for you - sounds, systems, immersion, etc. 

The FSL bird is fantastic if you want an advanced simulation of nearly all Airbus systems as well as aerodynamics logic. Here you will find the true showcase of 'cause and effect'. From the jaw-dropping systems to the aural simulation of what the real world counterpart sounds like, this is where it all comes together and I don't think anyone that has tried both products would deny that. 

The price points reflect the above. For Aerosoft, you pay X amount for recycled code which was improved upon while also adding newer features like the inclusion of TFDi Reallight & TrueGlass, and several Airbus variants but you only get the features that will allow a fairly inexperienced simmer to be content.  

For FSL, you get an add-on that will show you its worth from the minute you load it up to the minute you shut it down, relentlessly. It's a product that is far beyond just an aircraft shell and systems simulator. In fact, it goes beyond anything else I've ever experienced in an aircraft add-on before - even Majestic whom I considered to be at the top of the game. 

You pay a high initial cost but I assure you, you are getting a LOT more for your money here compared to some other top-tier companies in the business.

I don't think anything else comes close to what they have achieved and they seem to consistently raise the bar that was already too high for anyone else to reach. If you can justify spending your valuable funds on something like PMDG which doesn't offer a strand of immersion close to the FSL, you can easily justify the cost of picking up an Airbus by FSL and really celebrate what simulation has become today. I rarely describe an FS product as 'art' or 'a labour of love' but I truly believe that Majestic and now FSL have created works of art stemmed from a passion that surpasses every other developer in the business of making aircraft add-ons.  

As for performance, I run both the FSL A319-320 on an old i7 4790K with a GTX 970 and 16GB of RAM and have little to no issues running the aircraft with modest to above average settings. 

I have also the AS and the FsLabs A320/319...I agree 100% with you wrote! I can't say it any better.

Regards,

Richard

[AirborneZed 168]

21 hours ago, ShawnG said:

"Be careful?"  The aerosoft is less than half the price, it performs better. it has features compatible with the sort of flying most flight simmers do.  Also fundamental facts.

I mentioned that FSL has better system fidelity and failures,  its a fair comment.  You feel slighted because I didn't come up with some random percentage of difference out of thin air like you did?  The FSL is way better as a study sim. I understand this, I mentioned that as a point of fairness to FSL. end of story.  I'm NEVER going to buy it, because of cost, because of performance, because I don't want or need the things that set it apart, because I have a problem with the "lets see what we can get away with" pricing model.  because of several other reasons we aren't even allowed to discuss here.  Sorry my response was anything short of glowingly religious praise for FSL.  It's a very fine aircraft by all accounts, but I, and others, don't want it.

 

 

Shawn, 

I misread your original comment as "does not have the fidelity". It was early in the morning and I recant my reply.  Apologies for the confusion. 

I do agree with the pricing trend in our hobby becoming an issue. I suppose one could argue addons today are only getting better and more complex than years prior. It might be the new normal soon, unfortunately. 

[Dean_EGTC 57]

3 hours ago, Jude Bradley said:

The little things like push-buttons have animations that look great on the FSLabs one, where they don't exist on the Aerosoft one. (autopilot, ILS,FD) etc etc

I'm not talking about some of the resource hungry tricks they use,  I'm on about the basic size and font.  It's wrong.  Discounting FSL, Flight Factor and JAR got it right, or very close.  Hey, I'm not knocking the Aerosoft offering; I bought the Pro package.  I like it for what it is.

[killkenny1 22]

I own both birds - A320 by FSL and A320/321 by AS.

Originally, I waited for AS Bus, but delay after delay I finally got tired of waiting and bought FSL A320. The single most expensive add-on I have any bought to any game. Made a 160 Euro hole in my pocket, and in the end, it was worth it! The details, the sounds, the system simulation. Just after “sitting” in it for 20 minutes I realized this plane is gonna be something. And after doing a few flights I was very impressed with it. And upcoming update will make this plane only better!

However, one downside – FPS. Of course, FPS! It’s no surprise though, it is a complex add on to run. This was the reason I bought AS Bus later… and was disappointed right away…

I know, I know, it’s designed for different purposes, to simulate normal operations only. And yet I can use only one COM for example. In all my planes I use first COM for airport/approach, and second for center. This is something I got accustomed to. And I cannot do that it AS Bus. Exterior model also leaves a lot to be desired from, as well as mediocre sounds and VC. VC textures are fine by themselves, but the font size on DUs and FCU… Just rubs me the wrong way. I could probably look pass this if AS Bus had good performance. Not joking. AS Bus on my rig runs slightly better than FLS Bus, and worse than NGX/Q400…

Therefore, despite its price, I think FSLabs Bus is a worth addon. Expensive, but worthy. Even if one doesn’t need any failures and such, deeper A/C simulation just makes the plane more enjoyable to "fly." 

[pegruder 65]

ugh...fine.  Reading more and more about the FSL bus makes me want to fire it up again!  I wish I had better performance though!  I could  live without fs2crew I guess, I did for a long time before the FSL bus.

 

Question - and this may need a separate post for attention, but are the failures in the FSL bus service based like the PMDG?  Is this something to enable/disable?  When I look over the failures page it looks like I can preconfigure stuff but are there any 'surprises' if you will?

[Christopher Low 5,332]

This thread is making me hungry for the FSL A320, but I do not yet have P3D v4 installed, and I do not have the finances at the moment to fork out £100 for another high fidelity aircraft. I still want it though!

[DrumsArt 270]

1 hour ago, pegruder said:

ugh...fine.  Reading more and more about the FSL bus makes me want to fire it up again!  I wish I had better performance though!  I could  live without fs2crew I guess, I did for a long time before the FSL bus.

 

Question - and this may need a separate post for attention, but are the failures in the FSL bus service based like the PMDG?  Is this something to enable/disable?  When I look over the failures page it looks like I can preconfigure stuff but are there any 'surprises' if you will?

To answer to your question, not really at this time. There are many requests for this from users on the FsLabs forum. I think and hope it should happen one of these days.

Richard

Edited October 13, 2018 by DrumsArt

[fluffyflops 1,846]

the best aircraft addon I ever bought.. the fsl 320