3 hours ago, Lorby_SI said:

Why shouldn't it be feasible? Everything in software is only a matter of effort and resources. The well known 3rd party developers are very small outfits, at least when counting only their FTEs. If I'm not mistaken, the MSFS team alone is currently 15 times the size of PMDG (as per the official numbers of FTEs that are floating through the net). They could theoretically do in 10 months what takes PMDG 10 years to accomplish. And Microsoft has many more engineers to offer too, they have 1000 times the number of employees than the whole MSFS team.

That's a good point. But I again have to raise the fact that Asobo said they were going to leave aircraft to 3rd party developers as they do it much better, so I'm still not sure why we are talking about study level default aircraft all the time. I'm sure they will be well ahead of anything which was offered by FSX and still P3D and XP and probably have way more in-depth realism, and that would be a good thing, but study level on par with the top aircraft developers? I still find that highly unlikely.

 

Edit: Just read the demo review by the other poster, perhaps I'm wrong. I don't know...

Edited November 15, 20196 yr by threegreen

17 minutes ago, threegreen said:

That's a good point. But I again have to raise the fact that Asobo said they were going to leave aircraft to 3rd party developers as they do it much better, so I'm still not sure why we are talking about study level default aircraft all the time. I'm sure they will be well ahead of anything which was offered by FSX and still P3D and XP and probably have way more in-depth realism, and that would be a good thing, but study level on par with the top aircraft developers? I still find that highly unlikely.

Can you point out where they have said that? I remember they talking something like that about the airports, on the FSELITE’s interview about the world.

2 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

Can you point out where they have said that? I remember they talking something like that about the airports, on the FSELITE’s interview about the world.

It was some time back, I really can't remember in what video/interview they said it.

3 minutes ago, threegreen said:

It was some time back, I really can't remember in what video/interview they said it.

The reason I ask is because I’ve seen a lot of misinformation being spreaded as facts around here and for that reason sometimes is hard to know if it’s an official information or just a speculation.

Back to the topic, Jurg said on the IGN interview that they are working to deliver pretty accurate aircrafts. And the guy who was there in the X019 and talked to them said heard something similar from them.

Well, we will see.

5 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

The reason I ask is because I’ve seen a lot of misinformation being spreaded as facts around here and for that reason sometimes is hard to know if it’s an official information or just a speculation.

Back to the topic, Jurg said on the IGN interview that they are working to deliver pretty accurate aircrafts. And the guy who was there in the X019 and talked to them said heard something similar from them.

I totally get you, there's a whole bunch of conjecture and misinformation about things which have already been cleared up by the developers themselves.

That's why I just edited my post above because what the OP in the review thread said sounded quite convincing. Still remains to be seen, though, whether that kind of quality is actually fully "study level".

2 hours ago, threegreen said:

I totally get you, there's a whole bunch of conjecture and misinformation about things which have already been cleared up by the developers themselves.

That's why I just edited my post above because what the OP in the review thread said sounded quite convincing. Still remains to be seen, though, whether that kind of quality is actually fully "study level".

From my perspective, the question is if what we understand as "study level" is even a requirement. If the aircraft systems are convincing, that should be enough for everyone in the primary customer group. Besides, there is an equal measure of conjecture about what "study level" really is, and how much is actually simulated using accurate mathematical models as opposed to just using randomizers and plausible timers. For the unsuspecting end user both methods look the same - but there are a few orders of magnitude of effort between them. An accurate computer simulation of a single jet engine (=for research purposes) already weighs in at millions of $$.

Best regards

Edited November 15, 20196 yr by Lorby_SI