Race to the Xbox bottom I say!

You can usually get a pretty good idea of the reaction a flight sim add-on gets from the comments and votes your youtube review gets.

Amusingly, more than a few people, who are clearly not the brightest bulbs in the shop, down vote reviews as a sign of disapproval for the product without realising they are downvoting the channel making the review which was trying to help them out by giving them an informed opinion and not the makers of the product being reviewed. That's certainly occurring on my channel with this thing. 🤣

I'm also getting a lot of comments from some real intellectuals, calling me a 'faggott' for having reviewed it, and that sort of thing. Good to know flight simming is inclusive enough a hobby for even repressed redneck homophobes with projection issues to feel at home with it, isn't it? 🤣

Edited May 18, 20215 yr by Chock

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

Great review from Chock as usual. It's not for me but each to their own. My concern if when this sort of thing is thrown together as a cash cow will anyone now bother to produce a more faithful model because potential sales will, without doubt, have been affected.

Personally I suspect something like this will have absolutely no effect on future sales of a $100 777.

They are entirely different products that sell to entirely different markets.

18 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

Personally I suspect something like this will have absolutely no effect on future sales of a $100 777.

They are entirely different products that sell to entirely different markets.

Absolutely. The only time a less flashy cheaper product impacts a more expensive one is when it comes close to offering something of what the more expensive one does. Nobody is going to imagine this will be a suitable substitute for a top-drawer 'study sim' (TM) airliner, and anyone who is into that sort of thing is not going to see that price tag and think it will be challenging the fidelity of an FSL Airbus or a PMDG 747.

In fact you could argue that this product might actually help sales of a fancier add-on. If someone gets into flight simming and, not wishing to spend a fortune on something which is new to them as a hobby, decides to dip their toe in the water with this thing, then finds they kind of like it but hears people on forums and such saying it's not realistic and what not, they might then be tempted to bite the bullet and spend more cash on something everyone is raving about.

This is a bit like guitar playing. Everyone starts out with a cheap knock off copy of a Fender or a Gibson with strings and frets like a cheese grater, but after a while they realise that cheap guitar is holding them back, so they spend a bit more money on something better. But it was the cheap guitar which led to that sale of the more expensive one.

All us lot who are into flight sims and have been for years, have the advantage of having been gently introduced to the concept of paying 100+ quid for a fancy airliner add-on over a long period of time, where we started out paying 20 quid for the best sorts of things you could get for FS98 etc. So it has been a gentle curve for us, but for someone just getting into flight simming, they probably look at the price tag of that PMDG 747 and think 'eff that!'

Edited May 18, 20215 yr by Chock

True enough. 

20 hours ago, Dazzlercee23 said:

Apparently it comes with 6 liveries.

 

Air France, British Airways, Japan Air Lines, KLM old, Singapore Airlines and United Airlines.

all the liveries seem to be compatible, just flip the fuselage textures vertically and rename them, dont even have to change the format

31 minutes ago, Chock said:

You can usually get a pretty good idea of the reaction a flight sim add-on gets from the comments and votes your youtube review gets.

Amusingly, more than a few people, who are clearly not the brightest bulbs in the shop, down vote reviews as a sign of disapproval for the product without realising they are downvoting the channel making the review which was trying to help them out by giving them an informed opinion and not the makers of the product being reviewed. That's certainly occurring on my channel with this thing. 🤣

I'm also getting a lot of comments from some real intellectuals, calling me a 'faggott' for having reviewed it, and that sort of thing. Good to know flight simming is inclusive enough a hobby for even repressed redneck homophobes with projection issues to feel at home with it, isn't it? 🤣

It seems that posting screenshots is also a form of advertisement, i dont remember becoming a sleeper agent for captainsim 😛

Edited May 18, 20215 yr by sem

Flew the CS 777 from Sydney to Gold Coast-on autopilot most of the flight but landed the plane manually.

Luckily I don’t use any 747 mods.

Just now, sem said:

It seems that posting screenshots is also a form of advertisement, i dont remember becoming a sleeper agent for captainsim 😛

Wouldn't being in the minority, going against the crowd and supporting it be more of a revolutionary stance? 🤣 Not that I'm suggesting you should, it is a bit cack after all, but you get the point.

Edited May 18, 20215 yr by Chock

Just now, jarmstro said:

Horrible Brains faggots in the photo. Nothing like real ones.

So, a bit more of an accurate metaphor for this particular Cripple Seven then? 😈

Edited May 18, 20215 yr by Chock

41 minutes ago, Chock said:

I'm also getting a lot of comments from some real intellectuals, calling me a 'faggott' for having reviewed it, and that sort of thing. Good to know flight simming is inclusive enough a hobby for even repressed redneck homophobes with projection issues to feel at home with it, isn't it? 🤣

LOL.

Thx for the review! You convinced me not to buy this. 30 Euros (or whatever it takes in Euros) is way too much money for this.

Just now, crimplene said:

LOL.

Thx for the review! You convinced me not to buy this. 30 Euros (or whatever it takes in Euros) is way too much money for this.

Then my work is done. Glad I was able to help you with an informed decision;  that is what it is all about when doing reviews. I think most of the reviews are fairly scathing about it and just say 'don't get it', whereas I tried to point it out in a balanced way and allow the viewer to form their own opinion on it based on the facts. Some people will be okay with it, but when one compares it to the Aerosoft CRJ, which let's be honest, isn't vastly different in price, well, let's just say it is not Captain Sim's finest hour eh?

It's going in my Air Hauler fleet (since I bought it), and it'll be okay for that and the odd bit of fun, but it's not going to be the fleet mascot lol. Having said that, we might see it get patched up and improved, either officially or by modders, so that's a bit of a wait and see on that score.

7 hours ago, Chock said:

 

Here you go...

 

Fair review 👍

The inability to control doors animation is probably due to the lack of 2D panels in MSFS world which they couldn't port from P3D..

12 minutes ago, FS++ said:

Fair review 👍

The inability to control doors animation is probably due to the lack of 2D panels in MSFS world which they couldn't port from P3D..

Whilst that is true, as I pointed out in the review, all of Carenado's MSFS efforts, including their first stab at it with their 182, have a pop up 'ipad' with click spots in the VC which enable you to control animations on the exterior model including opening doors, and Black Box Simulations put some click spots on the doors of their Islander as well as some toggle switches on the panel to also allow you to operate them. And there is definitely some porting going on with those things.

These are two developers who have also come in for a bit of flak over the years, but if they can manage to work around that issue, then a developer which has been in business for a long time and made some very innovative products (for example Weapon for FSX) should be able to manage it. I am okay with them using default avionics, although they should have maybe changed the display graphics to not have it showing four engines on the systems, but it surely cannot be beyond the capabilities of Captain Sim to put some method in there to be able to open the doors and have the jet bridge contact the fuselage. These are not sim limitations, they are just sloppy, lazy work, and there's no real excuse for that on a payware product.

It's the cumulative effect of all those sloppy features which mark this down for me, not the fact that it is a reskin of a default 747, because that is one thing they are honest about, and so I've got no problem with that aspect of it.

Edited May 18, 20215 yr by Chock

11 minutes ago, Chock said:

Whilst that is true, as I pointed out in the review, all of Carenado's MSFS efforts, including their first stab at it with their 182, have a pop up 'ipad' with click spots in the VC which enable you to control animations on the exterior model including opening doors, and Balck Box Simulations put some click spots on the doors of their Islander as well as some toggle switches on the panel to also allow you to operate them.

These are two developers who have also come in for a bit of flak over the years, but if they can manage to work around that issue, then a developer which has been in business for a long time and made some very innovative products (for example Weapon for FSX) should be able to manage it. I am okay with them using default avionics, although they should have maybe changed the display graphics to not have it showing four engines on the systems, but it surely cannot be beyond the capabilities of Captain Sim to put some method in there to be able to open the doors and have the jet bridge contact the fuselage. These are not sim limitations, they are just sloppy, lazy work, and there's no real excuse for that on a payware product.

It's the cumulative effect of all those sloppy features which mark this down for me, not the fact that it is a reskin of a default 747, because that is one thing they are honest about, and so I've got no problem with that aspect of it.

Good point. I guess, they could put the EFB to good use and get doors operated from it, unless there is some kind of limit on the number of animations in MSFS.