4 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

The last skin was the 777-200 for $30, and this is the 777-300 for $20....the crux of the deal is that he refused to answer my question a few weeks back when I asked him how he was going to release the -300...as a stand-alone or as an expansion.  Seems he didn't answer because if he said it would be a stand-alone way back then....folks who just wanted the -300 would hold off on the -200 as they could care less about it...and ONLY got it because they "assumed" the -300 would be an expansion and you'd have to buy the -200 to get the -300.

Clearly a purposeful deception on his part IMO...I mean as a developer would you rather have $50 from a customer or just $20?  I think an honest dev would have clearly posted the release type on the release of the 1st model, so customers could decide how they wanted to purchase.

Yup, corrected my quote to mention the last skin was the 777-200 for MSFS.

1 minute ago, Chock said:

their 3D models used to genuinely be the benchmark to try and match in terms of animations.

That is for sure....from the opening engine nacelles, the APU access door, the RAT, nose cone with weather radar, even the emergency chutes on one model I believe!

As cool as it was....I never enjoyed it more than the few seconds you spend discovering them....after that...what was the point as we usually spend more time flying them than looking at them on the ground (at least I do).

It was a "gimmick" more than anything else (useful) IMO, and I'm sure it drew a lot a sales.  If the guy only was open and honest about what he's selling, I could almost stomach his stuff for its minor entertainment value...but he continuously tries to deceive the community with his shady marketing, lack of details on the commerce page, and recently his dive completely off the deep end by threatening to sue flightsim.to and the freeware painters who do nothing but boost his sales!

If it were me, I'd pop out each model for $10, clearly state exactly what you're getting (and more importantly what you're NOT), and let the chips fall where they may.  I bet he'd make way more cash that way, and I'd finally shut up about his dishonest sales methods! 🤣

LOL....reading his forums is priceless! Seeing how people are just now reacting to the stark fact that they didn't have to spend the $30 on the -200 if they only wanted the -300....its like a bunch of sleepy-eyed kids running downstairs on Christmas Day and finding a lump of coal in their stockings, they're like "Whaaaaat"?

27 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

As cool as it was....I never enjoyed it more than the few seconds you spend discovering them....after that...what was the point as we usually spend more time flying them than looking at them on the ground (at least I do).

It was a "gimmick" more than anything else (useful) IMO, and I'm sure it drew a lot a sales. 

Yup, that is true, and in fact it probably hurt frame rates if we're honest, which was never a CS strong point.

But it did at least show they'd put in some effort. Contrast that with not even using the 747 as a basis for learning how to make a customised product, instead simply copying and pasting stuff and showing no real concern for the anomalies that approach leaves in its wake - for example the lower EICAS screen showing four engine thrust instruments on what is supposed to be a twin-engined airliner - and it would be a rare person who'd claim that this 777 was a genuinely heartfelt effort from someone with an enthusiastic desire to make something good. 

It's sad to see a developer which was for a long time unique in being prepared to have a stab at old classics such as the 707 and 727, and do them well enough to garner many awards from reviewers, turn into a company which doesn't appear to care at all about making a product to be proud of. I don't know many simmers of old who don't have at least some fond memories of the CS C-130 Hercules or their 727, even in spite of their occasionally annoying piecemeal approach to releasing expansion packs to nickel and dime people up to a total price which ends up matching or exceeding the cost of stuff like the FSL A320. 

I guess times change and some things go for ever. So in all honesty, unless something changes dramatically, I can't really ever see me buying anything else from Captain Sim if this product is an indication of their level of commitment to developing stuff. They might come back, but I'm inclined to doubt it if this product is anything to go by.

And just so we're clear here, I wasn't quite as critical about this approach where the Bredok3D 737 MAX was concerned, which is a product which essentially does the same thing, but that was because it was completely honest about what it was, it was inexpensive, and it was the first stab that developer had ever had at making an airliner. Nor did its developer try to take ownership of people doing repaints for it. These are things which CS cannot claim, and okay, they backed down on that last point, but only because of the scathing and pretty much universal criticism they came in for when they tried it, and clearly not because they thought it was the right thing to do.

More than anything, it's just hugely disappointing to see a company which, whilst not always everyone's favourite, did make some genuinely cool stuff, now turn into an embarrassing shadow of its former self, with little to admire about it as things currently stand.

Edited June 18, 20214 yr by Chock

3 hours ago, Steve Dra said:

Still amazes me people buy his stuff...I won't touch it, based on principle alone.

Ok, thanks for sharing.

There are hundreds of posts about CS; do we really need a new thread with the same old same old?

If you buy this and you're disappointed - that's on the buyer, given the info that's out there about what you do or do not get.

Edited June 18, 20214 yr by Ricardo41

The CS haters are back again...

Not more to say about that !

cheers 🙁

I noticed the latest cash grab last night, I think i will wait for the PMDG version.

No hater here just not a believer of this business practice (using default assets) and charging money for it. No more post in this topic from me on a soon to be probable ongoing nauseating useless topic. A high quality proper aircraft is about to release I will focus my attention there.

13 minutes ago, Car147 said:

I noticed the latest cash grab last night, I think i will wait for the PMDG version.

Probably $140 USD for the PMDG version though 😉

4 hours ago, Steve Dra said:

LOL....reading his forums is priceless! Seeing how people are just now reacting to the stark fact that they didn't have to spend the $30 on the -200 if they only wanted the -300....its like a bunch of sleepy-eyed kids running downstairs on Christmas Day and finding a lump of coal in their stockings, they're like "Whaaaaat"?

It's very weird that they did not offer a discount to those that purchased the -200.  I mean, charging the purchasers of the -200 maybe $10 USD to get the -300 would do a lot to maintain customer loyalty.

4 hours ago, Chock said:

It's sad to see a developer which was for a long time unique in being prepared to have a stab at old classics such as the 707 and 727, and do them well enough to garner many awards from reviewers, turn into a company which doesn't appear to care at all about making a product to be proud of. I don't know many simmers of old who don't have at least some fond memories of the CS C-130 Hercules or their 727, even in spite of their occasionally annoying piecemeal approach to releasing expansion packs to nickel and dime people up to a total price which ends up matching or exceeding the cost of stuff like the FSL A320. 

I guess times change and some things go for ever. So in all honesty, unless something changes dramatically, I can't really ever see me buying anything else from Captain Sim if this product is an indication of their level of commitment to developing stuff. They might come back, but I'm inclined to doubt it if this product is anything to go by.

And just so we're clear here, I wasn't quite as critical about this approach where the Bredok3D 737 MAX was concerned, which is a product which essentially does the same thing, but that was because it was completely honest about what it was, it was inexpensive, and it was the first stab that developer had ever had at making an airliner. Nor did its developer try to take ownership of people doing repaints for it. These are things which CS cannot claim, and okay, they backed down on that last point, but only because of the scathing and pretty much universal criticism they came in for when they tried it, and clearly not because they thought it was the right thing to do.

More than anything, it's just hugely disappointing to see a company which, whilst not always everyone's favourite, did make some genuinely cool stuff, now turn into an embarrassing shadow of its former self, with little to admire about it as things currently stand.

I can't see them coming back from this.  A reputation can take decades to build, but seconds to take down.

As someone interested in business case studies, what CS is doing is very unique and also kind of perplexing (most businesses are very careful to maintain their reputation because reputation = sales).

50 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Probably $140 USD for the PMDG version though 😉

Your probably right on the money with the cost, but i see it as an investment in a product that will deliver on  it's promises, give years of satisfaction,  and an aircraft simulated to perfection. By the time you rake up the cost of the CS attempt ($50) so far, it's a no brainer.

1 hour ago, abrams_tank said:

As someone interested in business case studies, what CS is doing is very unique and also kind of perplexing (most businesses are very careful to maintain their reputation because reputation = sales).

I don't see this as "perplexing" at all. It's the same motivation that got PMDG to drop their DC-6 into MSFS: ca$$ money in the bank right now.

Secondly, CS has always had a mixed reputation at best, and had over the years plenty of run-ins with customers. I don't think they care much.

Thirdly, I don't think that the average avsim "study-level" simmer is the intended market for CS MSFS "777".

4 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

I don't see this as "perplexing" at all. It's the same motivation that got PMDG to drop their DC-6 into MSFS: ca$$ money in the bank right now.

Secondly, CS has always had a mixed reputation at best, and had over the years plenty of run-ins with customers. I don't think they care much.

Thirdly, I don't think that the average avsim "study-level" simmer is the intended market for CS MSFS "777".

So based on what some users posted, such as Chock, CS seemed to have better quality planes than their MSFS planes in the past (that's not to say they had high quality planes, but their past planes were just better than their MSFS planes, based on the feedback I have read).  From what I have read, CS had a better reputation overall in the past, even if there were some complaints about them.

Well, it appears CS has a pretty bad reputation now, with all the posts complaining about them here in AVSIM and on Reddit. 

8 hours ago, WestAir said:

With the PMDG 777 dropping early 2022, I'l just save $10 / month till it releases.

Good advice!