I've only bought two payware MSFS aircraft and been disappointed with both, not so much because they had problems and limitations but because they haven't been improved.

First is the Carenado 182.  Yep, should have realised that lack of updates comes with the territory with that company....

Second is the Orbx Optica.  Yes it's at a bargain price, has only been out a few weeks and is a great sightseeing aircraft, but the behaviour in pitch is appalling and in particular makes landings dicey.  Particularly as with its price it's going to attract people buying their first payware aircraft.  It shouldn't be THAT difficult to fix.

1 hour ago, Malcolm Street said:

I've only bought two payware MSFS aircraft and been disappointed with both, not so much because they had problems and limitations but because they haven't been improved.

First is the Carenado 182.  Yep, should have realised that lack of updates comes with the territory with that company....

Second is the Orbx Optica.  Yes it's at a bargain price, has only been out a few weeks and is a great sightseeing aircraft, but the behaviour in pitch is appalling and in particular makes landings dicey.  Particularly as with its price it's going to attract people buying their first payware aircraft.  It shouldn't be THAT difficult to fix.

 

Carenado are what they are. Guaranteed spectacular visuals, everything else is just pot luck.  They are consistently top class for visuals but their flight models range from functional but generic through to just plain broken. Their Mooney (currently broken)  and Seneca have been well received and seem normally fine. The 182 and WACO ...  not so much, a lot of people unhappy.

The Optica is not by Orbx at all,  it is just sold on their store. You can also get it at Flightsim.to and it is made by someone calling themselves EA7 Simulations.  Support is via a discord channel called "jonx" .  No idea who EA7 are.

It goes without saying that sticking with products from known good developers like for example the Warrior II from Just Flight or the DC6 from PMDG is going to give a much better chance of a good result. 

I suspect the problem with some of the smaller one man operations is not a lack of willingness to fix their products, some of them do not seem to even know how to go about even troubleshooting some of the weirder issues.

 

 

Edited August 24, 20214 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

19 hours ago, Chock said:

I'm sure many XPlane users will recall it pretty vividly; you know how much flight simmers hang on everything RR says like he's some kind of oracle.

I do recall it, caused a lot of anger at the time in the community. As you say, it was a post on the Avsim PMDG forum by Robert Randazzo, and if I recall (and my memory is hazy, so don't take it as fact) was that the sim doesn't support certain features that they need to bring their aircraft to X-Plane and that they won't be pursuing it further. He never said what those features were or talked further about it, but it caused an uproar at the time amongst developers and some users alike. Some X-Plane developers still went on to release their products, such as the IXEG 737 and even the Zibo 737 which likely started rumours that there was some other reason (and something we'll likely never know, or in fact should actually really care about, let by-gones be by-gones )

As for payware aircraft on MFS.... I only ever bought one, it was the Carenado C182, but I found I didn't use it much. It didn't offer me much over the default aircraft (and those I preferred). I use Orbx's Optica for flying over and testing our scenery because of the great field of view, but other than that I'm definitely on the light side of payware aircraft. I've seen horror stories of Frankenstein planes containing copy & paste bits from the default aircraft, and decided I'm going to wait it out until something comes along that really peaks my interest and has good reviews.

 

3 hours ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

The Optica is not by Orbx at all,  it is just sold on their store. You can also get it at Flightsim.to and it is made by someone calling themselves EA7 Simulations.  Support is via a discord channel called "jonx" .  No idea who EA7 are.

 

It is by Orbx.... just for a small correction. The version you are referring to is a different freeware version (I believe ported from another sim).

tl:dr on the previous pages but my ongoing disappointment is that a year in we still haven’t seen any traditional heavy iron. I need a 707, 727, 757, 767, DC10, VC10 and a Tristar to indulge my love of flight on the platform. You would have thought the likes of Just Flight would have managed to bring something across by now, even if they have to keep updating it to keep pace with Asobo code changes.

12 hours ago, WestAir said:

Refusing to have a discussion on a forum is destructive, because if all of us did that the forums would be dead. 

Say, suppose you go to a bar, are you going to talk to the local drunk, the loud boor, the overbearing preacher or the village id iot  😉 ? Nope, you speak with your buddies or an interesting guy who happened to drop by. Same here. I have a very long list of ignored people and that makes Avsim a great and more serene forum ! 

Edited August 24, 20214 yr by Dominique_K

52 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

Say, suppose you go to a bar, are you going to talk to the local drunk, the loud boor, the overbearing preacher or the village id iot  😉 ? Nope, you speak with your buddies or an interesting guy who happened to drop by. Same here. I have a very long list of ignored people and that makes Avsim a great and more serene forum ! 

Yeah but you wouldn't walk up to someone, say "I think Boeing is better than Airbus. If you disagree don't even talk to me." Which is what happened here. It's toxic to start a discussion with an asterisks or ultimatum, but that's my opinion and not one I wouldn't change.

In any case, I can't defend my statement in good faith because I just remembered I blocked that guy who was ranting about undulated runways last year. 😂 

That actually makes me a hypocrite, so I concede. No dying on this hill. 

Edited August 24, 20214 yr by WestAir

10 minutes ago, WestAir said:

Yeah but you wouldn't walk up to someone, say "I think Boeing is better than Airbus. If you disagree don't even talk to me." Which is what happened here. 

Where did you get that analogy??

Certainly wasn't from me.

8 hours ago, GoranM said:

I've defended MSFS many, many times.

I stand corrected then.

I really hope factually incorrect comments of some people about MSFS SDK fade away eventually, just like what happened with X-Plane.

2 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Where did you get that analogy??

Certainly wasn't from me.

You're right. I re read your comment and you said anyone who called you a troll would be ignored, not that anyone who disagreed would be ignored.

I sincerely didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I read these boards in between trips and have a minute or two to read, think, and reply, before it's time to haul some more passengers. Every now and again I spend too little time thinking and too much time replying.

14 minutes ago, WestAir said:

You're right. I re read your comment and you said anyone who called you a troll would be ignored, not that anyone who disagreed would be ignored.

I sincerely didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I read these boards in between trips and have a minute or two to read, think, and reply, before it's time to haul some more passengers. Every now and again I spend too little time thinking and too much time replying.

I appreciate the self-correction.

Thank you.

On 8/23/2021 at 5:06 AM, Nyxx said:

I am yet to find a good reviewer that tells thing how they are. Some are like paid adds for something that has so many glaring faults it’s untrue and are never pointed out or just bruised aside because it does not cost much. Into the blue always makes a point of calling things out like a review should so then we can figure out if they bother us or not... I simply want to know what I might be getting, I would sooner watch or read reviews that go to great lengths in pointing out what its like versus the real thing. I am perfectly capable of deciding what suits my own needs just give me all the facts please.

When I look into anything I want to buy I read all the negative things about a product first to see what’s “bad” then read all the “good” then make an informed judgment what suits my needs. YouTube is all about likes and subs. Perhaps good old writer reviews is were I should go.

I miss decent written reviews; information that I could glean in under 5 minutes now often takes over 15 minutes. Whilst some points are best illustrated with a brief video, most stuff is fine with stills and text. It seems no one reads any more? And obviously written pieces don't make money like YouTube ads, nor do they net "subs", sponsorship and patreon. I generally seek more in-depth written user reviews posted at Avsim and elsewhere from someone who's opinion I can respect before parting with money - as you said most YouTubers are in it for the money and "fame" and many seem to be seriously lacking in knowledge (I should not be able to pick holes in a what a "professional" reviewer is telling me!), I often view them as media personalities and egos rather than serious simmers.

Having said that, print reviews aren't perfect either; I suggested head-to-head comparison for similar products on Avsim published reviews and remember being given very short shrift, although it seems thread was lost to the Avsim hack.

Edited August 24, 20214 yr by ckyliu

I've never felt like blocking anyone.  I just read what's here, sometimes comment, and keep moving.  Ya there are posts I don't read all the way too long or just dumb so I might skip them.

1 hour ago, ckyliu said:

I miss decent written reviews; information that I could glean in under 5 minutes now often takes over 15 minutes.  

Having said that, print reviews aren't perfect either 

Reading is indeed more efficient than watching. Written material allows a cursory overview to skip the verbiage and go to the essential. Video make it more awkward if possible, they impose a linear content acquisition  (even with the YT 10 sec boost).  Add to that the ratio substance/length is low for a lot of videos (where is the darn beef !) and, anyway, I am not going to spend half an hour watching an addon review. And yes, a lot of these people are mercenaries in disguise. 

I like all JF Pipers, especially the Warrior, then I'm fond of Aeroplane Heaven's C-140, it has character, of the three Caronado aircraft's I own I like the Mooney, but I have uninstalled both C-182 and the Piper Arrow when I think they're just rubbish.

9 hours ago, Todd2 said:

I've never felt like blocking anyone.

I feel, on a gut level, like blocking a lot more people than I actually do.   But I try to make a point not to block reasonable people with whom I simply disagree about some (or even most) things.  However, when someone's entire presence in this particular forum appears to be focused on grinding axes that have repeatedly been ground to dust, or stirring the pot in the most flagrant way possible;  and when this has been demonstrated by repeated behavior over time... yeah, into the blocklist they go, without hesitation.   It makes the forum a much more pleasant place.

It's kinda funny,  too... I often forget who I have on block until I see someone I don't have blocked quoting an absurd or offensive post to argue with it;   then I see who they're talking to and realize "oh, yeah, I blocked that choad weeks ago, and it looks like the right decision.  They should, too."

It's happened a couple times in just this thread.  😉

Edited August 24, 20214 yr by kaosfere