3 hours ago, jpe828 said:

I think you are in the wrong thread... there is a Carenado Seneca V thread elsewhere

I based my judgement on the past experience with flysimware:

1) lower quality graphics than others and

2) the 2nd youtube video here

and took the liberty to compare the graphics quality of 2 similar airplanes from 2 different developers: twin Cessna and twin Piper. we get you don't like that.

If Flysimware provide some screenshots or youtubes that show an improvement over their previous products, I'd welcome that. I just can't accept lower than MSFS default graphics standard anymore since I fly VR only.

 

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by turbomax

10 hours ago, hangar said:

No offense but I've purchased and own a couple of their aircraft offerings over the years for FSX so I'm already quite familiar with their strong points as developers, as I've previously mentioned, as well as their not-so strong points, IMO.

My post was actually quite flattering so I don't see the need for you to be so defensive for I was merely agreeing with someone over an artistic perception. 

No need to explain anything further, it makes perfect sense and anyone with veteran experience with the sim addon aftermarket are quite familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of these dev's work.

In the older sim's like FSX/P3D addons, Carenado had the pretty visuals/textures, but systems usually were lacking along with updates/improvement effort.

LHC, Flysimware and Flight 1 have the avionics/ systems attention to detail, improvements and updates and quality we love but were not as pretty as Carenado on visuals.

In Flysimware's defense the Learjet 35A received a couple of nice updates to visuals over time especially with the interior textures!

That's been pretty obvious the past 15 years. On the other hand MSFS has now set a visual standard for textures and craftsmanship. I'm sure LHC, Flysimware and Flight1 will meet that visual standard with the new sim.

From the looks of the video Flysimware have been shining things up real nice on the visuals!🍻

 Prime example of a below standard aircraft is the Embraer 170/175 Series By Virtualcol, those cockpit textures are poor for even FSX/P3D standards.

 

 

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by blueshark747

@blueshark747 I especially liked how they went to the trouble of adding all the sliders for each of the interior lights 🙂

16 minutes ago, blueshark747 said:

On the other hand MSFS has now set a visual standard for textures and craftsmanship.

absolutely. and no matter how "study level" or not, these visual standards can and should be kept. for non-VR users this may not be as obvious, but in VR any discrepancies hurt your eyes. it is like watching the cockpit under a microscope.

28 minutes ago, turbomax said:

absolutely. and no matter how "study level" or not, these visual standards can and should be kept. for non-VR users this may not be as obvious, but in VR any discrepancies hurt your eyes. it is like watching the cockpit under a microscope.

That's a perfectly reasonable position to take but it's not universal.

Personally I'm happy with lower visual standards if the plane is fun and engaging to fly (the MND C-22J is a perfect example).

2 hours ago, Matchstick said:

a perfectly reasonable position to take but it's not universal.

true. therefore it would be a wise business decision to offer a product that appeals to both ends of the customer spectrum. if the price was the same, you wouldn't refrain from purchasing a product simply because it also adheres to visually high standards. and I don't normally complain just because it also has systems depth, study level and what have you. to select the optimum (not everything) feature mix will result in maximum sales, said Microsoft/Asobo. 😊

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by turbomax

No question some developers do make attractive looking simulations. The stunning visuals just can't overcome the major flight model and system issues I've encountered and I've purchased a few of these "lookers". Personally, I couldn't give a rat's rear how the seat textures look. If I'm looking at the seat textures then I'm not looking where I should be.

What I want is an experience, given the limitations, that approaches what I experienced when I flew the real thing. Unfortunately, I never got the chance to fly anything with real leather and most of the planes I did fly had interiors that were beat up, scratched and unremarkable anyway. For me, it's all about enjoying a satisfying GA VFR/IFR flying and navigation experience. I too fly VR only. Too each his/her own!

My ex-wife was visually a stunner in my opinion but that overall experience didn't work out well either. But that's an entirely different discussion...

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by BigG433

3 hours ago, BigG433 said:

but that overall experience didn't work out

you mean cold & dark, no system depth, slow on take off, only VFR and without 30 days trial?

Edited January 10, 20224 yr by turbomax

4 hours ago, turbomax said:

you mean cold & dark, no system depth, slow on take off, only VFR and without 30 days trial?

Now that's funny! Your list pretty much checks all of the boxes!

We will be using Substance for our ported products like we did for the Grumman G44A and for new products like this one we will continue to use 3D Reach who also painted for Carenado. We also had 3D Reach make friendly UV's so we can have a paint kit for customers. But ya we are using a professional paint Company so we can stop talking about the quality of our textures and to bring you the best product we can. 

(Keep in mind Asobo has made liveries look bad after SU6 for Xbox and now straight lines are wavy. They expect devs to make decals for liveries and no dev is going to do that. So we hope they offer a way to disable the function for this destructive texture quality.) 

And now we go beyond the norm compared to what you see with the products currently for MSFS from an interactive checklist, input tooltips, HTML gauges and anything the sim offers we include. We also have a new program for writing our user manuals. You will love it when you see it. Makes it super easy to learn.

Enjoy these new HTML gauges as they do not hit the sim performance like XML and enjoy the new font we designed for accuracy. The SDK still has not released anything on how to code HTML so i took some paid lessons on javascript and looked through many of the current HTML gauges in the sim and in 3 weeks i wrote 6 HTML gauges. So enjoy!!!

I will keep sharing some sneak peak vids and soon will show the textures and the entire product in full light and then you can judge a bit more than this last dark vid.

 

 

Edited January 11, 20224 yr by Flysimware

those antique 7-segment LEDs, the 70s are back. much easier to read in the dark than LCDs. now we are talking, very nice. I am converted. I hope the sounds are just as good. should be a piece of cake. 😊

thanks!

Edited January 11, 20224 yr by turbomax

Thanks for the info…this is looking like an immediate buy for me.

@Flysimware Great work, your work ethic is just so "right-on" that I don't think "lazy" is even in your vocabulary.

Love the Nav2 keypad btw!!

Dunno if I could make a request, but if you are planning on presenting with dated/aged cockpit and exterior textures to make the plane look used I would like to ask if you would release at least one that looks showroom new in & out, or nearly so. Dunno if that's doable for you at this point but just thought I'd put it out there, in case it can be done.

Thanks for your hard work...can't wait to see how she sounds and fly's...oh and please do a small jet, PLEEEEEAAASE!!

5 hours ago, Flysimware said:

We will be using Substance for our ported products like we did for the...

 

 

Lovely gauges.  They're a lot sharper than other companies including ones mentioned in this thread.

A sure buy from me...I just hope the plane keep comes with a paint kit that’s easy to use so that generous and talented painters can shower us with real world recreation of liveries.