Jump to content
MikeH99

Majestic Q400 MSFS Announcement

Recommended Posts

As reported in FSELITE and posted on the Majestic forums:

"MSFS 2020:
Flight Simulator 2020 has certainly made considerable strides over the last two years and the team has been feverishly working on updates making the platform more accessible for development.

Q400:
Folks frequently interject we used the SDK as an excuse for bringing the Q400 into MSFS and at the time of its initial release that was very much the case for us to be able to implement porting the Q400 over to MSFS. As each update is pushed by Asobo's team many things are improved thus allowing for progress. There are still a few things that we require which I am sure will be eventually addressed.

We will be pushing the Q400 to MSFS as a port over as mentioned previously, and this required our developer to completely re-write the code for the gauges and systems which is not a quick process and will be the major delaying component of the project (very much the same as almost starting from scratch). It would be unrealistic to provide a timeline for when we would like to see this port over ready for delivery at this time. However, once this phase is complete we can look at the Alpha testing phase."

http://majesticsoftware.com/forums/discussion/1399/majestic-software-status-update-for-2022

https://fselite.net/content/majestic-software-confirms-q400-for-msfs/

Can't wait! 

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to redo the VC and the external model of this plane before bringing it into MSFS. It really shows it age at this point. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Ron Hamilton

 

"95% is half the truth, but most of it is lies, but if you read half of what is written, you'll be okay." __ Honey Boo Boo's Mom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, fakeflyer737 said:

They need to redo the VC and the external model

Yea, I agree they will need to redo the model or will look so out of place in MSFS.I am skeptical about a port.

  • Upvote 1

Dan Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree they need an updated VC as well as an updated exterior model.  However my love for flying this plane is so strong I'd be ok flying it now and waiting to get that later.  Even a straight port would look nicer than p3d.  Assuming that rain drops on the windscreen would work now since that's a sim level thing?

  • Like 1

5800X3D, Gigabyte X570S MB, EVGA FTW3 3090, 32GB DDR4 3600 CL14, EVO 970 M.2's, 43" Samsung X60R 4k and 2  22" monitors,  Corsair RM1000x PSU,  360MM MSI MEG, MFG Crosswind, T16000M Stick, Boeing TCA Yoke/Throttle, Skalarki MCDU and FCU, Saitek Radio Panel/Switch Panel, Spad.Next

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, MikeH99 said:

We will be pushing the Q400 to MSFS as a port over

Aka the same model quality of P3D and taking no advantage of MSFS modern gaming engine :/. Why developers cant just start fresh with open mind like FBW, Fenix and iniBuilds? I mean honestly, they spent two years talking about "SDK" limitations, meanwhile they could take this time to at least redo 3D models to suits MSFS gaming engine. Otherwise, it will be a waste (Maddog I am looking at you) 

  • Like 9

i9-9900K OC 5.0ghz, 32GB DDR4 3600 RAM, RTX 2080Super 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

Aka the same model quality of P3D and taking no advantage of MSFS modern gaming engine :/. Why developers cant just start fresh with open mind like FBW, Fenix and iniBuilds? I mean honestly, they spent two years talking about "SDK" limitations, meanwhile they could take this time to at least redo 3D models to suits MSFS gaming engine. Otherwise, it will be a waste (Maddog I am looking at you) 

was inibuilds actually a totally new build and not an xp port? (Serious question)


5800X3D, Gigabyte X570S MB, EVGA FTW3 3090, 32GB DDR4 3600 CL14, EVO 970 M.2's, 43" Samsung X60R 4k and 2  22" monitors,  Corsair RM1000x PSU,  360MM MSI MEG, MFG Crosswind, T16000M Stick, Boeing TCA Yoke/Throttle, Skalarki MCDU and FCU, Saitek Radio Panel/Switch Panel, Spad.Next

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, micstatic said:

was inibuilds actually a totally new build and not an xp port? (Serious question)

At least the cabin looks different to the XP version that I own. I would assume as well the exterior model as well the cockpit. 

Edited by omarsmak30

i9-9900K OC 5.0ghz, 32GB DDR4 3600 RAM, RTX 2080Super 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be ready in 2027

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1

spacer.png

Bob Cardone         MSFS 2020 , Fenix A320, Milviz C 310 , Kodiak , Simple Traffic  

TrackIR   Avliasoft EFB2    FSI Panel  ATC  by PF3    FlyVirtual.net  CLX PC

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As announcements go for what is a hugely anticipated aircraft, that was really disappointing to hear that there going to port it. I do wonder about the add on companies that make decisions like this. Very out of touch.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess the Q300 v2 will be a ground-up develop from scratch on MSFS, but sounding like a very long time away:

Q300 v2:
This I think is one of the most anticipated aircraft that we have on our development board, which will be done from scratch for MSFS. This project's development will ramp up once the Q400 port over to MSFS is complete. The same is to be said of the other variants such as the 100/200.

As some of you already know the MJC is a small team of developers who also have daily jobs and families. So, the fast-paced development that is expected from some of the other dev teams is in no way feasible with the size of the MJC dev team. A timeline at this time of project completion cannot be provided, but when we are satisfied with the progress of projects in work we will provide updates with images and or video relating to such.

For many this may not quite be the news that was expected but we will get there.
 

  • Like 1

Len
1980s: Sublogic FS II on C64 ---> 1990s: Flight Unlimited I/II, MSFS 95/98 ---> 2000s/2010s: FS/X, P3D, XP ---> 2020+: MSFS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Carts85 said:

As announcements go for what is a hugely anticipated aircraft, that was really disappointing to hear that there going to port it. I do wonder about the add on companies that make decisions like this. Very out of touch.

I don't think porting is necessarily a bad thing.  But Majestic just needs better textures in MSFS (I'm not sure about the sounds, how good are the sounds for the Q400 in P3D?).  The Maddog port over would have been fine if it had better cockpit textures and sounds.  Functionality and systems wise, I don't think there are that many complaints about the Maddog, and it was a port over, if my understanding is correct.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

i5-12400, RTX 3060 Ti, 32 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I don't think porting is necessarily a bad thing.  But Majestic just needs better textures in MSFS (I'm not sure about the sounds, how good are the sounds for the Q400 in P3D?).

The sounds were fantastic from what I remember.  It’s been a few years though.

Edited by Gilandred
  • Like 3

Gary

 

i9-13900K, Asus RTX 4080, Asus Z790 Plus Wi-Fi, 32 GB Ram, Seasonic GX-1000W

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I don't think porting is necessarily a bad thing.  But Majestic just needs better textures in MSFS (I'm not sure about the sounds, how good are the sounds for the Q400 in P3D?).  The Maddog port over would have been fine if it had better cockpit textures and sounds.  Functionality and systems wise, I don't think there are that many complaints about the Maddog, and it was a port over, if my understanding is correct.

Well Maddog was a port over and to be honest, it was underwhelming. Given its price range, I would have expected something better but with Maddog, textures were underwhelming, they used none of MSFS decals and they opted to use the same technique as in P3D and FSX, aka low resolution textures which made it look underwhelming. Plus the sounds, that is by itself another story. I consider my investment in Maddog the worse so far in MSFS and honestly is very expensive for what you get. 

  • Like 1

i9-9900K OC 5.0ghz, 32GB DDR4 3600 RAM, RTX 2080Super 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me if it has new textures and sounds, it's not a portover.  It's a hybrid-something-or-other.

If I were them I would skip a port and just do a native build, they could indeed re-use some assets, namely their knowledge and expertise with this airplane, if nothing else.

  • Like 1

Rhett

i7-8700k @ 5.0 ghz, 32 GB G.Skill TridentZ, 3080Ti, 32" BenQ, 4K res

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

Well Maddog was a port over and to be honest, it was underwhelming. Given its price range, I would have expected something better but with Maddog, textures were underwhelming, they used none of MSFS decals and they opted to use the same technique as in P3D and FSX, aka low resolution textures which made it look underwhelming. Plus the sounds, that is by itself another story. I consider my investment in Maddog the worse so far in MSFS and honestly is very expensive for what you get. 

Yeah, I think we're in agreement. The Maddog needs better textures and sounds, that is what I wrote 😄

Edited by abrams_tank
  • Like 1

i5-12400, RTX 3060 Ti, 32 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...