I didn't mind the poor quality of CS airplanes for MSFS (but I didn't buy them). After all, it is a consumer's choice what to buy, and there is so much word not allowed in many industries that outsells much better products. However, their latest explanation about why they discourage missing freeware liveries (see https://fselite.net/content/captain-sim-explains-missing-767-captain-iii-paintkit/ ) really made me angry. It is a blanket lash-out against the quality of freeware liveries. I have created liveries myself, not fore CS airplanes, but one even was included in an official release of another developer. I have put a lot of work into those liveries, and reading that statement just shows an utter disrespect for what freeware painters contribute to this great community.

And, seriously? A company that arguably creates some of the worst airplane models for MSFS complains about the poor quality of free liveries for their products? Gimme a break.

Such a shame. In FSX times, their 707 and 727 where among my favourite models, but I cannot respect the current CS team anymore.

Peter

Edited February 8, 20233 yr by qqwertzde

1 hour ago, qqwertzde said:

....... their latest explanation about why they discourage missing freeware liveries (see https://fselite.net/content/captain-sim-explains-missing-767-captain-iii-paintkit/ ) really made me angry. It is a blanket lash-out against the quality of freeware liveries. I have created liveries myself, not fore CS airplanes, but one even was included in an official release of another developer. I have put a lot of work into those liveries, and reading that statement just shows an utter disrespect for what freeware painters contribute to this great community.

 

I think the problem we have with Captain Sim is not so much whether people like a study level aircraft or are just happy with a model that looks like a 777 but flies like a 747, (each to his own most will agree) but rather, the dodgy practices and legal obstacles CS has put up to stop people painting their aircraft or to grab the freeware liveries and call them their own. They had a stoush with Flightsim.to over this. (Google CS legal). None of this does our hobby any good and must be discouraged. So, some of the old school on this forum are saying they don't agree with the way CS is asking for money for a shell that just borrows its systems and flight model from something else but in reality,  it is the poor ethics that CS is employing that has upset most ,  just as it has upset you Peter .

The Xbox crowd know very little about all this and so don't get what riles some people on this forum, not helped by the fact that there is an assumption all new users have read every post on Avsim and should know CS are a bunch of ratbags! Of course they haven't and they dont so we get into arguments about study level vs looks good. when that is not really the reason why some won't touch CS with a 40 foot barge pole.

 

Cheers

Terry 

Edited February 8, 20233 yr by Lord Farringdon

I would be really interested to hear from Steve and other repainters on AVSIM what they think about the statement made by Captain Sim regarding the "errors/inaccuracies/technical and factual mistakes/wrong engine types" on freeware liveries. When I read the FSElite article, all I could think was "oh, the flightsim community are going to have a field day with this one"!

12 hours ago, Reader said:

Whatever happened to live and let live?
We are all different and because someone does not share your view does not make them better, or worse, than you are.
How does the world look from your particular lofty pedestal?

Huh?  It's a simple rational question. If a person doesn't care about simulation, then why simulate?

7 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I would be really interested to hear from Steve and other repainters on AVSIM what they think about the statement made by Captain Sim regarding the "errors/inaccuracies/technical and factual mistakes/wrong engine types" on freeware liveries. When I read the FSElite article, all I could think was "oh, the flightsim community are going to have a field day with this one"!

I think it's rather hypocritical, and frankly laughable, considering the inaccuracies of their model, and liveries they've released. They couldn't even add the correct GE engine to their model for goodness sake.
 

 

If people keep buying this garbage, CS will just to continue to create it. It's time to quit buying the product, and hopefully they will go away. Sadly we have so much more garbage products in the sim, Than actually good simulation products.

6 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I would be really interested to hear from Steve and other repainters on AVSIM what they think about the statement made by Captain Sim regarding the "errors/inaccuracies/technical and factual mistakes/wrong engine types" on freeware liveries. When I read the FSElite article, all I could think was "oh, the flightsim community are going to have a field day with this one"!

Hehe...I could comment volumes on this topic, but if I were to keep the filters I have to apply to myself when commenting on CS in general, it would be this:

CS Bad. 😄

As far as how they try to dissuade simmers from downloading "Bootleg liveries" (what they called the post in their forums, before they started deleting posts, then removed the thread altogether, then reposted the cleaned up version without some of the snide comments even they musta' felt were over the top)...I have a few more comments about that. 🙂 

First, like many have said here....freeware painters only help your product become popular and surely increases sales. The ONLY reason they'd try to squash them (back when the 777 released) for a plane they were not trying to sell liveries on...was purely ego-driven.  They wanted all freeware painters to only upload to their wonky ACE area, and when they couldn't force them, they tried to threaten fightsim.to to have the liveries removed.   After the obvious backlash, CS tucked tail and relented...I bet that seriously bent CS's Ego. LOL

With the new 767-300, they are now selling liveries. I guess after seeing all the livery packs flooding the MSFS marketplace, they want a piece of that pie.  I cannot fault them for that, and in fact, as long as the livery packs keep coming, and stay at the $9.99  $4.99 price, its not a bad deal and just like their modeler, their painter does make very good paints. $1 is very reasonable IMO, and as much as this may seem improper based on past releases, I really don't have an issue with it,

What I have a serious issues with, as you can imagine, are 3 things:

1. Their characterization that freeware painter's liveries are sub-par in general (we know there are so many levels of painters out there, but there are many great ones out there...every bit as good as theirs)
2. They took the P3d Paintkit off their site once they realized that us dumb freeware painters figured out you can paint the MSFS model just fine with it because, with some tweak, its identical to the P3d version
3. And worst of all...they purposely bugged the model so that if you try to paint a "Bootleg" livery, by their own admission "Damages the exterior nose section (the ugly cockpit roof bumps appears, broken pilots' windows area, missing windshield glass and frames).
   - FPS drop 30-50% guaranteed.

If they are confident their liveries are so superior to freeware painters, why did they need to purposely bug their product?  Sounds like they feel threatened by us dumb freeware painters huh?

By the way they are framing the freeware paints....it seems like they learned their lesson and are at least staying away from the flightsim.to FREE liveries...but just "warning" their customers that if you download a livery from anywhere other than their livery packs, you'll get sub-par, and buggy paints.  I don't have to tell you guys that many freeware painters put out a quality product, and for CS to disparage them to try and boost their paints is pretty pathetic if you ask me. 

Imagine if they put the same ego and effort into actually developing a good aircraft?  

10 hours ago, spinoza said:

Huh?  It's a simple rational question. If a person doesn't care about simulation, then why simulate?

Mine is a simple rational observation.
If a person does not agree with you that a simulation is not a simulation if it does not faithfully simulate
every minute detail of every aircraft model and says that they do not care if that is the case, then why
comment at all.
Just leave them to enjoy what they do, it does not have to conform to your ideals, or indeed those
of anyone else.

10 hours ago, Steve Dra said:

 

(..) And worst of all...they purposely bugged the model so that if you try to paint a "Bootleg" livery, by their own admission "Damages the exterior nose section (the ugly cockpit roof bumps appears, broken pilots' windows area, missing windshield glass and frames).
- FPS drop 30-50% guaranteed. (...)

Wow this is a new low. I didn't know about this one.

Now they lost the last bit of respect i had for them, ouch.

Hehe....CS just keeps piling on.   This post used to only say that "bootleg" liveries will have model errors (thanks due to they purposefully bugged it for freeware painters, or if they didn't and they just won't tell freeware painters how to fix it).  Now they have included a comparison screenshot, almost rubbing in our faces that only their liveries will net you a nice looking and performing model.🤔

And I particularly find hilarious that they say "If the #1 is not enough we have a few more" as if potential customers who are brave enough to try some of the freeware liveries STILL need a reason to shun and laugh at those poor freeware painters who are just trying to serve the community to HELP CS generate more sales.  Really CS?  just...really?

Its bad enough that CS sells questionable products at best, but to characterize all the freeware painters in this light, even the ones who've been staunch CS supporters and have created countless freeware paints for their past products that undoubtedly contributed to additional sales of THEIR products...I can't see any reason for the simming community to ever touch their products going forward.  Its just despicable in my opinion.

In Germany there's a saying:
"Ist der Ruf erst runiert, lebt's sich gänzlich ungeniert"
(Once the reputation is ruined, you can live without shame)

24 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

Its bad enough that CS sells questionable products at best, but to characterize all the freeware painters in this light, even the ones who've been staunch CS supporters and have created countless freeware paints for their past products that undoubtedly contributed to additional sales of THEIR products...I can't see any reason for the simming community to ever touch their products going forward.  Its just despicable in my opinion.

I'm "gobsmacked"!

I couldn't believe reading that post on their forum this morning. What has become of CS??? Since the introduction of MSFS (although many would claim their downfall was much earlier than that!), CS has brought many questionable products and tactics to the Marketplace starting with their triple seven introduction into MSFS, their wonderful "cockpit-less" C-130 and now this presumably recycled B767 for MSFS.

I purchased their B767-II for P3D and painted several liveries (for the community which inevitably benefited them!).

I am done with Captain Sim. Their new business model seems to have forgotten the importance of the customer.

Well, I'm a "word not allowed".  I mean, some have suspected it, but now it's official.

No, I didn't buy the 767-300.... because I don't want a 767.  Instead, in a moment of temporary insanity, I thought how much I'd like a 777, and also noticed all of those "Salty" mods on FS.TO, that promise to add lot's of features.

So I did it.  For the first time since the CS 727 in FS2004 back in.... err.... 200..4, I bought a Captain Sim product.  The 777-200.   I went off to FS.TO and downloaded the mod that promised the world.   I did notice that a lot of people in the comments for that mod were talking about how bad the AP was with the mod.  "They're probably doing it wrong", I naively thought. 😄

So I loaded the 777, looked at the FMC... wow, we have custom payload, fuel, INIT and lot's of other goodies!   Set up the flight in the rather nice looking VC and took off;

Hmmmm, no TOGA.  Ok, well we'll just take off with 90% N1... seems about right.

LNAV/VNAV armed.  The FD cues look ok.....

Turned on the AP, the plane descended at 7000 FPM and crashed....

I obviously did something wrong, I'll try again.

(Tried agan)

(Same result).

I then go back to the mod download page on FS.TO to see that the author has deleted the mod, because "it doesn't work. The AP is now badly broken, and I won't be making anything else for CS planes".

This all happened within a timeframe of about 33 minutes.   It was possibly the least fun £25 I've spent on 33 minutes of my time.

TL:DR - Don't buy Captain Sim.   no REALLY.   And certainly don't buy them on the promise that some super duper mod will make them like a PMDG bird.

I start counselling next Tuesday.

Edited February 13, 20233 yr by JYW

I'm stunned at that post by CS. I didn't think even them could go as low. Lesson learned, i will never buy anything from them again even if my dear 767 ever comes close to being flyable.

Done with them.