News: Aerosoft’s A330 for MSFS nearing completion

[Ricardo41 5,949]

16 hours ago, Saucey12 said:

 I'm in high hopes that things will get better over time for us traditional simmers. 

Get better? MSFS 2020 is the BEST times for "traditional simmers". The future of "traditional simming" depends on the console gaming market. The latter goes away, and it's back to "those other sims".

[regis9 4,014]

2 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

Get better? MSFS 2020 is the BEST times for "traditional simmers". The future of "traditional simming" depends on the console gaming market. The latter goes away, and it's back to "those other sims".

A perfect summary of why no one should complain about “casual simmers”

[BMIBaby 17]

I think I am the only MSFS simmer who has the study-level PMDG 737 yet also really enjoys the Aerosoft CRJ.

 

[Saucey12 38]

23 hours ago, cyril972 said:

 

Cmon, not this argument again and again; that is just nonsense. I'm quite young myself, at 25. When I started with FSX, the first AddOn that I ever installed was a Project OpenSky Airbus with no VC; it was freeware, and beside the Ifly 747, no other good freeware was available at the time.

Today, look at us: Inibuild A310, FBW A32NX and A38X, Synaptic A220, Headwind A330, HVX787 Salty 747, rumors about an A350 (although I'll believe it when I see it), countless moderators who did an absolutely amazing job improving GA planes like the TBM, the C172, and the C152. Some guys (WT) made the default CJ4 and avionics so great they got hired by MS to improve all things avionics-related in the sim. Thanks to those guys, now we have the best default avionics suit we've ever seen in a sim. The younger me playing FSX couldn't ever dream about what you have now.

MSFS is only 2 years old, so the developer has to rebuild everything from scratch; they can't build upon what was available on P3D. Now let me ask you this: What have been done in FSX or XPlane 10/11 two years after their release? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the NGX was released in 2012, six years after the release of FSX. We waited even longer for the FSlabs A320. Here in MSFS, we got the FENIX and PMDG 737 18 months after the release of the sim. Just imagine how far we will be in four years from now.

The best thing is that the content available on this platform just keeps getting better month after month. IniBuild, FlyTampa, NZA, ORBX, and GAYA are pushing the limit with every release. Same goes for aircraft. Really, I've never seen a platform with so much dynamism as MSFS has, so many projects are being announced. I'm currently waiting for the ATR next week and to see the progress Synaptic made with their A220.

Be honest, look at what is available, respect the hard work the guys are putting into incredible projects, enjoy what you have, and keep your eyes and mind open about what is to come.

On the subject of the Aerosoft A330, Aerosoft clearly stated what it will be and what it won't be. I'm waiting for it and will buy it. It will keep me untertained, and I know I will also learn a lot with it until Fenix decides to work on the A330.

 

You're taking my words a bit farther than I intended.  I'm simply saying there are two very different markets out there for MSFS.  Traditional simmers and the new simmers.  I believe many of the new simmers will not be around much longer after the new wears off.  I hope that many do stay!  It would be nice to get more people involved in vatsim and flying real world scenarios together. 

[Saucey12 38]

6 hours ago, regis9 said:

A perfect summary of why no one should complain about “casual simmers”

I consider myself a casual simmer because I really do not get to sit down and do it very often!  😄 

[Saucey12 38]

On 4/19/2023 at 12:09 PM, fluffyflops said:

agreed, 100 percent.  in my opinion ms2020 was always going to have to appeal to gamers and not simmers.  theres a big difference.  theres no money in simmers, there is in gamers.

i remember years ago there was supposed to be more people using bus and farm simulator than there was using fsx/p3d.  

kids buy tie fighters,  adults buy fsl and pmdg etc etc.

No more money for MSFS maybe, but we buy airport sceneries and aircraft from 3rd party developers, we are their bread n butter !  😄

[blingthinger 649]

12 hours ago, cyril972 said:

I also really want to know where this gamers argument is coming from, It doesn’t make sens but you guys keep saying this without any evidences.

Doesn't Asobo tend to hang out at the xbox/video game conferences? The one called uhh....what's it.....E2? Seems like they gave themselves that tatoo. 

I suppose they could start to shed that when IRL airframers start using the default physics as a prototyping platform for future design changes... have there been any of those yet?

I do kind of side with Mr Aerosoft about 'study level'. Any of these sim platforms could deliver a full simulation of every single system on any aircraft. The limit is how much time they put into writing all the subroutines and how many pilots/mechanics and engineering-degreed folks they bring into their group.

I think a good definition of 'study level' is if you feel the need to make flashcards to memorize how things work or what to expect in gauge readouts. Basic stuff like 'RPM goes up because I gave it gas' doesn't count. Knowing why the RPM might be bouncing around during startup (and what to do about it) is the 'next level'.

Edited April 20, 2023 by blingthinger

[kiwikat 506]

On 4/20/2023 at 7:11 AM, MarcoPolo said:

I think I am the only MSFS simmer who has the study-level PMDG 737 yet also really enjoys the Aerosoft CRJ.

The problem with the CRJ isn’t that it isn’t the same level simulation as the 737, but rather the fact it has tons of random issues that come up during flights. Some of the issues have been around since the P3D version. Aerosoft has awful to non-existent customer “support” as well.

I would really enjoy the CRJ if the darn thing just worked consistently. I hate that ILS only works right for me like 1 out of every 5 flights. The other day it just decided that it was going to ignore the STAR I entered and started flying somewhere else. Another recent time it stopped following the glideslope and tried to imitate a lawn dart. I’m not asking for additional functionality, but rather for what’s there to work.

So far there’s no evidence to believe the A330 will be any different. I remember not being overly impressed by it in P3D. I’m just assuming the same will be true for this new MSFS version.

Edited April 21, 2023 by kiwikat

[jer2929 90]

On 4/20/2023 at 8:11 AM, MarcoPolo said:

I think I am the only MSFS simmer who has the study-level PMDG 737 yet also really enjoys the Aerosoft CRJ.

 

I love them both, especially with the added CRJ sound pack. CRJ is great to get into some smaller airports and also gives my TCA yoke and bravo throttle quadrant a good workout. The LNAV is certainly wonky and so is the coupled vnav. It's okay on simple STARS but never try a complicated RNAV approach. It desperately needs an update. But once you understand it's limits, hand fly it! Or keep the ap engaged and VS it down. It works pretty well. Its a fun, all hands on deck plane. Anyway, I'm looking forward to the 330. 

[Lmaire 38]

1 hour ago, jer2929 said:

I love them both, especially with the added CRJ sound pack. CRJ is great to get into some smaller airports and also gives my TCA yoke and bravo throttle quadrant a good workout. The LNAV is certainly wonky and so is the coupled vnav. It's okay on simple STARS but never try a complicated RNAV approach. It desperately needs an update. But once you understand it's limits, hand fly it! Or keep the ap engaged and VS it down. It works pretty well. Its a fun, all hands on deck plane. Anyway, I'm looking forward to the 330. 

Which added CRJ sound pack  you're talking about? I'm interested in getting it. Thanks

[jer2929 90]

https://www.ftsimplus.com/msfs-bombardier-crj.html

 

They're really great stuff. 

[Fiorentoni 4,227]

https://fselite.net/content/aerosoft-airbus-a330-in-beta-status-update-and-new-previews/

It's in beta. Oh and in case you wondered, here some selected re-quotes from Kok:
 

Quote

"The same goes for the systems, which according to Mathijs, are in a “more or less okay” state. He states that development could probably continue on this forever, as the systems go deep and many of them are linked with each other. As an example, he explains the cabin heating. When the cabin needs to be heated, this heat will be diverted from the engine. The electrical system involved means that the generators will need to provide a little bit more power, meaning there will be a drop in engine thrust. Systems like these make the aircraft complex under the hood, although simmers might barely notice these intricacies when flying the plane. ...
Despite the aircraft being in such a good state already, there are also plenty of areas where work remains to be done. The MCDU, LNAV and VNAV functionality are where the team still has the most of the work to do. The ECAMs need a lot of changes as well."

My two cents: Pushing this thing into a beta when seemingly basic functionalities like the CDU, LNAV and VNAV are stil far off from where they need to be, is Aerosoft in a nutshell. I expect this to be a buggy mess that will fail every other flight in basic lateral or vertical navigation or things like setting a speed constraint or deleting a waypoint. And I'm not talking about the beta, I'm talking about release state. Actually I expect it to be be much worse than the CRJ (if only because this wasn't devleoped by our good Hans), though hopefully better than the FSS E-Jet disaster.

Edited April 22, 2023 by Fiorentoni

[G MIDY 101]

It's a little bizarre and disheartening that someone will actually talk down their own product to manage expectations. I'd rather put my energy into delaying release to work and expand the feature set so I can talk it up and not down. At least why not promise to release it with initial features and updates to improve it?

When MSFS was first released the freeware stuff was pretty average at first but they're becoming excellent, the likes of the FBW320 are getting close and then you have the Inibuilds A310 which is excellent. If a payware developer can't compete with freeware developers on quality then they're doomed.

The message I get is our market for this product is the unsuspecting naive who are there to be taken advantage of because what do they know? It's really sad to be honest.

[blingthinger 649]

On 4/22/2023 at 6:45 AM, G MIDY said:

who are there to be taken advantage of

Ooof! My sole purpose in life is to be scammed! I am the moth to Aerosoft's bright light.

If you want utopia, there's always flightgear. If the recent GPU price gouging/inflation is anything to learn from, there are tons of folks in this world with lots of disposable income who will keep spending it mindlessly. Therein lies the heart of the video game industry.

 

On 4/22/2023 at 6:45 AM, G MIDY said:

It's a little bizarre and disheartening that someone will actually talk down their own product to manage expectations

Amen to this, though again, utopia this is not.

 

On 4/22/2023 at 6:45 AM, G MIDY said:

can't compete with freeware developers on quality then they're doomed.

It's a good thing for the 3rd parties then, that we aren't all spending our free time learning the SDKs to do this ourselves! I ain't complaining (even though I do love a good SDK).

Edited April 23, 2023 by blingthinger

[james42 258]

I hope they don't do what they did with the FSX/P3D version. If I remember correctly, they released it as early access and it was almost totally unflyable. I picked it up about 3 months after it released and it was still totally botched. The autopilot had a mind of its own and the flight dynamics had you floating half way down the runway at 100 knots when trying to land. There is definitely a place for a decent modern long haul airliner in MSFS so I really hope they can pull it off.

Edited April 23, 2023 by james42