Virtualcol stop A220 developemt for MSFS

[bobcat999 8,482]

6 minutes ago, The Flight Level said:

Airliners are the best for creating “Hot Topics” on AVSim! Thank’s for the great read guys! Hope everyone gets sorted!

Laurie, you win the internet today! 

[CaptainNick 575]

22 hours ago, environmental_ice said:

anyone with this attitude has clearly never been on an A220 #1  and #2 doesnt care if the freeware one ever comes out at all. The latest development while exciting is clearly over a year away which is disappointing. According to Synaptic alot of work is still left to be done with texturing. Look at what is being done with the A21N in Horizon Simulations. Look at what is being done with FBW. The old jokes about Virtualcol are tired. At the end of the day just getting a decent looking model out for MSFS opens up the doors for talent to come in and take it to the next level. Even in 2023 with plenty of mods to improve aircraft we still have comments like this who dont see the entire picture. What a shame

The entire picture? VirtualCol makes trash add ons worthy of inclusion on an Abacus boxed set for fs9. You seem desperate to want a 220 no matter the quality. I think most of us here would rather not see a VirtualCol one get released, than they continue and thousands of people get duped on the marketplace by it thinking it is something it’s not. But hey, if you want trash so bad I’m sure you could reach out to them and send them some cash to finish the project…

Edited June 1, 2023 by CaptainNick

[Sonosusto 679]

On 5/31/2023 at 3:05 AM, GoranM said:

No offense, but this is why I like to address such things in private. Some people are not open to my response.  And that's fine.  To those who are interested, I'm happy to let them know.  There's already a few in here who have asked me in private.  1 of them as recently as about a month ago.  

 

True. Flight simulation hobbyists (or whatever we're called) are some of the most immature and petty of humans on the internet. A lot of us are kind of fierce and have brand loyalty. Some (like me) don't really care about what sim or plane someone in a virtual world unless we get frustrated by a developer.

To get back on the main point, I am not sure why anyone would be disappointed with Virtuacol to stop developing a plane for MSFS. Their planes historically are not only lower fidelity overall but lack important updates and even more importantly....they charge too much money for lacking so much substance. Not the only developer that does this. There is a huge list in the last few years.

As far as XP 12. Well, this is the MSFS forums and I only have XP11 for a bit because I can't part with some of the planes I own. But the freeware aerobask da62 is stealing the show from Aerobask at the moment. Comment below....if Aerobask made planes for MSFS I'd totally re-buy them!

Edited June 2, 2023 by Sonosusto

[Sonosusto 679]

On 5/31/2023 at 7:14 AM, GoranM said:

Interesting analogy.

Maybe

On 5/31/2023 at 6:55 AM, eslader said:

XP is a good sim. No hate on XP from this end. However, anecdotal data would seem to indicate that the far larger market lies with MSFS, so that does make the "why don't you develop for MSFS" question more than just "XP sucks." 

Kinda like, Michelin is a great tire, and there's a reason you can get Michelins for a Lexus ES as well as for the Bugatti Chiron. Far fewer people using the Bugatti, so it makes good business sense to sell to the more mass-market cars as well.

All that is to say that I really wish some of the better XP developers (not just HS -Aerobask too) would consider developing for MSFS as well. I'd buy!

 

 

If Aerobask made anything for MSFS I would totally get their planes!

[Alvega 2,124]

41 minutes ago, Sonosusto said:

Maybe

If Aerobask made anything for MSFS I would totally get their planes!

 

He is totally against Windows, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Quote

As long as it isn’t available on Linux I won’t be using it! Developing for Microsoft Flight Simulator is not at all something we are considering.

https://www.thresholdx.net/article/intlio

[Sonosusto 679]

18 minutes ago, Alvega said:

 

He is totally against Windows, I wouldn't hold my breath.

https://www.thresholdx.net/article/intlio

Well, then a good reason to keep XP for their planes haha.

Meanwhile, 90% of my flying is with other high(er) fidelity planes in MSFS.

Kind of a shame as they would do pretty well overall in MSFS. Meh.

[micstatic 4,319]

The virtualcol is moot to me. The one I’m excited for Is the in development a220 from synaptic 

[environmental_ice 238]

19 hours ago, CaptainNick said:

The entire picture? VirtualCol makes trash add ons worthy of inclusion on an Abacus boxed set for fs9. You seem desperate to want a 220 no matter the quality. I think most of us here would rather not see a VirtualCol one get released, than they continue and thousands of people get duped on the marketplace by it thinking it is something it’s not. But hey, if you want trash so bad I’m sure you could reach out to them and send them some cash to finish the project…

I don't "seem" to want another aircraft no matter the quality. I already gave my reasons on why as I don't need every plane in my hanger to be study level. Who knows if the community would have been able to improve on it. There's no reason to flat out say this wouldn't happen. Take that pessimism to someone who cares to read it. Nobody is being duped when a developer clearly states what the product is. I think Vcol has been very transparent in their business and You aren't above anyone else that is interested in Lower fidelity addons that are priced accordingly. There is a market for it otherwise LVFR wouldn't have gave up on sceneries and moved to aircraft. But sure go ahead and be like most of the arm chair captains on here and remind strangers how much "higher" your standards are because you only fly high fidelity. I bet you log off thinking so high and mighty of yourself. Very Cringe 

Edited June 2, 2023 by environmental_ice

[blueshark747 1,843]

A Virtualcol A220 is as good as no A220.

Looking forward to what Synaptic Simulations are working on.

[The Flight Level 2,113]

No holding back on this forum 😉

[vgbaron 3,626]

As long as one keeps it relatively civil.  🙂 

[jarmstro 2,402]

1 hour ago, environmental_ice said:

I think Vcol has been very transparent in their business

I don't agree. When I bought the Virtualcol E175 where did they state that it was, to all intents and purposes, impossible to fly it from A to B making use of the autopilot? Where did they state that for twenty quid that the sounds you would get were so bad that you had to mute them? Where did they transparently state that the plane was a waste of money?. (EDIT. *He, not they. Virtualcol is one old man.)

Edited June 2, 2023 by jarmstro

[Sagoland 22]

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

I don't agree. When I bought the Virtualcol E175 where did they state that it was, to all intents and purposes, impossible to fly it from A to B making use of the autopilot? Where did they state that for twenty quid that the sounds you would get were so bad that you had to mute them? Where did they transparently state that the plane was a waste of money?. (EDIT. *He, not they. Virtualcol is one old man.)

It has flaws but unflyable is not true. I guess you didn't watch the tutorial series on Youtube if you have problems with autopilot. Full IFR flight works. Here's one of my Youtube videos. Anyway I have now moved over to FSS E175.

MSFS. Updated Virtualcol E195 and Inibuild EGLL Heathrow. GSX, FSLTL/AIG. Arrival. - YouTube

[jarmstro 2,402]

35 minutes ago, Sagoland said:

It has flaws but unflyable is not true. I guess you didn't watch the tutorial series on Youtube if you have problems with autopilot. Full IFR flight works. Here's one of my Youtube videos. Anyway I have now moved over to FSS E175.

MSFS. Updated Virtualcol E195 and Inibuild EGLL Heathrow. GSX, FSLTL/AIG. Arrival. - YouTube

You can learn to fly it by rote. Following absurd instructions like some video game. But it is unflyable if you try, even in the most basic way, to fly it like an EJet. It's junk. It's the worst plane ever released for MSFS without any doubt. Trash. The old geezer that made it should retire.

Edited June 2, 2023 by jarmstro

[petersej 0]

On 5/30/2023 at 7:30 PM, somiller said:

Aerosoft didn't release a CRJ200 for MSFS.

On this note, is there any talk from Aerosoft on making a CRJ200? It would make sense to complete the CRj family since they have the rest of them done.