47 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

If PMDG announced 6 months after they released the 737 they were stopping development of the plane to completely rewrite a large portion of the craft, there would be a run on torches and pitchforks. Somehow, Fenix gets a huge pass on this.

I think most of us would be okay, and some wouldn't be. It's no different from the Fenix; This thread is an example that some people dislike the Fenix and disapprove of their offering. You'd find those same sorts of posts with PMDG.

I think the biggest reason why is because people with type ratings see so many things right with this product that it becomes very easy to spot what's wrong. Back in the days of FS9 the simulator was so removed from reality that a lot of glaring issues were omitted. Nowadays the aircraft is photorealistic, and the expectation is that it flies and sounds equally realistically, but that's not possible. The people who understand that tend to be a lot less critical.

1 hour ago, BrammyH said:

- If PMDG announced 6 months after they released the 737 they were stopping development of the plane to completely rewrite a large portion of the craft, there would be a run on torches and pitchforks. Somehow, Fenix gets a huge pass on this.

Like @WestAirsays, most would be OK. A very vocal minority wouldn't.
I've noticed quite a bit of backlash against Fenix recently. Despite the detailed progress update in May, it appears a number of people are fast losing patience with them.

Personally, I think why Fenix Sim gets more leeway is due to:

1. Being a new developer with no comparison to a previous product to be benchmarked against.
2. Being a developer who aims to push the boundaries to achieve the most possible realism.
3. Giving infrequent updates and a history of (under)promising and (over)delivering.
4. Taking criticism and not blaming others for any shortfalls.
5. Seemingly being on the flight simmmer's side w.r.t. pricing their product.

None of that can be said of PMDG.

Anyway, back on topic.
If FSLabs' (supposed) A321 and their A330 arrive for MSFS with same systems depth as their P3D offerings and a big visual improvement of the interior, all while maintaining performance, then I believe they'll do far better than they ever ensivaged.
In spite competitor products and possible 'Airbus fatigue', there's still a lot of pent-up demand for a high fidelity long-haul Airbus. Plus, the A321 has a different mission profile to the A320 (ceo/neo).

1 hour ago, BrammyH said:

- If PMDG announced 6 months after they released the 737 they were stopping development of the plane to completely rewrite a large portion of the craft, there would be a run on torches and pitchforks. Somehow, Fenix gets a huge pass on this.

- The Fenix is the most complete airliner I have flown: auto insert of missed approaches, secondary flight plans, and armed RNAV approaches are all in the Fenix. 737s don't do armed RNAV (I think), but the PMDG does not do secondary flight plans.

- The PROSIM license doesn't allow the Fenix to fully support some hardware peripherals so users also need to run SPAD to take full advantage.

Fenix definitely don't the amount of people complaining it is taking so long is unreal then again most of these don't understand the concept of developing and just expect things to take a week.... Even the Dev's have said some people are putting in support tickets threatening to do some real bad stuff to them.....

I have to agree with what F737MAX as said. Fenix have a way of doing things just like PMDG. Fenix decided to put out a lot of updates, people then complained they then do announcements every couple of months the same people complain again. You can't win. Fenix strive for realism at least they admit fault and when people question them is this correct they actually go and check with other people etc. Not everyday you said a bunch of the team in Discord talking with everyone having a chilled conversation or fixing problems.

If I remember correctly a few months back one guy was even saying he would take them to court because the product did not work for him even though I believe it was because his computer specs did not meet requirements.

Edited July 6, 20232 yr by carlanthony24

2 hours ago, BrammyH said:

If PMDG announced 6 months after they released the 737 they were stopping development of the plane to completely rewrite a large portion of the craft, there would be a run on torches and pitchforks. Somehow, Fenix gets a huge pass on this.

Fenix gets a "huge pass" because for a developer at its first release, they did a fantastic job in record time. It's not a "pass" but a simple recognition of their merits. They delivered something peple really, really, desperately wanted when the sim needed it, and didn't botch it despite the huge pressure.

The fact that their update cycle is much longer than other developers is fine, since the product they released was already great at release. It wasn't perfect, but perfect doesn't exist, even after a ton of micropatches. 

Besides, a portion of the flight simulator commnity runs to the torches and pitchforks for much, much less, including against Fenix. 

Edited July 7, 20232 yr by Abriael

14 minutes ago, Abriael said:

Fenix gets a "huge pass" because for a developer at its first release, they did a fantastic job in record time. It's not a "pass" but a simple recognition of their merits. They delivered something peple really, really, desperately wanted when the sim needed it, and didn't botch it despite the huge pressure.

Those are all good points. Don't get me wrong, I love the Fenix. It's truly amazing what they have been able to deliver.

17 hours ago, Jeff Nielsen said:

If you guys are talking about the FNX, that's a known bug and is already fixed for V2 according to Amir.  It's reading a "MAX XXX" speed constraint incorrectly, so if your DECEL is prior to one of those restrictions (if your approach or arrival has one), it will zoom up all the way o to the 'limit' (250).

I've noticed the Fenix often flies much slower, at the lower end of the econ speed bracket, when there is a hard speed restriction in the STAR, i. e. fly AT 250 kts, not max 250 kts. I always have to open the speed window and manually dial in the speed restriction so it actually flies that exact speed rather than something 30 kts lower. Is this normal in the Airbus or is this a bug too, perhaps related to what you said here?

Edited July 7, 20232 yr by Nixoq

Just now, Nixoq said:

I've noticed the Fenix often flies much slower, at the lower end of the econ speed bracket, when there is a hard speed restriction in the STAR, i. e. fly AT 250 kts, not max 250 kts. I always have to open the speed window and manually dial in the speed restriction so it actually flies that exact speed rather than something 30 kts lower. Is this normal in the Airbus or is this a bug too, perhaps related to what you said here?

That's a different issue.  I think Amir talked about that somewhere but can't remember.  That also might be a thing where it's more than 1 issue at the same time.  Could be how they tried to get it like how the real plane flies versus the sim.  I know they're still trying to dial the plane in more.  I remember also him saying something about the leg type itself causing certain issues that they were fixing.  It's been a while.  That's a bit out of my wheelhouse. I'm probably not describing it all correctly as well.