7 minutes ago, joemiller said:

Default level?  hahaha.. your issues

If you think the LVFR planes - without Horizon mods - ar anything above default level, then good for you. 

Just now, Maxis said:

Looks like i stepped on someones toes here for relaying information directly from the developer.

 

ricardoLVFRVerified Dev

2 days ago

 

it won’t dilute anything. We made an A320ceo which there already exists a study level, it works for us and it seems it hasn’t diluted fenix’s sales a tiny bit. Our market is in between entry level and study, we aren’t looking into doing study level aircraft. There is a market for people who don’t want study level planes too.

 

Taken from the comments section of the FS Elite press release found here

https://fselite.net/content/latinvfr-aims-to-release-airbus-a340-for-msfs-this-month/

 

Now .. as to expectations.. I would hope that as a dev learns new things they would apply it and improve with each product .. If your happy with stagnation good for you.

 

 

No toes were hurt,, haha.. yes they have said mid-level, but your tone implies a low quality product- it's not.

Just now, joemiller said:

No toes were hurt,, haha.. yes they have said mid-level, but your tone implies a low quality product- it's not.

That's your unfortunate take on it .. i merely stated my hopes and the devs aims. Nothing more .. nothing less

7 posts in less than 25 minutes defending the dev / using ad-hominem comments against people legitimately raising issues?

Hmm... 🤔

21 minutes ago, joemiller said:

your tone implies a low quality product- it's not.

Said like an objective fact. 😄

No worries Joe.  Great that you see the LVFRs as "mid-level" and high quality.  I'd save a fortunate if I considered watered-down default models as "mid-level". 💲

In my opinion, for the price paid, it's a low quality product; on the basis that the flight model is so poor, the sounds unconvincing and the textures disappointing.  The modeling is ok - quite good.

Edited April 6, 20242 yr by JYW

Well the A330 at least has a TOD indicator, unlike the Asobo A320.

But that's really not that impressive lol

1 minute ago, Tuskin38 said:

Well the A330 at least has a TOD indicator, unlike the Asobo A320.

But that's really not that impressive lol

It does indeed.    However, the aircraft's VNAV system doesn't take too much notice of said indicator.

26 minutes ago, Maxis said:

That's your unfortunate take on it .. i merely stated my hopes and the devs aims. Nothing more .. nothing less

forgive me, for I have sin.😪

Spoiler

 

 

If the systems matches the looks we will definitely be fine. At least make it safe to fly on VATSIM without to many workarounds.

2 minutes ago, espent said:

If the systems matches the looks we will definitely be fine.

But they won't. You can even just look at the displays in the video to see that. 

I understood that is the default Asobo stuff. 

On 4/6/2024 at 6:20 PM, F737MAX said:

7 posts in less than 25 minutes defending the dev / using ad-hominem comments against people legitimately raising issues?

Hmm... 🤔

🙂 their official YT has deactivated comments, wrote this on FB Aviationlads & LatinVFR and they erased posts. Anyway, my money will not go for this kind of product.

I just really wish that the ground contact model was better in MSFS. The tilted landing gears sink into the ground on landing and that just kills it for me. This is one thing I will give to X-plane, their landing gear simulation is far superior. Either way it's nice to get a nice A340. Lets hope the 3rd party devs can help in places where the plane is lacking.

LVFR what is more mediocre with them. Their Scenery or the Aircraft? just a joke. $$$ grabbing at this point to gullible souls who have money to just waste.

Edited May 5, 20242 yr by JBDB-MD80

20 hours ago, Vali said:

I understood that is the default Asobo stuff. 

No, since the A330 they've been doing their own coding.