11 minutes ago, tfm said:

Haven't looked. Rather than this or a clickable biro or glowing brake pads etc etc, I'd prefer PMDG to spend a little time enabling us to use our iPads for the FMC and EFB 😉 

the clickable biro makes it study level

Edited July 2, 20241 yr by jason74

I think it is probably due to the fact that the 777 cockpits are dated compared to the most recent variants of Airbus and Boeing, probably just that (?)

I purchased it and rushed installing and trying in a short circuit around an airport I picked based on bad weather. It was a very nice ride and I do acknowledge the difference in look and feel to the P3D version I also own (although being the -200 LR). 

It look very real to me.

The cockpit colour scheme/texture looks off. It is fairly obvious when compared to the real thing. They need to fix it.

If you compare the Bluebird, it's easily noticeable, they nailed it, perfect colours and textures.

I have the same, something is wrong with the cockpit and sound, maybe after hundred's of hours in the Fenix I got spoiled, btw am already back to the Fenix.This is a personal opinion, and everyone's opinion is different off course.

People seem to be talking at crossed purposes.

1. Yes the 777 flight deck is inherently 'outdated' in real life, and is a see of relatively uninteresting brown.

However the OP isn't talking about that fact - he's talking about the fact that the aforementioned outdated flight deck isn't particularly well depicted.

I must admit that having spent plenty of time in a 777 flight deck I do know what they mean - whether it's the material reflectivity, consistency of colour, the wear pattern they've chosen etc it isn't quite there in terms of the feeling of how the real thing looks. It's absolutely fine, just not industry leading like the Fenix for example. 

7 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

You‘re kind of missing the point of my „scepticism“ as you call it: Why did you feel the need to announce the 787 on the FSExpo, when you‘re yet to release a product at all?

Mods can you remove my post.  It double posted for some reason. Thanks.

Edited July 2, 20241 yr by sherv_BBS
Double post

7 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

You‘re kind of missing the point of my „scepticism“ as you call it: Why did you feel the need to announce the 787 on the FSExpo, when you‘re yet to release a product at all?

Not missing your point at all. I made it clear in the Expo presentation why we announced it. Did you even watch it? We know what we're doing and if you didn't get it,  I will spell it out for you much much later down the road.  As transparent as I like to be I can't reveal everything yet.  But again, if we have no credibility or professionalism in your opinion, that is fine. You are entitled to it.  But you're just flat out wrong and that's just my opinion.  

2 hours ago, sherv_BBS said:

Not missing your point at all. I made it clear in the Expo presentation why we announced it. Did you even watch it? We know what we're doing and if you didn't get it,  I will spell it out for you much much later down the road.  As transparent as I like to be I can't reveal everything yet.  But again, if we have no credibility or professionalism in your opinion, that is fine. You are entitled to it.  But you're just flat out wrong and that's just my opinion.  

Amazing what people choose to listen too or not watch and understand what you mean.

Don't get me wrong I still think PMDG planes are good but they have not really advanced much since P3D days and i personally think they are getting left behind by other new developers .

Their game changing tablet is still very basic and they have brought nothing new to the table , they are stuck in a time warp from FSX/P3D

Edited July 3, 20241 yr by jason74

I find it quite Cartoon Game Looking compared to the Fenix but its still great to fly.

PMDG haven't been "industry leading" for a long time. Maybe back in the days of TR's Fly!

1 hour ago, bhx22 said:

I find it quite Cartoon Game Looking compared to the Fenix but its still great to fly.

I certainly wouldn't give it that label.  

3 hours ago, jason74 said:

Don't get me wrong I still think PMDG planes are good but they have not really advanced much since P3D days and i personally think they are getting left behind by other new developers .

Their game changing tablet is still very basic and they have brought nothing new to the table , they are stuck in a time warp from FSX/P3D

I don’t understand comments like this. What exactly “new” are they supposed to bring to the table? They have simulated all the systems and functionality of a real 777-300ER with high accuracy. Are they supposed to add things that don’t exist in the real aircraft? 

The new MSFS version has things not found in the FSX/P3D version. Probably the most important of which the new LNAV and new nav data format which finally allows correct depiction of curved paths. I have flown a couple of complex RNP-AR approaches and the aircraft followed the lateral and vertical profile very well. That is something that no previous PMDG product on any platform would do.

They have included integration of the Hoppie network in the MFD COM function, allowing users to do correct and accurate  CPDLC communication with Vatsim controllers that support CPDLC (not all controllers do). It incudes the ability to receive current METAR and TAF reports for any airport, and to do so exactly as it would be done on the real aircraft

The electronic checklist system works exactly as it does in the real aircraft.

They have included a full passenger cabin which is very well done. I (personally) have no interest in going into the cabin, and tend to keep the cockpit door closed, but I am glad they included it for those users for whom it is important.

PMDG aircraft have always had dozens and dozens of user-configurable options for individual airframes, allowing them to be set up exactly as a specific airline’s model would be for things like cockpit instrumentation and specific autopilot and FMS behavior. They have far more options in this area than any other add-on except perhaps the FSL Airbus.

The PMDG emulation of a the functionality of a real Honeywell Mark V EGPWS is the best and most accurate to be found in any add-on aircraft by any developer. I work with the real thing on a daily basis. The only thing it lacks is RAAS.

The UFT may be “basic” but it looks and works more like the tablet on a real aircraft than many EFBs.

The UFT has many new functions, including control of ground corrections, doors, service vehicles etc. It now also allows many repair and servicing functions previously available only in FMS menus.

The rest of the UFT functions work very well. Simbrief import, Navigraph charts etc are all there. I own and fly the Fenix A320 and I actually prefer the PMDG takeoff and landing performance calculator. It looks and performs more like the performance calculator on a real aviation tablet app. The company I work for uses ARINC Direct (a subscription service) for performance calcs, and the UI of their app looks very similar to PMDG’s

For me, the internal graphics and texturing is perfectly fine. Would it be possible to go higher resolution in this area? Perhaps. But that comes with a performance cost. 

 

24 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

I don’t understand comments like this. What exactly “new” are they supposed to bring to the table? They have simulated all the systems and functionality of a real 777-300ER with high accuracy. Are they supposed to add things that don’t exist in the real aircraft? 

The new MSFS version has things not found in the FSX/P3D version. Probably the most important of which the new LNAV and new nav data format which finally allows correct depiction of curved paths. I have flown a couple of complex RNP-AR approaches and the aircraft followed the lateral and vertical profile very well. That is something that no previous PMDG product on any platform would do.

They have included integration of the Hoppie network in the MFD COM function, allowing users to do correct and accurate  CPDLC communication with Vatsim controllers that support CPDLC (not all controllers do). It incudes the ability to receive current METAR and TAF reports for any airport, and to do so exactly as it would be done on the real aircraft

The electronic checklist system works exactly as it does in the real aircraft.

They have included a full passenger cabin which is very well done. I (personally) have no interest in going into the cabin, and tend to keep the cockpit door closed, but I am glad they included it for those users for whom it is important.

PMDG aircraft have always had dozens and dozens of user-configurable options for individual airframes, allowing them to be set up exactly as a specific airline’s model would be for things like cockpit instrumentation and specific autopilot and FMS behavior. They have far more options in this area than any other add-on except perhaps the FSL Airbus.

The PMDG emulation of a the functionality of a real Honeywell Mark V EGPWS is the best and most accurate to be found in any add-on aircraft by any developer. I work with the real thing on a daily basis. The only thing it lacks is RAAS.

The UFT may be “basic” but it looks and works more like the tablet on a real aircraft than many EFBs.

The UFT has many new functions, including control of ground corrections, doors, service vehicles etc. It now also allows many repair and servicing functions previously available only in FMS menus.

The rest of the UFT functions work very well. Simbrief import, Navigraph charts etc are all there. I own and fly the Fenix A320 and I actually prefer the PMDG takeoff and landing performance calculator. It looks and performs more like the performance calculator on a real aviation tablet app. The company I work for uses ARINC Direct (a subscription service) for performance calcs, and the UI of their app looks very similar to PMDG’s

For me, the internal graphics and texturing is perfectly fine. Would it be possible to go higher resolution in this area? Perhaps. But that comes with a performance cost. 

 

I think some just like to knock PMDG, no matter what they create. Typical Avsim reaction to anything PMDG. 

13 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

I don’t understand comments like this. What exactly “new” are they supposed to bring to the table?

• Additional details, e.g. cabin announcements, animations of events (wing condensation, brake smoke, windscreen wipers that work, etc.), ice / snow accumulation on wings and engine cowlings.
• Better use of the MSFS sound engine.
• Modern texturing techniques (the cockpit panels look flat/lacking in reflectivity)
• Higher quality animations (the engine wobble effect looks weird).
• Enhanced lighting effects, both of dynamic lights and reflections on glass surfaces.

These are just some examples that some other airliner devs have added to their aircraft, even in other older flight sims.

The idea should be to make their new products more immersive for flight simmers by adding such extra detail. Instead, (the LNAV improvement aside) many people feel there's not a lot of difference from what the FSX version of the 777 offered.