22 minutes ago, virtualstuff said:

It actually isn't a port native MSFS latest SDK, the cabin/wing views will change when the high def cabin will be available...
Those parts are only for shadows you are not mend to be in that part, it's not intended for that purpose as of now 😉

 

You can still port when building with the native SDK, that's not a contradiction. For example in this case they've quite clearly ported over (= converted into native MSFS format) their P3D textures, sounds and, well, cabin. Also most of the systems are a straight 1-to-1 port logics wise from all I've seen. It's P3D deja vu all over again.

Now don't get me wrong, in terms of systems porting over makes all the much sense since the systems were superb. Textures and sounds on the other hand...

Come on you can't be working 4 (!) years on that and then just have P3D-ported visuals and audio all over! Saying things like "cabin will come later" is just plain ridiculous in that context.

20 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

You can still port when building with the native SDK, that's not a contradiction. For example in this case they've quite clearly ported over (= converted into native MSFS format) their P3D textures, sounds and, well, cabin. Also most of the systems are a straight 1-to-1 port logics wise from all I've seen. It's P3D deja vu all over again.

Now don't get me wrong, in terms of systems porting over makes all the much sense since the systems were superb. Textures and sounds on the other hand...

Come on you can't be working 4 (!) years on that and then just have P3D-ported visuals and audio all over! Saying things like "cabin will come later" is just plain ridiculous in that context.

As I stated it isn't a port simple as that... but hey what do I know. 🤣 The textures are brand new, but I'm on the beta team so I don't have a clue 🙃 

Edited December 13, 20241 yr by virtualstuff

1 hour ago, virtualstuff said:

As I stated it isn't a port simple as that... but hey what do I know. 🤣 The textures are brand new, but I'm on the beta team so I don't have a clue 🙃 

Alright I give you that, but the result stays the same: Mediocre quality textures after 4 years of work.
It's probably even worse that it's not a port because it means this is what will result out of their maximum effort with latest technology. I admit I haven't looked at it in the simulator (because I won't buy the A321CEO), but people have said it's at best on par with the free iniBuilds A320neo. Compare that to the iFly 737 MAX, who have also come directly from P3D - their textures and cabin are state of the art.

To be fair, some people complain about the quality of PMDG VC textures (which is ridiculous), so I would need to see these with my own eyes.

48 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Alright I give you that, but the result stays the same: Mediocre quality textures after 4 years of work.
It's probably even worse that it's not a port because it means this is what will result out of their maximum effort with latest technology. I admit I haven't looked at it in the simulator (because I won't buy the A321CEO), but people have said it's at best on par with the free iniBuilds A320neo. Compare that to the iFly 737 MAX, who have also come directly from P3D - their textures and cabin are state of the art.

Actually I have both and the VC it's similar (Fenix since the first build and we had there also issues performance/displays dark and unreadable and that improved a lot since then).
Which one you like more is personal preference. It seems you go on and on to mentioned 4 years where is that stated?
I think the future is bright to have choices in our hobby and more choices are a good thing, few years ago the future was very dark regarding flightsim.
I applaud everyone which is contributing to our hobby. I'm off to do some flying and enjoying my hobby.
I never liked the VS debates with whatever software so I end here and wish you fun gentlemen in the virtual skies.

Edited December 13, 20241 yr by virtualstuff

Bought the FSL two days ago and very pleased with the product. I had held off buying the Fenix in the hope FSL would come to the table. I was always impressed with their P3d products. Only thing I would like to see is the wx radar implemented even if it is the current one found in 2020. Price is reasonable imho.

1 hour ago, virtualstuff said:

Actually I have both and the VC it's similar (Fenix since the first build and we had there also issues performance/displays dark and unreadable and that improved a lot since then).
Which one you like more is personal preference. It seems you go on and on to mentioned 4 years where is that stated?
I think the future is bright to have choices in our hobby and more choices are a good thing, few years ago the future was very dark regarding flightsim.
I applaud everyone which is contributing to our hobby. I'm off to do some flying and enjoying my hobby.
I never liked the VS debates with whatever software so I end here and wish you fun gentlemen in the virtual skies.

Well you did mention the Fenix, not me. I was talking from a general point of what one should expect from a developer who releases a 80 dollar (post-tax) single-variant aircraft for MSFS2020 in the year 2024.

Apart from that I also wish you the same.

The flight characteristics in various weather conditions is not going to be super accurate when flight model processing gets about 2-4% of the CPU time and the rest goes to processing graphics, weather simulation, network streaming of scenery, etc.

P3D was probably the most capable in terms of being able to be de-couple the graphics from systems/physics simulation with CIGI (Pro version only).

It is interesting that so many of these MSFS “debates” focus on textures/graphics, but some get offended when others call it a game.

I think what “might” be a good idea for FSLabs is to publish the manual online for anyone to access, this will go a long way into answering questions for those interested in the aircraft and what is and isn’t simulated.  I think the potential buyers of more complex aircraft are likely to be manual readers … but that’s a big assumption.

Are there any good YouTube reviews out there? I haven’t found any so far, just a few streams. Kinda surprising since it’s been out a few days, usually you have a bunch of people reviewing it. 
 

would appreciate a link to a quality review (not a multi hour stream) if anyone has seen one. Doesn’t have to be YouTube, written reviews are fine as well 

I suppose not so many customers, so Blackbox711 is your choice for now.

1 hour ago, JonathanC said:

Are there any good YouTube reviews out there? I haven’t found any so far, just a few streams. Kinda surprising since it’s been out a few days, usually you have a bunch of people reviewing it. 
 

would appreciate a link to a quality review (not a multi hour stream) if anyone has seen one. Doesn’t have to be YouTube, written reviews are fine as well 

Written review from Katiepilot a few pages back.

56 minutes ago, Beardyman said:

I suppose not so many customers, so Blackbox711 is your choice for now.

There are two other streamers who did some pre release stuff that’s I’m aware of. I suppose a search on youtube or twitch should yield the results you’re after.

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

The flight characteristics in various weather conditions is not going to be super accurate when flight model processing gets about 2-4% of the CPU time and the rest goes to processing graphics, weather simulation, network streaming of scenery, etc.

I think you don't really understand how a game engine functions, how a graphic is rendered, how multi-threading and multi-core processing actually works to make this... dubious comment. it quite utterly makes very little sense.

A CPU cannot render graphics (to the degree a GPU does) and a GPU cannot compute math-intensive to the same degree a CPU can.

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

P3D was probably the most capable in terms of being able to be de-couple the graphics from systems/physics simulation with CIGI (Pro version only).

These things are already inherently decoupled in any modern game engine (just not physically like CIGI does), hell any modern application that has a UI. it's one of the core principles to creating a responsive UI by having it run on a seperate thread.

1 hour ago, ha5mvo said:

There are two other streamers who did some pre release stuff that’s I’m aware of. I suppose a search on youtube or twitch should yield the results you’re after.

Yeah you'd think so, but not really. Maybe after the weekend, I suppose the ones I follow (320Sim, V1, Easyjet etc) are testing it out right now and will publish soon. 

I did read KatiePilot's review and appreciated it, but I'm looking for a more "formal" review that goes over it in detail and compares it to other addons and so forth. 

BlackBox711 is on Leg 6 of the FSLabs and he gave his opinion so far:

He said as far as Flight Model he prefers the FSL. He says the flare simulation feels better. He goes on to say that Fenix has better sounds in his opinion. He then says that with regards to systems, Fenix and FSL are equal to him, but FSL pulls ahead with its MEL simulation. Finally he covers textures and says he doesn't mind the FSL textures, without saying if he thinks it's better or worse than FNX.

We're going to have to wait for someone to start pulling out the actual book numbers and do some hard line comparisons (fuel burn, V1 cuts, etc etc) but the two birds seem very close. On a personal note, I think Fenix takes it with its cabin and engine simulation, but those are personal preferences. I really really love the FSL MEL simulation. It's very immersive.