Well, I cannot use the A350 at all right now. The cockpit is frozen with some displays partially working, and no switch and no button is working. 😞 I even can't operate the EFB.

21 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Well yikes :), didn't see the Fenix vs iniBuilds drama coming 😅.

All I can say is, I wish no developer ever decides against working on something they are planning (or would love) to do, especially something that is going to take time to develop in order to be deeply simulated, just because another developer might be quicker to market with the same aircraft etc.
 

Yep, the only "bad look' Aamir was guilty of was being influenced by Inibuilds. I get it that this is a business at the end of the day and that to do it justice would have taken a long time in development but yeah ... i would have preferred having it done by Fenix over Inibuilds. Also the man is speaking on his own behalf. like it or not people are able to do that. Nothing he has stated appears to be factually incorrect so i personally don't have an issue with it. 

 

But here we are ...

33 minutes ago, Farlis said:

I think it's perfectly fine. But not at the price tag.

That is a valid point, and I agree. Unless iniBuilds plans to really build this out, it is at too high a price point and that is something i will consider more carefully in the future. 

35 minutes ago, FPVSteve said:

Also, regarding the ToLiss, we were assured addons on MSFS would be cheaper due to a larger market

And here is Flight Factor charging another $15 USD just for an Engine Expansion: 

As the OP from that thread said, quoted:

Quote

They charge $100 for the 200ER variant with 1 engine type and will be now charging an extra $20 on top for the other 2 which should've been included as part of the already expensive 200ER package.

You can cherry pick individual cases for MSFS, but you are being dishonest, or just misleading people, if you claim that MSFS add-on prices, on average, are not lower than XP or P3D prices. 

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by abrams_tank

How is performance in VR on 2024 with this aircraft ? Have a 4080 and 7800x3d

16 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

54 minutes ago, Cognita said:

The majority, are not engineers, not pilots, they are just people who want to experience what it might be like to pilot an aircraft on a mission from point A to point B. 

This is what Captain Sim counts on. 

Works for me. I've bought PMDG, Fenix, and various other such in the past, and may yet buy this. But I'm certainly in no rush - MSFS 2024 has so totally rejuvenated the whole low'n'slow environment that I feel no trace of my usual inclination to rush out and get this. It looks great, as a visual model, but I have no real love for airliners, and don't actually find the 350 particularly attractive. Feels a bit like the 787 to me, which is to say soulless in my eyes. Couldn't care less about systems depth myself, but will certainly wait for 2024 to settle down a bit more beforfe grabbing this aircraft.

21 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

This is what Captain Sim counts on. 

Yes, exactly, and they seem to be doing quite well. But to be fair to iniBuilds, there is a continuum of addons from the Bedek's and Captain Sim's to PMDG/FENIX and iniBuilds is a little further down that continuum.

20 minutes ago, Cognita said:

Unless iniBuilds plans to really build this out, it is at too high a price point and that is something i will consider more carefully in the future. 

They'll be adding a "host of new features" (I don't believe they said what they are yet) and the ULR variant for free sometime in Q2.

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by Tuskin38

Sometimes I can't help but feel that Ini is their own worst enemy.

There are things that they do very, very well and where they drive the market forward and set examples for others to follow.

For example the GSX integration in the A350 is a work of art that I would nominate for one the best implementations of such an external add on integration I have ever seen.

Also the maintenance part of their aircraft that they introduced with the A300, where tires and brakes wear down and you can see that in the visual model as well, so that you have to start paying attention on your landings, look at the brake wear indicator pins, the hydraulic and oil useage, that's all an ingeniuous idea that breathes life into their aircraft and I love that they carried this over from the A300 (I wish Microsoft had included that in their A330 Contract as well).

I see much love and attention to detail in their aircraft. 

But they also have a tendency to brush over other aspects of their aircraft just to have something on the market earlier.

The engine and pitch to power behaviour of the default A330 is an example of this. 

When it comes to how these aircraft fly, how the engines are modeled, what goes on in the background of the systems modelling, they often come across as unfinished and half baked.

And certainly not for lack of capabiltiy on their end, but just because the product manager decides: That's good enough.

Like Voltaire said: "Perfect is the enemy of good".

My impression is that IniBuilds so far always settled for just good. And they could be more than just good. They are just one final step away from playing along the big names of the study level designers like FSLABS, FENIX, Accusim and PMDG. But they just won't make that step.

That's frustrating to me as a customer who really enjoys the promise their products always show. 

 

I will say though that for an initial release I do see the progress they made, compared to the initial release of the A300 in MSFS. Not only in terms of features, but also stability and performance. So I will give them that.

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by Farlis

44 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

You can cherry pick individual cases for MSFS, but you are being dishonest, or just misleading people, if you claim that MSFS add-on prices, on average, are not lower than XP or P3D prices. 

Okay, well then let's see (all taxes included, prices in GBP) with some comparable addons across simulators.

MSFS

• Fenix A320 = £49.99
• PMDG 737-800 = £55.26
• TFDI MD-11 = £55.31
• Leonardo MD82 = £74.58
• Inibuilds A350 = £72
• PMDG 777 = £74.99

Average: £63.69 with PMDG 737
Average: £65.37 without PMDG 737 (if excluding Zibo below)

 

X-Plane

• Toliss A320neo = £73
• Zibo 737-800 = £0
• Rotate MD-11 = £66.51
• Rotate MD80 = £47.50
• FFA350 = £51.45
• FF777 = £70.52

Average: £51.50 (including Zibo)
Average: £61.80 (excluding Zibo)

 

I don't think I'm being dishonest at all.

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by FPVSteve

43 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Y aquí está Flight Factor cobrando otros $15 USD solo por una expansión de motor: 

Como dijo el OP de ese hilo, citado :

Puedes seleccionar casos individuales para MSFS, pero estás siendo deshonesto o simplemente engañando a la gente si afirmas que los precios de los complementos de MSFS, en promedio , no son más bajos que los precios de XP o P3D. 

Very bad comparison included with the engine pack in comparison, money vs depth of simulation the FF is much cheaper

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by Aglos77

5 minutes ago, FPVSteve said:

Okay, well then let's see (all taxes included, prices in GBP) with some comparable addons across simulators.

MSFS

• Fenix A320 = £49.99
• TFDI MD-11 = £55.31
• Leonardo MD82 = £74.58
• Inibuilds A350 = £72

Average: £62.97

 

X-Plane

• Toliss A320neo = £73
• Rotate MD-11 = £66.51
• Rotate MD80 = £47.50
• FFA350 = £51.45

Average: £59.61

 

 

You are so selective in your choices! LOL Why wouldn't you plug something like this to your "equation " 

https://store.x-plane.org/FlightFactor-777-200ER-v2-Ultimate_p_1883.html

or this

https://store.x-plane.org/FlightFactor-777-200EREE-v2-Ultimate_p_1989.html

... I just did.

The price at the end is what each of us is willing to pay, for me for example the CL650 is the cheapest aircraft I have ever bought if I do the calculation euro + enjoyment + hours used, I think discussing prices is a bit silly.

What I wanted to know is what level of depth they had simulated the a350 because I had serious doubts from the beginning, first because as much as it weighs more than one Inibuilds is neither FSLabs, nor Fenix or Leonardo (although they can always surprise us) and secondly because an a350 is a very complex aircraft to simulate and very difficult to get information to make a first level simulation.

I'm sure many people will enjoy it, others will surely be a bit disappointed, but I'm clear that this is not a plane for me, even if it were free I wouldn't fly it.

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by Aglos77

If you consider FS as a game, then take the A350, it is very beautiful graphically, super fun and it will bring you a lot of pleasure, but do not look for fidelity.
If you are looking for an aircraft worthy of a professional simulator, thinking (rightly or wrongly) that Microsoft/Asobo offers you a "real" simulator, then prefer the Fenix A320.

But what I can say with certainty is that no software company is able to produce an aircraft or a simulator reproducing identically the tens of thousands of parameters of a real liner.
These simulators require teams of highly qualified engineers working for years on this project, and no software manufacturer can afford it.
The expression "study level" means nothing.
It is part of this jargon which allows to sell dreams.
And we do not all have the same dreams, that is why competition is very useful.

The main thing is therefore to have fun, without taking yourself too seriously and above all, without listening to the sirens of "influencers" on YT, real or false pilots, who do not always seek objectivity and intellectual honesty but more certainly profit.
😉