How good is Qualitywings 787 ?

[UrgentSiesta]

On 3/10/2025 at 1:43 AM, ywg256 said:

Why does msfs have to get dragged into this when we are talking P3D addon aircraft? It is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

It's not irrelevant at all. The guy is asking whether he should buy it and how it compares to PMDG.

The answers are resounding, No's & Doesnt's.

The reason is that the dev team disbanded, the product is no longer supported, etc., 

And the overwhelming reason for THAT has been the utter annihilation of the P3D addon market due to MSFS' popularity.

He's also getting good advice in that if he wants a decent quality 787 (by today's standards), he's not going to find it for Prepar3D.

My advice is that if he wants a Hi Fi airliner, he's better off avoiding the QW and choosing a dev team that is at least still around.

But if he truly wants a decent 787 (IMHO one should never chase a particular airframe, but rather choose a particular experience), the best advice we can give him is to guide him in the direction of that which he seeks.

[ywg256]

5 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

It's not irrelevant at all. The guy is asking whether he should buy it and how it compares to PMDG.

The answers are resounding, No's & Doesnt's.

The reason is that the dev team disbanded, the product is no longer supported, etc., 

And the overwhelming reason for THAT has been the utter annihilation of the P3D addon market due to MSFS' popularity.

He's also getting good advice in that if he wants a decent quality 787 (by today's standards), he's not going to find it for Prepar3D.

My advice is that if he wants a Hi Fi airliner, he's better off avoiding the QW and choosing a dev team that is at least still around.

But if he truly wants a decent 787 (IMHO one should never chase a particular airframe, but rather choose a particular experience), the best advice we can give him is to guide him in the direction of that which he seeks.

And if he doesn't have/want MSFS then what is the answer? I didn't see him say anything about MSFS once.

[UrgentSiesta]

18 hours ago, ywg256 said:

And if he doesn't have/want MSFS then what is the answer? I didn't see him say anything about MSFS once.

Do we want to help people who are asking for advice, or do we prefer blind dogma...?

[Zatoichi]

On 3/8/2025 at 10:51 AM, Beardyman said:

Just wondering if purchase or not, so my question - is it comparable to PMDG birds ( performance and complexity ), any major issue still lingers ?

I see no query regarding MSFS. 

[DChockey08]

Has anyone been able to get it to work in v6? 

Still get the very-dark displays issue that clearly seems to be a shader issue. 

[ywg256]

34 minutes ago, Zatoichi said:

I see no query regarding MSFS. 

That's my point...Why suggest product for another platform he doesn't seem to suggest owning or wanting to own and while he is in the P3D forum...That doesn't help him at all. If he brought up MSFS then a completely different story. Some people fail to miss the details...

 

2 minutes ago, DChockey08 said:

Has anyone been able to get it to work in v6? 

Still get the very-dark displays issue that clearly seems to be a shader issue. 

I haven't found anywhere from anyone yet in my searches of anyone having solved this issue. Pretty much one of the main reasons I didn't bother with v6. That and FlyTampa texture issues at CYYZ amongst other sceneries.

[CAP1234]

18 hours ago, ywg256 said:

hat's my point...Why suggest product for another platform he doesn't seem to suggest owning or wanting to own and while he is in the P3D forum...That doesn't help him at all. If he brought up MSFS then a completely different story. Some people fail to miss the details...

No one is asking/forcing anyone to get MSFS - it is just a suggestion to OP as to where they can get the better quality 787 and how to best utilize and get their money's worth. QW is dead - anyone making new purchases needs to really reconsider whether it is right product, As I previously mentioned there is going to be no further updates to their 787 on P3D. 

[ywg256]

5 hours ago, CAP1234 said:

No one is asking/forcing anyone to get MSFS - it is just a suggestion to OP as to where they can get the better quality 787 and how to best utilize and get their money's worth. QW is dead - anyone making new purchases needs to really reconsider whether it is right product, As I previously mentioned there is going to be no further updates to their 787 on P3D. 

Is the "better quality" 787 for P3D? If it isn't and for MSFS which he didn't even mention, then yes...you are asking for the OP to get MSFS.

[Boomer]

I have it and the grafix are not great in P3D but maybe thats more of a P3D thing...much of the cickpit is hard to read.

Also bear in mind support is gone.

Should you get it?  No.  Mainly because support is gone.

[UrgentSiesta]

5 hours ago, ywg256 said:

Is the "better quality" 787 for P3D? If it isn't and for MSFS which he didn't even mention, then yes...you are asking for the OP to get MSFS.

My goodness!

We're NOT asking him to get MSFS. We're advising him NOT to get the QW!!!!

As I (and others) said ALREADY, the QW is NOT as good as the PMDG in P3D. Which was his direct question, right? Right...???

The advice is that if he wants some things as good as PMDG, he should stick with PMDG. While they're no longer selling new P3D licenses, they are still around (unlike QW), and (allegedly) still supporting their P3D product line.

He could also go for FS Labs in P3D. They are also a Study Level dev team who is still actually in business (unlike QW), and who are still (allegedly) supporting their P3D product line (unlike QW).

But he didn't ask about Airbus, did he...?

No, he asked about Boeing's. And specifically about 787's.

And if a 787 is truly what his heart desires, he should go to MSFS rather than give money to a company that no longer exists for a product that hasn't been updated in half a DECADE.

Anything less is just Sour Grapes bad advice by someone who can't adjust to reality.

And Im justified in saying that because I'm still an avid fan of P3D who regularly flies a couple of outstanding add-ons there that (still) don't exist for any other simulator.

Edited April 3 by UrgentSiesta

[Luis Hernandez]

13 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

While they're no longer selling new P3D licenses

There are some versions of the 777 and 747 available at Aerosoft: https://www.aerosoft.com/us/shop/flight/p3d-fsx/prepar3d/aircraft/

I think we all can agree the 772 would be the closest to the 787 regarding mission profile.

[CO2Neutral]

On 4/2/2025 at 9:03 PM, UrgentSiesta said:

the QW is NOT as good as the PMDG in P3

PMDG don't have a 787?

On 4/2/2025 at 9:03 PM, UrgentSiesta said:

And if a 787 is truly what his heart desires, he should go to MSFS rather than give money to a company that no longer exists for a product that hasn't been updated in half a DECADE.

QW 787 is considerably more functional than the MSFS 787.  I think you are making an assumption the OP requires product updates?  The QW 787 doesn't need any product updates to be functional.

 

[ywg256]

On 4/4/2025 at 1:48 PM, CO2Neutral said:

PMDG don't have a 787?

QW 787 is considerably more functional than the MSFS 787.  I think you are making an assumption the OP requires product updates?  The QW 787 doesn't need any product updates to be functional.

 

Exactly. I use the 787 and it's just fine. No need to suggest him to move on to MSFS. Doesn't make sense. Who cares if they haven't updated it. Are the FT sceneries or FB for P3D considered junk cuz they don't update their sceneries any longer? Bizarre world.... I guess with hardly any updates from anyone we should all just forget about P3D and go to MSFS....

Edited April 5 by ywg256

[UrgentSiesta]

On 4/4/2025 at 8:48 AM, CO2Neutral said:

PMDG don't have a 787?

QW 787 is considerably more functional than the MSFS 787.  I think you are making an assumption the OP requires product updates?  The QW 787 doesn't need any product updates to be functional.

 

You're being obtuse (hopefully intentionally).

[CO2Neutral]

4 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

obtuse

What is "annoyingly insensitive" or "slow to understand"?

The OPs original post is "How good is Qualitywings 787" ... your response was "And if a 787 is truly what his heart desires, he should go to MSFS".  So you think diverting a user to MSFS 787 somehow answers the question of "How good is Qualitywings 787"?

I'm not going resort to naming calling, but you really have provided exactly ZERO context relative to the OPs question.