@JonathanC
The problem with Toliss isn't just the textures: it's the 3D modeling of the entire airplane, which, unfortunately, is far inferior to the Fenix. 😥

I saw the video of the new update released by Fenix a few hours ago, and for once, if you'll allow me, I'd like you all to watch it, in absolute tranquility, peace, relaxation, harmony, and sporting spirit.
No flames, no sides, no polemics, please. 🖐️
Let's show ourselves that we're capable of admiring and applauding even "opponent" products when those products deserve it. 🙂

What can I say? This new Fenix is a true masterpiece, a feast for the eyes, with modeling currently unmatched by Toliss models.

I absolutely love Toliss!! 💙
They're the airliner I've flown the most in years!! ✈️
It's certainly not my intention to discredit Toliss, but I very sportingly acknowledge that the Fenix Airbus is far superior in terms of modeling and texturing (and no slouch when it comes to avionics, either).

So... yes... I stand up and give him a well-deserved round of applause. 👏👏

It would be great if Toliss and Fenix collaborated to improve "our" Airbus for Xplane.
Toliss avionics, Fenix modeling and texturing.
It would be another masterpiece.
But maybe I'm overdoing it with my imagination. ☺️

Edited July 29, 2025Jul 29 by efis007

20 minutes ago, efis007 said:

@JonathanC
The problem with Toliss isn't just the textures: it's the 3D modeling of the entire airplane, which, unfortunately, is far inferior to the Fenix. 😥

I saw the video of the new update released by Fenix a few hours ago, and for once, if you'll allow me, I'd like you all to watch it, in absolute tranquility, peace, relaxation, harmony, and sporting spirit.
No flames, no sides, no polemics, please. 🖐️
Let's show ourselves that we're capable of admiring and applauding even "opponent" products when those products deserve it. 🙂

What can I say? This new Fenix is a true masterpiece, a feast for the eyes, with modeling currently unmatched by Toliss models.

I absolutely love Toliss!! 💙
They're the airliner I've flown the most in years!! ✈️
It's certainly not my intention to discredit Toliss, but I very sportingly acknowledge that the Fenix Airbus is far superior in terms of modeling and texturing (and no slouch when it comes to avionics, either).

So... yes... I stand up and give him a well-deserved round of applause. 👏👏

It would be great if Toliss and Fenix collaborated to improve "our" Airbus for Xplane.
Toliss avionics, Fenix modeling and texturing.
It would be another masterpiece.
But maybe I'm overdoing it with my imagination. ☺️

Just imagine the outrage if someone from here heaped as much praise as you have just done, on an X-Plane product in the other forums.  

As a matter of fact, I challenge you to do it.  Pick your favorite X-Plane add on and let it rip in the other forums.  Let's see if they can admire and applaud opponent products when they deserve it.

😆

Edited July 29, 2025Jul 29 by GoranM

1 hour ago, efis007 said:

It would be great if Toliss and Fenix collaborated to improve "our" Airbus for Xplane.

It may be that the in progress Toliss-Aerosoft collaboration for MSFS bears fruit for XP, as well. 

1 hour ago, efis007 said:

even "opponent" products

The Fenix team has done an outstanding job with this aircraft. It’s one of the most complete and immersive airliners I’ve seen in desktop flight sim, and it’s exciting to see that level of quality becoming more common.

While my personal preference leans toward X-Plane—mainly because of its flight modelling, weather engine, and the way it handles clouds, I really enjoy seeing great aircraft like this push the whole hobby forward. Each sim has its strengths, and it's a great time to be involved in flight simulation with so much passion and innovation on all sides.

Edited July 29, 2025Jul 29 by MrBitstFlyer

1 hour ago, GoranM said:

Just imagine the outrage if someone from here heaped as much praise as you have just done, on an X-Plane product in the other forums.  

As a matter of fact, I challenge you to do it.  Pick your favorite X-Plane add on and let it rip in the other forums.  Let's see if they can admire and applaud opponent products when they deserve it.

😆

Seems like a good candidate might be the Flight Factor 777 compared to PMDG’s version. 

esp given how much some MSFS folks like to disparage PMDG. 😮

sadly, I’ve still neither addon so I can’t be the one to poke the bear 😜

1 hour ago, GoranM said:

As a matter of fact, I challenge you to do it.  Pick your favorite X-Plane add on and let it rip in the other forums.

No no no 🙈 .... better not to do it!! 😂

9 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Seems like a good candidate might be the Flight Factor 777 compared to PMDG’s version. 

It'd definitely have to be 2 worthy products that need to be compared.  Like you, I have neither of them, but I'm sure there are some worthy competitors.

9 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

esp given how much some MSFS folks like to disparage PMDG.

Indeed.  Although I like to give PMDG their props.  It's safe to say flight simming has seen the emergence and rise of "study level" add ons because of PMDG's earlier products.  Namely the 744 and 737 series.  Many people seem to forget this.

9 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

sadly, I’ve still neither addon so I can’t be the one to poke the bear

I think anyone who is well informed of what happens on both sides of the fence won't be willing to poke the bear.  It's just a shame that it's heavily one sided.  

So far, no one has objected to efis' post.  And I think it's obvious as to why.

I certainly don't mind the comparisons.  I actually enjoy scrutinizing all models and textures.  But it's unlikely we'll see the same kind of post on the other forums.

Edited July 29, 2025Jul 29 by GoranM

10 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Seems like a good candidate might be the Flight Factor 777 compared to PMDG’s version. 

The FF777v2 has always seemed like an excellent product to me.
Even though I haven't had a good relationship with FF and its A320 in the past, I remember watching several videos of the new 777, and it seemed to me to be of a decidedly high standard, absolutely comparable to the PMDG.
In my opinion, they're both very good (though I can't really say, as I don't own them).

20 hours ago, JonathanC said:

I'm hoping someone from Toliss is reading this - I for one am very willing to pay for a "Texture Upgrade Pack" or something like that, which will make your amazing planes look even better.. as XP 12  continues to improve lighting and general graphical fidelity, it starts to show the limitations of the older textures. I fly the Fenix in MSFS, and today they released an update that makes it look even better than it did before. 

So yeah, I appreciate that it takes time and money to rework textures for the new XP 12 engine or lighting or whatever is required, but please do consider it. I personally will be happy to pay a fair price (for me, that would be around 25% of the full price of the aircraft, but of course you know your audience and pricing better than I do). 

5 hours ago, Franz007 said:

For me the textures of the A320-series are quite ok to be honest. I would only wish a bit better ones for their A330 and A340, although it’s for me really not the most important.

Quite a few options for the 32x series out there:

https://forums.x-plane.org/files/file/91558-toliss-a32f-cockpit-texture-replacement/

https://forums.x-plane.org/files/file/89835-enhanced-cockpit-texture-for-toliss320neo/

https://forum.thresholdx.net/files/file/3738-toliss-airbus-a320-family-cockpit-texture-mod-v20-for-xp11-xp12/

https://forums.x-plane.org/files/file/94857-toliss-a319-old-aircraft-cockpit-textures-with-wear-and-tear-xp11xp12/

https://forum.thresholdx.net/files/file/3939-factory-new-a321-xlr-cockpit-tristar-productions/

 

Can't find anything for the A330 or 340.

Looking at the texture file structure, all labels and details like screw heads are on textures separate from the panels, so one does not have to create anything from scratch or resort to Substance Painter or Blender, if knows Photoshop a bit. The RGBA channels of the NML maps can also be adjusted with Photoshop to control properties like material glossiness.

3 minutes ago, Bjoern said:

Quite a few options for the 32x series out there:

https://forums.x-plane.org/files/file/91558-toliss-a32f-cockpit-texture-replacement/

https://forums.x-plane.org/files/file/89835-enhanced-cockpit-texture-for-toliss320neo/

https://forum.thresholdx.net/files/file/3738-toliss-airbus-a320-family-cockpit-texture-mod-v20-for-xp11-xp12/

https://forums.x-plane.org/files/file/94857-toliss-a319-old-aircraft-cockpit-textures-with-wear-and-tear-xp11xp12/

https://forum.thresholdx.net/files/file/3939-factory-new-a321-xlr-cockpit-tristar-productions/

 

Can't find anything for the A330 or 340.

Looking at the texture file structure, all labels and details like screw heads are on textures separate from the panels, so one does not have to create anything from scratch or resort to Substance Painter or Blender, if knows Photoshop a bit. The RGBA channels of the NML maps can also be adjusted with Photoshop to control properties like material glossiness.

Thanks! I didn't think to look for user-created mods. I'd still prefer a native implementation, but certainly these may help.

6 minutes ago, JonathanC said:

Thanks! I didn't think to look for user-created mods. I'd still prefer a native implementation, but certainly these may help.

These should be good to go until ToLiss remodels their cockpit or changes the texture mapping in any way.

5 hours ago, GoranM said:

It'd definitely have to be 2 worthy products that need to be compared.  Like you, I have neither of them, but I'm sure there are some worthy competitors.

Indeed.  Although I like to give PMDG their props.  It's safe to say flight simming has seen the emergence and rise of "study level" add ons because of PMDG's earlier products.  Namely the 744 and 737 series.  Many people seem to forget this.

I think anyone who is well informed of what happens on both sides of the fence won't be willing to poke the bear.  It's just a shame that it's heavily one sided.  

So far, no one has objected to efis' post.  And I think it's obvious as to why.

I certainly don't mind the comparisons.  I actually enjoy scrutinizing all models and textures.  But it's unlikely we'll see the same kind of post on the other forums.

Yes, I agree.

And it's not as if Toliss texture/graphics haven't been put forward as Areas Needing Improvement before. AFAIK that's about all I can remember being criticized for the Toliss products.

Sadly, it seems like it's become "cool" to disparage PMDG, desspite the good work they've done over so many years. I can say from personal experience that it was an absolute No Brainer to go with PMDG's 747 back in P3D. It was definitely state of the art, and AFAIK, no other 747 in any other sim came close. And that is, AFAIK, really still the case.

Agree in re Efis' post. It's fair game to say that the Par level for graphics has been significantly raised in the last 5-7 years.

Yep - there's a lot of defensiveness in re MSFS over there. Nobody's willing to call out the Emporers New Clothes (unless discussing PMDG!! )

 

@efis007

 

12 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Sadly, it seems like it's become "cool" to disparage PMDG, desspite the good work they've done over so many years. I can say from personal experience that it was an absolute No Brainer to go with PMDG's 747 back in P3D. It was definitely state of the art, and AFAIK, no other 747 in any other sim came close. And that is, AFAIK, really still the case.

Back in the FS9 days, I was disappointed to see that the PMDG 747 had a totally unrealistic behaviour in certain edge of the envelope situations (e.g. OEI stall), whereas the LVL-D B767 behaved convincingly and flawlessly in all the situations I could put it through, possibly even better than a real Level-D simulator! This gave me the idea that PMDG was maybe a bit overhyped, whereas the less glamorous people at LVL-D showed a remarkable attention to quality in small but important details.

At the same time, I am now aware that only "OCD"-simmers like me and @jcomm are really fixated on flight model details like these, which are justifiedly of no significance to most simmers. So PMDG has certainly always made products which are overall state of the art, yet their popularity  often tends to obscure other designers that show more attention to specific details.

13 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

I can say from personal experience that it was an absolute No Brainer to go with PMDG's 747 back in P3D. It was definitely state of the art, and AFAIK, no other 747 in any other sim came close. And that is, AFAIK, really still the case.

While I do agree with you to some extent this is what jon b had to say about PMDG and iFly’s 747 for P3D.

I owned them both and think both were great.

Sorry for the off topic. 

3 hours ago, Murmur said:

Back in the FS9 days, I was disappointed to see that the PMDG 747 had a totally unrealistic behaviour in certain edge of the envelope situations (e.g. OEI stall), whereas the LVL-D B767 behaved convincingly and flawlessly in all the situations I could put it through, possibly even better than a real Level-D simulator!

Absolutely agree.
The LevelD 767 was truly a remarkable product for its time.
I'm lucky enough to still have it with FS9 and fly it every now and then, and every time I'm amazed not only by the avionics accuracy but especially by the flight dynamics.
Hand-piloted, it handles masterfully, flies like a dream, and truly feels like flying an "X-plane inside FS9." 😲
A truly beautiful airplane.
The LevelD's only flaw was the main panel graphics, which were quite pitiful (the PMDG 747's were a little better, though not by much), and it wasn't in widescreen format.