April 1Apr 1 18 minutes ago, DavidP said: I'm going to buck the trend here. I totally agree - I want this to be the best possible version of a cool plane you could possibly get. In an ideal world everything should be Fenix-level quality. But at the end of the day I'm just happy we get a solid, lovely representation of a historic jet. I can see it being a bit of a risky undertaking to take on and I'm glad someone is willing to take that risk. Same with Just Flight, and other devs like Red Wing that are willing to preserve history.
April 1Apr 1 4 hours ago, Krakin said: That's a strange take considering iniBuilds made the A300 and A310 for X-Plane before they made the jump to MSFS. The Inibuilds MSFS A300 initial product release was a total disaster with numerous sim breaking bugs. It had trouble staying in the air and not completely nose diving. As if MS/Asobo/IniBuilds just said screw any sort of Quality Control testing... Asus Maximus X Hero Z370/ Windows 10 MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled) 8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled) 32GB DDR4 3000 Ram 500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2
April 1Apr 1 54 minutes ago, blueshark747 said: The Inibuilds MSFS A300 initial product release was a total disaster with numerous sim breaking bugs. It had trouble staying in the air and not completely nose diving. As if MS/Asobo/IniBuilds just said screw any sort of Quality Control testing... Why are you involving MS/Asobo when the A300 was a standalone payware release? 5800X3D. 32 GB RAM. 1TB SATA SSD. 3TB HDD. RX 9070XT.
April 1Apr 1 Personally, I think the OP reflects completely unrealistic expectations for a $50 consumer entertainment release. If everything on that SOP list was implemented, it would probably cost $249 and take 8 years to develop. Few users would even value that degree of SOP depiction. Most users, I expect, will look for a reasonably realistic start up flow, and for the aircraft to fly from A to B in a reasonably convincing fashion, with pleasant modelling, textures and sound. Notice I keep using the term reasonably. It's not reasonable to expect the stated degree of pure systems replication - given the price point and target audience. Edited April 1Apr 1 by JYW Bill 😎FS2024 • Currently in 'GA mode' : A2A Comanche 2024 & Aerostar • Black Square C208, Bonanzas, Barons, TBM850, Dukes • COWS DA40 & DA42 • FSW Legacy, C24R Sierra & C414 • Echo Falco F8L • FFX HJET, Visionjet and P180 2024 • Got Friends A32 Vixxen • FSReborn Sirius TL3000, Sting S4 and Piper M500 • Flyboy Rans S6S • Skyward DA50RG • SWS Zenith CH701, RV-8, RV-10, RV-14, PC12 • Milviz C310R • Air Foil Labs Bristell B23 TrackIR • BeyondATC • PMS GTN Payware • RealTurb • Axis & Ohs • FS Realistic Pro9800X3D • RTX 3080 • 64GB DDR5-6000NPPL licence holder in the UK
April 1Apr 1 57 minutes ago, Krakin said: Why are you involving MS/Asobo when the A300 was a standalone payware release? It was also another issue of poor Marketplace vetting and quality control involving MS/Asobo's process as well. Of course years later we've learned that same "Marketplace quality/security vetting process" is a myth💡 Edited April 1Apr 1 by blueshark747 Asus Maximus X Hero Z370/ Windows 10 MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled) 8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled) 32GB DDR4 3000 Ram 500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2
April 2Apr 2 24 minutes ago, blueshark747 said: It was also another issue of poor Marketplace vetting and quality control involving MS/Asobo's process as well. Of course years later we've learned that same "Marketplace quality/security vetting process" is a myth💡 It was released in December 2023 and only hit the marketplace in February 2024 so my question remains. 5800X3D. 32 GB RAM. 1TB SATA SSD. 3TB HDD. RX 9070XT.
April 2Apr 2 3 hours ago, Farlis said: Then why were the same aircraft in the MSFS versions so half baked in system depth? I haven’t ever seen the A300 described as half-baked. Poorly optimized…? Oh yeah. (Which they just fixed in a recent update). The A310 is, as stated, a free/Default aircraft. So we kinda expect those to be mid fidelity at best. And from what I heard, the A310 was one of the better Defaults for a long time. Im comfortable saying you’re off base here. 🤙 Edited April 2Apr 2 by UrgentSiesta
April 2Apr 2 2 hours ago, blueshark747 said: The Inibuilds MSFS A300 initial product release was a total disaster with numerous sim breaking bugs. It had trouble staying in the air and not completely nose diving. As if MS/Asobo/IniBuilds just said screw any sort of Quality Control testing... One could say the same thing about the A350, too. 🤷♂️ Ine thing I’ve noticed is that a good deal of “launch hysteria” comes from people who don’t necessarily know how to fly the plane. For eg, this was VERY true of the iniBuilds A400.
April 2Apr 2 The OP posted this on inibuilds forum, and they were receptive to it. They always are, really. The 340 has only gotten better since its launch, I have no doubt the 1011 will too. I had a blast flying it into Kai Tak yesterday and I’m excited I get to keep doing that for years after never having a good TriStar.
April 2Apr 2 53 minutes ago, ATRguy said: The OP posted this on inibuilds forum, and they were receptive to it. They always are, really. The 340 has only gotten better since its launch, I have no doubt the 1011 will too. I had a blast flying it into Kai Tak yesterday and I’m excited I get to keep doing that for years after never having a good TriStar. Sometimes I feel like people are so traumatized by the PMDG forums that they ascribe that level of petty censorship to every dev. There are people posting WASM crash memes on the inibuilds discord and they don't get banned, do people really think they ban people for constructive feedback? 7800X3D - RTX 5080 - 64GB DDR5 - Dan C4-SFX
April 2Apr 2 I think in fairness to Inibuilds, they did not claim for this sim to be a study sim capable of replicating all procedural aspects of flying the Tristar unless I missed something in their promotional materials. Their marketing of the product certainly promotes a lot of system functionality being present, but to me this does not claim something it isnt or doesnt do. If the feedback is going to be used by Inibuilds , then I thank @Joshua757 for taking the time to list the discrepancies he discovered and having those fixed which will benefit many simmers. 👍 As for the claim that Inibulids is unethical as quoted by @Aglos77 in the post above, I think this steps beyond what I think is fair. Sure, its OK to be frustrated with a product that has bugs, but I dont believe their practices are dishonest or immoral or unprofessional. You could say their product may have been rushed to market perhaps prematurely however it doesn't rise to the level of being unethical in my opinion. Lets be thankful that we have a product of this quality in MSFS2024 for one of the historic 70's airliners. Its been a long time coming. As with other Inibuilds products ,they are actively working on providing updates to a number of their products, so I am sure there will some attention paid to improving the quality and fly-ability of the Tristar even further. I do look forward to purchasing this product directly from Inibuilds in the coming months as I will not purchase from the MS Marketplace. Keep the reviews coming. 😀 Happy landings! SpoilerSystem specs: MFG Crosswind pedals| ACE B747 yoke |Honeycomb Bravo throttleNow built: P3Dv5.3HF2: Intel i5-12600K @4.8Ghz | MSI Z690-A PRO | Asus Dual RTX 4070 Super OC 12Gb| 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200Mhz |Samsung 980Evo Pro PCIe 500Gb | WD Black SN850 PCIe 2Tb | WD SA510 4Tb |beQuiet 802 Tower Case|Corsair RM850 PSU | Acer Predator X34P 3440x1440pMark AldridgeMSFS2024 SU5 & P3D v5.3 HF2
April 2Apr 2 1 hour ago, Peterwk said: Clickbait. Yep. This whole thing here is clickbait. Shilling for views, likes and subscribes on AVSIM. "That's what" - She
April 2Apr 2 18 hours ago, Farlis said: Then why were the same aircraft in the MSFS versions so half baked in system depth? For the A310 at least it may be because MS were hiring them on what was presumably a fixed price contract so they simply had a hard limit of how much time they could spend and still make a profit.
April 2Apr 2 15 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said: I haven’t ever seen the A300 described as half-baked. Poorly optimized…? Oh yeah. (Which they just fixed in a recent update). The A310 is, as stated, a free/Default aircraft. So we kinda expect those to be mid fidelity at best. And from what I heard, the A310 was one of the better Defaults for a long time. Im comfortable saying you’re off base here. 🤙 When compared to the systems depth of the X-Plane A300 ini made the MSFS version comes off extremely poorly Edited April 2Apr 2 by Matchstick
April 2Apr 2 16 hours ago, JYW said: Personally, I think the OP reflects completely unrealistic expectations for a $50 consumer entertainment release. If everything on that SOP list was implemented, it would probably cost $249 and take 8 years to develop. Few users would even value that degree of SOP depiction. Most users, I expect, will look for a reasonably realistic start up flow, and for the aircraft to fly from A to B in a reasonably convincing fashion, with pleasant modelling, textures and sound. Notice I keep using the term reasonably. It's not reasonable to expect the stated degree of pure systems replication - given the price point and target audience. PMDG are doing it for sure, and I’d bet Fenix and probably Leonardo are as well. E.g., Randazzo made a fairly big deal about being able to run comprehensive Functional Check Flight procedures on the 777. So, about 50% more than the 1011. and Fenix were able to get there in 4-5 years. I’ve already said the 1011 shouldnt be at that level, but it’s really not that much more work (relatively speaking).
Create an account or sign in to comment