Cameron XA

Of course. It's not so simple for them (Laminar) at this time. Until the SDK can open up some more I would not expect much. We have to work within the confines of what's allowed via the SDK. We've pushed the limits for now.

I took the plunge and purchased this product today. I don't share the same thoughts as others here as to the accuracy of the systems (especially on the FMC), though I do see how it can be fun. Pros: Much nicer texturing and 3D than the 757/777 Good interior sounds Pretty cool setting options in the "iPad" Coolish exterior reflection Maybe I didn't try hard enough, but I didn't have the FMC cause a CTD, so +1 for that Quite good FPS! Cons: FMS has very evident issues/lacking accurate procedure selection or even features, or things are implemented but not in a completely 767/Boeing-true way (the list here is actually somewhat long and I could care less to list it all). Not so great exterior sounds Why a rotating exterior beacon? Should be a quick strobe QC was evidently lacking in numerous liveries, but I'm sure third party guys will solve this Wish it came with better manuals from a customer perspective. A massive FCOM is not exactly what I want as a simmer Worth the purchase? I think many will still be quite happy and I'd say it's important to still support the developers and show some support, so buy it. I wish it were a bit more immersive (for me), but it's not a horrible simulation or experience overall. I think for me I simply get let down a bit when a product doesn't truthfully simulate a lot of what it's assumed to do with pure accuracy as a "Professional" series labeled product and price tagged at near $70 USD. Hopefully as time goes on the FMS will improve in this regard. One can hope, right?

Why don't you list what you didn't like on the 757 so others can address here if that's been resolved in the 767? Seems to me most feel this is a level up in quality over the 757/777. I don't really understand your post here...are you saying they are just too similar, or you're in fear of the quality level due to a prior purchase? If it's the latter I am NOT the person you should be listening too. I don't have the 767. But, in real life they are essentially close to the same cockpit.

Sweet! Hope this is true. The 767 is one of my all-time favorite aircraft. I remember way back when the LVL D 767 came out I just had to get MSFS to fly that plane. Gave me a lot of fun times on VATSIM, too! X-Plane has needed this airliner for a long time, so this is welcomed news if things are looking top form. I would expect it to look the same, Paul. They pretty much do in real life too. :wink:

What are you...a magician? :wink: Well, of course I am. Some dude says "X-Pilots" and you make some funky remark probably eluding to a specific site for which I am a part of when you take a letter out of the word (which he may or may not know of, and likely meant XP people). But, you didn't answer anything. It's more of the same drivel from prior posts in the topic. I don't have anything against you. Don't even know you, really, but I'm curious as to your comments in this thread. I'm trying to get you to clarify, because if you're about to be making false statements we have a problem.

Care to enlighten, because I'm still mystified? On another note, I'm also getting a chuckle at the topic here overall. Sometimes I wonder if devs could just slap an FMC on anything and say, "Welp, this is just like the real thing," and folks would just eat that statement up and believe it (in fact, I'm partially convinced of such). Some of you guys seem so passionate to have wanted certain add-ons that you'll fight to the grave if someone with knowledge or even opinion comes in to say their side against it. Apparently against even people who are even qualified (like a dispatcher, or another airline captain). I have not flown the MD80 in real life. I can't comment to its realism, but I have now seen multiple people say it's unrealistic, and others say it's the cats' pajamas. Many of us really aren't even qualified to say the FDE is realistic (though the Rotate MD80 certainly gives me the immersion of what I would think it would feel like). That said, I will say that I find it hard to believe this product could have every bit of accuracy. It was about 1.5 years in development I believe, and we compare to something like IXEG which is in year 5, or even PMDG who takes quite a number or years to get something out. I think it's evident this is not true study level on the systems simulation. It's a nice 3D model, great textures, cool feeling flight dynamics, etc. with a level of assumed functionality, but not to the 'T'. I think we'd all be kidding ourselves if we think we could learn this product and how it works, then go to the real MD80 and try to apply it there. And, I'm not so sure Rotate has tried to sell it that way either. I have the MD80. I think the 3D exterior modeling is superb, as is the texture detail. My knowledge stops there. While I cannot speak for its authenticity in systems simulations, I do enjoy it for what it is. Case in point, stop getting so wound up when someone who desires the technical systems accuracy sees flaws where you don't want to see it. If you already enjoy it for what it is, cool...do just that. But, you aren't everyone, and everyone is not you.

And so we're all clear here, Laminar does not make access to this readily available at this time. Further, such integration with things like XSquawkbox gets even more complicated due to their bizarre NDA. Time will tell, but there's a reason practically no one has tackled this, and it's not because folks/coders are inept.

There were a ton of people involved in prior projects as well.

:ph34r:

Just remember December 23rd is approaching quite fast and after that time your upgrade window closes. :wink:

Given the discussions I have had by a very significant publisher in the MSFS market, that is a very easy "yes" to PMDG. Don't get me wrong, '15ish' planes will make you a living. It will NOT come close to a single PMDG release combined. How that will carry over to X-Plane? Unknown since PMDG is not there yet, but if it's anything like we've already seen with airliners then the answer remains the same I believe. The sales stats of PMDG in the MSFS world is staggering. The GA market in X-Plane is also considerably dismal in comparison to airliners. Don't forget...15ish GA planes is far easier to produce. Easy to produce usually indicates lack of systems (sometimes because a Cessna is a Cessna and always will be a Cessna). People will eventually get bored of it. You may be happy with the income stream on it, but it won't get where the airliners are. And, one thing holds very true: Quality over quantity. Quality wins and lasts every time. Quantity ages quickly and becomes a burden for a developer to keep up due to trying to rush products to market in the past and not being able to keep them up to date as they should. Look at PMDG's product stable. There aren't many products, but they live, thrive, and generate cash on quality. Their reputation is upheld, and to many, they are King.

I think you are clearly missing my point. In reality, it is these "serious simmers" that dictate the add-on market demand. Non-serious simmers (which are included in these stats) mean nothing to the marketplace. As such, if someone says heavies/airliners are more popular, then technically, they are correct given the pool of people that actually PURCHASE add-ons. Forum user perception is not skewed from a marketplace standpoint. Folks are vocal, and I have the stats as a publisher to back it up. Airliners, especially those with simulated systems, win the sales numbers game with zero question.

The majority of the participating community are heavy airliner fliers. Those stats do not tell the whole story when it comes to the market, which is a very important factor here. It would shock you to also know how many of those folks know nothing of forums or add-ons.

I think he's basing it off of another forum where this project has been discussed. Doesn't sound like it'll be long before you can plunk the money down and tell everyone for us though, Glenn.

This purchase page just popped up! http://store.x-plane.org/Rotate-MD-80_p_441.html $59.95 is the final price. EDIT: Well, I guess they weren't ready. Page just taken offline.

Mr Sgier (CyberMike for those that don't know), I realize you have or could have in the future a review here too. There's nothing wrong with that at all, and Mr. Dutton himself (the reviewer) is a great guy! That said, I think it's important people know how the individual reviewing said products is compensated, and, well, in this instance it's by the very store owner who sells the products. These are no conjectures. I very much so have solid proof, and I'm sure you knew the association too. There's a reason these reviews are directly linked on the org product pages, you know. But, more importantly, I have it from the reviewer himself how he's compensated. I'm not guessing. I've been told by the man himself when this website was initially started, and by whom. In due time. Right now we get about 2-3 people asking about Linux every month. I can manage that for now. Anyways, back on topic, and sorry Tony! I can appreciate this aircraft for what it is, and will most certainly look at obtaining it. There's slim pickings in the E175 market, and even without 100% functionality it looks like a blast to fly, as well as a very well modeled 3D exterior! Plus, I'm sure these guys will continue to improve on it based on user feedback. The two guys who developed the product are solid individuals.

Not to be a debbie downer, but if you're going by reviews I'd wait for something more official. The owner of X-Plane.org PAYS the person writing these reviews on a monthly basis. I'm sure they don't tell people this fact for good reason. I haven't even read this one, but I expect it to be every bit as positive as each other one to stuff the pockets of the person stuffing the reviewers own pockets. In other words, there's too much bias there. The product may very well be good, and I actually think at some point I'd enjoy to purchase it, but that doesn't take away from the above. PC Pilot or Computer Pilot, as well as FS Magazin are a bit more authoritative and unbiased.

I think it's clear from your screenshot that at 295MB available while only on the ground it won't take much to push your GPU over the edge.

I see nothing in our system from you. What's your support ticket ID #?

The transition is the result of scud simulation. I think some people are confusing the overcast layer needing to start exactly where they see a cloud layer begin (because that's what they've always been used to with default X-Plane) compared to what SMP 3 is actually achieving. The tops and bottoms of clouds are not perfectly flat! We actually discussed and tested a "less" scud effect at one point with our beta team but the feedback was they then felt the change was too abrupt. This is the happy medium. The same location of slider in v3 is producing MORE clouds than in v2. Very important to remind you that "less is more" with SMP3 when compared to v3, so please take this into account when deciding what settings you want. To me it sounds like a tough load on your card if you're having 1-2 second load pauses.

Guys, it's a little baffling to me that you're asking these questions on a site that has nothing to do with the product. Why don't you actually contact support? Thousands of people have read and received their discount codes already. You need to check your spam/junk/trash folders as well. Anyways, NO support can be given here for your lack of code issue if you cannot find the e-mail. You know where to go...

Thank you, sir!

You won't. SkyMaxx Pro already does this for you.

A big step up from this card you have now. I went from 680 to 980 to 980ti.

Due to limitations in the XP SDK this remains unchanged at this time.