Jump to content

Heavy Metal

  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

83 Good

About Heavy Metal

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. While I do appreciate this explanation by FSDT, it basically just proves to me, that FSDT knew exactly how their product would work (or not work) after release and decided to still sell it out to the wider audience, potentially also including new (more casual) clients, who paid them good money and do not (need to) know about SDK limitations or have a history with FSX/P3D and/or GSX. So imho they also accepted to make some of such Asobo issues now to their own and have to deal with that responsibiliy. Instead of blaming all issues now solely on a) Asobo/MS because of the SDK and even worse b) on their own clients who in their opinion should have clearly known about all possible technical sim limitations because those issues have always been around and surely must have been deteted by all their clients beforehand, so it cannot be their fault, that their absolutely flawless product is to blame just because it makes those other companies´ issues visible. How can these ppl even in the slightest expect from watching their website with all those nice and shiny pictures and words of perfectly deboarding passengers, that GSX as the "definitive ground service add-on" would or even could even try to resolve f.e. those MS jetway issues with their so-called "replacement" jetways? Maybe FSDT should not have sold it then if their product is still so heavily impacted by MS issues...? Or at least should have released it a) after SU10 when they seemingly expect those airport cache and bgl file issues to have been resolved and b) with 3D passengers added at a later time (or as a beta option with a possibility to turn them on/off) when they knew these models will not work as expected and will show their product from a very bad or at least unintentially (?) funny side (no matter if it is their "fault" ) instead of using them as one of their main selling points etc... Sorry, I can imagine it is hard to work around these limitations. I always liked GSX in P3D and also gladly pay the folks at FSDT for their efforts and work. I can also see some of those issues with a smile and do not wish them harm. But I can also understand that other (and especially new) customers cannot accept this "let´s just try to weasel out of it until Asobo finds a fix" strategy. And personally, while I am not that concerned with floating passengers (let me turn them off, the rest is basically all ok), I am really just tired of this constant blaming of others (Asobo, MS, cloud service) and playing the poor and innocent developers of hearts. It is YOUR product, YOUR money earned, and if it is faulty, it does not matter, whose fault it is, because these are still YOUR clients and it is YOUR responsibility to the clients who paid you for the product YOU sold them while being fully aware and actively knowing of the issues to come (because as you stated these were obvious already since SU5, right?). So please just stand for your product and accept to take the heat (remember, the client is always right even if he is not). Or just watch your reputation with these customers sink very very quickly which imo would be a shame for you, your company and also for us in the long term. Because we all love your work and we all love and need GSX.
  2. Ae you talking about liveries being used by FSHud or also about the flight schedules the planes are using? Where are flight plans taken from by FSHud? Does it have its own database, does it use current schedules, are these updated, does it use fictional routes? That´s what I mean. We have "live" information in MSFS (even if it is delayed by some minutes), we have or will get external tools with flight plans (hopefully accurate ones). And if I wanted to use them, can I then still use FSHUd with those? And do not say "why would you want to use those if FSHud already provides that" because if these programs do a better job regarding traffic then why would I want to let this pass? I think an ATC program should read the traffic which is used in the sim, no matter the source from where it is taken instead of ignoring it and just using its own.And of course, my intention is not to say FSHud is bad. I think it is pretty good actually as far as I can judge. I am just concerned with this part of it. But I think this should be enough about FSHud when the thread actually is about Pro ATC.
  3. I know, but why would I want an ATC tool to generate its own traffic? In my view that´s just a workaround to be able to interact with traffic. However, I want an ATC tool to access the traffic which is in the sim, be it by Asobo live traffic or maybe Just Flight Traffic once released or another tool injecting live traffic, etc. I do not want programs conflicting with each other. An ATC program should do ATC, not traffic. Understood, not possible at the moment, but in the long term that should be the target. Just my opinion of course.
  4. I also used ProATC, but gave up on it during P3D times. It has the same issues with vectoring or handing you off to other areas back and forth or forgetting you at some point like all the other ATC programs I have used. Also, only one "minor" update in a year usually, so no way I will cash out more money on it unless I see some real improvements coming up. I do not need SR, and as others said, it has the same bugs as back when I used it in P3D. I would also assume it is same code for most parts. Also, the mixing of voices is a complete immersion killer. I will keep an eye on FSHud which seems to be promising, although I actually would rather wait until the tools can interact with the Asobo traffic (AI and/or injected live traffic) before I make the final choice. And I want both VFR and IFR, even though MS ATC is not that bad anymore. Until then I will stick with PF3. It also forgets me now and then and it URGENTLY needs a real user interface instead of some web browser window and short cuts for you to figure out what to press at what time, but it covers VFR and IFR, does its job most of the times pretty ok, has a lot of voices (even after deactiving the terrible or less convincing ones) and has at least some more updates in a year. Only tried P2ATC in a demo version and it did not convince me for the price asked. And yes, I surely will go VATSIM at some point but I still do not have the time to fully commit to it and do not want to a) embarrasse me too much and b) not ruin the experience for others by asking/doing stupid things. 😉
  5. I will try this later. Makes sense to me as Aamir mentioned in their discord somewhere that it´s a known issue on their side and they are checking into this. He assumed it might have to do with panel states saving/loading etc. Thanks!
  6. Yeah, the traditional PMDG way, our old diva amongst sim developers. Trying to build up tension and excitement by artifically delaying the release again and again - and when they stop trolling their customers with facebook pictures and when finally, the release officially starts, their servers go down....
  7. I cannot find any arrogance in a relaxed answer like "Yeah...we know...." especially when it follows a seemingly relaxed statement like "I know WIP, but them tires need to get that dirty treatment ha!" I take both merely as a casual way of communicating, and I prefer when ppl are not "all business" all the time, especially in a public forum not their own. Maybe a language barrier topic, but I honestly do not understand any of the following reactions on this, sorry. Plane itself looks promising. But I somehow got tired of flying airliners after all the years in P3D and XP. I will probably still get my hands on PMDG 737 and Fenix A320, these and the CRJ by Aerosoft should then be enough for me. I am currently more enjoying flying GA over areas I have not visited in other sims. But who knows, if their plane will be a serious competition to the before mentioned planes, I might reconsider.
  8. Right decision for a lot of people who want to have all their products in one place without too many hassles after a reinstall etc. While I like this idea, too, and though I haven´t read their forum post so far, I will stick to their web store. I guess the discount can/will only be applied if you purchase the 737 though their store where you bought the P3D 737 before I have a proof of purchase by PMDG and not only a purchase info about MS Coins without clear indication on what I spent it (at least the last time I checked). I might (!) have more controls which updates to apply and when (the store updates to the newest version with no way to fall back to a previous version - as far as I know so far) In the end, it does not matter to me, which installer to run - the plane will usually be installed in same folder structure as the MS store version. And in the unlikely case if not, the PMDG might be more flexible. I feel better supporting them directly without them having to pay fees to MS just for putting up their product on the store.
  9. I started up P3D a fews days back but I do not think I can go back for regular flying there. I think I will uninstall most of the ORBX scenery add-ons in the next weeks and keep it plain and simple just for stable airliner operations until these planes have worthy substitutes in MSF. Besides Airliners (which also bored me the last years a bit) there is nothing in P3D that would convince me to stay at the moment tbh. X-Plane is something different as it performs well, has lot less issues than P3D (at least on my system) and it can keep up in a lot of aspects. And I still enjoy the FF A320 now and then. MSF is great for exploring in GA and the VR implementation works best of all three (for me at least) although X-Plane is quite close after Vulkan update. I also like the default GA planes and the feel of movement to them. Not perfect and the systems (especially autopilots) are still way off what we get in the other sims, but as I said earlier, those are default planes and for that they do an amazing job. I hope they will get the SDK updates running so that 3rd Party Devs can start developing their toys into MSF. I think once this is done and the first study-level planes will be released, and helicopters will be included, MSF will also start winning over the hearts of most simmers out there.
  10. never worked for me. at least before this patch. no matter where you select live weather (flight conditions, live setting... even if it shows rain in the mini screen after selecting, once you start the flight it´s always clear weather. But if have found a working workaround other than restarting the sim, please provide exact description of what you are doing where. Would be much appreciated by a lot of ppl I assume.
  11. Hmm, no mentioning of fixing live weather when starting the second flight... then again, a lot of stuff packed into the patch. Let´s hope nothing major got broken in the making.
  12. I cannot start any flight out of European airports anymore. France, Germany, UK, always crashes during loading screen at 75/80%. No landing challenge (Nice), no Community flight on Friday (London) for me as long as this happens. Have had no CTD issues until today... well, welcome to the club it seems. No issue with North America so far. And when it works, it seems to have smoother performance indeed and I had changing live weather (no more clear skys after the first flight or 3 knots of wind outside Europe). Just lost Europe for flying now completely... unhappy.
  13. I also find the UI good and easy to learn/adopt to. Just takes a few clicks from left to right and you are ready to go. They should and maybe might slightly adjust some areas like the control setup or the nav log, add some in-flight maps functionalities, give a way to edit a new flight plan while still in the plane, but the general GUI is quite good in regards to look/feel and handling as it is in my opinion.
  • Create New...