Jump to content
Mathijs Kok

Aerosoft A318/A319/A320/A321/A330 Professional Preview

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Superbus21 said:

Do you also need the FSX for testing or why do you have it installed?

 

Of course we test the Airbus in each simulator we will sell it for.
If it will be compatible with FSX SP2, FSX Acceleration, FSX Steam, Prepar3Dv2 and Prepar3Dv3 then it means we have to test it on all of those simulators seperatly. Otherwise we could not advertise it as compatible.

Share this post


Link to post

Do you use some static checking tool for your C/C++ code before testing? I assume yes, because testing is very expensive (needs many hours of flying) and some obvious errors can be easily captured using such tool.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎08‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 4:37 PM, Emanuel Hagen said:

We are sorry that you do not like the new approach, certain things just change and so did the usage of 2D panels.
 

While I can totally understand that they might be really helpful in certain situations the majority of customers do not use them.

We do not use them because they are not there!

As far as changes go I do not like the views in the A318/319 and the A320/321. I do NOT like the fact that the F9-F11 views have been relegated to a menu list on a right mouse click. It may be OK for some users who do not fly much other than Aerossoft but for me, and I would imagine a lot of other users, it is a royal pain in the proverbial!

I would like Aerosoft to give us back F9-F11!

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Budlake said:

We do not use them because they are not there!

As far as changes go I do not like the views in the A318/319 and the A320/321. I do NOT like the fact that the F9-F11 views have been relegated to a menu list on a right mouse click. It may be OK for some users who do not fly much other than Aerossoft but for me, and I would imagine a lot of other users, it is a royal pain in the proverbial!

I would like Aerosoft to give us back F9-F11!

 

Mike

Agreed. Would love an option to use the standard FSX F9 to F12 key bindings. 

Share this post


Link to post

In particular, 2D panels of the PFD and ND would be particularly useful. After flying other devs products like the Majestic Q400, it is realy noticable. How can it be "old fashioned" if other devs aircraft are being introduced with them. Please Aerosoft, rethink this.

Regards to all.

Share this post


Link to post

 

3 hours ago, ColH said:

In particular, 2D panels of the PFD and ND would be particularly useful. After flying other devs products like the Majestic Q400, it is realy noticable. How can it be "old fashioned" if other devs aircraft are being introduced with them. Please Aerosoft, rethink this.

Regards to all.

I'll backup Aerosoft with the 2D panels. It's not realistic so why have it there. If you don't like it, don't use it and just fly the default busses. 

Share this post


Link to post

Besides...

ManyPanels.png

 

you can make 2d panels from the 3d system, they will not be limited to the FS2002 standard with 256 colors and have the right shading. I know it is not the same but if you really want it there are options.

Of course the MCDU does have a 2d panel and even runs on your tablet or big phone.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

The main problem I have with the 3d panels is that I have to change my entire view and postion every time. Its a bit annoying especially when I just want to press one button. But it bothers me more when I want to remain the outside view of the aircraft and dont want to change the entire view just for pressing one button. And it would be quite nice to see the taxi lights going on from the outiside view.

Those 3d views of the different panels are nicely done but for me does not replace the 2d panels.

Share this post


Link to post

You wouldn't possibly make a 2D panel of only the external lighting? It's awesome to to look at the aircraft from the outside and switch lightmodes, as well as it's easier when appraoching the runway to switch on strobe and runway lights rather than move the camera :D

Share this post


Link to post

Just wanted to say that I'm completely fine with the 3D views and have no interest in the 2D panels.. So keep up the work! :)

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, iccowan said:

 

I'll backup Aerosoft with the 2D panels. It's not realistic so why have it there. If you don't like it, don't use it and just fly the default busses. 

It should be there because it is a default view and it helps some people, particularly new simmers, to find things.

Also a 2D panel is generally less demanding on resourse so it enables those that do not have a super computer to enjoy flying aircraft other than the very basic MS defaults.

If you don't like 2D panels don't use them yourself but don't hold others with different veiwpoints or requirements in narrow minded contempt. 

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, generale84 said:

we can expect new pics tomorrow?

 

Why not just wait and see? ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Budlake said:

It should be there because it is a default view and it helps some people, particularly new simmers, to find things.

Also a 2D panel is generally less demanding on resourse so it enables those that do not have a super computer to enjoy flying aircraft other than the very basic MS defaults.

If you don't like 2D panels don't use them yourself but don't hold others with different veiwpoints or requirements in narrow minded contempt. 

 

Mike

I do like 2D panels myself, having been using Flight Sim for 20yrs ( you'd think I would have learned something by now ). But the views you get using the F9, F10, and F11 keys in the A320 series are very good, and work well for me. On this Mathijs is probably ( he usually is ) right.  I would have liked a key for the overhead panel,  I could probably  assign one but I am not that smart. So that is my minor request for the A330.

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, Dudley said:

I do like 2D panels myself, having been using Flight Sim for 20yrs ( you'd think I would have learned something by now ). But the views you get using the F9, F10, and F11 keys in the A320 series are very good, and work well for me. On this Mathijs is probably ( he usually is ) right.  I would have liked a key for the overhead panel,  I could probably  assign one but I am not that smart. So that is my minor request for the A330.

 

5 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

Gents, let's put this topic to rest. I do not expect the A330 to have 2d panels. 

 

Please respect that this line of discussion is closed. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post

First of all, respect to all of the developers, which are working on this really fantastic aircraft. Thank you for all your efforts!

I am really waiting for it!

 

Just a quick question (sorry, if this already has been answered, but I could not find this in this thread...):

Will the displays have higher refresh rates like the A318-A321 (or customisable refresh rates) to get gauges (especially the PFD) which runs more smooth?

 

Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post

If I'm not mistaken our displays run at the same speed as the gauges of the real Airbus, so no, in that case they would not be made faster.
I'll recheck this information though.

Share this post


Link to post

OK. I have seen enough on the question as to when this product will be released. However, at this stage in development, you must have arrived at a "median" sale price. Can you say at what level the pricing will be ?

rgds

carey

Share this post


Link to post

Exact pricing is not set, but we estimate around the $50 (plus vat when applicable). There is a remarkable increase in price of many add-ons at this moment, one we do not understand. Some simple to medium complexity aircraft are in the $40+ niveau now, other projects go way over $100.  That all pretty new and we are not too happy about that. Of course financially it is great for us because we got the distribution channels all working great and even at higher prices we'll still sell good while making more money.

 

For the hobby however it is not very good news. What 16 year old kid can buy a $120 aircraft? That means an increased risk of piracy, that means more protection (that is expensive to included and hellishly expensive to support), it also means that retailers no longer want the boxes. That last one is pretty bad as boxes are a fantastic way to introduce new people to the hobby, the moment boxes were gone from the US market (around 8 years ago), overall sales to the US market dropped by 45% in 3 years. Only the release of FSX on STEAM halted that decline.

 

I (we as Aerosoft) feel that there should be a good relation between the price and what you buy. Our CRJ should be twice as 'good' as a CRJ costing half as much and one that costs double better de damned good to be worth the money. Now we are in a comfortable position being the largest add-on producer and publisher. Aerosoft does not depend on one single release to continue to grow or even continue to operate. I fully understand a small company with just one or two products on the market is tempted to explore what the customer is willing to buy and unfortunate many people simply believe a $50 add-on is double as good as a $25 add-on. So chances are great that the $25 add-on will be more expensive soon to avoid that pit.

 

That why even though the A330 might be many times more advanced as other add-ons of the same price it's not likely we'll seek the highest price ranges. Not our style. Just as we will sell the product as one buy for all simulators and without online activation. We can only hope customers will see value where it is.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...