Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Such a disgrace

FSX. 5 flights on Captain Sim SP1. Vancouver, Phoenix, San Francisco, Montreal... Except one good flight between KPHX and KSFO, all my flights started or ended in a crash to desktop or some navigational failure. Here is my list of weaknesses. Feel free to complete it... The thing is.. I am really tired of my six months of waiting and the time spent in these wreck flights.

 
This is my fifth flight. Awful. Approaching Montreal Trudeau. Blank textures in my virtual cockpit (i can't even see my Navigational display (ND), erratic navigation too (Ascot approach not fully recognized, nor displayed). Did not even land on the runway. 2 others flights tested, from FSDT Vancouver and another, approaching Flightbeam Phoenix. They both ended in Crash to desktop (CTD).

The MCP management is not really smooth. You have to click precisely on the good area otherwise, it's not working.

The Vnav fonction is not working properly.

SID and STARS are barely reproduced here. You will not find all the waypoints on approach / departure.

The landing runway axe is not in the right position.

The cockpit lights are uneffective at dusk time. A major FSX constraint that some other editors have already by-passed.
 
The manuals are not complete. The first ones, manual 1 and 2, are giving very common informations and datas on the Boeing triple seven. When i tried to download them from Captain sim (after logging it), an error message appeared. I had to try again.

There are no working TCAS even if you set TA/RA and Above or Below properly.



 
Some excerpts from Captain Sim community forum.



Despite all my negative comments, i want to say that i still believe in this aircraft project. The virtual cockpit is really nice, the sounds are good and there are a dozen of nice liveries available for free.  Captain Sim is also wanting to improve it. Besides, we are not really far from a very good hard core product.
But C.S. is paying here a politic: we simmers, we pay to see (in advance) like in Poker; but this service pack 1 is not reaching the standard level of a good aircraft payware. In fact, this aircraft, at this point, is somewhere..  between CLS and PMDG. Until further notice!


This article is my sole responsability,
Dom Mason
Airdailyx, January 2013





27 comments:

Anonymous said...

I was tempted to buy this product in the past, but the bad reports from many people have left me to not buy it. Since then, I have been waiting for PMDG and their 777, which when finally released everyone can forget about CS. I never really understood the CS approach of releasing bits of a product over a period of time.

Anonymous said...

I had to start the engines with CTRL + E because the start switches did not work. No problems at all after that!

Anonymous said...

I'm frustrated with the current 777 situation. PMDG's 777 is going to dominate with systems, no doubt about that, but their visuals are lacking in model accuracy and their texture quality overall compared to some other projects. But because PMDG is doing it, it's not likely any other dev will want to tackle the 777 for a while.

Magic Aviation said...

Me just this afternoon I did try to do a review about this bird with 1.0

Have a lot of mistakes with the sysstems, External power in flight, VNAV and ILS for the moment not implemented, and also I don´t understand why CS don´t would make the VC and cockpit in the same aircraft. If you compare the cockpit version with the Gauges and try after the Pax version are a terrible frames comparation

http://magicaviation.blogspot.com.es/

Anonymous said...

CS, has managed to piss their whole fanbase off this time.
Totally unacceptable this time.

Anonymous said...

Okay, lets put it this way:
The 787 from Boeing already flies for many companies worldwide, but it isn't completely flawless, is it?

Anonymous said...

One of the Worst Addons ive ever had. Was installed and uninstall within 1 hour. Huge disappointment. I had respect for them with their 757, but seems that's the best they can do.

Anonymous said...

We need to pressure Lockheed Martin to build a 64bit version of P3D & all these OOMs go away.

Anonymous said...

interesting..although not entirely wowed but I flew this baby from FT CYUL to UK2000 EGLL without a hitch. FPS were much improved for me.

Anonymous said...

Heres what I've learnes as a wise man, don't say anything, don't write dont beta test for them. They have and pick their avenues, don't beresponsible for a mess. If your not a pilot, I recommend don't claim to be 1.


And If you do than blame it on your selv'es, never new we had so many airbus pilots in my life

Anonymous said...

As far as Captainsim, shame on you..... seriously all of you. you know better. Espececially if you fs9 breothers.. you know you hide behinde the rusian tracker, but yet people still but. but to no extent. Your better off being McPhant where you Fail. you have no FMC capabilities

Anonymous said...

Last but not leasdt, FSDTeam. they messed up... fixed still mess up but slightly... But they listen to what we say so who knows. good for them. So in closing I suggest this.


FSDTeam has a place in our hearts. Captainsim, hides behind darkness of simrussia as we all know and won't say fuckem. and aerosft pts thems selves out thier. I root for aerosft. antime of the day. Keep the piece guys.

Anonymous said...

That's the weird thing about CS; some have had great luck with their products and some have not. How can that be possible? For example, I have never had a problem with their 757 and others have issue after issue and absolutely hate the 757. Again, how is that possible? It can't be the user. It has to be CS.

Martin said...

I stopped believing in them long time ago. \\after several times my support requests were put to bed\\

The problem with all their planes - they look damn goon on screenshots. And only after you buy them, install and start using, you realize there are tons of annoying things about their products. Either bugs of features.

I own 727, 767, 707. All of them gone from my HD within a month. Yes, they do release SP. I install again, try and uninstall. Support is good to none. It's good at least that a group of few dedicated fans on their support forum exist, that actually helps people sort out their problems.

After repeated request by several customers about fixing some annoying issue with the 707, we were told to shut up. That was the day I left this sad forum for good, and never installed any of the CS products anymore.

Now CS is in the same place where I've put Abacus and Ariane.. Sad, but true. In the times were companies like PMDG and CoolSky keep releasing first class products I don't see a reason to waste my money on mediocre "beta" releases like the CS777. And I wonder why people keep falling for that "customer involvement" program propagandized by CS, when PMDG will wipe it out the second their 777 is out.
Just my 2 cents....

Anonymous said...

Anyone who knew Captainsim could see this wreck from miles away. After their FS9 757 debacle a few years ago most people came to the conclusion that Captainsim simply isn't very good at modern EFIS and FMC programming. Unfortunately this hypothesis is turning out to be true once more with the 777.

When you buy Captainsim you're essentially paying just for the eye candy, not systems complexity, accurate flight modelling or a polished, bug free experience. They should have stuck to classic aircraft with simpler gauge programming.

Anonymous said...

CS777 ...................................................................... Some good Flights that's all doesn't like turbulence or clouds

T.J. Streak said...

It will be interesting to see who will release the first flyable version of the 777: Captain Sim or PMDG. My money is on PMDG.

Of course, a lot of people are not happy with PMDG's "it will be ready when it's ready attitude." Some people want frequent updates, screenshots and vidoes of the work in progress, and a firm release date. Those people should be quite happy with the Captain Sim 777, because CS has given them everything they want.

DAndre Newman said...

They should just stick to modeling. How I wish the CS 757 VC could work with the QW 757 which has a very poor VC. CS is nothing but eye candy. And for what its worth, its the very best eyecandy in the business.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but I don't understand that. If you compare the center Eicas displays of a real 757 photo to the CS displays and the standby instruments, the location and dimensions in the CS vc are plain and simple wrong. The textures are shiny in my opinion, not more.

DAndre Newman said...

Still the most realistic looking texture wise.

Anonymous said...

Hardly. Not as blurry as PMDG's textures, but definitely not the most realistic in the FS world.

DAndre Newman said...

And the best is...

ALX WNT said...

Abacus of course.

ALX WNT said...

Abacus of course

Anonymous said...

Best is relative and a matter of perspective, and an inaccurate word to use in the FS dev community since much of what developers do is more or less, artistic to their taste.

As I said, CS's textures aren't as blurry as PMDG, but they do not at all feel like the most realistic textures I've seen in FSX. Carenado, Alabeo, Sibwings...examples of what I feel are more realistic textures. Then you look at upcoming devs and projects like Enigma Sim to see there is a lot more potential than this.

Lenny Matthews said...

Mr. Newman, I think you're confusing '100x zoom detail' with physically correct and properly designed virtual cockpits. I agree, at 100x zoom the CS 777 VC is great. But you only get 15fps, and the moment you zoom out you realize the general shaping is wrong. Not only that, but you'll also notice the shading of their virtual cockpit is COMPLETELY inaccurate along with most of the geometry. Take for example the center pedestal, its about a foot higher than the real thing. The overall shading on the VC is well... nonexistent. I would hesitate to applaud something that inaccurate and as poorly researched as their cockpits. For me, the 'best' virtual cockpits come in the form of ACCURACY.

Anonymous said...

Abacus sets the standard. A PMDG 737 is poor compared to it.

Post a Comment

Comments are now deactivated. Please visit our new website: AirDailyX.net

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.