Well, at this point, and after the premiere stream debacle we know for sure they are not good sensing what is good and what is bad for whatever remains of their reputation.
If in doubt: Donāt ask. Come back in 14 days for a status update. 
1 Like
Like others have already said, stuttering/performance needs to be addressed before anymore features are added to this addon by the developers. Current performance has rendered this addon unflyable at this point on my end.
2 Likes
To be fair it looks like they are doing exactly this.
After a few setting changes (mainly āglass cockpit refresh rateā = MIN) it is now flyable for me again (which it wasnāt before) so there was some progress. Dev talked about that they migrated 10% to WASM until now. When they are done things should be fine again.
1 Like
Ok, so from my flightsim world: āok - I thought - itās LFPG, my Fenix A320 was a bit slower here as wellā I tried convincing myself, although my Fenix wasnāt really much slower. Fired embraer up, was surprised the FMC was working well, noticed and appreciated new SYS3 Elec.Pump sound in the background, continued appreciating rain effects on the windshield and illumination in the cockpit.
I took off feeling a bit tired of stuttering but I kept telling myself, that my Fenix also was slower here (which was not true). Started climbing - minor stutters present, managed to hold myself to not quit the flight (because I hate doing that) but I actually gave up after noticing, that when flying over central France, clouds everywhere, I could not convince myself any longer, that my Fenix A320 was slow here as well only 2hr earlier (which it wasnāt, it was as smooth as always has been, as any default Asobo aircraft).
A big NO for me. Iāll try again in two weeks.
I made two flights last night. The first was with the latest update of the FSS Embraer 175, flying from KSEA runway 16C to KPDX, runway 10R. This flight worked very well. Had no issues with stuttering. However had to turn off the autopilot when approaching KPDX and land manually, since the glideslope does not work yet. Then I performed the same flight in the Virtualcol E-175, using the same airports and runways. Set the altitude for 14000 feet, but the plane kept on climbing after reaching this altitude. Had to use vertical speed to descend, but it did then stay at 14000 feet. Ran into similar issues with holding altitude at other waypoints. However the localizer and glide slope worked correctly, and I landed at KPDX with no problems.
I am encouraged by the progress so far on the FSS Embraer 175, and look forward to the next update.
I had read elsewhere that ILS landings were possible with the FSS 175 at this point. Is that not the case?
It seems very hit or miss. Iāve read some have no issues. For me, Iāve done 8 flights and had a successful ILS capture 1 time.
I have not had a successful ILS glideslope capture with the latest update.
And that is exactly why you should not spend money on early access products.
How much was it? 50eur?
I would really understand if Devās stated that they need some crowd funding and in return they offer a buggy demo. But what they did was presenting videos which made fake impression of working product and spammed their website with Aerosoft logos for credibility (Aerosoft confirmed that they did not authorize this).
Big red light on my end.
2 Likes
I wish they had gone the crowdfunding route as well rather than an EA route. While the two approaches are, in practical terms, not all that different, I think there is a big difference in transparency and expectations between the two.
3 Likes
Iām with you there. The trend towards EA releases is not good for users because you donāt know whether youāre buying into a project thatās 80% complete or 20% complete unless thereās complete transparency from the dev. I think the E175 project has shown that marketing sizzle can fool most people. Seems like FSS really put their whole reputation on the line with this one, so I wonder if the damage will be un-done or if their overall success will suffer because of it.
But people knew it was still in development before they even purchased it. Iām not familiar with this developer so I donāt know their track history with past products. But people need to do their research. This seems to be happening more and more where people impulse buy and then throw a fit because they got dupped. Maybe the developers presented the product in an unethical way to trick people into thinking it was more functional than it was, but again, something people should look for and consider before buying. Anyone who has been simming for any substantial amount of time should be able to spot these things a mile away.
They announced the EA only like 3 days before the actually planned release date , so from that and the trailers people thought this aircraft is at least 90% finished - not 20 like it really is. In my opinion this product is dead now anyway, just look at how few comments there are in this thread in the last weeks and only a fraction of them are linked to the plane itself. If you check their roadmap there are only basic functions being implemented in the next updates. Not even mentioning things like malfunctions and the likes. I hope somebody else will make a decent version of this gorgeous aircraft.
p.s. from the announcements we even thought we will get the 170 and 190 series - nobody is loosing a word about the 190/195 anymore.
1 Like
So lesson learned perhaps? Thereās screwy developers out there and people are gullible. On the other hand, sometimes people bite off more than they can chew. I have no idea how big this development team is or their background, maybe they went in over their heads. I canāt imagine the coding or developing knowledge needed to code an aircraft system. On the other hand sometimes developers who are trying their best to give people want they want get discouraged or take a back seat because, letās be honest, some people can be quite cruel and is something that has been oozing out of this community more recently since Iāve joined this forum. Even for free stuff.
One day itās this is the best thing ever, thank you so much. The next, worst piece of software Iāve ever used. How should developers feel about that kind of feedback? People arenāt robots.
1 Like
On a more positive note, look how long it took Pmdg to release the 737. They have a the financial stability. Snaller teams might rely on a bit of upfront cash to keep the project alive and pay the programmerās.
I am disappointed too because it is a beautiful plane and could easily become one my favorite airliners. Lets 
1 Like
I too have been quite critical of the approach the devs took as well. Iām not going going rehash everything again.
Despite all that, you know what? I bought the early accessā¦ Why? Same reason as above. I really love the E-Jets, in sims (I love short, regional hops) and also as a passenger IRL, so I really, really want to see a good E-Jet product for MSFS and figured thereās a better chance of that happening giving them my $40 and being a part of development than just shouting from the sidelines of forums waiting for another E-Jet to arrive or waiting for the freeware one to slink along at freeware pacingā¦
I just tried to fly the embraer after the most recent update and itās still NO for me. I can not understand how the developers even remotely did not see the fps impact this aircraft has on computers? I emailed them a while back and they told me that their aircraft on 4/5 of their PC is fine, but I honestly refuse to believe that. Thereās sooo many people complaining at the fps hit this little plane, with default avionics, has.
And just yesterday I got email form them informing me, that in this update theyāre reversing back to version 0.92 because this is whan community is demanding. For crying at loud, this is not what community wants! Community wants a plane, which (remembering is fit with default avionics) will not be heavier on fps than Fenix A320 nor PMDG B737.
I really liked the idea of supporting the new, fresh team with good ideas, that created great visual model, but Iām sure this is the last time I ever supported such project and bought early access product.
2 Likes
This is the fog of war of early accessā¦ The plane isnāt optimized yet, and new code appears and disappears weekly. Iāve been a beta tester for a number of products and this is just what happens as products are developed. Itās not anything close to a finished or polished product.
This is also why itās good that itās EA, to a degree, as the community testing will unearth problems that the dev and a small beta testing group wonāt find.
I remember I was beta testing one XP11 add-on and I am on Windows and Linux and I asked them if they wanted me to beta the Linux version as well, and they said, āNo, we already have 2 or 3 Linux users, and itās good for them.ā The product was released and caused CTD problems for Linux users left and rightā¦ Always good to have as many testers as possibleā¦
When I select the FSS Embraer 175, the following appears: āWe are focusing on improving the performance of the system due to stuttering issues. It is caused by rendering in the JavaScript/HTML combination, which can only be solved by switching to the more complex C++ and WASM/NanoVG combination. We already migrated some code parts into WASM and will continue working on that in the next four weeks. Thank you for your patience!ā
I have not had the stuttering issue which many have experienced. I realize that they are working on this, and believe that the end result will be an improved aircraft. I am willing to wait for a few weeks, and meanwhile can fly the Embraer 175 and use V/S or FPA for descents. I regularly use LittleNavMap as an aid during final approach and landing. On some approaches into KPDX I only have a few hundred feet above the ground when I break out of the clouds, but still manage to land sucessfully.