But this is not the A380! It only looks like the A380 from the outside. (:
Let me rephrase it. This is the closest thing to an a380 we’ll see in years on xbox.
Ok I decided to get it. Burned a Xbox gift card on it.
Pros:
- have an a380 at all on Xbox without waiting years
- visually overall good
- cockpit decent
- good liveries
Cons:
- lackluster sounds
- no pax cabin or bonus items. Pretty bare bones
-textures could use improvement
-overpriced
-performance stutters if at a big airport
2 Likes
I mean, Bredok3D can do it because they rely almost entirely on stock functionality for that aircraft (which is a “Frankenplane” as one user above put it). When building out a more realistic custom FMS, it’s trickier.
2 Likes
I am not criticising anyone here but we as a community question why developers such as bredock3d or captainsim or many other similar developers get away with such releases, and also keep getting priority in marketplace release schedule.
The answer is pretty obvious, it’s us, the community. Many of us don’t like to wait for the more options to be available even if we know that those will be miles ahead. Many of us don’t have the luxury to have all the options either, I am talking about pc and Xbox ofcourse. And these developers just do the right thing (business wise and for them) at just the right time to swoop in and cater to those people. And I believe the count of that userbase is quite high, maybe even the majority. They will probably buy the the better thing again later, but the impulse of having the new shiny thing ASAP is quite strong. Infact I have committed the same sin, if it can be called that ( I am by no means a serious simmer or even a simmer by acceptable standards, but I try to pick my purchases carefully, be it aircraft / scenery).
5 Likes
You make a good point. And I don’t wish to see the likes of Bredok banned from the Marketplace, because people do buy their stuff… and even enjoy it!
Impulse buying seems to be a common theme among MSFS enthusiasts but one can’t blame the devs for a lack of restraint. I love buying new add-ons but I do careful research — even when it’s a product from one of the more reputable houses — and will usually steer clear of brand new stuff until it gets discounted.
I know we all make jokes (Captain Sim, etc.) but no one’s really scamming anyone. Most of us know to give Bredok a wide berth if we want anything close to study-level, and those unaware can find out pretty easily about the quality of the company’s releases. Bredok don’t claim to make PMDG-level stuff.
The market needs to be as diverse as the community for which it caters. That means there’s plenty of room for devs like Captain Sim, Bredok, RM Studios, 2Pilot, MSFScenerybuilders, at al, even if I personally consider their products a load of tat.
2 Likes
I don’t have a problem with these lower tier products being available in the Market Place and most of us recognize the developers we choose to avoid.
The problem though is the product description provided by the developers are, in some cases, nowhere near accurate and thus very misleading. This should be part of Microsoft/Asobo’s checking procedure. They are accepting the product in the market place as functional but it should also be accurately described so that unsuspecting buyers are aware what they are buying.
3 Likes
I agree 100%
If people want to buy rubbish, then let them buy rubbish, after all it’s their money. Creating a quality standard and banning bad products from the marketplace won’t magically make bad developers disappear or stop bad addons from being made. They’ll just sell it somewhere else and people will keep buying it.
However, it’s Microsoft’s duty to make users fully aware that the product being shown is rubbish. Prohibit developers from posting a misleading description, force them to disclose whether they are using any default aircraft assets and which ones, and allow users to post comments on the marketplace, thus alerting potential buyers.
7 Likes
This. Plus they are quickest to market because their products aren’t that advanced. They use the base MSFS elements so they are able to pump out planes and scenery once they have the models tweaked.
So it’s not a matter of them getting pushed to the front, just the fact that they are faster to market than those more serious/study level items.
Also I agree that they shouldn’t be removed from the marketplace because that is unfair and a slippery slope. However there should be the ability to provide/see reviews and have “top commenters” or “top reviewers” that are approved by MS/Asobo so that some more scam-like addons can be flagged and avoided by those who are new or not as familiar with the creators. Also having an approval process for “preferred creators” from MS/Asobo or something like that would be helpful to differentiate out those that make really quality work and others that just push things to the marketplace.
Any information they can provide to the non-educated customers would be best so that they can make their purchase decision and have to live with it, whether they like the add on or not.
2 Likes
Not only comments but the developers need to tell us when there are broken systems before we buy the plane. I bought 2 planes recently the Flight FX Cirrus SF50 and the Tecnam airplane. Both airplanes have major issues the devs are aware of but nowhere is that said on the marketplace. Microsoft/Asobo needs to back every mod or do what Train Sim World does where every mod is under the game devs.
2 Likes
What you are saying is fully correct.
But you probably missed my point. Despite that I intentionally used the word “can”, it is not about ability. It’s about “will”.
For some reason Inibuild “will” not add worldmap flightplan import to their airliners.
There is honestly no question that a team as skilled as Ini can implement it. They for unknown reasons intentionally choose not to.
This causes Inibuild airliners to be unfit for a certain user skill level, the advanced beginners and early intermediates. These users are (sadly) better catered by Bredok3D’s A380 because Inibuild demands skills like flightplan understanding/programming and Navigraph/Simbrief. Bredok3D gives them the sim aid of easily creating an in-sim graphical flightplan which is sent into the airliner.
The early beginner will handfly anything anyway, and dont need this.
Advanced intermediates dont need it either. They have learned to hand program or use Navig/Simb.
But the advanced beginner/early intermediate is trying to figure out how to IFR-fly the airliners, and need help getting a valid flightplan into the plane to see and learn how it behaves.
Inibuild demanding skills from this user group, which they don not yet have, makes Inibuild airliners inaccessible to them.
Inibuild thereby creates a market hole which has to be filled by other devs like Bredok3D.
See my point?
If “studylevel” devs like Inibuild make their planes unfit for beginners, they are part of the reason why a section of the market is filled with “Frankenplanes”.
2 Likes
Sorry but none of the aircraft you buy are really aircraft they just look like them
2 Likes
Oh, no! Don’t say that! You are ruining my immersion! 
1 Like
I get your point but I think that statement does MSFS a huge injustice. For 99.9% of us, the sim’s airliners are the closest to real-life we’re going to get. You could say the same about multi-million dollar simulators but they use those to train real pilots…
2 Likes
Why are people stunned ini wont use world map flights plans? If its a custom FMC/MCDU then itll most likely use navigraph. Why? Every custom FMC/MCDU that uses navigraph gets up to date changes especially the way ini does it. It connects with simbrief. Navigraph has charts accessible on the sim, as an app, and on web browser. Navigraph is also very cheap to the way the flight simulation community of aircraft and scenery devlopers are going so its worth it.
I really think navigraph is quite the jump from the casual new and shining aircraft developers to the more advanced in details and complexity aircraft developers.
Its easier the way ini does it if you actually fly the planes like theyre meant to fly not just to be flying a plane for its type.
One option doesn’t have to exclude the other.
Just Flight has all of the options in the BA146.
And thinking that a progressing beginner will get into Simb/Navig. before even knowing how an ifr flight plan works is just out of touch with with the variety of the user base.
Not everyone knows as much as you do, @Th3Duck0nQuack. To understand my point you will have to widen your perspective beyond yourself. No offence meant.
1 Like
Sorry it was a joke although also true 
1 Like
At least you got the irony and humour
1 Like
ding-ding-ding
The basement of quality has been reached again. #bredoksskimpingaircraftdesigns
Kudos for the forewarners