I am not your bro. And my opinion is valid - it’s an opinion. Just like yours. I am done engaging with you.
2 Likes
Good on you man. I don’t really think we were ever engaged in anything meaningful anyways. You go back to living under your bridge, and I’ll get back to flying and having fun.
1 Like
I post on fb because it doesn’t fill my videos with ads. That’s the only reason. And I avoid twitch because of how their interpolation in their compression affects visual fidelity.
It really is a joy to fly. It does have a few bugs. But I seriously can’t name a plane that doesn’t. And I dunno what Jeremy Smirnoff or w/e here gets out of complaining in multiple venues about it.
Honestly I think by his other posts that he may be a community manager for a competing dev. Esp after he faulted the p149 for trivial things.
1 Like
Jeremy is hardly the only player that doesn’t like this plane. Every single issue he brought up is factually accurate, and is not subjective. I own every Carenado plane, the Aeritalia G91, and the Zenith 701 among several freeware aircraft. The Trinidad, in comparison, is the worst plane in my hangar, and I include the default Asobo aircraft in that comparison. The plane has issues that aren’t bugs, but are a result of a lack of knowledge or effort on the part of the developer. There are a few examples of this, including that this is an FSX model, and so has jagged edges where they should be rounded off, the doors don’t open (which Jeremy correctly stated that the dev is blaming this on Asobo despite other developers resolving the issue) and lights that remain on while the plane is powered off. No other plane has the always-on lights issue, and yet this is an issue the developer was obviously aware of and decided to release anyway. Nothing inside the cabin has audio, which drives me crazy personally. The external taxi/landing lights don’t have a source. There are no PBR textures. You can’t cold/dark start it (only plane in my hangar where that’s the case).
So, let’s say you decide to put blinders on and just “have fun” with the plane anyway. That’s fair. But this plane is a pretty dang close comparison to Carenado’s Mooney, right? There is absolutely no comparison between these two planes, and they are priced very closely. I got the Mooney for about $17 when it was on sale, so I actually spent less on it. The Mooney is fantastic, and has none of the issues that the Trinidad brings. It’s expertly modeled and textured, doors and windows open and close, internal sounds, external light sources, PBR textures, cold/dark start, internal lights turn on/off as they should, etc etc. There is objectively NO comparison between these two similar planes at similar price points.
The Trinidad remains the only plane that I regret purchasing, and I was denied a refund on it. People deserve to know what they’re getting into before spending money on a 3rd party plane. Players like Jeremy who tell the truth are appreciated, and I wish I had seen his feedback before I jumped on the developer’s reputation from the previous generation. Saying “yeah it has issues, but is still fun to fly” is not the point. If you put on blinders and ignore a plane’s issues, they’re all “fun to fly” unless they don’t actually fly. 
7 Likes
In my flying days I had a go at the Tobago and loved it - the Trinidad was far, far above my aspirations so when I saw it being released on MSFS I looked forward to it.
But I’m disappointed at all the negative reaction - I try to ignore the sniping, it does nothing for proper discussion - although I understand this is a new venture (in MSFS) for the dev.
As it stands I won’t be buying this one just yet, will wait until there has been a few updates, but I will keep an eye on it.
Meanwhile thanks to the dev for whetting my appetite and I do hope you can make some improvements along the suggested lines.
Thank you for understanding the intent behind me posting my opinion on this release.
The way I see it, there are quite a few commercially released aircraft at this point. Three of them stand out to me as a mess - this Trinidad (CAN be redeemed if the developer is able to pick up the skills required to develop for this new platform and stop blaming Asobo on everything he isn’t able to implement), the Virtualcol Beech 99 (CAN be fixed, but it’s not much better than the Trinidad in its current state), and Bredok’s Eurofighter Typhoon (I think that one is well past any redemption because in order for it to be taken seriously, it needs to be gutted of ALL the avionics packages it was shipped with and the entire cockpit needs to be rebuilt from ground up, which is beyond the intent/capability of Bredok - it’s pretty evident that they intended to put out a toy that has no resemblance of the actual Typhoon, and that’s what we got - a toy jet)… Oh, and there is the Kitfox, but that’s old news. All the other releases have been very enjoyable, and if there were initial issues (Blackbox’s BirdDog, AT Sim’s Cri Cri), they have been handled nicely by the devs.
But I think at this point it’s quintessential that the community keeps these developers in check. I am not asking for perfection or for there to be no issues at release point. Those are present in most if not all aircraft released. IndiaFoxtEcho had their share, ATSim is still working on updating the communications issues with the Piaggio, the wonderful Fiat Aeritalia is getting updates soon, the DC F-15 (which I also think was a little premature in release) also is being worked on diligently.
The question the devs need to ask themselves before release is - does it work well? Does it AT LEAST come up to the level of visual and systems fidelity of the default aircraft in MSFS? Every one of those default aircraft can be started from cold and dark with no issues. They all LOOK good. They mostly fly well - some airliner issues aside. But if those things aren’t there, maybe hold off on releasing and work them out before asking everyone for their money. That’s all I ask for. They will always be room for improvement. But don’t try to sell me something that looks ugly, doesn’t work, crashes to the ground the second you activate Flaps 3, etc… Those are BASIC development issues that should be handled before the product is ready for the market.
If you don’t know how to do functioning doors, then just don’t do them. I’d rather them state that it’s not within the scope of their aircraft for now (with functionality potentially added down the line)… I am happy with that. But when you tell me the doors don’t work and blame Asobo for that when I have a hangar full of third party aircraft where the doors work just fine? Well, that’s pretty upsetting. And it’s not fair to the Asobo team. They aren’t perfect, and they have a TON of issues to work on, but there are things they have absolutely done well… To ascribe your own failures onto the Asobo development team is an unfair, slandering action.
If voicing my displeasure with the state of release of some of these aircraft makes me a “troll”, or “not having a life” in someone’s eyes, so be it… I am pretty content with my life - I have a great career, a lovely family, and happy and healthy kids. I am satisfied. What anyone else thinks of me for having an opinion is largely irrelevant. But I reserve my right to speak my mind when I see fit without anyone else’s approval. I don’t throw out personal insults when I criticize your product. It’s all business. If someone out there enjoys what I see as unfinished, half-baked aircraft, I can’t help that. But these developers should know that there are people who will call them out for putting out shoddy product. And while my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt, it’s there. If anyone is interested, they are welcome to read it. If not, move on.
Again, thanks for understanding what my grievances with this release were. I am glad I am not the only one.
3 Likes
Thank you everyone for your reviews, I will be staying away for now - hopefully the developer can bring the quality up or the price down as I am a huge fan of the Trinidad and it’s unlikely any other dev will touch it with a release already on the market.
This is what I mean… Every time this guy posts, it’s just filled with misinformation. Apparently, according to him, the sim is in beta, which just isn’t true. It continues development as it will for the next foreseeable future, but who is pulling this guy’s tongue to say these things? I am sure the Asobo team would be happy to find that a developer is publicly stating that their product is in beta.
I bought this and I despair…
Good flight model, but ultimately terrible all round. Aside from a very few devs, this seems to be path of course as I predicted. Asobo must get this SDK into shape and the sim, and take away the excuses.
Ok downvote, call me names all day I dont care, I was right about the Carenado stuff and everybody said I was blaming Asobo unfairly and was saying this and that, and then boom Asobo not only patched the planes but also released a fix, I said exactly same the same about the delays in getting updates on the store and I faced a whole lot of backlash but look now.
Im not saying I know everything, but I have been simming for over 20 years, Cars, Planes, Trains, new blood or not its all the same circles with better stuff, however this is going to run into real issues if Asobo only keep pushing the eye candy and dont get the rest of it into shape, Add-ons like this will be the norm, and serious simmers will abandon it and the addon market will be a nickel & dime low quality place..
Slippery slope argument is not really valid, imo.
Well, I partially agree with you - the SDK has a long way to go. But Carenado product is pretty solid - it looks great, and everything that needs to work functions pretty nicely for the most part. There was that issue with the Asobo update breaking some third party aircraft and yeah, they fixed it. Carenado supplied the updates for the other issues. That one was on Asobo. But if the level of quality in other add-ons will be similar to Carenado, it’s NOT bad. This thing is well below those standards. There is the Asobo component with the incomplete SDK, and then there is the learning curve for the developers. Some of them are obviously struggling putting out stuff that’s on par with MSFS2020 standards.
But if you look at other aircraft released, most of it is pretty nice. The highly complex simulations like PMDG, QW, A2A, Aerosoft, Majestic, etc… haven’t released products yet - it’s for that same reason. The SDK is just not there. After having experienced first-hand the PMDG aircraft, I honestly can’t see how it would work in this sim as it stands. There are too many variables for it to function properly right now - on the level of PMDG. Those guys aren’t gonna throw something out and be all “Well, here is our 737, currently the autopilot doesn’t work all that well, you can’t change passenger loads via MCDU, and some other stuff doesn’t work either, you can’t adjust lights, but here it is! Eventually things will work!” They have a reputation to uphold. When people buy that kind of aircraft, they EXPECT things to work properly. Same deal with A2A. There is a reason those cats are waiting to put things out. In the meantime, your “hack it how I can and pray it works” crowd is pumping out aircraft left and right, so you have this, Virtualcol, etc.
I think it’s on the consumer to vote with their wallet. People ought to not buy this kind of rubbish at this point. If it fails commercially, things will be pretty loud and clear what the expectations of the consumers are. As I said, it’s not like we don’t have quality third party aircraft already.
Not all of this is on Asobo.
You simply will not see any decent airliner aircraft for a very long time. Aerososft have pulled back on the CRJ, which was never going to be super simulated anyway, despite all the marketing BS. Anyway it has been said over and over.
I am sorry but it is all on Asobo, the SDK is woeful, the sim’s system are very poor. I am not interested in debating this, they are by any other sim’s standards that is a fact! Just as the graphics are beyond any other flight sim which is not debateable. Graphics dont make a sim. Anyway if you are happy then that’s very good.
How can it be “all on Asobo” if the very issues the developer claims are Asobo’s fault are resolved by other developers?
No worries though, seems today they just got some 5 star reviews, so it must suddenly be a perfect plane, no?
2 Likes
I will disagree with you on the systems. How did you come to the conclusion the systems are poor comparing to other sims? Let’s look at P3D, for example. How are their default systems superior? Specifically? Yes, if you buy study-level aircraft, they sure ARE, but I believe that’s on that specific aircraft level - my KingAir from MilViz operates VERY different from my PMDG Boeings and VERY different from FSLabs Airbuses. They each work the way they do because those systems are part of the aircraft code! There is nothing to indicate the default systems of P3D are any better than those of MSFS. We just don’t have the complex aircraft in MSFS to compare. Even then, if you look at the CJ4 mod - it arguably has more complex systems than default aircraft, same with FlyByWire A320. I believe the ABILITY to have them is there. The problems may lie in SDK’s capabilities at this point to incorporate external code.
After the latest update is the plane worth it the cost?
oh my…so because your add-ons have custom code the default terrible systems, which are the only systems we can use in MSFS is ok. Have you thought about this. You do know that many people dont buy add-on planes? you do know that many add-ons use and will use the default avionics! Come on man, have higher standards.
Again, you have to compare apples-to-apples. What sim gives you better default systems? The answer is NONE. P3D’s default planes are pretty ugly visually, and are light on systems! You can’t even zoom in or out of the map on the default G1000 in P3D. It has NO synthetic vision. X-Plane doesn’t even have a built-in flight planner! The dafault aircraft that come with MSFS are more featured and better looking than any of the default aircraft in other sims. They AREN’T terrible - they are exactly what they are intended to be - flyable, with CORE features implemented. I flew them for months in MSFS. And yes, I do know that many users don’t buy add-on aircraft. If such is the case, they must not be looking for complex aircraft. Fact of the matter is, THIS IS AN EXPENSIVE HOBBY. It costs money to really get things out of it - from hardware, to scenery, to aircraft. Don’t forget, MSFS comes with scenery you’d spend hundreds of dollars on in P3D and X-Plane. I know, because spent around $2000 in P3D just in the last month and a half or so, so I could get it to look somewhat close to MSFS, and so that I could fly the available aircraft that have system depth. Orbx Global range products are about $300-$400 alone to get the sim to look acceptable to the 2020 eye. You don’t have to pay a dime of that in MSFS.
The add-ons that use default avionics are usually pretty cheap.
MSFS will require patience and time to mature. This goes from improving default systems to the availability of complex aircraft. That’s just the nature of the platform. I am having a TON of fun in both MSFS and P3D. But don’t come down on Asobo because now that I have immersed myself in both platrorms, your “bang for the buck” in MSFS is INCOMPARABLE. That’s a fact, Sir. 
I just don’t know where you are coming from to claim that things are “better” in other sims. Again, the only thing P3D has right now is availability of a TON of complex third party aircraft. X-Plane doesn’t even have THAT (I know that because I own it too, though I never fly it)…
4 Likes
So, is there an update available? How do I get it, run the installer and entering credentials again?
Am I the only one who is experiencing an fps drop when in cockpit view? And I don’t even know where the performance is going because this plane doesn’t even look very good or has a glass cockpit which can eat up frames.
It has legacy xml/BMP gauges that cause a huge framedrop on a lot of pc’s (same problem as the DC F-15 currently)