I just meant LM can’t market it as a home simulator because that’s not what their licence is for. If it was an Entertainment licence I imagine it would have more marketing and more attention.
Let’s be honest, there’s a LOT of elbow room for better marketing in there, and for better pricing policies (which are also part of marketing). The issue isn’t that they can’t. It’s that they aren’t even trying. That being said, at this point it’s a moot point. They had plenty of time to do better. Now the big player in the market is back, and that ship has left the port. I fully expect third-party support for P3D to slow down to nearly nothing by this time next year. It just annoys me that people will blame third-party devs instead of the real issue, which is on LM’s side, as they’re already doing.
It’s in the development list from Aerosoft.
Seems to me, I think it may be one of the next ones.
1 Like
People just want to complain. It’s the internet.
That anyone would think that LM would have any thought to care about home users is amazing. But, people like to think they matter. Unfortunately, they choose the wrong “people”, or in this case “thing” to think they matter too, instead of moving on to people who might actually care about them. It’s a business, not a mother. Their business is government/business grade simulation, people who will spend millions of dollars for a product.
But, for those who have a couple of $million to spare, they might be able to get LM’s ear. Got $250,000 to start a business around their simulator? LM will talk to you and sell you what they got (but not much more).
Trust me, LM spends lots of money on marketing. Just not to home users.
I know, but that’s not the type of marketing that’s relevant here, so it may very well not exist.
Well they can’t market it any other way. It’s now allowed under their licencing agreement.
Again, marketing isn’t an exact science. They surely have constraints, but there has to be some leeway within these constraints. The issue is that they haven’t even tried. But again, it’s moot. The ship has sailed.
I usually agree with you, so I am a bit surprised by this statement. Do you really think LM have any interest in furthering a hobby?
They cater to a professional and military aerospace market, why would they have any interest in furthering a hobby (in an area that is not even part of their larger product market let alone a core component)?
1 Like
I’m sorry for sounding a bit selfish, but I can’t exactly care less about what their interest is. What I care for are the results. And the results are a hobby that has been stuck in 2006 for fourteen years, becoming more and more niche and unwieldy, and less friendly to newcomers, with more and more people encouraged to be elitist pretend pilots that couldn’t be more toxic to be around and less interested in helping people understand the joys of flight simulation. Of course, this isn’t all LM’s fault, but they certainly did not help as a platform holder.
If they’re happy with the results on their side, great for them. On my side, I definitely am not about how they handled it and keep handling it. Their reasons are pretty irrelevant to me because I’m a gamer/simmer, not a shareholder.
3 Likes
I get what you’re saying I think
I am not a simmer (and I don’t really think I want to be one when I read this forum, with a few exceptions; so I sympathise with your comments about the simming community) so I am really not qualified to comment or judge on what you said. Just wanted to try and understand it
2 Likes
Have some more screenshots (sources 1, 2).
This is looking more and more gorgeous. Incidentally, Mr. Kok says they show things that weren’t possible a few days ago.
5 Likes
YAY. here’s the working HUD courtesy of dev Hans Hartmann. This becomes more awesome by the minute.
6 Likes
Dam n! My credit card is starting to smoulder…
1 Like
I just have to say … take my money!
Looking forward to this release
Release before Christmas?
For anyone looking for " study level " , at the moment , this looks like the ticket !!
Just to clarify,
It is not going to be a study level version (depending on your definition of the term “study level”)
You need to get into the likes of PMDG or FSLabs to get that amount of depth.
Aerosoft states they don’t create “study level” aircraft, as that’s not the market they want to sell to.
They want to make an aircraft that reproduces the more necessary systems, as their studies show that’s what sells best.
I’m sure this will be quite nice, Aerosoft’s CRJ has always been good, but it’s not “study level”.
I for one, will be getting it as soon as it is released.
It won’t be “study level” in the sense that there will be no programmable systems failures, circuit breakers won’t be emulated, and some systems, though emulated, will be simplified.
For example, in the current P3D version of the CRJ, the basic behavior of the hydraulic system is accurately depicted (two engine-driven pumps and 3 electric pumps), and though all the switches and related MFD displays of hydraulic system pressure flows work as they do in the real aircraft, the flight controls can be moved in P3D even with all hydraulics off, whereas in the real aircraft, at least one of the three electric pumps must be on to move flight controls on the ground.
The real CRJ is less complex than many airliners, meaning the pilot workload is higher. There is no autothrottle. The FADEC can hold a fixed thrust setting for climbs, but the pilot is solely responsible for managing thrust (and airspeed) in cruise and descent.
There is no autopilot VNAV function on the great majority of r/w CRJs - there is an FMS “advisory VNAV” function that can display the aircraft’s current position in relation to an optional descent path on the PFD, but the pilot still has to manage the actual descent rate and path with a combination of engine power and autopilot vertical speed, and is responsible for meeting speed and altitude constraints on a STAR manually.
The A320 in MSFS should be able to do an automatic VNAV descent but currently cannot - and that has been a source of many complaints. The CRJ in MSFS won’t be able to do it either, but in this case, it will be because it is not an available function on the real aircraft.
If Aerosoft can bring the same functionality to the MSFS version that currently exists in the FSX/P3D version, it will be without question the most complex airliner add-on currently available for MSFS, and I have no doubt that it will sell very well.
12 Likes
12 Likes