Taking into account the technology of the time, this is the worst looking model I’ve ever seen in a flight simulator.
Putting it on the marketplace is a joke.
4 Likes
I just got an email informing me the Beech 99 has been updated, as well, so knocking the dev and especially putting that in the same description as this rubbish Tyffie is just plain wrong.
PS - for anyone who wants to look, learn and not just bash, this is the dev site:
and:
I know they are dedicated, even if their products are not up to the standards of other developer teams, they are certainly far better than many others and I would be happy to fight their corner against claims of “cash grabbing” because it’s just ignorance.
If there are issues, report them, otherwise move along.
Yes, the Typhoon looks dismal - worse than many Abacus models I was ignorant enough to purchase early in my FSX experience - but the Beech 99 is not in the same pit.
excuse the couple of edit additions - here is what they said on the model feedback:
After the launch of our product, we received several suggestions to modify things in our model. We thank all the customers and people who helped us by indicating the problems and inconveniences that they found, and most importantly, your kind patience and understanding.
It is very important to understand that this is a new Flight Simulator, several things, especially operational development, have changed compared to previous simulators and the SDK is not yet complete, so it has not been easy for any of us who develop to publish a product completely finished and working properly, especially those that are not type PROP airplanes, because only for these type of airplanes exist enough written information, video and examples, but for cases such as TUBROPROP or JET, there are still many doubts that it has not been possible to be easily resolved, especially on the subject of sounds.
Look, there is a thing called standards… I can forgive a thing or two not quite working right and being fixed. That’s a work in progress. How come Dino Cattaneo of IndiaFoxtEcho just said that one of their planned aircraft won’t see the light of day just yet cause they converted it from the previous sim and just weren’t happy with how it came out and the quality is not up to par? How come Aerosoft can delay the CRJ cause they want to get it right? THAT is the difference between caring about the quality and just quickly slapping some stuff together and starting to ■■■■ money out of people for a way incomplete, substandard work. I am not expecting perfection. I am fine, for instance, with the way Carenado releases their aircraft - sure, there are a couple of things glitchy, those can be addressed in an update as they have, BUT… The model looks great, up to MSFS standard, and it flies well! It ALWAYS does. When I buy Carenado aircraft, I know not to expect study-level, but things will generally be believable and most things you need will work. Virtualcol is cool with releasing a model where EXTERNAL POWER on a COMMUTER LINER is INOP! The windshield wipers don’t work… (Fine, that one is NOT necessary, but they work on default MSFS aircraft!)… Avionics go dead. It’s underpowered so you can barely take off. The flaps issue has been addressed, they say, I will even let that one go. BUT it’s an UGLY model. The cockpit is HIDEOUS. How in the world is THAT excusable? THAT is cash-grab. Look, all these people KNOW MSFS is a new platform that requires them to do things in a new way. So take the time and learn it. I’d rather you sit on the product and tinker with it to make it work and look like it belongs in a new sim than release a pile of rubbish. Why is A2A and PMDG not in the market with MSFS at this point? They sure as hell want to be, but it’s NOT working for them yet. So they’d rather wait until it is, or until they are able to implement what they need. I’d rather have more people follow their mentality, to be honest. Don’t just throw stuff at me cause I want new aircraft. I am just as hungry for a PMDG in MSFS as everyone else, but guess what? I went and got P3D and got PMDG stuff for it NOW, so I can enjoy it NOW while they are working on the MSFS versions. At least, I know that in P3D, their stuff is TOP NOTCH and it flies like a dream. It sucks seeing this beautiful simulator become a dumpster bin for developers to dump their half-finished, ugly converts into it…
I am guessing I know why Carenado has so far released fairly simple aircraft. Go look at their portfolio on P3D - they have WAY more complex aircraft there. It’s not on MSFS yet though they said they want to eventually bring all of it over… Cause they are starting with simple things, taking their time to bring more complex stuff later. I don’t own Carenado products for P3D YET, but they have earned my TRUST after seeing their great work in MSFS. That Mooney is to die for! I am actually thinking about picking up some of their stuff in P3D. Virtualcol has Embraers in P3D, I’d LOVE to get an Embraer. After this recent Beechcraft 99 debacle, will I buy any of their stuff in P3D? Heck no! I don’t trust them as far as I can throw them! If you read their SimMarket review for Embraer in P3D, you will see that people are complaining about the quality of textures/meshes in the cockpit? Guess what? That’s congruent with what I see here in MSFS - I am now convinced that their stuff is pure unadulterated rubbish. It may not be on the embarassing level of this Typhoon, but it’s not far above it. Based on this released product, it’s FAR BELOW the level of DEFAULT AIRCRAFT in MSFS. Why would anyone want that? Who wants to fly a pile of ugly junk that’s below even the default stuff? Asobo did well with most of their default offerings - I love the TBM, the 172, 152, The Baron, and such. Why would I want something that’s far below that level both visually and functionality-wise?
That’s my point. Don’t throw stuff at me just cause you can’t be bothered to learn the SDK and expect me to like it and not dog it in reviews. Your sounds are terrible. You say it’s because it’s a new platform and the sounds are tied to actual engine performance. Guess what? Work on it until you can make it work - OTHERS HAVE DONE IT!
There is Bleriot, IndiaFoxtEcho, AT Simulations, Iris… They have all released things that are FUN and WORK. Sure, there were issues. Even a controversial dev like BlackBox eventually got their BirdDog to be pretty good! People were complaining about the ugly cockpit, they fixed most of it. Other issues were also handled. BlackBox didn’t put out a solid product from the start, THAT lesson should have been learned by Virtualcol. They shouldn’t have gone down the path that obviously results in a ton of upset people.
I can fully understand the rage and anger some are expressing - because I’ve been there. It’s the same developer who gave us the “fantastic” EDDH airport, available in the marketplace for quite some time - with bathroomtile textures for roofs. I didn’t buy it, but it annoyed me.
Now Justsim brings EDDH to the marketplace too, a renowned developer. It’s clearly a port from their P3D or Xplane version. The textures are better (not the night textures of the terminal though), but also below average imho. There’s no real terraforming recognisable from the product pictures, and they failed to bring the airport to todays state of development when it comes to buildings that have long been removed irl. So all in all I guess the efforts on their side were limited. Is that up to “the standards”?
To my point:
The calls for any vetting process other than the technical standards are a mistake imho.
What standards should Microsoft apply? What level of quality should be necessary to get access to the marketplace? Why should we allow Microsoft to make decisions in our place? What if I want my home airport at all costs and there’s only one version not deemed worthy but better than default?
I think deciding by my own standards and having the choice is preferrable over any form of censorship. Even if that means the occasional bad purchase.
That said, I won’t ever purchase this “Eurofighter”.
Preventing substandard items from reaching the marketplace does not in any way hinder them from selling the products elsewhere.
The standard is very easy - I know some are unhappy with the Asobo models - personally, as they are essentially just a “gizzit” to get you started and so you have at least something without further outlay I don’t mind them not being AAA standard - the products should be reasonably accurate in the cockpit panels and exterior model (which I think everyone agrees the Typhoon isn’t, by some margin - even accepting licensing and technical restrictions) at a reasonable price for the qaulity they represent and not be worse than the default items.
If Eagle Dynamics can do it, Asobo and Microsoft can. Even the one failed module for DCS World was still far better than a large amount of add-ons for other sims.
Besides, even if you argue against that, when something is so obviously just a gimmick plane, then imho Asobo have to think long and hard about what they want to achieve and whether they are prepared to accept the fallout in the community and the inevitable damage to their, and the product’s reputation.
But that doesn’t mean they should simply say “buzz off that’s utter rubbish!”. No, they should offer support and advice to the substandard developers - and if those developers don’t bother even trying to get it right, then the consequences are very simple.
2 Likes
I’m hearing from multiple sources that the new jets are “Kitfoxes with jet engines”.
I want my money back for the Kitfox, why would I step into these piles?
It’s OK. Not worth $20 by a long shot, however. The way the engine cfg and airframecfg are set up are to ‘hack’ the current parameters to exceed Mach 1. (Spoiler: you’re not actually going supersonic because it’s not even supported yet). The sounds are bit on the low end as well as the model needs polishing. Fun for a few flights, but again, I’d wait for a discount if possible.
1 Like
Is it a bug, or am i just too blind?
I cant find a way to change display brightness, could someone help me?
My diplay in the center is way too dark and the others are too bright. Like this i dont even want to start a testflight.
1 Like
Nope. I haven’t been able to change the brightness either.
1 Like
I do agree with that. That’s why I don’t call for anything to be removed from the Marketplace. To me, it’s just another storefront - like SimMarket or Orbx. Except Orbx does seem to have a bit higher standard to what they put on there… I just wish some developers had better standards. Until then, it’s up to us to spread the word on the products we think are not good. Perhaps that will get the developers to fix their shortcomings. I am definitely not expecting perfection, but there is a certain level (and you are right, that level will vary from individual to individual - to some people, the Typhoon is wicked amazing) of standard that shouldn’t be neglected.
People might think the Typhoon is wicked amazing, but that’s a subjective opinion.
On the other hand, the main landing gear being completely back to front and inside out is a fact.
2 Likes
Why should it not be on the marketplace? Like anything else it’s up to the consumer to decide if its worth it. Some kid may want to fly it and not care if the instrumentation is not accurate or its not an accurate simulation of the real thing.
What is the threshold for acceptability for the marketplace? On some forums people say Aerosoft planes are not a good standard - should they be allowed on the marketplace? Who decides?
A lot of people complaining above have bought the plane so the developer is clearly right to have put it in the shop window since its clearly selling.
I haven’t bought it because I made the choice not to buy it and I check reviews and videos before I buy anything so I know what I am getting.
Congrats to the developer. He’s doing well out of it even if he doesn’t appear to be PMDG standard and Microsoft get their cut of the sales.
Yeah but the problem is the consumer can only decide whether or not its worth it after they’ve parted with their hard earned money for it. I bought it because on the surface it looked half decent. It wasn’t until I loaded it into the sim that I discovered what a mess it it. Too late for me though. The purchase is made.
That’s crazy! They need to get a handle on QA for the Marketplace.
1 Like
Because I (and presumably others) would like to think that anything on the marketplace has been deemed to have a certain level of quality and authenticity.
2 Likes
As others have stated, this is all about the consumer. I saw the video and I wouldn’t have bought this, but my 12-year old nephew would LOVE it. It’s all subjective. Does it fly? Does it look cool? Good enough for him.
Remember that MSFS is marketed to people of all ages and knowledge levels, and yes, there are those who think of it as a game.
That said, every single item offered on the Marketplace should offer a refund (I’m not sure if they do). That way, we get our money back and my nephew enjoys the jet.
2 Likes
At least he’s committed to improving it, thought it seems like he shouldn’t have put it on the market in its original state. Thanks to threads like this, the more diligent buyer knows exactly what he or she is getting.
1 Like
I just purchased this jet yesterday on the marketplace. After having a wonderful experience recently purchasing the MB-339 I thought I could trust that Microsoft would ensure anything sold on the marketplace at least met the standard of their official planes. NOPE!
The Typhoon looks like a toy plane in the cockpit. It is horribly optimized. I crash down to a constant 20 fps or less when inside the cockpit compared to the 60fps I get in the cockpit of the MB-339. Most of the switches are useless. What a disappointment. I can’t even find any documentation explaining the controls.
I thought it would get me by until the DCS version is complete but now I’m going to be a lot more careful about buying ANYTHING off of the marketplace.
1 Like
I don’t think they’re going to disallow people from selling in the marketplace. Who’s to say what’s good and what’s not. What I would like to see is the ability to write reviews, that should help sort the wheat from the chaff.
1 Like