Unfortunately we’ve seen this behavior with other big anticipated releases, there really is a low key “PMDG vs ALL” campaign like mindset lately when releases of other products are near, where folks feel they need to nitpick PRICES and TEXTURES somehow trying to sway others on how to spend their money.It doesn’t exactly work with 15 year consumer bases like Leonardo, we know exactly what we are going to buy and the distractions aren’t going to work. I do feel your pain as it does come off as annoying, especially when you are a long term customer of such developers and follow each and every WIP update. For those with genuine concerns of sub standard MSFS textures and visuals in 2022, it’s best for them to give it some time and see if improvement patches are inbound.
No one can rain on our parade tomorrow except MS/Asobo servers knocks on wood
For those interested in studying the MD80 systems a FCOM can be downloaded from here
Please keep discussions focused on the topic of the thread. Also, please try to avoid broad generalisations of other forum users or make posts that could derail the thread away from its purpose.
If you see such posts then responding to the same will not benefit the wider forum community.
LOL, only 1200 pages! 
Thank you
I was half hoping that Saturday was a typo, and it would appear today
Release is set for 30/04/2022 - 12:00 CET (10:00 UTC) 
Big surprise with the BAE 146 being released overnight. Yes, it is a port too but the cockpit textures and sound has been completely redone to high quality MSFS standards. The sounds are top notch. The flight model and systems depth is top notch. They had a price of USD80 but reduced it to USD65 after listening to the community.
MD82 is a port from P3D for textures and sound. No evolution or revolution for the new MSFS platform. I just bought the BAE 146 and it is fantastic in the short time I have had it so far. The MD82 is a great plane but at EUR75 and basically a straight port I will wait until they improve the cockpit textures to make it look stunning and up to MSFS quality and improve the sounds. Then I will be back to buy it in a heartbeat. For now, its all BAE 146 in full stunning MSFS glory. Next will be the PMDG 737 which is a port but fully redone for MSFS and expecting to be priced around USD65 per plane. Happy flying.
This post is so miguided. You do realise that the MD80 is a whole lot more complex right? But you are worried about textures?
Just saw Flightdeck2Sim’s stream and the textures look way better than P3D version. Also the EFB has added features.
Edit:
No evolution or revolution for the new MSFS platform.
Yeah so this is outright false. Are you even familiar with or even use the P3D version?
This is getting out of hand.
An opinion is one thing, but you are trying to push your whole " simple prior sim platform port" narrative as facts. False accusations and assumptions of products that aren’t even released are pretty distasteful. You clearly haven’t followed the progress of said products if you are still calling them “ports”. Nor do you understand what a " simple port conversion " is.
If you are infact a beta tester of both PMDG 737 and MD82(I seriously doubt that is the case) then I’ll respect your experiences.
Not sure what sort of biased anti consumer/product campaign you and a couple others are trying to push, but we can see the malicious intent clear as day.
Just out of interest what does this one offer that makes it so much more complex. As far as I can see the 146 and 737 model everything you need for a normal flight (aside from weather / terrain radar obviously).
Has it got more complex failure logic so not following procedures can cause systems to fail dynamically? Not sure where the others sit with this but given pmdg had this sort of thing with the dc6 I’d hope the 737 has this modelled.
Well have a look. I am talking about the BAE146 not the 737. The MD80 is more Complex in a lot of areas, and the model and maybe the textures maybe more complex, but coming in screaming my new toy is better than your new toy when it isnt is sill, and for silly reasons that make zero difference!
Can’t agree on this. Not to say that it’s a bad product, far from it, not persuading others to not buy it (those love it always will)
A lot of the texture and price complaints here (I am more on price). Is basically hoping to not dump that much at once into a new aircraft so complicated it might post us a steep learning curve. The point is there is always a crowd of “wanting to try study level” ppl out there but don’t want to spend that much. Pmdg is kept mentioned coz they are promising to sell a lot cheaper than they did previously plus the textures are done better.
Now the question is how big this crowd is. If say selling it at usd 60 will double their sales, it seems like a good deal to everyone as they earn more, old customers saved some lunch money and new customers will be flying this plane. Plus being software developer I don’t think it will create more bug fixing or updating workload, as they only need to fix once and then upload to server. Time will tell, maybe ended up just flight and PMDG will suffer being not so well received and they lowered the price, or they will be suffocated in money and the remaining old style pricing companies will offer steep discount, who knows. As consumer it’s always better to be dirt cheap thanks to a very large market no?
I think mods can change the title of this thread to ‘MD-80 texture quality rant’ , because the ‘discussion’ here is all about that. Next month will come and you will still be arguing that the texture of a bolt in the cockpit is at the P3D level.
Honestly, I’ve had enough of this ‘P3D Conversion’ talk. I’m pretty sure that none of the people complaining here are even beta testers or have any knowledge of the development of this addon.
Claiming that it’s P3D conversion based on screenshots and guesswork is a rant. It’s your right to think the textures are bad, but there are a million better ways to say that than accusing the developer of being lazy without proof.
Hilarious photo. And I rarely say that on flight sim forums, thx!
Malicous haha, hardly. I am on the MSFS platform because of the advances in graphics and I am sure a lot of fellow pilots are too. To keep defending that texture quality does not matter, particularly for the highest-priced plane ever on the platform does not wash for a lot of simmers. I am not from the P3D or Leonardo camp, just the MSFS camp that got me back into swimming after many decades away from it. Graphics advancements is the main reason. A forum is a collection of opinions and we are all from different backgrounds, so take them as you please. I am open to be pleasantly surprised if the most expensive plane on MSFS that the textures have indeed been improved from P3D up to MSFS and if/when that happens I’ll be all in too. To have high standards for the most expensive plane taking full capability of the MSFS platform should be allowed. Planes are clearly ported over, but how they are ported is what matters. In short, graphics and textures matters to a lot of people for immersion and realism. Not to use the MSFS platform when you are selling the highest priced plane will put a lot of people off. It is not just systems depth and flight models that all simmers are after. Happy flying.
Edit: Watching the flightdeck2sim pre-release review today it looks like the developer may have boosted the texture quality from the earlier previews. He does not have a problem with the textures. If that is the case then that is great and how it should be. Likely the developer is listening. Flightdeck2sim said the sounds can do with improvement. Likely to be addressed by a 3rd party developer first I suspect.
Okay, but what about the texture of the bolt below the captain’s seat? 
Oh so you are a “flying with my nose an inch away from the bolt” pilot! I am more of a flying while staring at the spring type guy. When I buy the plane in a few hours I will try the bolt method and report back ASAP.
This is an extremely complex aircraft that will require work and study to fly correctly - especially for those who have never flown previous iterations in FSX or P3D. That will probably put some people off no matter how good the textures might be.
I personally care about the accuracy of the aircraft systems and flight model - I am paying for a flight simulator, not a texture simulator.
I am not an MD80 pilot, but I have extensive experience with R/W MD80 series aircraft as a mechanic, and the flight deck of the real thing is not “pretty”.
If Leonardo accurately modeled the actual appearance of the cockpit of a typical 25-30 year old MD80 cockpit at maximum MSFS resolution, people would probably be outraged at the chipped, scratched paint, faded smudged and dirty push buttons, dirt and dust, tattered trim, worn seat cushions, milky delamination around the perimeter of windows etc.