SLC is same, only flight plan.
In case anyone has the same doubt as the OP.
About SLC, very disgusting dealing with the developer after having bought it since release.
I actually said what I thought on reddit, can be searched by this title:
āMy experience as a consumer with an independent developer of an addon for flighsimā
The pity is that PACX does not have voice customization (only custom boarding music and custom safety briefing audio) and in SLC you can customize all them.
According to what I have been told (I was banned from his discord for nothing) after missing his deadline of September 24, he said he would be out this week. Today is Sunday and nothing.
So, if doesnāt open source or a small dev teamā¦ buy under your responsibility.
2 Likes
Absolutely agree, it pretends to have an update. I believe that in reality there is not. SLC for me closed, it is also not 100% compatible with MFS
2 Likes
SLC does look nice but PacX definitely seems to be updated on a more regular basis.
1 Like
Yeah agreed - The SLC developer continues to talk up the upcoming updateā¦but its been upcoming for a year and he continues to miss his own imposed deadlines.
If he put half the time he spends banging on his own discord into actually programming we might have seen an update by now.
If I had my choice again Iād just go straight for PACX
5 Likes
If I buy PacX do I also need to buy FSUIPC ? Thank you
No need, you can use the un-registered free version of FSUIPC and it should work.
2 Likes
yes, when I purchased slc more than a year ago there was no full compatibility with MFS, but an imminent update was coming that never arrived
2 Likes
Yep the imminent update for SLC has been coming in a week, for the past year. I have my doubts it will ever happen. Donāt bother asking on the SLC discord, heāll just get grumpy.
For this reason got to go with PacX, not only that PacX is pretty good as well and has a career mode. If SLC does get updated to 1.6 then that might pull ahead.
1 Like
I bought SLC too as it looked great last year, but just isnāt getting any kind of development. Iād 100% go with PACX if I were you.
2 Likes
pacx does just what you ask
1 Like
Honestly, Iām surprised no one in the US has reported this guy to the BBB for false advertising. While he can use his terms as a shield, the fact that he publicly has stated development goal dates and then gives vague and untimely excuses for not releasing his āupdateā should be considered false advertising. Simply saying he canāt release it for over 1 year ābecause reasonsā holds no water. At least PACX gives updates and valid reasons for not supporting certain features.
1 Like
Because itās not false advertising.
He is not SELLING the 1.6 update. He is PROMISING it. Heās SELLING a complete and functioning product, and representing what it does and doesnāt do accurately. The update is a free product for purchasers of the existing, functioning product. You cannot falsely advertise something you are not charging for, or something that is not integral to the common use of the product youāre selling. The purchaser must act in RELIANCE on the advertising as part of the purchasing decision FOR THE ADVERTISED PRODUCT in order for there to be a false advertising claim.
If I say Iām going to come over and mow your lawn for free, you canāt sue me for false advertising.
2 Likes
I have heard that PACX will have a noticeable impact on your FPS, just be aware.
The rumors are bad, someone needs to have tested both and fps proof of each one.
@DaveR44
I do not know if the case of the update is false advertising, I do not think it reaches that extreme, but it can condition the purchase with future promises.
The most serious problem that SLC has is his developer as I said on reddit, where it looks like he behaves.
I donāt think thatās true! I have over 1.000 hours of flying with PACX but never seen any FPS impact.
If you just said that and I did not purchase anything that is true. However, if you tell me that you will mow my lawn for X and in 2 weeks you will mow my lawn for free, then my purchase is now based on the understanding you will be mowing my lawn in 2 weeks for free. That is called a contract and with regards to this software developer, since he gave timeframes and then specific dates when something would be complete, heās on the hook. Now, he can hide behind his TOS but at the very least itās shady. BTW a report to the BBB doesnāt mean youāre suing someone but it does mean you can report to warn others of deceptive practices.
As for your offer to mow my lawn for free, even if I canāt sue you for hiding behind your TOS, what I can do is tell my neighborhood not to hire you. That, I am sure, is a lot worse of an outcome than it would be to sue you.
Iāve never noticed any FPS drop with PACX.
However, if you tell me that you will mow my lawn for X and in 2 weeks you will mow my lawn for free, then my purchase is now based on the understanding you will be mowing my lawn in 2 weeks for free.
Thatās not the same situation at all. The same situation would be I mow your lawn for $X. Then the next day I say Iāll mow it again in two weeks for free. If thereās a contract ā and I donāt think there would be ā itās a gratuitous contract, which canāt be enforced. If you somehow suffered financial damage as a result of reliance on my promise, you could file suit to collect damages from me. You could also sue in equity to force me to mow your lawn as I promised, but only in exchange for my usual mowing rate of $X. What you canāt do is sue me for āfalse advertisingā.
Can you just install this and away you go? or is it a massive faff? PACX i mean.