With 86 Aircraft Released in the Sim, Why Are Almost All Of Them So...Lame?

Discussion Hub General Discussion
1

This is a bit tongue and cheek, as I’m sure that there are plenty of folks who like all 86 of the aircraft that have been released (according to the latest Development Update), but out of all of the aircraft in the sky, I’m having serious difficulty fathoming some of the choices being made by add-on developers because most of the aircraft being produced are so…weird. Long EZ? Ultralights? Bleriot? Cessna 120? What about planes that pilots actually want to fly? I suppose Milviz’s exquisite Corsair implementation does fit into that category, but as far as warbirds go, I’d rather experience combat with them, so DCS would be the obvious ticket for that.

Looking at AOPA’s Top Five High-End piston purchase list for 2020, it pretty much aligns with what I would buy IRL. I have to believe that these aircraft represent the pinnacle of what most GA pilots would buy in a heartbeat if money were no object. The only thing missing IMO is a v-tail Bonanza. Anyway, this is the list:

Cirrus SR-22
Piper Malibu Mirage
Beechcraft Bonanza A/G36
Cessna 206
Beechcraft G58 Baron

And yet, none of these aircraft are in the sim! Yes, I own the Premium Deluxe version and I reiterate my claim. Asobo’s default aircraft are so out of touch with reality that their existence should be ignored. They are entirely ersatz.

Which brings me back to the subject of my ire. The best GA aircraft in the sim is hands down the Just Flight Piper Arrow/Turbo Arrow. Fully implemented, flies like the real thing, totally awesome with one exception: it is an Arrow.

It is a bit like having the most realistic auto simulation software ever made, but instead of developing Porsches and Ferraris (or even a Lexus), third party developers spend their time modelling KIAs and Hyundais. Again, no offense intended to KIA or Hyundai drivers; I’m sure both companies make fine automobiles, but they are so ordinary! I’ve never heard of anyone having a life goal of owning a KIA Sephia.

Guess what add-on developers? It is the same thing with airplanes. Everyone who owns any airplane feels lucky to have it, and certainly their are pilots who, lacking the skill or confidence to fly a high performance aircraft would choose something as amiable as a Piper Warrior, but Beechcraft is the Porsche of the GA world. It is synonymous with speed and luxury and pretty much every pilot who doesn’t already wishes they owned one. The exceptions being the bush pilots out beating up the brush in their Cessna 206s and the Piper Malibu Mirage pilots who want to get above it all in pressurized comfort (though the Beechcraft Baron 58P can also cruise the flight levels). Cirrus pilots just like Ferraris better than Porsches. I don’t understand them personally, but to each their own.

Like I said, this is all a bit tongue and cheek, but I am truly mystified by the lack of what I consider to be the obvious airplanes that virtually everyone would buy if they became available in the sim. Perhaps it is just business strategy. I did have to hand it to Just Flight in releasing the Arrow III first. Being so starved for any good GA aircraft whatsoever, buying the normally aspirated Arrow was a no-brainer, but that required investing in the Turbo Arrow later. Grudgingly, I will admit that the Turbo Arrow is fast enough in cruise to be suitable for travel, but you have to climb high and suck the O2 for optimal speed and it is still a bit slower than I would prefer. Plus, IRL the T-tail sucks and the fixed wastegate turbocharger results in lots of necessary and expensive engine maintenance. And lets face it, unless we are talking about a Malibu, the name Piper just has zero cache.

In any case, add on developers, what I’m looking for in my GA aircraft is 180 KIAS and that is really a minimum. 200 KIAS or more would be better. So no, Cessna 120s or Piper Warriors are not going to cut it. Neither is a Piper Comanche (unless it is a 400, or a top-end twin Comanche). A Mooney Ovation would be OK and those of us who didn’t buy the Carenado version would likely snap up a full fidelity version. But really, what we want is what every pilot wants, and it can be summarized by the list above. After we have those aircraft, feel free to go back to building Stinsons, Tri Pacers, Cessna Cardinals or whatever else tickles your fancy. But please, before that, can we have some Porches in the Sim?!

:grinning:

17 Likes
2

I am thrilled to have to as many 30’s-50’s, 100 KIAS cruising GA aircraft as possible. I’m overjoyed at the Carenado Cessna 170B being released, now we only need an early straight-tail 172 and with a steam gauge and glass 172 already included in the default aircraft the whole lineage will be complete. Give you an idea where I’m coming from?

The only Beechcraft products I want are the Staggerwing biplane and Model 18 twin. Well, the V-tail Bonanza would be OK to have because it’s quirky.

I’m sure there are a sizable content of MSFS users who couldn’t care less about anything either you or I have mentioned and only want more study-quality airliners.

Everyone is entitled to their preferences. This includes developers. Thank God every developer isn’t just doing some sort of market research analysis to see what they most popular/lowest common denominator aircraft is to get the most sales before they start a project!

Tongue in cheek or no, your post comes off as arrogant and dismissive of other people’s tastes and pretending to speak for “every pilot” is laughable.

14 Likes
3

Well, your list includes a lot of default planes. Consider this: a developer needs to invest significant time/money into development. People are MUCH less likely to buy something that’s already there. Granted, not on the same level, but regardless - you will hear a bunch saying we already have mods for that. So it’s a risky thing. You already have people grumbling at a C170 cause there is a C172.

7 Likes
4

Your “lame” is someone’s “awesome”.
Addons, wither free or pay are your options.
Easier just to ask for recommendations and doesn’t require a 500 word op/ed post.

13 Likes
5

Yes, honestly I do worry that by modelling the Cirrus, Beech A36 and Baron, Asobo made developers think twice about bringing these aircraft into the sim, which would be a real shame.

1 Like
6

There so much wrong with OP post that I do not even know where to start. What you want is already in the sim and most people would not buy again a better version (which probably would even be graphically inferior).

You use “we WANT” a lot as if your personal opinion represented actually what virtual pilots want. I say virtual because giving the real life data about popular planes does not show what virtual pilots want to fly. In real life only a small proportion of people buys new aircraft and many of them are bought for practical or safety reasons, speed, efficiency, or luxury or comfort, neither of which translates to virtual world.

I am personally not interested in buying most of the planes from that list because the versions in the sim although not perfect are not bad, and they are being improved by ASOBO. I also like the sIngle engine older GA being made for MSFS.

8 Likes
7

Again, my tongue was firmly in cheek folks. It was humor. I wasn’t being serious in claiming that every pilot (real or virtual) secretly wishes they had a Bonanza or really anything claiming to represent anyone besides myself. I certainly recognize that everyone has different tastes. But unquestionably the planes in the top five are extremely popular (and aspirational) with pilots and it does seem strange to me that they don’t exist in the sim outside of Asobo’s defaults. I do think that there is a market for full-fidelity versions of the aforementioned planes and I hope those developers that service that market won’t be scared off by the Asobo versions. P.S. A Staggerwing Beech would be very cool. :slight_smile:

EDIT: And in all seriousness, I think it is awesome that we do have such diversity of aircraft in the sim–I keep being tempted to buy the Bleriot just to see if I can fly the English Channel. The Long EZ isn’t my cup of tea, but I was impressed when it showed up in the simulator as I’ve always liked its distinctive looks. Likewise with the Cessna 120. If a Cessna 190 or 195 with a big old Jacobs rotary showed up in the sim, I’d probably buy it…Not to mention some of the strange and apparently wonderful Russian aircraft that have shown up lately. Those might be a bit too exotic for me, but who would have thought?

4 Likes
8

Well, the Asobo Airbus didn’t stop anyone… so there’s hope. Of course, that one was really sub-par. Not sure about their GA offerings. I have hardly tried those.

9

The GAs are looking to be in much better state than airliners from what I read. I have never flown any of the jets and airliners in the sim though.

10

Well, the PMDG’s DC-6 is a work of art. That is one aircraft I would never have bought if any of their modern airliners would have been available–and I’m so glad I ended up purchasing it. In terms of modern airliners, the FBW A32NX and Aerosoft’s CRJ are both good. I suspect that the FBW will eventually get to full-fidelity and it keeps getting better every day. The CRJ is good, but it is still missing wx radar and last time I tried to have the autopilot fly holds it wouldn’t work. Hopefully that got fixed. So, if the DC-6 is discounted, then I’d say the other airliners aren’t quite at the fidelity level of the Just Flight Arrows, but in fairness, it is much easier to do a full fidelity GA aircraft than an airliner. So given the amount of development time required, I’m actually pretty happy with the state of third party airline offerings, though I’m really wanting to see the PMDG 737 plus something long haulable (maybe Quality Wings 787 will make a surprise entrance later this year…).

EDIT: Just realized you were talking about Asobo. As far as Asobo GA default planes, yes they are generally much better than the airliners. Both types of planes look great, but have a lot of inops and unrealistic behavior, which tends to be more noticeable on the airliners. Both work well for just cruising around though. That said, I think the airliners have gotten somewhat better. I generally don’t fly them anymore, but I did fly the 787 with the heavy mod a few weeks back and I had a successful flight.

2 Likes
11

Personally I didn’t fully understand why they dropped the sim with what… 30 airplanes?

Why not less and make those fewer airplanes better? I get the whole idea that ‘other people’ should make the ‘real’ planes, but as a sim maker… isn’t that a bit of a shameful position? Why not also go for a few awesome planes? But well… it is what it is…

6 Likes
12

What you describe is what I would have rather had, but from a business perspective, I think they made the right call. I would imagine that the vast majority of customers are neither real life pilots nor experienced flight simulator users. As such, presenting a wide variety of aircraft that are of minimal complexity and therefore easily accessible was a good choice. Providing a full fidelity aircraft in the mix would have been difficult and potentially confusing to customers. The Aerosoft and PMDG forums have been educational in seeing what kinds of issues inexperienced customers have had with those aircraft. Regardless, it is great for everyone that MSFS has exploded the customer base. Hopefully, we will continue to see more great add-on aircraft in the sim. I’m very interested to see the level of fidelity of the upcoming Junkers payware that Asobo is planning on introducing. Perhaps Asobo will develop some higher fidelity aircraft as paid DLC.

2 Likes
13

None taken. Although I love my Hyundai (I wanted something newish, and this plus Kia were the only real choice in my budget), I’m aware that there are nicer cars. In fact I just looked out the window and noticed that my son had moved my car out of the covered port to make way for his friend’s BMW. Again, I’m not offended but I will pretend to be later…
I wouldn’t buy the ultimate Hyundai simulation, though. I don’t need to.

2 Likes
14

Love it! I probably should have said Subaru (because that is what I drive). Nobody gets to their death bed wishing that they would have owned an Outback either :slight_smile:.

2 Likes
15

Well I don’t really care about any of those aircrafts. Not because they’re lame, but I’m just not interested in flying them.

I’m still waiting for A350. So for now, I uninstall every aircraft in my sim and only leave the A320.

1 Like
16

Well I don’t know.

I agree that it might be sensible from a business perspective, but if you extend that reasoning, they could also have let go of the 60 layers of weather, or turbulence, or forget about the rain, people just want to fly and will be happy with two clouds (and less lightning).

I’m not fully sure why that reasoning is acceptable for the airplanes but not for the rainbows? There seems to be a lot of energy spent on that stuff, when it’s the airplane that flies you through it.

Mind you, I’m not disagreeing with you. It was probably their reasoning. I just find it a bit weird that we all seem to accept that a flightsim is essentially delivered without the correct tools to use it. Or sort of half half tools to limp around the planet. Anyway… that’s why I don’t fully get it. Bit confused about the product I suppose.

17

Heh, yeah at this point, I think nobody would complain if the lightning just went away (again, calling out the hyperbole for the humor challenged). You make a good point. Perhaps the ideal solution would have been to have the option for full fidelity aircraft, with the defaults set for accessibility. But that would have been the most expensive and time consuming. I think many of us are confused about the product–hence all of the sim vs. game threads :grinning: . Unquestionably, MSFS has managed to be many things to many people.

1 Like
18

You picked up on the lightning joke :slight_smile:

Well, I’m just a curmudgeon I suppose. There’s more in this sim that confuses me after a year. I feel the focus has been too much on the graphics and not enough on the system supporting the whole experience. The airplanes are part of that. But also ATC, flightplanning, incorrect airports, the user interface etc.

I don’t think they were joking that they need 10 years.

1 Like
19

There are really only 3 more that I need, or want and I’ll be tickled.

The Twotter, coming
Cessna 337, Carenado?
Piper Malibu.
As long as the avionics keep getting upgraded by Working title, I’ve got my Baron, king Air, Cirrus, and A320.

1 Like
20

Or an O-2 from Milviz. There is something about that aircraft…That is definitely one that I’d probably feel compelled to buy in the virtual world…

1 Like