• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Area51sim - c-5m galaxy out now

I have it. All I can say is "BEWARE"; it is not what it seems. I am "disappointed". That is all.:stop:
 
model looks like it have the same superb quality than their Cobra Heli it is on my list but not for this month :)


BR
Tom
 
Gator, how is the model shine? I have their cobra and the model shine makes the matte textures look like its been varnished. From the screen shots, it's hard to tell if the C-5 is truly matte.
 
simkid22 said:
Gator, how is the model shine? I have their cobra and the model shine makes the matte textures look like its been varnished. From the screen shots, it's hard to tell if the C-5 is truly matte.
Click to expand...

There is a shine to it. Sometimes it is more pronounce than other times. It only comes in one livery. On there website a gentleman said that in the next couple of days there will be a patch and a down loadable paint kit. I must say It made me happy to read happy re painter under your simkid22 name. It would be great to see a Dover paint for this monster.

:ernae:
J.J.
 
the aircraft will be on there site soon and will only be $30 which is not a bad price i think.

EDIT: on there forums, there going to work on a few more things and then get the FMC to work.
 
I was able to see some of these huge airships doing pattern landings in California once. Awesome to see. They are so huge that they look like they are floating, like blimps.

Cool to see..



Bill
 
Cag40Navy said:
EDIT: on there forums, there going to work on a few more things and then get the FMC to work.
Click to expand...

Getting the FMC "to work" (like it is supposed to) isn't a simple quick fix like they make it sound. And just having a FMC doesn't make the plane realistic either. What about all the other systems in a plane that modern and complex? If they were planning to add all that stuff, why didn't they wait to release it? (rhetorical question- I know why they didn't wait.)

I'm really growing tired of developers not releasing FINISHED products... :blind:
 
Kiwikat said:
Getting the FMC "to work" (like it is supposed to) isn't a simple quick fix like they make it sound. And just having a FMC doesn't make the plane realistic either. What about all the other systems in a plane that modern and complex? If they were planning to add all that stuff, why didn't they wait to release it? (rhetorical question- I know why they didn't wait.)

I'm really growing tired of developers not releasing FINISHED products... :blind:
Click to expand...

yea, i know, but i just thought i might let people know.

i agree, i wish companys would finish there products before release.
 
"Getting the FMC "to work" (like it is supposed to) isn't a simple quick fix like they make it sound. And just having a FMC doesn't make the plane realistic either. What about all the other systems in a plane that modern and complex? If they were planning to add all that stuff, why didn't they wait to release it? (rhetorical question- I know why they didn't wait.)

I'm really growing tired of developers not releasing FINISHED products... "


There's a standard set of rules when progressing through the design process, and it goes:

You can have any given design in two of the following three ways:

- Fast
- Cheap
- Right

Cheap has already been selected, and speed is relative to each developer. It's a simple fact that for some people, this is a business which needs to put food on plates and roofs over heads. And, most of the really ground breaking, system intensive groups have at least a few people working in this manner. I'm not, for the record. My latest efforts were reimbursed at approximately 1/3 minimum wage.

"i agree, i wish companys would finish there products before release."

Well, wish in one hand and spit in the other; then see which gets full first.

If you're really tired of hastily released products, take matters into your own hands. The best way to do this would be de-selecting cheap. Offer up a living wage + benefits and overhead for either a solid development team or in support of a developer who is making an add-on you want. Last I heard, a competitive salary was about $60-$80,000 for a low level, college educated graphics design artist. Systems would best be handled by Engineers (probably a controls engineer, unless you also wanted the same engineer to double as flight model/physics), and a good entry level hire would again have a salary in the realm of $60,000. Also, be sure to account for either raises or turn-over. Be prepared for the salaries to steadily work up into the $100-$150,000/year range, or hire on interns to learn the trade for when the experienced professionals can no longer be afforded.

On the other hand. You could also take a solid look and realize there's another way. If a product needs to be perfect before you double click that executable, overcome buyers impulse and wait. Wait until you either hear it's bug free or until all known issues have been addressed.

Either way, regularly making angry/negative posts which offer up no productive solution is no way to motivate existing developers or bring about happiness in the many other individuals who seek out this hobby in a effort to relax and unwind.
 
JohnC said:
On the other hand. You could also take a solid look and realize there's another way. If a product needs to be perfect before you double click that executable, overcome buyers impulse and wait. Wait until you either hear it's bug free or until all known issues have been addressed.

Either way, regularly making angry/negative posts which offer up no productive solution is no way to motivate existing developers or bring about happiness in the many other individuals who seek out this hobby in a effort to relax and unwind.
Click to expand...

It isn't about it being perfect when you first buy it. It is about it having the features they intend. Not having a FMC and its accompanying systems is HUGELY different from a product that does. Compare the default 747 to the PMDG 747. You can't. (Here's another example that most of you probably know) Not having a VC AT ALL is completely different from a product that has a fully working one.

It being bug free has nothing to do with it having a huge feature or not having a huge feature. I am fine buying a "buggy" product in which the developer plans to fix the bugs. The PMDG J41 is a good example. They didn't release it without a FMC. They didn't promise to add something huge like a FMC afterwards. It WAS relatively buggy, but it has now been fixed with a service pack.

It seems to be an increasing trend that developers are promising more HUGE features in future service packs, yet next to none of them have delivered.

The "productive" solution is for developers not to release unfinished products (note I didn't say anything about bugs or minor issues, those happen). It is what almost all consumers want and expect. It is also what almost every single developer already does! :kilroy:

Back to the C-5... I really hope they can turn this into a more complex simulation. The market for an accurate modern military aircraft is wide open.
 
Being a developer, I know how hard it is to make a single product that works perfect on every single computer, 'and' is appreciated by all who obtain it.

That just doesnt happen.


Second, I think they recieved a ton of responses on the FMC (probably because it looks so dang good) that they are going to go ahead and create or add an existing FMC software section to the package. They have offered to do this freely. That is pretty dang cool of them. The cost of adding this from a 3rd party will be expensive as FMC's are a HUGE (gigantic) sophisticated bit of programming, like you cannot imagine. (Open up the FSX GPS in Notepad and you will get an idea).


From what I saw, it is a nice looking plane. It is not a Cap. Sim model. It is a nice looking plane. I hate to hear overly critical stuff about new planes. Its a bit harsh in my own opion, but to each their own. Nothings perfect, everyone has updates. If you want something really really really cool, get a real one. Even those have updates, hidden gauges, squeaks, oil leaks. Always something to complain about.

:d


My humble two cents.
 
Going to agree with Lionheart on this one. It's hard enough to get just the basics right let alone doing 10,000 lines of code just for an FMC that most people won't even know how to use... (not saying that NO ONE knows... just most) (that includes me).

if i add my two cents that makes four. One more and we've got a nickel!!!!

kc
 
:ernae:Going to have to go with Lionheart and krazycolin. Also one should know what to do when the FMC goes out or on the fritz. Anotherwards toss the darn thing out and use the melon. Im pretty sure the military teaches this as part of training. Im leaning to purchase as it is for FSX anyway and so far the only one. Besides I have a panel editing program if i want to make adjustments to suit my needs.
 
.....me too.

The FMC is not the pinnacle of simulation, and I've never seen an FMC in-sim that was correct and fully functioning anyway. Stuff like that is fun, but the aircraft that seem to sell the most (and actually make profit) are the ones striking a fair balance, like the aerosoft and IRIS F-16s. There are feel-good avionics to make you feel like you're in the real deal, but it's not overdone. I like aircraft that are crazy complicated but can still be CTRL E'd from time to time.

A developer could easily double the amount of time spent on a project just making perfect gauges, and they'd start taking money out of their own projects and food off their families plates. Full-on projects are always going to be the ones with the most mass appeal, like airliners.

Us Americans love our military aircraft, but Europe has a gigantic simming marketshare and most of that is in GA and commercial avation. I'm just happy there's a new C-5 out. These guys are making what I want.

Back to the topic: Can I see some very good VC shots from standard eyepoints?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top