And in that, you would be going from the ridiculous to the sublime. If you don't like the Aerosoft Catalina, you don't really like aeroplanes.
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
FCS Sunderland available for Pre-Order
- Thread starter AndyE1976
- Start date
And in that, you would be going from the ridiculous to the sublime. If you don't like the Aerosoft Catalina, you don't really like aeroplanes.
Ow dear god! I havent seen a payware this bad since.... Ever!
Now, following my rule of critique (cant complain without giving helpfull advice) here is my helpfull advice to the people selling this.
#1, scrap the model. Its bad. No saving it.
#2, scrap the artist. They dont know aircraft
#3, scrap whoever said "Ya, this is good enough, lets sell it"
Back in FS95 or earlier, this may have been acceptable, but now? No. When I first saw this, alarms went off when the web page only had VERY SMALL pix. If your proud of your work, you show it off. That should of been everyones first clue. If your hard up for a good floater, get the Aerosoft Catalina. Its one of the best floaters on the market, if not THE best.
Not really, PRB, any more than endless posts of 'OMG' and 'Awesome' is piling it on about a good product.
Okay, the opinions here are less than complementary but they are no less valid for that.
Besides which, some people may yet buy the Sunderland and leap to its defence ( cough). And this will be the thread in which to do it.
If it was freeware, I would consider this "piling it on" and not fair because its free, but its not, its payware and not cheap payware.
You do realize that they are asking about $39? ($31 w/sale) But the normal price of most of there addons is the same, which it way too high IMO.
We are the ones spending the money, so bring out all the critics and pile it on I say!
You do realize that they are asking about $39? ($31 w/sale) But the normal price of most of there addons is the same, which it way too high IMO.
We are the ones spending the money, so bring out all the critics and pile it on I say!
I agree with that, more or less. I'm just detecting a hint of unnecessary incivility starting to creep into this thread, which I am attempting to head off.
I didn't respond earlier but now I will.
The way things happen in the world is a two way street. You either agree or disagree. I'm member to the usual and better known forums. I do a lot of reading and, generally keep quiet. I noticed first thing that when something is good, it gets praised and others build on that. That's fine. But when someone jumps in with derogatory thoughts, they immediately get banished, and/or advised to rethink before posting again. In other words, intimidating them to douse the heat.
We all hear the good. Why not hear the bad too (if any) and give a real opinion of our thoughts. Some here get away with voicing opinion on a regular basis. Most, do not because they get jumped by the majority that do like it and the subject fades away. That's ludicrous.
While not directing this to any developer in particular. It's simple. Support what you sell. Take the good. Take the bad. If there is negativity that can be fixed, fix it and grow from it as a developer or, move on.
I'm not sure how many here were, or are into radio control flight as a hobby. Like any hobby there are usually many publishers of magazines in relation. All the articles praise what's advertised within, and negativity scarce. Then come a publisher of a magazine that laid things on the line and told hobbyists the real story. The name of the magazine, R/C Reports. If it was good, they told you. If it was bad, they also told you that. There was no padding. Anyone ever listen to Paul Harvey. The same applies here in this hobby. It's not cheap by no means and opinions should be shared...good or bad.
I would love to see a section on any forum called Flightsim Reports that gave the true and unbiased opinion of products throughout the market
The way things happen in the world is a two way street. You either agree or disagree. I'm member to the usual and better known forums. I do a lot of reading and, generally keep quiet. I noticed first thing that when something is good, it gets praised and others build on that. That's fine. But when someone jumps in with derogatory thoughts, they immediately get banished, and/or advised to rethink before posting again. In other words, intimidating them to douse the heat.
We all hear the good. Why not hear the bad too (if any) and give a real opinion of our thoughts. Some here get away with voicing opinion on a regular basis. Most, do not because they get jumped by the majority that do like it and the subject fades away. That's ludicrous.
While not directing this to any developer in particular. It's simple. Support what you sell. Take the good. Take the bad. If there is negativity that can be fixed, fix it and grow from it as a developer or, move on.
I'm not sure how many here were, or are into radio control flight as a hobby. Like any hobby there are usually many publishers of magazines in relation. All the articles praise what's advertised within, and negativity scarce. Then come a publisher of a magazine that laid things on the line and told hobbyists the real story. The name of the magazine, R/C Reports. If it was good, they told you. If it was bad, they also told you that. There was no padding. Anyone ever listen to Paul Harvey. The same applies here in this hobby. It's not cheap by no means and opinions should be shared...good or bad.
I would love to see a section on any forum called Flightsim Reports that gave the true and unbiased opinion of products throughout the market
TeiscoDelRay
Life Time CM
Yeah RC Reports was a lone wolf and always to the point. I did a couple plane articles for it, you might remember my Balsa USA Stearman report with the two Red Barrons on the cover.
As far as this payware is concerned, as a texture artist I could not let that bump mapping and coloring go as a final.. It looks like the bump map and main textures were done on a 1024 size and should be 2048 for todays computers and graphics cards. The brick wall lines are attempts to bump map the panel lines but way overdone. I know the bump mapping can be toned down, a lot. Just use a plain blue layer over it and change layer properties until you get the look you want. As far as the incorrect colors you can always do more research and re color. These things should be done before release
As far as this payware is concerned, as a texture artist I could not let that bump mapping and coloring go as a final.. It looks like the bump map and main textures were done on a 1024 size and should be 2048 for todays computers and graphics cards. The brick wall lines are attempts to bump map the panel lines but way overdone. I know the bump mapping can be toned down, a lot. Just use a plain blue layer over it and change layer properties until you get the look you want. As far as the incorrect colors you can always do more research and re color. These things should be done before release
I have been a 3D and texture artist for almost 20 years and have worked for almost all the 3rd party dev's in one form or another, Aces, and even Oleg Maddox/IL2, so I would think that qualifies my openion on aircraft models. I have never really "bashed" ANY product, but I have given critique more then a few times This is one of those few occasions, as a professional, I felt I just had to say crap was crap. If we could prevent someone from making the error of paying money for this, we did a good thing. Never reward bad products, or you get more bad products.
I know out there the artist that did this is feeling a little hurt from the negitive reviews its getting, but thats part of the job! I have delt with that for years, and I get it all the time even today. The good artist's will accept the negitive, and work harder to make things better, and the bad artist's will sit in a corner and sulk, maybe quit, but thats what seperates the good from the bad. Not everyone can do this job, and its best to filter out the bad early. Culling the hurd if you will
I understand the admin's wish to keep things civil, and maybe shelter someone's feelings, but sometimes you need to just call it like it is, and hopefully save someone some money and regret from a bad purchase. Whats more important? Saving an artist's feelings, or saving your members money?
This is one of those few occasions, as a professional, I felt I just had to say crap was crap. If we could prevent someone from making the error of paying money for this, we did a good thing. Never reward bad products, or you get more bad products. I know out there the artist that did this is feeling a little hurt from the negitive reviews its getting, but thats part of the job! I have delt with that for years, and I get it all the time even today. The good artist's will accept the negitive, and work harder to make things better, and the bad artist's will sit in a corner and sulk, maybe quit, but thats what seperates the good from the bad. Not everyone can do this job, and its best to filter out the bad early. Culling the hurd if you will
I understand the admin's wish to keep things civil, and maybe shelter someone's feelings, but sometimes you need to just call it like it is, and hopefully save someone some money and regret from a bad purchase. Whats more important? Saving an artist's feelings, or saving your members money?
If this could be raised to the standards of the FCS Lancaster then that would be something, that's no A2A acu-sim bird, but it's a fun plane to mess around with and convey's a reasonable feeling of flying a lancaster.
The Lancaster improved upon the Wellington, but this seems like a step backwards in the state that it appears.
FCS is not a small time developer and there are at least 2 Sunderlands in the UK that you can get extremely good access to (Duxford and Hendon), so there is really no excuse for putting out a model that looks like this and asking top money for it.
As far as I know it's not actually been released, so hopefully they will address the issues before that happens.
The Lancaster improved upon the Wellington, but this seems like a step backwards in the state that it appears.
FCS is not a small time developer and there are at least 2 Sunderlands in the UK that you can get extremely good access to (Duxford and Hendon), so there is really no excuse for putting out a model that looks like this and asking top money for it.
As far as I know it's not actually been released, so hopefully they will address the issues before that happens.
its not a big developer either, its a publisher
Also the wellington and lancaster where done by the same person and i think the sunderland is done by a different person.
We can only hope, but its always good to let them know that there are issues to address before they release it. I hope nobody pre-orders it untill we see something a lot better then this.