43 replies to this topic

[Private-Cowboy]

Hi,

even if I'm goeing to earn some scolding from the Eaglesoft following now I've to say how immensly disappointed I am by the new Eaglesoft Turbo Cirrus for FSX. I've waited a looong time for here and got her this morning (was released today) and boy did I had to pick my chin pack up from the floor - and that's not because the Turbo Cirrus is so good.

Eaglesoft, you can't be serious offering such a VC for a price twice as much as a Carenado. Visual glitches, poor framerate and texturing that would put freeware to shame ... surely cou can do better than this. As much as I love to have a modern Avidyne GA in my hangar I'm not willing to accept that and will apply for a refund.

Because it might be me I've a few shots so you can judge yourself...


All buttons are flat and not modeled (they were in the older Cirrus planes from Eaglesoft, why not here). The entire row below the displays are just flat textures.


This is a joke, right? I've not seen something this blurry and badly modeled for ages now. And there are visual bugs too like the metallic shimmering of the visor holding.


16bit textures are not goeing to help either. Do you really think customers are willing to accept that kind of textures.

It suddenly becomes clear why there were no VC preview shots all the time but only exterior shots. Maybe you need to look a how a VC can be done...





Don't get me wrong, I don't even complain about the bugs (like unclickable VC buttons) that will get fixed. I'm shocked by the modelling and textureing here. Is that what you do when you say you have "bigger fish to fry"?

Honestly, either step up the quality to some standard, lower the price or go freeware. At two Carenados this Turbo Cirrus is a HUGE letdown for me.

Ok, rant over. Now you can bash me for saying out loud what many might only think.

Edited by Private-Cowboy, 17 August 2008 - 08:40 AM.

[IndependenceFAN]

100% agree with you.

[Private-Cowboy]

The modeling is anything but fine if the buttons are all flat textures and not modeled. And just take a look at what are supposed to be round curves at the windows and then look at the same spots on the Carenado VC. I would not call that Eaglesoft 'fine' by a long shot, not even close. To me its fubar and even a few new textures will not fix it - it's broken, simple as that. You may apply new textures but flat buttons will remain flat buttons and a 'curve' designed by 3-4 lines will never be a curve.

[Lemming_]

Dude, I know you have a good selection of payware, so I trust your opinion.

Now go get refunded

[franthree]

Not so nice   how does exterior look can we see a shot?

[Private-Cowboy]

The exterior is as perfect as can be. It looks really good and the paints are very well done with subtle shine and so on.



That why I don't understand the VC even less. The outside is so great and the inside is so ... yuck.

I did a comparison with the Carenado Mooney. The model (and thus the polycount and animation) size (external and VC combined) is pretty much the same with the Carenado and texturewise the Carenado uses even less - 18MB for a Carenado M20J vs. 20MB for a Turbo Cirrus (external and VC combined). So from that point they should be on par but internally the Turbo Cirrus looks vastly inferior. There are addons that are much more detailed like the Huhges H-1 (5 times the size for the VC) and therefor look better but the Carenado M20J and the Turbo Cirrus are on very similar level in terms of textur amount used and model sizes. I'd say ESDG wasted polycount on gimmicks like tie downs or suitcases that can be put besides you plane where the entire polycount went into the plane at Carenado. I also know that those Avidyne displays hit the fps pretty good but the Turbo Cirrus (with all its 'optimizations') turns in about the same fps that the A2A Stratocruiser does and is miles behind the Carenado Mooney or Hughes H-1.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to bash ESDG for no reason. They do make nice exterior models. But as a whole they are to expensive in my mind. I merely wanted to show you the VC (because it is not shown anywhere in the high gloss preview shots ESDG published - guess I know why now). Now I'll 'get refunded' and you can judge yourself if this VC is good enough for you. I personally don't pilot a plane from the outside so I'd rather have VC that does not make me throw up and less outside gimmicks. But that is different for everyone.

Edited by Private-Cowboy, 17 August 2008 - 12:16 PM.

[FSRobert]

Well, it seems a step back into the retro days of FS2000.  maybe many patches are in the making to upgrade it.

Thanks for posting this. I was going to purchase it as well....not anymore though.  

Anyway one looks at it, gotta dislike advertising that leads one to believe of a quality product. In most cases it back fires on the delveloper.

If, a Delvolper has a product to sell it´s always best to have the product in question tested by many testers. Screen shots taken by all sorts of tester to post for the interested buyer.  It´s a fair way for the buyer to see different views of the product in question. Many different testers means many different screen shots from many different rigs and and set ups thus showing  just what the product is all about. It´s the best way...simple.

Delvopers who only choose to post screen shots themselves are the ones to stay away from and " buyer beware " should be written all over it.
They give only one view of the product in question to the buyer and that is the view they want to show to capture buyers...yes sir, if a payware devolper thinks he/she has a stunning product, they should not be afraid to have many tester showing it off for them, just makes sense to me.

Most FS products sell best within the first 48 hours or less depending on all the hype around it. Some products are so hyped it turns into mass mania buying and then get a dissapointment.

If, the product proves to be worthy, the selling continues due to it being a good product.  Once a FS product is bought most buyers want to show it off by post screen shots and thus getting a new buyers in ther process, that´s if the product it good...then again we all know that.

The end product is all about money to the delvoper of a payware product. It´s like any business, it´s all about making money.

...remember this is MHO on the matter.

[JAI777W]

Time will tell. I believe we are on the verge of a quality jump, with FSX halfway thru it's life and FSXI only 2 years away. The 'old days' will be over soon. The days that a developer could get away with this kind of 'crap'.

I think alot of developers will fail to be able to make that quality jump in textures and modelling. Companies like Abacus, and Wilco will have a hard time, although Wilco seems to be stepping up it's game (just a bit) with their latest release (E-Jet).

Don't worry about it too much Private Cowboy, give it another 2 years, perhaps 3 and you will not see this kind of 'jokes' anymore. Of course there will always be add-ons that will be below par, but the user/customer won't take that crap anymore...

[Rimshot]

Mr. Cowboy, have you contacted Eaglesoft for support? I think it is kind of low to judge a developer's work on a public forum without having verified if what you are seeing is correct, i.e. posting your grieves on their own forums. There are issues with the initial release (see their excellent support forums) so there'll be a new installer available today.
What I see in your screens however is a very badly setup graphics display. I haven't purchased the Turbo Cirrus yet, and your unfundamental rant is nowhere capable of stopping me from doing that, but I bet it looks good on my system   Besides that, the inside of a Cirrus looks different from that of a Mooney. Actually Eaglesoft have captured the tight modern look very well. Again, you'll have to setup your system properly  

[Private-Cowboy]

Believe me, I've had my contacts with Eaglesoft over their Columbia 400. And believe me, I've no intereset in contacting them for support again. Back in the days they lied to me, modified and censored my posts, removed images that I put there to proove my bug reports.  Finally I got threatened that I would get banned if I would continue to talk about the bugs ... obviously Eaglesoft planes are bugfree from the beginning.

I hope you understand that I've not even tried to talk with Eaglesoft about that now after what happened back then. And as I have also said here I was not complaining about the bugs (and there are some on the Turbo Cirrus like unclickable buttons in the VC), they are known and will hopefully get fixed. I was merely expressing my disappointment over the poor modelling and textures. This is just my personal opinions and I've posted sceenshots for you to judge yourself. Those are not 'issues' that will get fixed. And even if I waste my time I can ensure you that those are not results of a 'badly setup graphics display' - I've close to a dozen addons an NONE of them shows stuff like that. Those textures are even that bad if you open them directly in DXTBMP or the imagetool.

I have no interest in stopping you buying or enjoying the Turbo Cirrus. If you can have fun with her I'm happy for you. I can't. Everyone can make up its one mind on things like no VC pictures shown at all on Eaglesoft website, no VC -Previews have been posted showing anything else then forward view and only lots of external shots have been postes in the 'hooray Turbo Cirrus posts' in 'pro-Eaglesoft' forum. But don't say I have not warned you.  

P.S.: In my mind a public forum is the ONLY place to judge a developers work because it's the ONLY place where something like 'free speech' it possible. I tried to talk with Eaglesoft in their own forum but failed miserably.

P.S.S.: If you ask, why I gave Eaglesoft another chance after what went down between me, them and their C400 I must admit I like modern glass cockpit GAs and they are the only ones that offer them.

Edited by Private-Cowboy, 18 August 2008 - 01:11 PM.

[Mango]

Bert, feel free to post shots as well. To tell the truth, i was waiting for those VC pics. The Dashboard itself looks fantastic and the exterior model is outstanding. But i have to admit that i am puzzled by some of the VC textures. I am a fan of the Twin Comanche which has a very good performance /quality mix and was also looking forward to the Turbo Cirrus...

[Private-Cowboy]

True, the outside is great - and I said that. My guess would be that ESDG went too far in their effort to optimize the Turbo for framerate. Their old Cirri (is that the correct term?) were much worse from an fps point of view but had modelled buttons etc.

In that case it might have been wise to implement two versions, a standard one and a lite one. Instead you're only getting a lite one that has way to many compromises in my eyes. I was a bit surprised too that ESDG did not show any VC pictures at all. They still don't have a single picture on their site showing a view over the shoulder or something like that.

Not a single interior shot on the official Turbo site: http://www.eaglesoft.../CSR22G3Tss.htm

And in their forum there are no VC-shots AT ALL, only panel shots showing a straight forward view. They show VC-shots from their other planes including the Twinkie, the Columbia 400 and Liberty but not a single one of the Turbo Cirrus. It up to you what to make of that...

Edited by Private-Cowboy, 18 August 2008 - 02:25 PM.

[}SkOrPn--7]

I can only back up comments by Private-Cowboy because after being stung by two purchases the FSX version of the C400 and Piper Twin Comanche both having the same VC/texture issues. While the Piper Twin Comanche was better I decided to give Eaglesoft a wide birth with no more purchases. Before I purchased the C400 I went to there forum and asked for screenshots of the interior but not one single person stepped up to the plate and showed any. So with that I decided anyway to give it a try knowing my suspicions would more than likely come true. After posting screenshots on there forum of the issues not to bash them but to point out my fist impressions and disappointment like Private-Cowboy things were edited and images removed. They do not like any customer placing images on there forum for all to view of poor quality or you questioning them about bugs.

Eaglesoft are anal and if you kiss butt your going to fit in real nice over there so simmers be warned ...................

[Rimshot]

OK Cowboy (what's your real name by the way? I feel silly calling you 'Cowboy' as if I play in a bad western  ). I can understand your sentiments and I feel your frustration about your previous contacts with Eaglesoft. They (and any other company for that matter) certainly would have lost me as a customer if they treated me like the way you describe. However, I don't know about all of that so I won't pass a judgement on them, also because of the fact I have never had serious issues with their work and the support has always been satisfactory. Let's just say, as I said before, I still would have taken it up with them directly in their own, also public forums. You are ofcourse free to do it your way

I still haven't got the Turbo Cirrus because the patched installer isn't online yet. Therefore I still can't see for myself, but I still have a very hard time believing the Turbo's interior will look as bad as in your shots, although Heiko's remarks are making me wonder if ESDG has delivered something below par. That would be very strange since their other Cirri (I think it's the correct term too) look just fine. Not spectacular, but good. When I get her I'll post a view shots of my own for you and anyone else to see if there's a difference. I can only hope I'm right  

Edited by Rimshot, 18 August 2008 - 03:59 PM.

[Rimshot]

 }SkOrPn--7, on Aug 18 2008, 10:41 PM, said:

Before I purchased the C400 I went to there forum and asked for screenshots of the interior but not one single person stepped up to the plate and showed any.

Eaglesoft are anal and if you kiss butt your going to fit in real nice over there so simmers be warned ...................

About the first part of your post; very strange. The C400 has the best VC they ever made and if you would have searched their forums thoroughly you would have found many previews showing the VC.
The second part of your quote is, well, kind of crap without some arguments to back it up. Pretty easy this way huh guys??

[Private-Cowboy]

I can't say anything bad about the C400-VC either. The Twinkie-VC was a bit bare bone and the blueish gauge lighting was strange. But the C400-VC was pretty much ok, nothing spectacular like the Mooney or Huhges H-1 but in a state I was happy with. I returned the C400 and got a refund though because of the bugs back then (spelling mistake 'mainfold' instead of 'manifold' - they wanted to make me believe not a single beta tester ever noticed that - and temperature readout bugs and so on). They told me they don't know if ever or when they would patch those because they 'had bigger fish to fry' so I took the refund before time ran out. But the C400-VC was much better than this one here.


This is the C400-VC, much much better looking then the Turbo-VC. But spot the spelling mistake? It's even visible here.  

Let us know your findings on the VC if you get her. I fear you will be as shocked as I was - I hope I'm wrong though because I generally like the Cirrus very much. But I don't fly my planes from spot view (as ESDG does as it seems) and for GAs I don't use the 2D-Panel either. A flat, badly textured VC like this one should not be sold in 2008 - not for that price at least. I HONESTLY hope you turn out some better shots and can prove me wrong. Try to do similar angles and post them unedited as I did for comparison though please.

Thinking about it (and given the fact the C400 has been patched to get rid of the bugs that are none) the C400 might be the better choice for an Avidyne-GA.

I've to agree with }SkOrPn--7 about ESDG though when it comes to their forum. They are nice as can be when you crawl up their behind. But when you start to complain about bugs or express your disappointment about certain things they are not that nice anymore and not open to critisim at all. They ban you faster than you can say "Columbia 400". I'm a bit unsure what to make of them anyway. They do behave very 'important' and 'elite' in the forums they are using like they would be greatest dev team on earth posting what wonderful things they have done to their newest creation and such. But the end result (the addon) is pretty much mediocre most of the time. Other devs teams are basically nonexistant and don't do such things but their addons are works of arts - I'm speaking of Carenado, A2A and Aerosoft inhouse (Hughes etc) dev teams.

When I posted my bug findings about their C400 their first reaction was to deny their existence and tell me it has to be my machine. I insisted that this was not the case and showed them sceenshots to back up my claims. They then showed shots themselfes that should prove me wrong but funnily those shots showed the very same bugs I was talking about. As I hinted them towards that fact all images (mine and theirs) vanished and my posts mysteriously transformed (sentences with 'bugs' etc where removed and so on). I was fast enough to print the entire thread to pdf back then and when I uploaded the pdf (showing the images and all) they told me I should stop to 'harass them' or they would ban me from the forum and also ban me from any future ESDG-purchases I might wanted to place. I stopped the dispute their. Strangely enough some while later a bug fix was released adressing the spelling mistake as well as the temp readout bugs - things that never were buggy according to them. I don't know but that is not very professional in my eyes.

Edited by Private-Cowboy, 18 August 2008 - 04:41 PM.

[}SkOrPn--7]

 Rimshot, on Aug 18 2008, 09:07 PM, said:

 }SkOrPn--7, on Aug 18 2008, 10:41 PM, said:

Before I purchased the C400 I went to there forum and asked for screenshots of the interior but not one single person stepped up to the plate and showed any.

Eaglesoft are anal and if you kiss butt your going to fit in real nice over there so simmers be warned ...................

About the first part of your post; very strange. The C400 has the best VC they ever made and if you would have searched their forums thoroughly you would have found many previews showing the VC.
The second part of your quote is, well, kind of crap without some arguments to back it up. Pretty easy this way huh guys??

I respect your opinion and if the following is what you say is "the best VC they ever made" then you and I have very different views. I just went and installed the C400 and took some quick screenshots and to me there is no difference in what Private-Cowboy has mentions of poor textures. I should have stated that when I made my post asking for images of the interior I was very diligent in my request as I took screenshots of RealAir SF260 showing the shots I wanted too see of the C400 and what I requested was not on the forum to be viewed.











I'm sorry but those textures do not meet my standards and while the outside views you can't fault them they are of the highest quality.

As for the second part of my comment if you haven't seen this for your self it's because it gets removed/censored/edited before any forum member has the chance to comment or see the original post. Like I said I respect your opions and views and happy that you feel your able to support there payware product but for me I have walked away.

[Buziel-411_RED]

Eaglesoft always appeared to me as a big, rich, fancy company who didn't really care about us... No offense to any Eaglesoft lovers, just the prices and from the stories here... Compare Carenado's prices, for example, toe Eaglesoft's.

Oh, and anyone know whats with PMDG? SimMarket is selling the PMDG 747 for 95 US dollars! Thats abit pricey, wouldn't you say?