39 replies to this topic

[Xstasus]

Looks Fine To Me But Still No Flexed Wings  

[boeing_737]

Hi all,
I am thinking...if we could ask PMDG people to post a preview video ALONG WITH THE SPECS, we will know better what is in store fo us!

[dolbinau]

boeing_737, on Dec 8 2004, 04:31 AM, said:

Hi all,
I am thinking...if we could ask PMDG people to post a preview video ALONG WITH THE SPECS, we will know better what is in store fo us!

Keep dreaming.

They most likely won't.

[notadrater]

ProX, on Dec 7 2004, 02:10 AM, said:

Looks Fine To Me But Still No Flexed Wings 

Do people ever know what they're talking about anymore? They already said they're putting in wing flex, and does wing flex really matter? Wouldn't you rather have a good panel and good sounds and a quality FDE? Psh, people these days...  

[Pavehawk]

drater, on Dec 7 2004, 07:42 PM, said:

ProX, on Dec 7 2004, 02:10 AM, said:

Looks Fine To Me But Still No Flexed Wings 

Do people ever know what they're talking about anymore? They already said they're putting in wing flex, and does wing flex really matter? Wouldn't you rather have a good panel and good sounds and a quality FDE? Psh, people these days...  

Good point.  I really only care about the panel and the sounds, its not like you fly it from the outside.  A  nice model is just a plus, not a necessity in my opinon.  Even if the model wasn't that complicated, it would be a plus because it would offer more fps.  

[dolbinau]

Pavehawk, on Dec 9 2004, 06:26 AM, said:

drater, on Dec 7 2004, 07:42 PM, said:

ProX, on Dec 7 2004, 02:10 AM, said:

Looks Fine To Me But Still No Flexed Wings 

Do people ever know what they're talking about anymore? They already said they're putting in wing flex, and does wing flex really matter? Wouldn't you rather have a good panel and good sounds and a quality FDE? Psh, people these days...  

Good point.  I really only care about the panel and the sounds, its not like you fly it from the outside.  A  nice model is just a plus, not a necessity in my opinon.  Even if the model wasn't that complicated, it would be a plus because it would offer more fps.  

I Agree .

The only thing I like about the Model is screenshots.

[boeing_737]

dolbinau, on Dec 8 2004, 02:59 PM, said:

Pavehawk, on Dec 9 2004, 06:26 AM, said:

drater, on Dec 7 2004, 07:42 PM, said:

ProX, on Dec 7 2004, 02:10 AM, said:

Looks Fine To Me But Still No Flexed Wings 

Do people ever know what they're talking about anymore? They already said they're putting in wing flex, and does wing flex really matter? Wouldn't you rather have a good panel and good sounds and a quality FDE? Psh, people these days...  

Good point.  I really only care about the panel and the sounds, its not like you fly it from the outside.  A  nice model is just a plus, not a necessity in my opinon.  Even if the model wasn't that complicated, it would be a plus because it would offer more fps.  

I Agree .

The only thing I like about the Model is screenshots.

Hi,
Have to agree.
BUT if the visual model is not even upto the freeware standard  I most probable won't buy it.  ( PS. I don't mean models like POSKY and MELJET)
Atleast it should be acceptable.

AND it  should not kill frames and make me think i am seeing a powerpoint presentation!

My 2 Cents,
Cheers

Edited by boeing_737, 09 December 2004 - 07:21 AM.

[dolbinau]

boeing_737, on Dec 9 2004, 11:20 PM, said:

dolbinau, on Dec 8 2004, 02:59 PM, said:

Pavehawk, on Dec 9 2004, 06:26 AM, said:

drater, on Dec 7 2004, 07:42 PM, said:

ProX, on Dec 7 2004, 02:10 AM, said:

Looks Fine To Me But Still No Flexed Wings 

Do people ever know what they're talking about anymore? They already said they're putting in wing flex, and does wing flex really matter? Wouldn't you rather have a good panel and good sounds and a quality FDE? Psh, people these days...  

Good point.  I really only care about the panel and the sounds, its not like you fly it from the outside.  A  nice model is just a plus, not a necessity in my opinon.  Even if the model wasn't that complicated, it would be a plus because it would offer more fps.  

I Agree .

The only thing I like about the Model is screenshots.

Hi,
Have to agree.
BUT if the visual model is not even upto the freeware standard  I most probable won't buy it.  ( PS. I don't mean models like POSKY and MELJET)
Atleast it should be acceptable.

AND it  should not kill frames and make me think i am seeing a powerpoint presentation!

My 2 Cents,
Cheers

.

As rarely as I use the External model I still wouldn't buy it if it had a really bad one .


I'm starting to wonder if many people will want to merge the Posky 744 with PMDG's   .

[Atrix]

can't wait

[C172pilot]

dolbinau, on Dec 5 2004, 03:16 PM, said:

boeing_737, on Dec 6 2004, 01:08 AM, said:

Capt. Blaze, on Dec 3 2004, 05:22 PM, said:

How much do you think it will cost? 

Hi,
Maybe about $45.
BUT,
Its tough going for PMDG competing against POSKY and Meljet. If either of them adds a VC like POSKY does in its Airbus A330 .. I have some doubts whether the PMDG 747 will gain as much popularity like the 737NG.

Anyway 737 Lives on!

I Am Sure it won't have as much popularity as the 737NG.

1. People would be more aware of PMDG's Frame rate losses.

2. People would be more aware of PMDG's Complicated Systems.



I'd say the majority of people who bought the 737NG don't know how to use it properly.

They Probably were expecting a Kittyhawk 737-800 with a nice LOOKING panel and a VC.

They probably thought it was too crap because they couldn't get anything to work as they were doing it wrong; So they won't buy the 744.

PMDG"s complex systems?? You mean the real world. If a person can't work the system they need to study the manual.

I found the PSShizzle 777 hard at first. I read the tuitorials and now it's very boring(since it's a crap program anyways!)

It's about time we get an outstanding 744. If it's hard on your system, turn off the water and shadows.. it's not needed anyways.

I have a P3-500mhz and a G-2 mx 400 64meg graphics card. I don't care if I can't have max scenery levels because frankly, most of it is not accurate(especially around chicago!!!!!!! grr!)

With all honesty, I get 15fps landing at KORD-Simflyers- with medium to high settings. 15 is quite fluid.. sure it's not 25. but above 25fps is not necessary. Or depending on which system ya use 30fps is one full second of frames compared to 25   .

Anyhow, I'm getting a college/uni. laptop in the spring so I'm expecting atleast 4ghz speed so it will run smoothly :-).

BRING ON THE 744!!!!

If you can't simulate the system the right way, don't fly it.. Also, this is a product I will be purchasing, same with the PSS777v3! BETA TESTING request sent in! :-D

[dolbinau]

^^

Thats exactly what I'm saying! PMDG will/has have/had Complex systems, Yes; You can read the manual but some people just can't understand it!

I'm trying to say just that; It won't sell as well IMO because people WON'T fly it because its too complicated.

[E-Jet]

2004 ? 0.0

[Romario_]

Has this been released yet?

Edited by Brian_Griffin, 07 November 2010 - 08:35 PM.

[ImpulsivePlay3r]

Brian_Griffin, on Nov 7 2010, 08:29 PM, said:

Has this been released yet?

huh, where you been?

PMDG 747 has been out for ages............

[Iain_]

ImpulsivePlay3r, on Nov 8 2010, 02:50 PM, said:

huh, where you been?

PMDG 747 has been out for ages............

[_BD6_]

ImpulsivePlay3r, on Nov 8 2010, 09:50 AM, said:

huh, where you been?

PMDG 747 has been out for ages............

Way to detect sarcasm, bro. Lesson for you... an :-p after a stupid comment usually signifies sarcasm.

[mhockey21]

How about the that dug up a 6 year old thread just to say "2004? 0.0"

[_TW_]

mhockey21, on Nov 9 2010, 09:30 PM, said:

How about the that dug up a 6 year old thread just to say "2004? 0.0"

How about you chill out?  A spammer's post was removed, which Embraer then replied "2004?" to.  

Edited by Toby Werner, 09 November 2010 - 10:24 PM.

[mhockey21]

Toby Werner, on Nov 9 2010, 08:24 PM, said:

How about you chill out?  A spammer's post was removed, which Embraer then replied "2004?" to.  

[ImpulsivePlay3r]

Toby Werner, on Nov 9 2010, 10:24 PM, said:

How about you chill out?  A spammer's post was removed, which Embraer then replied "2004?" to.  

Makes sense, ofcourse i didn't see that bit, Hence why i posted my response.... DOH!