Originally Posted by
Vox
It looks quite disappointing and time wasting to see that after so many weeks we are still debating, insulting and thread open/closing about what it is and what is not.
The point is very simple in my humble opinion:
SSW is doing (and will always do in the future) models who may appear not as charming as the competitors' ones from the very external point of view because they took every possible precaution to make them MP friendly. There's no reason to be rude or arrogant about this. They are FS9-ish because they want to be lighter in FPS and in their opinion there's no other way to achieve this.
In addition to this, their models are more than 90% close to the reality described by manuals, performance data and flight experts that provided important info during the development (pilots and technicians). And anyone can verify all this by spending some quality time reading the documents and graphs that they provide and by making tests and comparisons. Plain and simple. No tricks.
On the other hand, the competitors produce models with stunning exterior (and of course interior, talking about the cockpit art) quality but that honestly lack in performance realism and MP capability.
Now, the average simmer is problably a solo-pilot (or perhaps he flies in couple with a friend or two) and doesn't spend a lot of time investigating about the actual realism of the model by searching info or reading manuals (as a matter of fact, most of SSW customers don't do it either) and the fact of having an extremely beautiful model with only an average level of consistency of all the systems/avionics and a heavy load on FPS and MP environment is just a nonessential detail for them.
If all the people who tried both the models in object would have made an honest comparison based on the material provided by SSW (not by competitors), they would have surely come to the same conclusions. But they simply don't have the time (and passion) to do it.
Full stop.
Cheers,
Christian
Bookmarks