External Modelling Is Sub-par

[BetrWingmodels]

How? How can anyone claim to love commercial aviation enough and not be able to see how horrid the wings of Inibuilds are being modelled?

 

Look at this comparison of the Ini A320 vs the Fenix A320. How is someone being paid to butcher the wings like this? So you take up modelling virtual airliners as a career choice and just forget to double check whether or not the plane represented it's real world counterpart accurate or is it only about how it flies and I should not caré if the plane looks like the real thing?

 

 

[BetrWingmodels]

Fenix vs Inibuilds wings

 

Edited May 24 by BetrWingmodels

[BetrWingmodels]

[BetrWingmodels]

[BetrWingmodels]

[BetrWingmodels]

Images of the real A300. Notice how the underside of the wings does not continue to slope down. How am I the only one, including the Inibuilds devs, whose eyes and brain work well enough to spot the massive difference. At this point, I doubt the passion some claim to have for aviation.

[David Cherrie]

No idea what you are talking about but since you didn't give any detail at all but pictures of two different models of planes. If you have the correct specifications, what are they? Unless there are obvious differences, you can't go off of photos or screenshots, you need to compare the actual 3D models and specifications.

For example the Asobo 747-8 is actually 1.8m shorter than the actual plane. You won't see that in photos and screenshots, only way you can see it is comparing the 3D model to the specifications.

Edited May 25 by David Cherrie

[DizzyG3015]

I agree that it is obvious the modelling is subpar in a lot of ways. Wings, especially flaps and sharklets. But I also agree that the pictures are 1) too many and 2) not expressive. Plus you should really check your way of speaking to others on the internet. Being this angry and salty is not helping anyone. And if you really cared that much you would have found out that there are already multiple threads on that topic. No need to open a new one 

[Deer-in-Motion]

It would help if they were actual screenshots instead of taken with a phone, with arrows or circles of something to highlight what you're trying to point out.

[BetrWingmodels]

18 hours ago, David Cherrie said:

No idea what you are talking about but since you didn't give any detail at all but pictures of two different models of planes. If you have the correct specifications, what are they? Unless there are obvious differences, you can't go off of photos or screenshots, you need to compare the actual 3D models and specifications.

This was disheartening to read. You confirmed that some adult human beings cannot process what anyone's working eyes can see.

 

Pictures don't mean anything? Not useful? You cannot tell that Fenix got the wings modelled perfectly to the real plane while inibuilds did not? You watched pics which I provided.........and have or at least, should have the capabilities to go ahead and perform your own test to double check...yet will watch clear evidence showcasing how different, inaccurate and terrible the inibuilds wings are modelled on their A310 (the worse by a mile and on par with the FBW/Asobo A320), their A300 and now yet again, their A320?,

 

At this point, I can bet the price of the A350 and A380 from Inibuilds to have misshaped wings also as this is plane No.3 and no improvement from them, and bc no FSim consumer has the time or effort to go as far as to scour the Internet or approach Airbus for "3D models", somehow we should accept the lack of effort on the part of a developer who charges for their addons and tell anyone who notices room for improvement that their eyes recieves them. That is what you're saying right? If you don't find my pictures/screenshots enough proof why don't you check for yourself? I'm so confused by this response. 

 

 

[BetrWingmodels]

17 hours ago, DizzyG3015 said:

I agree that it is obvious the modelling is subpar in a lot of ways. Wings, especially flaps and sharklets. But I also agree that the pictures are 1) too many and 2) not expressive. Plus you should really check your way of speaking to others on the internet. Being this angry and salty is not helping anyone. And if you really cared that much you would have found out that there are already multiple threads on that topic. No need to open a new one 

1. That's good that you agree. But why not focus on that instead of taking my original posts as disrespectful?

 

2. "Too many"? Well, I tried via a previous post on this forum to get the attention of both Inibuilds and other consumers, without any pictures and was told to provide blueprints in very sparky, dismissive and rude tones in their responses. 

 

3. I have come to learn over the past 15 years among Microsoft Flight sim communities that even when you make a short post and come across polite, the lowlifes always find a way to belittle and be rude towards you. So I am already prepared given my previous post on the Inibuilds forum was met with mostly rude comments all due to myself identifying a major flaw in the aesthetics of the Inibuilds aircrafts.

 

Eventually, even the kindest person could become salty after many times trying to initiate or engage in polite discussion where there may be a difference of opinion and immediately be insulted or talked down to. I have had enough. Part of my saltiness also does come from the inability or lack or care from a dev I was becoming very fond of, proceeding to create these imaginary wings which the real life planes they are recreating do not have.

 

So please don't be offended or be affected by my tone. It clearly was not directed at you. Just the devs and people like that other guy who responded claiming photos, screenshots and working eyeballs cannot spot faults.

[BetrWingmodels]

14 hours ago, Deer-in-Motion said:

It would help if they were actual screenshots instead of taken with a phone, with arrows or circles of something to highlight what you're trying to point out.

It would help if you doublechecked yourself my friend. 

 

You do not need to reply on what another person provides. You are well equipped yourself to say, "hold on, let me check for myself", and actually spot exactly how horrid Inibuilds are modelling their wings.

 

I do not mean to come across rude towards you but...perhaps I do not have the time and do not feel the need to invest in means to produce high quality screenshots of in-sim-footage. I have tried using the screenshot key on the keyboard but the outcome is always over saturated so I just gave up and decided to use a phone for ease of life.

 

That said, come on....you can see clearly just like everyone else that the wings are atrocious.

 

Had this A320N been the first, I wouldn't be disappointed. This is their THIRD plane...and still cannot get the modelling correct?

 

*sigh*

 

I was so looking forward to their A350 and A380 but I now have zero faith that they care or are skilled enough to get the most important attribute of an aircraft modelled correctly.

 

I just needed to let the "where is your proof" folk in the Microsoft side of flight simming that the bulky, chunky wings from Inibuilds, Asobo, Headwind and Horizon Simulations are indeed real, unnecessary and hideous and all it takes is to load up one's sim, choose the Ini A310, A300, A320 (ini and fbw), Headwinds A339 and Horizons 787 then find real world pics of these a/c on one's phone and start identifying the major and easy to spot differences. 

 

15 years ago, most of us passionate simmers were just grateful to have certain aircraft and were willing to ignore certain inaccuracies. It is 2024, how are some developers still giving us models which look like toy planes you can buy in a market with the chunky wings they are recreating.

 

That is all I have to say on this topic. At least other real aviation enthusiast can now find a post or two on the dreadful bulky wings and inaccurate flap movement and know they are not imagining things even if the majority of flight simmers are too braindead, too young or too casual to notice or care. 

[David Cherrie]

2 hours ago, BetrWingmodels said:

This was disheartening to read. You confirmed that some adult human beings cannot process what anyone's working eyes can see.

 

Pictures don't mean anything? Not useful? You cannot tell that Fenix got the wings modelled perfectly to the real plane while inibuilds did not? You watched pics which I provided.........and have or at least, should have the capabilities to go ahead and perform your own test to double check...yet will watch clear evidence showcasing how different, inaccurate and terrible the inibuilds wings are modelled on their A310 (the worse by a mile and on par with the FBW/Asobo A320), their A300 and now yet again, their A320?,

 

At this point, I can bet the price of the A350 and A380 from Inibuilds to have misshaped wings also as this is plane No.3 and no improvement from them, and bc no FSim consumer has the time or effort to go as far as to scour the Internet or approach Airbus for "3D models", somehow we should accept the lack of effort on the part of a developer who charges for their addons and tell anyone who notices room for improvement that their eyes recieves them. That is what you're saying right? If you don't find my pictures/screenshots enough proof why don't you check for yourself? I'm so confused by this response. 

 

 

I'm a professional modeler and I have spent the past 15 years re-creating 3D models and environments to represent the real world so I have as much of an eye to detail as anyone you would come across. You have posted photos of a screen (not screenshots) with different camera positions with different focal lengths with no other detail at all. I see differences between the Fenix A320ceo and the iniBuilds A320neo because they have different engines and different pylons because they are 2 different aircraft.

If you can't be in any way constructive (and after reading your previous thread which also has no detail at all), how are developers or anyone who doesn't have telepathic powers supposed to address the issue?

Take screenshots of your computer, and use red circles to point out and list the inconsistencies. You are the one coming to the forums in a rude manor with no explanation other than you think it is wrong and is in no way productive for anyone.

[DizzyG3015]

14 hours ago, BetrWingmodels said:

1. That's good that you agree. But why not focus on that instead of taking my original posts as disrespectful?

because a basic law of human behaviour and social interaction is that not only the said things count as a matter of fact but also how you say it and if you stay respectful. I am sure you are an adult so it is sad I actually have to explain that. 
 
I even dm‘d inibuilds a while back about the wings and sharklets, what is wrong with them, how it should be and provided meaningful pictures. But at all times was I kind and respectful of their work. Whether they will improve it - maybe. But I would strongly advise you to take a deep breath and calm down. Your way of behaviour is not going to achieve anything here, I can promise you that.

Edited May 26 by DizzyG3015

[richboy2307]

Folks, 

Please don't force us to intervene. Also avoid getting personal, even though the provocation and temptation is real sometimes.

I know everyone is very passionate about their planes, and while we may express it differently, ultimately it is all coming from a good place of wanting the best, most accurate representation of what you want to enjoy and love.

Additionally, as already mentioned on the discord and on other forum posts regarding this issue for A20N, we do note the feedback and we are working on an art update to address wings and windows that will come at a later time.

No product is perfect, nor will it be an absolute 1:1 representation of its real counterpart, but we try and narrow that gap as far as practicable within the ambit of resources available to us.

I am going to lock this topic now as to avoid any unnecessary disputes; and also moving this to the more appropriate A320neo Modelling & Texturing support section.

We appreciate everyone's patience and understanding!
Thanks!