mutley 4,487 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Just published is John Stevens' review of OpusFSX. Has this multi-purpose program been received well by John? Read on... Link to post Share on other sites
ddavid 149 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 A Quickie, John: you have quite a new set up (i7 + nVidia670) - would you expect a frame-rate hit on a slower system? Good Review - Thanks. Cheers - Dai. Link to post Share on other sites
saunder 3 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 No frame rate hit at all unless you were using Hi-res weather textures from a different source. The program takes very little in the way of resources... Link to post Share on other sites
needles 1,010 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Well done John, a great review. I particularly like the videos showing the characteristics of Opus whilst in the cockpit. Well worth considering. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites
saunder 3 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I must admit video's are new to me and I don't think the video really gives the vibration and movement the credit it deserves. It really does look realistic I have tried Ezdok and accu-feel and uninstalled them both and then tried going back for a comparison to uninstall them again. I think it is one of those programs that you do not know what you have been missing until you try it and he still wants to add so much more and the good thing is as he develops it you get it no waiting all year for the big update. The thing is I am saying what a great feature the DHM is but the weather engine is a masterpiece... John Link to post Share on other sites
britfrog 180 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 why 10/10 ?????? what are you going to award it when they start getting the bugs out of it? and make it better Link to post Share on other sites
saunder 3 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 What bugs? Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew Godden 934 Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 why 10/10 ?????? what are you going to award it when they start getting the bugs out of it? and make it better A reviewer spends hours assessing a product to produce an objective report against a range of criteria. This criteria and the performance of the product form the basis of the score. The review is done in the reviewers own time, is performed pro bono, and for the benefit of Hangar members and the flight sim community at large. Rather than adding a mindless and meaningless post with an excessive use of question marks, try posting something intelligent and insightful which details the bugs you claim exist. You are entitled to your opinion, but because it differs from that of a reviewer doesn't make you correct or give you the right to question the judgement and view of a reviewer. Just because you may have had problems and negative experiences with the product, also doesn't mean everybody else encounters or experiences the same problems, including the reviewer. Link to post Share on other sites
saunder 3 Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 Regarding the above comments of which I would not normally respond to, but it is a little unfair to make a statement that a developers software contains bugs without stating what they are, yes there are bugs, in the beta release versions which are often released daily and are optional. If there are any questions regarding the meaning of beta: Beta (in other words prototype) (named after the second letter of the Greek alphabet) is the software development phase following alpha. It generally begins when the software is feature complete. Software in the beta phase will generally have many more bugs in it than completed software. After many hours of testing there is no doubt in my mind that the software, development and absolute first class customer service available to everyone and normally seven days a week more than deserves the award it received. There will be no more comments from myself on this issue I am not going round in circles with the same discussion because I am busy working on another review. Thank you John Link to post Share on other sites
Kasper 14 Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 A fine review. If I was not so used to Active Sky I would absolutely consider this product. Link to post Share on other sites
britfrog 180 Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 Firstly let me say my response was not against the review just against the points given, what are you going to award when they make it better ?? you leave no room to indicate that the program has been improved, as it will be! Andrew if you dont like question marks simply ignore them and write an intelligent response, read yor own signature there are a number of things that opus know about that they are working on , how it interracts with REX , is one, also in time they are going to hopefully create their own textures instead of utilising what another company has put into the fsx directory, there are many ways that that OPUS can be improved it is not perfect, ie the winds aloft problem , all of which they are working on and when it is relesased we will not be able to indicate with points awarded that it was better then the first review. Link to post Share on other sites
ddavid 149 Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 There are 3 main types of Review: 1. Reviewer personally likes/loves the product - and, possibly paid real money to purchase said product. The Review will reflect the feelings of the reviewer, which will be enthusiastic and positive. The Review will be subjective but reflect the real feelings of the reviewer. This will be quite apparent when the Review is read. 2. Reviewer likes the product, has reviewed or purchased other, similar products from that developer and feels a degree of obligation towards making the Review positive. The Review may possibly be more positive than that made by an objective Reviewer? Probably, Yes. This type is quite typical of those found in publications where the developer advertises and is a natural result of common commercial interest. 3. Reviewer personally dislikes/hates the product. The Review will come down hard on the developers, particularly if the reviewer has paid for the product! The Review will itemise the bugs/errors/problems found in the product and will probably comment on poor support/documentation/other similarly deficient products from the same developer. So, when one reviews a Review on this, or any other Forum, remember to ascertain which classification it fits into. Then one can orientate one's response accordingly: a. Congratulate the reviewer on a fine Review, which complements one's own experience, having purchased the product. Or, pillorise the reviewer for failing to spot the obvious deficiencies, giving detailed examples. b. Bin it and wait for the publication of a real Review (See 1. and 3. above). c. Agree or disagree (As a.) on the basis of experience with product. I think that covers some of the angles. Certainly, reviewers prefer constructive comments after their Review is published. But, as any fule kno', any response is better than none! And my own opinion? Well, I personally think that Flight Simming is about ... (Shuddit! - Ed). Cheers - Dai. Link to post Share on other sites
mutley 4,487 Posted January 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 Just one comment from me.. Winds aloft is a FSX bug, I think Opus Software has done more than any other developer to try and allow/lessen it's effect on the sim. It can't be fixed. Any future developments from OPUS will just do more to affirm its award. Thanks everyone for your comments so far, please can we keep future replies to questions about the product rather than the scoring. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now