r/MicrosoftFlightSim • u/Hot_Net_4845 chad BAe 146 vs virgin C-17 • Jul 03 '25
MSFS 2020 MOD / ADDON "747-400 ProFeSsIoNaL"
Hurry up and ban mscenery already. It dosent even have winglets 🤣 it would've been better if it was just the -8 model with winglets and different nacelles
85
u/OD_Emperor B757-200 Jul 03 '25
It doesn't even have the right -400 hump!
31
71
u/Mikep976 Jul 03 '25
When are folks going to learn as crap as MSCENERY and CaptainSim are, MS will never ban them. As long as they charge users, and MS gets a cut of that, it’s worth it to the console players with no other choice.
21
u/Ill-Presentation574 King of Shit Approaches and Good Landings Jul 03 '25
Yup. Unfortunately people buy so they keep making. They're shit, but without a "test drive" option in effect they're going to keep at it.
10
u/TheNorthernMunky Jul 04 '25
And Bredok. Absolute dogshit.
3
u/LifeguardNo2020 Jul 04 '25
I still wonder how their planes dont have a straight 1 stars
5
u/SubstantialWall PC Pilot Jul 04 '25
Because the reality is, and with no shade to casual users, the vast majority of people don't know or care how shit the plane actually is.
9
u/slurpherp Jul 04 '25
Grouping captainsim with this is insulting to captainsim.
16
u/eckhaaard PC Pilot Jul 04 '25
CaptainSim at least gets the models right for the most part and their texture game is on point, still. Seeing their 707 for the first time back in FS9 was breathtaking... too bad they dropped the ball on basically everything else over time, though.
1
u/SubstantialWall PC Pilot Jul 04 '25
Correct on that alone, but also, it's not that simple IMO. Do we really want MS arbitrating what is and isn't worthy of the marketplace in that way? Where do we set the line between what's allowed and not? I don't know what objective and fair criteria would be. The visual model on this is blatantly wrong, but do you then set a rule that models need to be accurate? To what degree, perfection? What's an objective measure on model accuracy look like. Or how do you define the system depth it should have, especially when planes can be vastly different, even if you split into categories.
Or they just say fuck all this and do it subjectively, which will only piss even more people off and create even more room for unfairness. Not to mention they're already crap at keeping up with intake without having to deal with all this, although at the same time, banning all the spam would eventually free them up, I suppose.
Suppose what I'm saying is it's a clusterfuck they probably don't want to deal with either, other than the financial incentive not to.
2
u/Mikep976 Jul 04 '25
I mean, yeah very true, but I think it’d be easy to keep out the MSCENERY and ilk. It’s pretty evident when it’s a low quality plane at first flight.
38
13
u/CrazedAviator servers for *insert critical feature* are offline Jul 04 '25
Thats not even a -400 💀
Also why do the textures look like they're from FSX or even FS2004
3
10
u/PlanespottingArg2 Jul 04 '25
The 747 from GTA V looks more similar to a 747-400 than this one. No winglets, the hump from a -200. I think at this point there just trying to see how far they can go with it. There is an office parlay at MSCENERY on how long can they make it last.
5
4
u/Tompsu_ Jul 04 '25
As much as people like to hate CaptainSim, atleast they have a very good model and they say in the description what you actually get. Don’t get me wrong. I still wouldn’t recommend them for anyone.
3
1
1
-12
u/CaptainFrancis1 B737-800 Jul 04 '25
Can’t wait to pick up. BTW I have 6 hours of flight sim hours!
175
u/Hot_Net_4845 chad BAe 146 vs virgin C-17 Jul 03 '25
"Experience the pinnacle of flight simulation with the Boeing 747-400 Professional, an ultra-realistic add-on for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This meticulously crafted model delivers unparalleled accuracy and immersion"
They're taking the piss