First experience and some suggestions

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Hello PACX team,

Thank you for your work. PACX has a very modern UI, which most other flight simulator plugins do not have. I have tried my first flight with PACX. Although the flight cannot be recorded because of a bug, I have some feeling and suggestions. Sorry for my poor English...

1. The passengers information is too difficult to get.

The main window contains no information, except the "START" or "END" to tell me whether it's in a flight. If I want to see how about my passengers, I click on the airplane button, but only see a "Satisfied" without more details. Then I have to click on the passengers button, but only see a list of NAMES... If I want to know the following information to feel more realistic, I have to click on each name and count them by myself, even if I don't need the exact but only a rough number:

- How many passengers are still not aboard.

- How many passengers are hungry.

- What percentage of passengers changed from hungry to not hungry after the food and drink service.

- How many passengers are sleeping during the night flight.

- What percentage of passengers are not satisfied after I announced a delay, are most of them children or adults, men or women.

Actually, the main window is a little waste of screen space. The biggest END function will never be used during a normal flight, but takes the biggest space at the center.

Why not replace the big button with interesting passengers information statistics? Then it will be more convenient, we will feel more realistic, have more achievability, and won't have to click twice and only see a bunch of useless names.

Why not change the passenger name list into a information table? Then at least I can check them conveniently by myself.

2. A seperate window may not be a good idea.

For example, I want to see the flight stage changed with my operation, but I cannot do this because PACX is a different window from the simulator, the PACX window have to disappear from the screen If I am operating the plane. One solution is to let the operating system keep the PACX window above the simulator window, but the PACX window is too big... Maybe an embedded window inside the simulator is better.

3. The function of "vocal interraction" is not successful in fact.

The experience is totally different between speaking to passengers and speaking to a speech recognization program. The vocal interraction function in PACX is very unnatural. Maybe a perfect vocal interraction with passengers is really difficult to implement technically, but this implemented function now is not attractive enough to have one important button on the main window. 

4. It's better to have more kinds of and more customizable audios.

There can be more kinds of audios, just like welcome/deboarding music, turbulence tips, and so on. In addition, it would be cool to replace the audios by myself, then I can hear the audios from my favourate airlines. FSPassengers is a good example.

5. The price may be too expensive for the implemented functions now...

The functions are obviously less and simple than FSPassengers, but the price is similar to it. I understand that the development is not very easy to implement the different announcements, vocal interraction, and online logbook. However, the detailed flight report, customizable audios, career mode, controllable cabin service, practical main window(although the UI is less modern) in FSP are obviously more attractive. The AI passengers in PACX has more potential fun, but the funciton interaction not successful designed(see the 1st issue above). I believe there will be more powerful functions in PACX to be worthy of the price.

I hope PACX is getting better and better.



Edited by blove

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, thank you for the feedback. I'll address each item inline.

  1. This is actually by design. A pilot would not be able to instantly know about every single passenger at any given moment. We wanted to make sure the information was provided was realistic and accessible in a realistic way.
  2. This is difficult to implement. Keeping PACX separate allows us to ensure it has little to no impact on performance and stability of the simulator itself. It also allows us to do a more with the user interface.
  3. What sort of announcements are you making? Some of the issues we've seen with this come from not knowing exactly what to say to PACX. We will be addressing this in a future version with a system that allows customization of the vocal recognition system.
  4. This is going to become increasingly more difficult as the sound packs get more complex. We will be adding the option for boarding music in the next update, and we will be adding boarding sounds, etc. in the future.
  5. I understand why you might feel this way. There will be more features added to PACX over its lifetime, and as the software matures, that price will make more sense.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.