Pretty decent review. Want to note that I will take low poly model over FPS hungry high poly model any day. It is a constant struggle to run X-Plane at decent FPS when you add Orbx, weather plugin, big airports and VR. Every single frame optimization counts.
Polys aren't that big of a deal for fps. It's more to do with the systems coding. Just look at the flyjsim, phenomenal modelling and texture work with little performance penalty. If toliss upped their 3d model quality to industry standard then I don't think you would notice a huge difference
Thanks for your review. While the addon lacks of certain modelling aspects and sound set, it excells at flight model, "to the numbers" performance at the by far lowes fps-cost of an airliner model in XP11. Hence it is a balance of "eye-candy"/high quality texturing vs. fidelity and performance that each buyer needs to weight for him. Unfortunately your review rather critiques on the first area and could elaborate more on the second part. As an opposite example one could take the ini A300: while scoring high marks in the first area (excellent texturing, sounds) it lacks in the latter (flight model issues, e.g. mach transition/cg handling, etc, not so great fps) and comes at an even higher price. So in the end it really matters what matters to you as a buyer and hence I would have suggested to visualize/point this out better at the conclusion.
I agree entirely - the Toliss A319 & A321 are vastly better than any other X-Plane airliners for fps performance (both in terms of perceived smoothness, and actual calculated fps impact in the plugin manager) and their Airbus fly-by-wire simulation has a long pedigree going back to QPAC. It flies brilliantly as a result.
To be honest I think they are giving a good price at 80 dollars. All of the engines(at least the iae and the leap) can be replaced with carda's engines, which is what I am happy with(they are free). The sounds get better with FTSim's soundpacks which is really cheap, and I am generally happy with what comes at 80 dollars. Well done ToLiSs
I really like Toliss as a dev team. They are very efficient at their coding and make great planes. I like their customer service and frequent updating. Just wish they would have someone else do their sounds. I also hope they model and texture their A346 better than the 319 and 321. They are using a new graphic design company(Ekran Deaign) so fingers crossed. Hopefully BSS will make another one of his excellent Airbus soundpacks for this beauty.🤞
I feel like this is a good review of the aircraft. In terms of systems, you can't really complain. I feel like there is some functionality lacking in the MCDU, comparing to non-functional yet shown pages on the FlightFactor A320. Also CPDLC is more and more making its way into VATSIM/IVAO. It's a bit of a shame this isn't really covered well on the X-Plane platform, since it is used a lot by both ATC and pilots, both IRL and virtual. The switches in the cockpit are indeed a good point, they should be scrollable to a preffered position rather then a cycle-through process. To be honest, I haven't paid much attention to the modelling, I spend most of the time in the flightdeck during flight, and I look rather at other views when watching the replay of the landing. The cabin is poorly modeled tho, it is rather disappointing, as well as the lack of window textures. But honestly, this is one of the best planes on the market in terms of flight model. I would definitely recommend this payware aircraft. Paying the 80 dollars was worth it for me, but I feel like for the NEO option, they should've charged less, or nothing at all. Since it feels like the same plane, tho different systems are applied. I hope with their version of the A340, more effort will be made into the points that need improving. I hope to see changes in both their A319 as the A321. The developer of this project seems very much willing to improve things, but is rather limited by time. I do understand this, but I feel like they should've improved their products first before working on a new plane. However, hats off to Toliss, for the work they've done so far. They certainly do deserve credit for what they've already realised!
Dear Sol, thank you for this review. It was very useful for me, because you assured me that these problems appear not only to me. I experienced the mouse issue (disturbing), and the sound too. Regarding the sound I would like to ask you something: isn't it somehow possible the increase the engine volume level IN the cockpit? With some plugin, etc.? All the volume settings (X-Plane itself, Toliss plugin) are set to the max, but in the cockpit I hear only a weak engine sound. I believe that the real cocpits are very soundproof, but the developers should have give the option for the users to hear the engine better from inside, just like at FF A320. Anyway I think that FF is a far better choice, but for people who dont have a gigantic GPU (like me) Toliss is an option.
I second this, great performance, good systems modeling - although some important features are still lacking (e.g. custom waypoints). Generally the cosmetic and sound aspect is quite poor, and the product does feel a bit overpriced. That being said, it's also fair to mention that the average quality of airliners in XP is very low, and Toliss products are probably the top notch ones you can get in the sim, together with Zibo - which I believe is of a superior level, albeit being freeware
This is a very interesting review. I think I agree and disagree with several of your observations Sol. I agree completely about sound, my hearing is not very good, which is nice because I don't have to buy sound packs as it is hard for me to distinguish between a quality sound pack and the default aircraft. Yet the Toliss engine sounds are annoying, it is very easy for my brain to distinguish the looping sound that repeats over and over and is really umconfortable. I hope your review can make Toliss realize they need to put a little more love in sound. If it is bad for me it should be really bad for many others. About the model I think you are going a little too far, to my eyes the plane looks really nice, I understand your points but those are minor details to me. And the balance between systems and looks should be treated carefully, the level of detail in the Toliss simulation is outstanding and I don't think that was stressed enough in this review. The planes really fly fantastically and the LR version is great for long but not ultra-long hauls. I would say that is a very realistic simulation, study-level with bad sound and with some minor details in the 3d modeling that could be improved. You are too picky with 3d stuff maybe you have a background there :). I prefer criticism to praise so well done.
Hey Luis! You might be surprised to know that my background has nothing to do with visuals. One of the reasons this review took so long to come out was that I needed to learn how modeling and texturing work in X-Plane 11. It took a couple of months until I could confidently point out issues without, to be honest, sounding like an idiot. I'm glad that you agree with my assessment of the sounds, they're certainly a weak point. In terms of the visual model, I agree that a quick look at the Toliss reveals practically nothing wrong and that for someone who just wants to fly the plane, they certainly do their job. But the reason I was so picky is that the issues I mentioned do not exist as much or at all in other aircraft that are priced similarly. Hopefully, that clears some of my harshness up. With that said though, everybody likes to sim differently and I completely respect your opinion :D. I do agree as well that in terms of the flight model and systems, Toliss has done a fantastic job. I tried to express that in the review but thank you for pointing out that it didn't feel that way -- I will try and correct this in the future. With all that said, thank you for your comment Luis and thanks for watching! ^SV
Whilst you make some good observations I honestly feel this review would put people off buying this aircraft and miss out on an incredibly immersive and one of the best ever Airbus experiences in flight sim. I don't think that is fair. Toliss I believe offer the best and most complete airbus package in X-Plane. To start the negatives by making such an issue of how the lights turn off and on is petty. I don't even notice what you are referring to (and most of the other negatives). You've got XEnviro running and that is why there are mouse issues over the MCDU switches. In fact all reviews should consider turning off plugins. You also mention other clickspot issues of which I don't notice, don't have an issue with, or I understand that XEnviro is causing a "lag". You also compare graphics to Flight Factor but fail to mention how Flight Factor's A320 is a resource hog. I get almost double FPS in the Toliss. You should give a nod to that. There are issues with the sound, painting, and graphical glitches but the amount of time you devote to them in your review is disproportionate to the quality of the product. I agree that for this price we should get the full package including sounds (BSS sounds are almost essential) but don't overlook the indepth MCDU (you can put range rings in it for example) the provided weights setup, the VSpeeds and temp calculations, deep failure scenario settings, the ability to save during a flight, and this is just off the top of my head. Bottom line is your presentation for reviews is awesome (amazing X-Camera work), but the content needs better analysis and proportionate reviewing.
Hi Shane, thanks for your comment! I thought it would be important to clarify a few things. I review all of my products in a plugin-free copy of X-Plane I have installed on my computer. Therefore, no plugin can interact with the product and lead me to assume something about it that is incorrect. In this factory version of X-Plane, I experienced these issues with MCDU mouse lag, not in a version that has xEnviro running. The shots of the plane you see in the review with xEnviro are purely for eye candy. Any conclusion that I made in the review was done in this stock version of X-Plane. The FlightFactor A320 is certainly a resource hog and this is no secret. However, the intense resource use comes from the FlightFactor's plugins, not their normalmaps. This is why I did not make this comparison when showing the two side-by-side. The comparison is purely to show how FF have put more detail into their normalmaps. I would have used another plane but I figured having a side-by-side comparison of another aircraft from the a320 family was important. Besides that though, I get why you feel as if there are a lot of negatives. It's very difficult to balance positives with negatives. This is especially true because you need to explain negatives in detail but positives can all be summed up in a sentence. I really appreciate you bringing this to my attention and will work on trying to incorporate the positives even more in future reviews. Thanks again for your comment! ^SV
For me both Toliss-aircrafts actually do have a very bad immersion. FF320, Inibuild A300/A310, ZIBO or IXEG are way better (sounds, textures. reflections, mouse interactions etc.). The missing immersion is actually the main point i criticize about this aircraft. Even the freeware FBW on MSFS2020 has a better immersion and amazing sounds. The flightmodel and accuracy may be great, there are really something missing in the Toliss that i dislike. A strange thing is that it looks like people cannot stand any kind of criticism about the Toliss, it seems a bit like a religion....And about the mouse-lags over the MCDU: i don't use xEnviro and have the same problem. It's afwul to use it. And you cannot resize the popout MCDU like you can in the other addons, another weak point of Toliss (togteher with a missing realtime refueling-panel, no modern custom EFB, no working tilt and gain on weather-radar, no ground-handling, no cabin lights). Again: the Toliss is far from perfect and i found the review spot-on.
This review lacks so much that its almost laughable. It is common knowledge that there are some issues with the modelling but that the benefit gained in performance is well worth it. As for the sounds, many are not even using the correct sounds. Some people are loading the wrong file and get default sounds and then blame ToLiss. I understand that you are trying to point out the flaws as well as the good, but what you have done here is point out the flaws and completely neglect the good. I wish you could be more balanced and honest in your review. This does not feel like a serious review to me. You are trying to make one of the best products out there sound like one of the worse. This is an opinion piece at best.
Dunno, I think the comments and that like bar suggests you are the one reaching for conclusions. Opinions are opinions, and the reviewer was perfectly just as valid in calling out the critiques instead of whistling and twiddling their thumbs.
This is why I gave up on X-Plane. All the 3rd party payware planes feel cheap and low quality. I wasted so much money on them. The 1st plane I bought was the shitty ramzzess 777 worldliner pro, then their crappy A350XB, and then when the rebranded themselves as Flight Factor, I bought their A320. Boy what a piece of crap they all were. I'm so done with shitty X-Plane.
Pretty decent review. Want to note that I will take low poly model over FPS hungry high poly model any day. It is a constant struggle to run X-Plane at decent FPS when you add Orbx, weather plugin, big airports and VR. Every single frame optimization counts.
Polys aren't that big of a deal for fps. It's more to do with the systems coding. Just look at the flyjsim, phenomenal modelling and texture work with little performance penalty. If toliss upped their 3d model quality to industry standard then I don't think you would notice a huge difference
@@a.nelprober4971 System coding uses CPU but most graphic/poly load is distributed to GPU under Vulkan.
Thanks for your review. While the addon lacks of certain modelling aspects and sound set, it excells at flight model, "to the numbers" performance at the by far lowes fps-cost of an airliner model in XP11. Hence it is a balance of "eye-candy"/high quality texturing vs. fidelity and performance that each buyer needs to weight for him. Unfortunately your review rather critiques on the first area and could elaborate more on the second part. As an opposite example one could take the ini A300: while scoring high marks in the first area (excellent texturing, sounds) it lacks in the latter (flight model issues, e.g. mach transition/cg handling, etc, not so great fps) and comes at an even higher price. So in the end it really matters what matters to you as a buyer and hence I would have suggested to visualize/point this out better at the conclusion.
I agree entirely - the Toliss A319 & A321 are vastly better than any other X-Plane airliners for fps performance (both in terms of perceived smoothness, and actual calculated fps impact in the plugin manager) and their Airbus fly-by-wire simulation has a long pedigree going back to QPAC. It flies brilliantly as a result.
To be honest I think they are giving a good price at 80 dollars. All of the engines(at least the iae and the leap) can be replaced with carda's engines, which is what I am happy with(they are free). The sounds get better with FTSim's soundpacks which is really cheap, and I am generally happy with what comes at 80 dollars. Well done ToLiSs
I agree with your conclusion and thanks for a factual review.
Thank you SimHanger! Glad you liked the review :).^SV
I really like Toliss as a dev team. They are very efficient at their coding and make great planes. I like their customer service and frequent updating. Just wish they would have someone else do their sounds. I also hope they model and texture their A346 better than the 319 and 321. They are using a new graphic design company(Ekran Deaign) so fingers crossed. Hopefully BSS will make another one of his excellent Airbus soundpacks for this beauty.🤞
Great review, I'm glad your willing to call out the problems with the Toliss. It's a great aircraft but lacking in many ways.
I feel like this is a good review of the aircraft. In terms of systems, you can't really complain. I feel like there is some functionality lacking in the MCDU, comparing to non-functional yet shown pages on the FlightFactor A320. Also CPDLC is more and more making its way into VATSIM/IVAO. It's a bit of a shame this isn't really covered well on the X-Plane platform, since it is used a lot by both ATC and pilots, both IRL and virtual. The switches in the cockpit are indeed a good point, they should be scrollable to a preffered position rather then a cycle-through process. To be honest, I haven't paid much attention to the modelling, I spend most of the time in the flightdeck during flight, and I look rather at other views when watching the replay of the landing. The cabin is poorly modeled tho, it is rather disappointing, as well as the lack of window textures. But honestly, this is one of the best planes on the market in terms of flight model. I would definitely recommend this payware aircraft. Paying the 80 dollars was worth it for me, but I feel like for the NEO option, they should've charged less, or nothing at all. Since it feels like the same plane, tho different systems are applied. I hope with their version of the A340, more effort will be made into the points that need improving. I hope to see changes in both their A319 as the A321. The developer of this project seems very much willing to improve things, but is rather limited by time. I do understand this, but I feel like they should've improved their products first before working on a new plane. However, hats off to Toliss, for the work they've done so far. They certainly do deserve credit for what they've already realised!
Hey William! Thank you for your comment! I'm glad you liked the review and I appreciate the compliment :). ^SV
Great Review! Really highlights how the biggest downfalls are the modeling and sounds! Hopefully toliss will address this in the upcoming 340
Dear Sol,
thank you for this review. It was very useful for me, because you assured me that these problems appear not only to me.
I experienced the mouse issue (disturbing), and the sound too.
Regarding the sound I would like to ask you something: isn't it somehow possible the increase the engine volume level IN the cockpit? With some plugin, etc.?
All the volume settings (X-Plane itself, Toliss plugin) are set to the max, but in the cockpit I hear only a weak engine sound. I believe that the real cocpits are very soundproof, but the developers should have give the option for the users to hear the engine better from inside, just like at FF A320.
Anyway I think that FF is a far better choice, but for people who dont have a gigantic GPU (like me) Toliss is an option.
Hi ! What kind of DLC is used to display the clouds in intro ?
I’m guessing XEnviro
The lackluster sound is what i hate the most. I had to resort to BSS soundpack straight away which sounded way better
Does the sliding window open?
Nope
I second this, great performance, good systems modeling - although some important features are still lacking (e.g. custom waypoints). Generally the cosmetic and sound aspect is quite poor, and the product does feel a bit overpriced.
That being said, it's also fair to mention that the average quality of airliners in XP is very low, and Toliss products are probably the top notch ones you can get in the sim, together with Zibo - which I believe is of a superior level, albeit being freeware
@BREQKER I thought inibuilds is not that advanced. People were saying how the a300 doesn't really have true systems
@BREQKER le reddito. apparently engines were merely cosmetic etc
What plugin for clouds do you use?
Thank you...
This is a very interesting review. I think I agree and disagree with several of your observations Sol.
I agree completely about sound, my hearing is not very good, which is nice because I don't have to buy sound packs as it is hard for me to distinguish between a quality sound pack and the default aircraft. Yet the Toliss engine sounds are annoying, it is very easy for my brain to distinguish the looping sound that repeats over and over and is really umconfortable. I hope your review can make Toliss realize they need to put a little more love in sound. If it is bad for me it should be really bad for many others.
About the model I think you are going a little too far, to my eyes the plane looks really nice, I understand your points but those are minor details to me.
And the balance between systems and looks should be treated carefully, the level of detail in the Toliss simulation is outstanding and I don't think that was stressed enough in this review. The planes really fly fantastically and the LR version is great for long but not ultra-long hauls.
I would say that is a very realistic simulation, study-level with bad sound and with some minor details in the 3d modeling that could be improved. You are too picky with 3d stuff maybe you have a background there :).
I prefer criticism to praise so well done.
Hey Luis! You might be surprised to know that my background has nothing to do with visuals. One of the reasons this review took so long to come out was that I needed to learn how modeling and texturing work in X-Plane 11. It took a couple of months until I could confidently point out issues without, to be honest, sounding like an idiot.
I'm glad that you agree with my assessment of the sounds, they're certainly a weak point.
In terms of the visual model, I agree that a quick look at the Toliss reveals practically nothing wrong and that for someone who just wants to fly the plane, they certainly do their job. But the reason I was so picky is that the issues I mentioned do not exist as much or at all in other aircraft that are priced similarly. Hopefully, that clears some of my harshness up. With that said though, everybody likes to sim differently and I completely respect your opinion :D.
I do agree as well that in terms of the flight model and systems, Toliss has done a fantastic job. I tried to express that in the review but thank you for pointing out that it didn't feel that way -- I will try and correct this in the future.
With all that said, thank you for your comment Luis and thanks for watching! ^SV
Whilst you make some good observations I honestly feel this review would put people off buying this aircraft and miss out on an incredibly immersive and one of the best ever Airbus experiences in flight sim. I don't think that is fair. Toliss I believe offer the best and most complete airbus package in X-Plane. To start the negatives by making such an issue of how the lights turn off and on is petty. I don't even notice what you are referring to (and most of the other negatives).
You've got XEnviro running and that is why there are mouse issues over the MCDU switches. In fact all reviews should consider turning off plugins. You also mention other clickspot issues of which I don't notice, don't have an issue with, or I understand that XEnviro is causing a "lag". You also compare graphics to Flight Factor but fail to mention how Flight Factor's A320 is a resource hog. I get almost double FPS in the Toliss. You should give a nod to that. There are issues with the sound, painting, and graphical glitches but the amount of time you devote to them in your review is disproportionate to the quality of the product.
I agree that for this price we should get the full package including sounds (BSS sounds are almost essential) but don't overlook the indepth MCDU (you can put range rings in it for example) the provided weights setup, the VSpeeds and temp calculations, deep failure scenario settings, the ability to save during a flight, and this is just off the top of my head.
Bottom line is your presentation for reviews is awesome (amazing X-Camera work), but the content needs better analysis and proportionate reviewing.
Hi Shane, thanks for your comment! I thought it would be important to clarify a few things.
I review all of my products in a plugin-free copy of X-Plane I have installed on my computer. Therefore, no plugin can interact with the product and lead me to assume something about it that is incorrect. In this factory version of X-Plane, I experienced these issues with MCDU mouse lag, not in a version that has xEnviro running. The shots of the plane you see in the review with xEnviro are purely for eye candy. Any conclusion that I made in the review was done in this stock version of X-Plane.
The FlightFactor A320 is certainly a resource hog and this is no secret. However, the intense resource use comes from the FlightFactor's plugins, not their normalmaps. This is why I did not make this comparison when showing the two side-by-side. The comparison is purely to show how FF have put more detail into their normalmaps. I would have used another plane but I figured having a side-by-side comparison of another aircraft from the a320 family was important.
Besides that though, I get why you feel as if there are a lot of negatives. It's very difficult to balance positives with negatives. This is especially true because you need to explain negatives in detail but positives can all be summed up in a sentence. I really appreciate you bringing this to my attention and will work on trying to incorporate the positives even more in future reviews.
Thanks again for your comment! ^SV
For me both Toliss-aircrafts actually do have a very bad immersion. FF320, Inibuild A300/A310, ZIBO or IXEG are way better (sounds, textures. reflections, mouse interactions etc.). The missing immersion is actually the main point i criticize about this aircraft. Even the freeware FBW on MSFS2020 has a better immersion and amazing sounds. The flightmodel and accuracy may be great, there are really something missing in the Toliss that i dislike. A strange thing is that it looks like people cannot stand any kind of criticism about the Toliss, it seems a bit like a religion....And about the mouse-lags over the MCDU: i don't use xEnviro and have the same problem. It's afwul to use it. And you cannot resize the popout MCDU like you can in the other addons, another weak point of Toliss (togteher with a missing realtime refueling-panel, no modern custom EFB, no working tilt and gain on weather-radar, no ground-handling, no cabin lights). Again: the Toliss is far from perfect and i found the review spot-on.
GIVE ME THAT NOW
This review lacks so much that its almost laughable. It is common knowledge that there are some issues with the modelling but that the benefit gained in performance is well worth it. As for the sounds, many are not even using the correct sounds. Some people are loading the wrong file and get default sounds and then blame ToLiss. I understand that you are trying to point out the flaws as well as the good, but what you have done here is point out the flaws and completely neglect the good. I wish you could be more balanced and honest in your review. This does not feel like a serious review to me. You are trying to make one of the best products out there sound like one of the worse. This is an opinion piece at best.
Dunno, I think the comments and that like bar suggests you are the one reaching for conclusions. Opinions are opinions, and the reviewer was perfectly just as valid in calling out the critiques instead of whistling and twiddling their thumbs.
This is why I gave up on X-Plane. All the 3rd party payware planes feel cheap and low quality. I wasted so much money on them. The 1st plane I bought was the shitty ramzzess 777 worldliner pro, then their crappy A350XB, and then when the rebranded themselves as Flight Factor, I bought their A320. Boy what a piece of crap they all were. I'm so done with shitty X-Plane.
All those planes are bad xp12 have better flight model