Is this what we pay our money for? debate

[britfrog 180]

I know FSX has far greater potential than fs2004 but I am saddened by the fact that there are very few "amateur" devs who seem able to create either a good a/c or piece of scenery for FSX. With 2004 there were, and still are, loads of people making all sorts of stuff freeware or otherwise but now with FSX we seem tied to large companies who find it acceptable to launch half ready products on us the paying public and use us as unpaid beta testers,

Is this correct or good policy?

 

I give you some examples Aerosoft announced in January 2012, airbus Pro I immediately ordered it having had the earlier version which wasnt bad but had its shortcomings made obvious by the pmdg NGX. So they announced a "pro" version. Now I know, and in fairness to aerosoft they did keep the punters up to date with the problems they were having, but when the product was deemed ready for release just before xmas 2012, it was virtually unuseable. here we are say 7 weeks later and we still dont have a product that should do what we expected and this is now on version 4 with 10 hotfixes added. Each new version involves an uninstallation and that always leaves stuff behind which can corrupt other stuff. OK the product isnt that expensive but is this kind of behaviour correct? what if an uninstallation went boss eyed, would they offer to pay for a re-installation as their product was properly released albeit prematurely?.

 

Take Captain Sim as another example over xmas i bought in their sale the 767 and 777 ok what can one expect for $10? the 767 isnt bad but the navigation and fmc is only half finished so you can program in a flight and it will get to the TOC reasonably well but at that point its little brain goes into stall and it will not calculate TOD or a descent path, this has to be done manually,  why? the program is not finished yet they have now launched into the 777, perhaps in an effort to sell it to some of those waiting for the pmdg product which will be launched at some time in the future. On their site they clearly labeled the version I bought as version .9 and that it was work in hand and that version 1 the release version would be ready soon, well I now have version 1 and it is quite clearly still work in hand, such a shame. When is a release version really a definite product? OK i can understand some unexpected things arising when the product is released to the great unclean which will require some small mods , but a whole re-write?

 

Now take REX , In fairness to REX the last few releases have been free so I suppose we cant be too critical but for 2 years now their clients have been complaining about slow internet speed and problems with upper air wind changes and a few other issues (which they say they had cured in the last couple of releases and hadnt) I now see they have launched a public beta which again is supposed to address these issues, but will it? ! well at least they are being honest about it download it at your own risk etc and you also have no back up if you install it. But is it correct that we Joe public should be even offered this opportunity? What if the installation turned into a ball of chalk? if you are like me and had to reinstall windows and fsx one has about a weeks worth of work ,

 

Why is it a new kid on the block like OPUS can get so much right , so quickly with so little experience? but they too are not beyond releasing a public beta on the paying public although it is clearly labelled as such.

There are other companies ,perhaps too many to mention that do the same.

 

Is This acceptable behaviour? Is this what we are to expect in the future? or should we as consumers with consumers rights be entitled to a finished product when it is released? after all by installing their program they have their eula as protection you cant  do this or that with their property THEIR PROPERTY!!!! their property might wipe out your computer and they cant be held responsible? yet if you lend their Faulty  program to a friend to try in his computer you risk a court appearance and perhaps even jail !! yet they can wipe out your computer, or at least cause you days of work and have no fear of you getting any compensation

Is this correct?

 

I open the debate to the floor -- - -- ----

[brett 2,315]

Yesterdays freeware developers are today's payware guys? My guess is there is not much money for development and they do what they can to stay in the game. I agree it's a bit unfair and have voiced the same opinion here before about incomplete products. At least they are giving us something to fly in the mean time. It takes alot of time to make this stuff and they are hogtied by the original FSX code when trying to improve on the products that they are making. Add to that is problems that develop not only in the way things work on individual computers but also with existing addon compatibilities. Don't get me wrong, I am not sticking up for them. I still think that the pricing of products that are not complete are all over the place and that some companies never really finish what they have started before moving on to the next product. Once you get into the payware world things start getting competitive. Just like anything else, we as consumers have a voice with our dollars and picking and choosing products and companies that give us the most for what we buy will be the deciding factor on how these companies act. Unfortunately folks with money to burn can't wait to get the latest releases and jump on them without waiting for confirmation on how good the stuff really is. I will say that there are many companies that do stay on top of what they make and continue to update them in a timely manner and have real lines of communications with their customer base. Those are the ones I will continue to buy from in the future.  

 

We can also say these same things about alot of other products out there from food to furniture. Buy smart is all we can do.

[allardjd 1,853]

Vote with your wallet - if a vendor disappoints you, don't buy from them again.  Let them know that and let other flight simmers know that via forum posts.  That's about all you can do unless you want to jump into the development business and try to set the new standard.

 

Without getting too defensive of them, I think one of their difficulties is related to a new operating system floating in their punchbowl every 12-18 months.

 

John

[GHAO 0]

There's a lot of pressure, especially form companies that still have shareholders. Some companies (I can't remember who) say they don't have release dates - the product is ready when it's ready, and never before. I think that is the way it should be.

In the real world when the first gigantic jet engines came through they packed so much thrust in that McDonnel and other companies told customers to let the engines 'settle in'. I don't know for sure, but I would bet that a second-hand aircraft with engines that aren't going to blow up is a lot more desirable than a brand-new jet from the factory. The same here with software - the promise of fixes just makes the later version more value for money than a brand-new product, even if the later version is a year behind the current market.

Personally - when I buy a product I want the final version, one that works. I don't want to be trawling forums finding out that a patch goes live every week - iTunes bugs me to John O'Groats and back with each spelling error they find in the Catalan EULA that requires another 70mB of download (about 3 hours I think on my connection). As such, I normally wait patiently for the final version to arrive.

One exception though is a game like AirHauler or Anteworld (Outerra) - where the initial customers do have a lot of comments that can be made and can change the game. AH has improved so much from the AH forums, and Anteworld is almost turning into a game designed by the public for the public, with a bunch of developers making it happen. But with a plane, not much can be altered in such a drastic way - so it should be better first time around.

[snowingairlines 0]

There is definitely a move towards payware if you want really good software, but the standards have also changed. A top quality add-on has changed. Take a look through Carenado's product catalog, and you will see a change form no gps, to the default gps, to a custom gps, than to the G1000. 

[Quickmarch 488]

I've got to agree with JA. I'm actually quite tired of "jumping in" to a piece of software that looks good in print (I'm a real sucker for a good sales pitch, but I don't own any land in Florida, yet) only to find that it is a bit crippled in many ways. (Insert smiley, here. I can't because I'm writing this on the Crapple)

This is prevalent I the high-end simulations. I've several aircraft in my hangar that have cost me in excess of $50 that either don't work or work only with a lot of tweaking. Someone's going to have to do a lot of convincing before I spend any more money in a couple of the major sim product houses. I understand their problems, but I think they should concentrate on bringing out and supporting one or two really good titles and leave the plethora to the experimenters.

That's my $0.02,

March

[Quickmarch 488]

PS: I wonder if the developers troll these forums for hints?

Cheers,

March

[dogtrack 346]

Mmmm....and it's not just Sim Software that suffers from these types of "unfinished" releases. Millenium Edition, Vista and not to be accused of blinkered vision a certain video editing software offering from Serif_Movie Plus v1_and another from Pinnacle_Video Studio-early versions up to 8_and the list goes on and on and on.........

 

Adobe seem to have got it right. But then all that research, developement and testing comes at a price and a mighty big one at that. Could that be the answer? More input before release and a substantial price hike for the additional time and effort. I for one would not like to speculate on that !!

 

Perhaps the bottom line is more on the line that some developers are working beyond their actual capability. Hobbyists trying to make a buck... Guess no individual is ever going to admit to that though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[britfrog 180]

Perhaps some sort of citizens charter should be drawn up that to some degree negates the "I want my cake and eat it as well" EULA

[Seasmoke 1]

The problem is even worse for newcomers, (or should that be latecomers?), it never occurred to me when I got involved that I was going to have  to learn about the inner workings of my PC in such detail, just to play the game!

I come from a gaming background in the likes of World of Warcraft and in 8 years of that, I have never had to sort out any of the hundreds of addons that are involved. On the odd occasion when something has gone wrong, the  supplier has come onto my PC remotely and sorted it out.

 

I had only had FSX  a couple of weeks when I downloaded (paid for I think) an MD500 heli' that had the rotors turning vertically through the cabin. Mildly amusing until I discovered that I could no longer work FSX. Uninstalling (using a techie) turned into one disaster after another until in the end I just ordered another high end gaming PC.  The old one was knocking on a bit, but even so!!

 

So now I restrict myself to Orbx, Just Flight and (as from today), Nemeth Designs.  I must be missing out on heaps of other good stuff but what can I do?  With a thousand odd bucks of hardware screwed to my desktop and not enough savvy to sort out any crashes or serious leftover gremlins, and I guess, the feeling...........that I shouldn't have too, should I  ?

[britfrog 180]

The problem is even worse for newcomers, (or should that be latecomers?), it never occurred to me when I got involved that I was going to have  to learn about the inner workings of my PC in such detail, just to play the game!

I come from a gaming background in the likes of World of Warcraft and in 8 years of that, I have never had to sort out any of the hundreds of addons that are involved. On the odd occasion when something has gone wrong, the  supplier has come onto my PC remotely and sorted it out.

 

I had only had FSX  a couple of weeks when I downloaded (paid for I think) an MD500 heli' that had the rotors turning vertically through the cabin. Mildly amusing until I discovered that I could no longer work FSX. Uninstalling (using a techie) turned into one disaster after another until in the end I just ordered another high end gaming PC.  The old one was knocking on a bit, but even so!!

 

So now I restrict myself to Orbx, Just Flight and (as from today), Nemeth Designs.  I must be missing out on heaps of other good stuff but what can I do?  With a thousand odd bucks of hardware screwed to my desktop and not enough savvy to sort out any crashes or serious leftover gremlins, and I guess, the feeling...........that I shouldn't have too, should I  ?

 

well at least you are here now i am sure you will find a solution to any fsx problem here if you ask, there are plenty of helpful types here

[Seasmoke 1]

You got that right Brittfrog !

 

John ( Allardjd) and Brett to name but two.

 

So a quickiee for you......... when FSX first came out did people think that the platform was a bit shaky or was it the dogs bollix in it's day?

[allardjd 1,853]

The problem with FSX when it came out was that most computers of the day could barely run it, if at all.  Performance tuning and setting sliders way to the left were the order of the day and a lot of people were MS-bashing for having the audacity to release something that required such expensive, high-end hardware to run acceptably.  Obviously, that's pretty much behind us now and we're all eagerly looking around for the NGFS.

 

John

[rob16584 42]

When FSX came along we all say what it could do thanks to the screenshots from MS, but the first release needed a patch fairly quickly because performance was terrible, and even then it was far better than the PC's of the day. I think it's only in the last couple of years that PC's have begun to catch up to FSX, and the results are stunning.

 

From a business point of view I can see why developers release their add-ons in parts, but I think that Captain Sim do it wrongly. I like how Just Flight do it by selling you a finished version, but allowing you to buy add-on liveries, extra models etc... to build your collection.

 

There are a couple of developers who I point blank refuse to purchase anything from due to poor support and/or incomplete products. One was actually given to me to review and when I suggested areas to improve and listed the faults they told me just to ignore the bad points and just focus on the good bits and that a patch would never come out because it would take too long to do. Had I ever published it the review would have been short and not sweet!

 

I think that because developers such as Orbx, PMDG and A2A are continually raising the bar it makes it very difficult for other delveopers to keep up. At any one time there are probably a couple of developers working on the same add-on and rushing to get it to market first to try and cash in - after all it's profit that keeps them in business. Some newcomers to the FS scene may get taken in by the sales pitch (I know I did).

 

Thankfully sites such as Mutley's Hangar offer unbiased reviews to help you decide whether or not to buy the add-on [shameless plug]

[allardjd 1,853]

Rob,

 

While I agree with the entries on your list for who is producing the good stuff, I have to offer a caveat about PMDG.  On the advice of their legal staff, who fear lawsuits if any of their products come to be used for RW training, PMDG have steafastly refused to support use of their products for P3D.    Further, they have actually modified their EULA to specifically prohibit its use on P3D.  For a progressive, leading edge company to have their head where the sun doesn't shine is a travesty and I think flight simmers need to be aware of the fact.

 

Prepar3D is one of the very few credible contenders to become the NGFS.  If P3D does evolve into the new standard for flight simulation, those who pop for the very expensive PMDG software may find themselves out on a limb, faced with the choice of using the PMDG product OR the best flight sim.

 

This is in no way a comment against the quality of the PMDG stuff - it's superb, but I consider P3D is very likely to be the best simulator too (if not now, then soon), and as of now, PMDG doesn't want you to use their products on it.

 

John

[Seasmoke 1]

A tad curious what NGFS is, John?  Presumably not Naval Gun Fire Support !

 

At the risk of getting your rear-end sued Rob, what would be..........> "a couple of developers who I point blank refuse to purchase anything from"

 

A personal msg would be most acceptable on the topic, or answers on an unsigned postcard perhaps?  There are definitely folk on here who could stop newbs damaging their flying pleasure with duff installs?

[snowingairlines 0]

It seems that the best way to see if a product is worth buying, is to read many different reviews. I also got lucky, and entered late where there were lots of thread like this, which outlined which products not to buy.

[britfrog 180]

I think NGFS means next generation flight sim am i right John?

 

as for knowing what product to buy,

I strongly believe, as we are so hamstrung by EULAS, that all software should have a free trial period, over the years i have read many reviews not just for FSX but other stuff, and taken the review on board and bought the product only to be badly disappointed, I no longer read reviews (here on mutleys i have a bee in my bonnet over the marks given ) I now read the support forums, these give you a far more accurate idea of how good the program is before you buy, yes you can tend to get a few numpties and a few know-it-alls but the speed that the devs produces either fixes or service packs will give you some idea of how serious the company is and also how good the product is.

 

However I do predict that it will not be long before someone challenges these Eulas, they have already had to back pedal and legally allow you to sell or give programs away albeit in some cases without product support, It has also been determined that a eula only applies to the first buyer, but what right say does pmdg have in saying how or where you use YOUR copy of the ngx, that you have paid good money for? how can they enforce it? in short they cant ,without a permanent internet connection whenever you use their products which would be infringing on your human rights.

[allardjd 1,853]

NGFS = Next Great Flight Simultor, i.e. that which finally overshadows FSX and takes us where we'd all like to go - into multiple processors, memory beyond a couple of GBs or so and the largely untapped power of our very powerful graphics cards.  I've used that acronym in a number of posts and articles, but it hasn't caught on like I'd hoped.

 

John

 

EDIT:  When the guy making the best FS airliners refuses to allow them to be used on what is arguably the best flight simulator, only the lawyers have won - everyone else is in the losers column, including both the vendors involved. 

 

JDA

[GHAO 0]

I thought PMDG made planes that were able to be used by RW pilots for practice - I thought that was the main point of the company, ergo, I'd never buy them as I'd be out my depth! And as Britfrog says, how are they going to know you use their product with P3D without them spying on you?

[allardjd 1,853]

...how are they going to know you use their product with P3D without them spying on you?

 

I don't know if they do, but it wouldn't be hard for the app to detect if P3D is running and shut down if it is, or flash an on-screen warning.  I'd be surprised if FSUIPC can't see and report the sim version as well.

 

Even without physically blocking their software being run in P3D, by forbidding it in the UELA they have legally absolved themselves if anyone were to sue them for a mishap after having used their FS aircraft for RW training.  Apparently the primary intent of P3D by L-M is to be sold as flexible, easily customizeable simulation for businesses and government or military entities. 

 

John

[gpbarth 2]

Vote with your wallet - if a vendor disappoints you, don't buy from them again.  Let them know that and let other flight simmers know that via forum posts.  That's about all you can do unless you want to jump into the development business and try to set the new standard.

 

Without getting too defensive of them, I think one of their difficulties is related to a new operating system floating in their punchbowl every 12-18 months.

 

John

 

Capitalism should rule, and I have no problems paying for something worth the money. Re the A2A P-51. I paid top dollar for that military bird, and went right back and bought the civvie model, both with Accu-Sim. And added Accu-Feel. Then I went up on the A2A site and got some of the most fantastic repaints I have ever seen, for free! I've paid for REX Essential w/Overdrive and haven't been sorry. Likewise FS Commander, FSUIPC (registered), and so on.

 

I downloaded FacetracknoIR for free, and it works as advertised. Now there's a piece of software worth paying for.

 

But I have no problems with telling people if I'm dissatistifed with something and telling others to be cautious. That's free enterprise, and anyone charging for their wares has to endure this gauntlet. I paid for the Friendly Mooney panel package, and even at $20, I was not impressed. While the panels are so-so, outside views of the planes do not work with EZDok views - the other Mooney A/C in FSX are fine.

 

So it's up to all of us to make the market work for us and weed out the poor offerings. And when something comes along that is over-priced or just doesn't work, let the rest of the community know about it. I will gladly pay for something that I want, and will not pay for something worthless. Just my $.02.

[allardjd 1,853]

Ah, I think I've found the answer...

 

Software doesn't just appear on the shelves by magic. That program shrink-wrapped inside the box along with the indecipherable manual and 12-paragraph disclaimer notice actually came to you by way of an elaborate path, through the most rigid quality control on the planet. Here, shared for the first time with the general public, are the inside details of the program development cycle.

 

1 Programmer produces code he believes is bug-free.

2 Product is tested. 20 bugs are found.

3 Programmer fixes 10 of the bugs and explains to the testing department that the other 10 aren't really bugs.

4 Testing department finds that five of the fixes didn't work and discovers 15 new bugs.

5 See 3.

6 See 4.

7 See 5.

8 See 6.

9 See 7.

10 See 8.

11 Due to marketing pressure and an extremely premature product announcement based on an overly optimistic programming schedule, the product is released.

12 Users find 137 new bugs.

13 Original programmer, having cashed his royalty check, is nowhere to be found.

14 Newly-assembled programming team fixes almost all of the 137 bugs, but introduce 456 new ones.

15 Original programmer sends underpaid testing department a postcard from Fiji. Entire testing department quits.

16 Company is bought in a hostile takeover by competitor using profits from their latest release, which had 783 bugs.

17 New CEO is brought in by board of directors. He hires programmer to redo program from scratch.

18 Programmer produces code he believes is bug-free.

 

[Christopher Low 63]

I know FSX has far greater potential than fs2004 but I am saddened by the fact that there are very few "amateur" devs who seem able to create either a good a/c or piece of scenery for FSX.

 

I agree, Brit. I would have expected some enthusiastic UK freeware developer to have built models of many of the bridges throughout England and Wales. PlayHorizon have given us great versions of most of the really important bridges, but there are so many more that are missing......

 

Barmouth rail bridge

Cleddau road bridge

Flintshire road bridge

Orwell road bridge

Isle of Sheppey road bridge

Berwick-upon-Tweed rail viaduct

Thelwall Viaduct (M6) road bridge

Avonmouth (M5) road bridge

 

In addition, there are plenty of stunning rail viaducts that could be added (eg. Ribblehead).

 

[Kevin Firth 114]

Would love to Chris, just don't have the time what with trying to keep a job and a little one on the way seriously, have you ever thought of having a go yourself? K