Xpax ... satisfied?

[Guest Bud]

This is a program I really want to like but at the moment it mystifies me. There are things which don't work as they were intended as noted in other threads such as the weight calculation and the fact that the nos. in the manifest, in my case, are always different, by two, from those in the diagram. I understand that these issues are being looked at and am perfectly happy to wait for an update even if it takes weeks as noted below. There is one issue, however, and I assume it to be an important aspect of the program's intention, where I feel it unreasonable to wait this amount of time. I refer to the passengers' satisfaction.I have completed just six flights. On each occasion, my passengers' satisfaction was 91. This is probably a coincidence, but in any event, I haven't a clue what that means. Is it 91%, which would presume I had lost 'points' for something. There is no indication in the report that something upset the passengers. Surely if the bulk of the 'scoring' is based on performance, then we should have some sort of idea as to where things went awry. When this has been raised previously, the response has been that a full explanation will be given in a future update. I don't think this is reasonable if the first update is weeks away. Why is it not possible for an explanation of assessment to be given now via the forum. I'm also totally baffled by the index figure which is updated after each flight. I'm sure it has a significance, but I just cannot see what it is. If, indeed, the measure of performance is an important part of this program, then surely this should have been fully explained in the manual as an aid to the pilot improvement. Having said all of that, I should also add that there is much about this to admire and I'm sure that when the kinks have been sorted out and one or two things added, it will be a classic.Bud

[Jim Padgett 11]

Except for those whining screaming pansy passengers.... can't tough out a litte maneuvering it's not like I injured them.. ( this time ) ..

[Guest Bud]

Would it be possible to have a reply to my post please.Bud

[JSkorna 137]

Hi Bud,We have stated that we will release a more detailed explanation in the future and will continue to improve the flight report.Thanks,Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-community-sigbanner.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/

[Guest Bud]

JimI find that very disappointing to put it mildly. In the absence of any rationale behind a flight's assessment currently, how is it possible to improve pilot performance or, indeed, to give meaning to the figures provided. I believe that, from the outset, the means by which assessment is made should have been transparent, as they are with other programs of this nature.Are you able to provide a reason why this was not included in the manual, or cannot be provided now.Looking at it from the users' point of view, if performance is without context; if the weight aspect does not work and the seating manifest/diagram is at odds, at least, with some add on planes we are left only with the videos and though these are an excellent innovation, they are hardly likely to retain interest and increase the realism aspect of a flight.I hate to say it, because I am a big fan of HiFi Sims, but I do think that the release of Xpax has been ill thought out. Bud

[JSkorna 137]

Hi Bud,I'll try and take one thing at a time.First, the scoring system area. I guess for this area we need to look at what we expected XPax to look like vs. how some users are now expecting X Pax to be or to be used as. Originally we looked at X Pax as a fun, relatively low cost add on with some unique features. We were not attempting to copy or follow any other programs that are out there of this nature. There is enough copying going on already and we wanted to be unique as much as possible. I don't think we viewed X Pax as a pilot/flight training system at all, hence the lack of transparent meanings for the scores. There are specific flight events that do trigger a scoring penalty and those are clearly announced and reported. But instead of listing those in a manual ahead of time, we have left it up to the user to discover these things on their own. Now, is that the best way? I don't know, but I do know that it fits with our initial vision for X Pax. Then, there are the random happenings that cause passengers scores to change. These are a little more hidden and not under the pilot's or the airline's control. Even on a perfect flight there will be random un-controllable events that will cause unhappiness. Yes, the reporting/causes of these events can be spelled out better after they happen, and that is something we are looking to improve upon.Second, the weight/seating area. Yes, there are some issues with some planes and we have made a commitment to fix those. Why are they there? Because it is impossible for us and for our beta team to own every add-on plane out there in order to test. We tried to test with as many planes as possible, but we couldn't test them all. And again, fixes are in the works.Third, the videos. The inclusion of videos and the whole area of the videos was a major challenge for us and was brand new. We were able to get one complete set in place and provide a means for users to get their own videos into X Pax. Will that be enough? We don't know and only time will tell. Users may dislike them after awhile and then we will re-evaluate this feature for the future. That is why we already have the option to turn videos off.Finally, please remember that X Pax development was new to us is not finished. The future plans and features will try to include as many suggestions and ideas as possible. Just as it took time for our weather products to develop, it will also take time for our other product releases to develop as well.Thanks, Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-community-sigbanner.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/

[Guest Bud]

JimMany thanks for your considered reply. We are going to have to differ on the value of tranparency of assessment. I can see absolutely no reason for the decision not to publish criteria. I don't think this would in any way detract from the concept of fun and low cost. At the very least, some explanation of what the 'scores' represent and what the index figure means would have been useful.Frankly I would view the issue of 'copying' as a red herring. There are clearly defined aspects of flight which can be monitored, ie taxi overspeed, wrong flap settings, excessive bank etc. Testing these could not be regarded as copying. As I said in my first post, I accept fully the difficulties of coping with a multitude of add on planes and am perfectly happy to await a future update. I think I made it quite clear that, in my opinion, the issue of assessment was rather more immediate and easy to accommodate. I do not want, or need a pilot training program, I simply would like to have some sort of context for the figures given. Bud

[Guest Carl Hackman]

Hi BudAt the moment we are reviewing XPax and working on an update. I appreciate your comments and it is these comments that help to enhance and improve our applications with each update/Service Pack.The scoring is basically on these criteria (most deductions are indicated on the FS Screen as they occur).Excessive climb/decent ratesExcessive bankExcessive G ForcesHard LandingsFast manoevring on the groundThere is also a random point deduction during the flight which is basic a passenger satisfaction parameter as there are always some passengers that will never be 100% satisfied no matter how much you pamper them.I hope that this gives some indication of how we create the scoring of each flight.Any suggestions for improvements etc should be emailed to tell-us@hifisim.com we always read these comments and discuss them within the development team to decide how best to improve our product line. ThanksCarl Hackmanhttp://www.hifisim.comhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-dev-sigbanner.jpg

[Guest Bud]

Hello Carl, That's excellent. Many thanks - that really is all I meant. In fact, I had discovered one or two by using deliberate bad flyin' techniques. I will drop a line to tell us on the gforce criteria. I got a reduction for this whilst flying straight and level in cruise. I also got a reduction [and screams] for a gentle 5 degree flare on a perfect landing. Just loved the scream effect.Have a feeling this could be plane related - I use the F1 ATR which I think is usually a bit of a pain to deal with for add on programs.Bud