Sign in to follow this  
Guest panzerschiffe

A designer speaks out.... not everyone is perfect

Recommended Posts

I have to say something here......... As a Designer I see alot of Bashing of designs from time to time. So you think a designer isn't good at Flight Dynamics.... Well Not many people are....it's a bit of a Black art and I only can brute force something to fly right in my air & cfg files. the panel not up to your personal standards? Well not everyone can make panels....It's few and far between to find a flight sim add on designer who is good at more than one or two of the separate disiplines. I make ok visual models, close enough flight models, so-so textures and I can do panel layouts fine but can't make the background bitmap worth a darn. I also make some ok scenery.What does this mean???? Not a thing.... I do it for fun, so do the other freeware designers. this is a hobby and far too many treat it like it's real life. that means they need to get a life. if it were not for freeware developers, all you would have is the default planes and scenery to fly with!If you don't like the way a plane flies, learn flight dynamics and help the designer out with a new flight model, Don't like the panel, learn photoshop or PSP, buy cfg edit and make one thats better. Textures too plain, learn to repaint. Don't like where a building is on an airport, Download Airport and fix it.My point here? Insead of bashing a designers work off hand, try to be helpfull, point out a shortfall you noticed. if you have some information on something share it. we designers are not masters of all things avation and may not know something that you do. Try your hand at making an add on yourself, Add to the comunity. Then maybe you won't be so quick to judge something that someone did initialy for themselves but decided to share with us ALLI'll get off my soapbox nowBrian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Seeing as how you chose to raise this as a separate thread, rather than leaving it in the thread where it began so it might be read in context, might I direct you and other forum visitors to my reply.http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/DCForumID8/19188.html#15I think that, for once, you may have judged a bit too soon, Brian. I personally make a distinction between freeware and payware. It is shameful that some payware developers choose to abuse the privilege of `freeware`. ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'll get off my soapbox now"It's OK Brian. You've been doing this long enough and contributed so much that no one will fault you for being more than a little miffed about the troll thread Scott wisely removed.I was gonna lite up the guy too, but enough people here were putting him in his place.Mike chooses not to spend time here anymore, and we should all respect his decision. That doesn't mean the folks who call Avsim home should put up with someone bashing his freeware contributions. No wonder the poor guy gets frustrated.Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I moved it was because it didn't apply just to Samdim's AN-24.... but to all designs and the slamming going on around here. And I think you missed my point. I wanted to point out that there is alot that goes into any add on. Not every designer is a Steve Small or Mikko Malenimi or Richard Goldstine. But they all freely give something back to the community as a whole. and all I ask is that people keep that in mind when they see a problem with any uploaded project. I wanted to address that from the designers viewpoint (at least my veiwpoint on the issue)As for the "preview" of the payware AN-24, well it's a preview of the visual model and it's free. Also the name Freeware isn't a "privilege" it's a legal term. If the software doesn't cost anything..... Its Freeware.Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amen! :-beerchug---Banners? We don't need no stinkin' banners!---Visualize ProjectAI sig banner here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I don't think I missed your point. I just thought your timing and placing of that point was a litle inappropriate, spurred as it was by being a reply to the AN24 thread, when it is quite clear that you are actually referring to the now-deleted thread from earlier.Two very different issues. Ironically I agree with you completely if your post was a reply to the latter. But your liberal interpretation of freeware will come back to haunt you, I fear. Sub-standard payware knowingly farmed out to the unsuspecting masses as freeware is not the same thing as poor quality freeware from a would-be designer who has done his/her best. One deserves support and assistance, the other public discovery and shaming. To treat both equally is to show contempt for the best efforts of the genuine freeware developer. ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it's ok to give your personal opine as regards to any package either freeware or payware, the issue seems more to be just how you go about doing it. Calling someone's work "Rubbish" etc is not the best choice of words and does nothing but make people a little upset. Why not say... I think that the technology has increased to a point where we can expect better graphics etc?... Your other statement "...shameful that some payware developers choose to abuse the privilege of `freeware`"... is out of place too. I was not aware of the list of privileges to payware developers who also distrubute freeware? If anything this is a very good thing because in this case you can judge the payware version by the freeware. Don't care for it? Don't buy it. Don't like the freeware version? Don't download it. We are very capable of knowing weather something is good enough for ourselves without a spokesperson speaking for the users here'. Best Wishes, Randy J. Smith [h3]" A little learning is a dangerous thing"[/h3]AMD XP 2100 |MUNCHKIN 512 DDR RAM |ECS[/b ][i] K7S5A MB[/i] |GF3 64 MEG |WIN XP PRO |MITSUBISHI DIAMOND PLUS 91 19"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as you have 'trashed" someones design with inappropriate wording and attitude (IMO), it probably won't make it to the payware point, or even another freeware effort, which is probably fine by you.You seem justified in your actions and there is probably nothing anyone can say to make you think differently about your postJust goes to show there is always one in every bunch.I can think of plenty of downloads that have not come close to what I expected (even payware), but I never trash that person in public for his efforts. I either go to the author directly with CONSTRUCTIVE criticism or in the case of payware, chalk it up to experience, bottom line, lots of ways to handle something not living up to your expectations,... bashing the person's efforts is not one of them! My 2 cents!Regards, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>> While it's ok to give your personal opine as regards to >any package either freeware or payware, the issue >seems more to be just how you go about doing it. >Calling someone's work "Rubbish" etc is not the best choice >of words and does nothing but make people a little upset. >Why not say... I think that the technology has increased to >a point where we can expect better graphics etc?... OK, so to be polite (but not make any less of a criticism). I fear the flight model has no representation of the real thing, based as it is on an FS98 air file modified for use by strange amendments in the FS2002 cfg file. The sounds too, are substantially below par for a quality release, especially as other sounds have been available for some time that could have been modified for use with little or no effort on the part of the developers. Is it beyond the realms of expectation that a developer could actually check files for corruption before uploading them to an unsuspecting file library and inflicting the errors upon dozens of unsuspecting simmers, many of whom may have spent some considerable time downloading the unnecessarily large file size, only to find that the download contains errors? Twice.Oh, and I wonder what happened to the load configuration editor that was such a feature of the previous Antonov 24 release? Keen as mustard to point out the opening doors and windows, the developers must have forgot to put that feature in to the new version. So much for politeness.> Your other statement "...shameful that some payware >developers choose to abuse the privilege of `freeware`"... >is out of place too. I was not aware of the list of >privileges to payware developers who also distrubute >freeware? Your sitting in a forum which specifically prohibits the promotion of payware supported elsewhere. The right to talk about freeware is what this forum is for. Perhaps when the AN24 group have their own forum and support site we will have no need of this kind of shameful behaviour as the thread will simply be locked and removed? Quite why Avsim are even hosting such a file is a question the library masters might want to consider. Well, unless Avsim will also be hosting the support and sale of the commercial product?>If anything this is a very good thing because in >this case you can judge the payware version by the freeware. >Don't care for it? Don't buy it. Don't like the freeware >version? Don't download it. We are very capable of knowing >weather something is good enough for ourselves without a >spokesperson speaking for the users here'. How do I know that I dont care for it if someone doesn't tell me the truth about it? How do I know the truth about a freeware download unless and until I download it - or someone tells me about it?No, I'm confused by that. A forum is by nature a place where ideas and comments are exchanged. You seem to want a silent room where no-one says anything to anyone else for fear of upsetting them. That's a morgue. ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't take me the wrong way please. You just might be 100% correct in your opinion as regards to this aircraft package. All I am saying is don't come across in such a disrespectful manner by your speech, that's all. I feel that people's opinions about any aircraft are important for my choice in purchase etc. Give you an example here. I downloaded a certain aircraft off of the Library yesterday and gave it a whril. This is a MD 80 type mind you by a well know developer. I was able to do 30+ loops at FL 100' in this aircraft with crash and stress detection! So, should I get on here like I have a personal problem with this package and attack the developer? If someone asks me I will tell them what I found but would leave the extra personal comments to myself. And even if I did do a post stating what I thought, I would make sure that I did it respectively regardless if the developer is not. Best Wishes, Randy J. Smith [h3]" A little learning is a dangerous thing"[/h3]AMD XP 2100 |MUNCHKIN 512 DDR RAM |ECS[/b ][i] K7S5A MB[/i] |GF3 64 MEG |WIN XP PRO |MITSUBISHI DIAMOND PLUS 91 19"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And another designer agree's with Brian.Dee Waldron (HJG)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously recognise yourself in the message or you'd not respond so violently...Brian is completely correct, he describes exactly why many freeware designers give up.There is a small number of people that don't appreciate their work and continuously bash them for every flaw (real or perceived) in their work without ever even trying to help fix those flaws (or often even to find out whether they really are flaws at all).That's also the reason ever more commercial groups are cutting down on support. They just can't handle the deluge of flames sent to them by a small group of people (many of them not even customers. The amount of support demands (usually shouted) and flames received from people using pirated versions is staggering).Such attitudes are pathetic and can only come from either very childish people or people who have an intention to destroy the addon market for some reason.If you think there's something wrong with a product (commercial or no) why not simply contact the author in private and point out the flaws in civilised language (preferably with data to support your claim and/or ways to fix it)?Why scream out loud in public forums unless you have nothing to support your claims in which case you should remain silent until you do (and even after that remain civilised).There's people at the end of them there email addresses and forums. You're deliberately hurting those people emotionally (and in the case of commercial groups financially) because of some perceived flaw in the placement of an antenna or the landing speed being one knot different from what you think it should be....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And another one who decided to not even try (did start out on several things, in part because of the constant harassment and bashing of designers I decided to quit before release)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a scenery designer..I heartily agree with Brian. I simply ask those of you that receive freeware from those of us that provide it, to have fun! Feel free to be constructive, but please don't forget you are in possession of a gift. If you want me to do more for you, or faster for you, or be better than I can be, please never forget that you should look first to yourself to provide those wants. Think of telling the person who gave you a birthday present that they should have given you two birthday presents....not going to happen, right? Why folks feel its ok to behave that way in this situation, I'll never figure out.And never forget that this is all for fun. Whenever you think that payware is forcing out freeware, then you should stop buying payware. Amazing, how much you'll begin to realize how cool the freeware is, after all! Kind of like enjoying the song of birds, after turning off the TV.Bob Bernstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brian,I appreciate and understand your point, however in some cases this is a two way street. True, there will always be some people who revel in mouthing off about other people's aircraft, they let the side down. But there are many people who do provide constructive critiscm and many designers welcome that.There are unfortunately exceptions and a certain (name censored) is a good example. His general attitude is that ALL feedback for his work is rubbish and if you don't like it tough! So, when he released his MD-11 which is hopelessly inaccurate, unsurprisingly people pointed it out. This included people simply sending photos of real aircraft to compare with his, but as far as he is concerned, we are all morons and idiots for wanting aircraft that look realistic.I have given feedback to designers before, often when my knowledge of a particular aircraft or livery or scenery might be useful. Such comments are addressed politely and so far have been met with polite responses and thanks for the input. I know that this just would not happen with Mr (name censored). Unfortunately, I cannot address any of this on his website, no matter how politely as I'll get flamed to death by his merry band of devotees!So, yes not all users are perfect. But neither are all designers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,This seems to me to have gone off at a bit of a tangent.I have MASSIVE respect for people who do freeware for FS, yourself included brian.I don't think that anyone (at least in my opinion) in the previous posts have BASHED freeware, they are just stating that if this is a payware preview then the developer is using it as a yardstick so people can judge his/her work, and make a decision as to weather they are going to pay money for it.If someone were to ask my opinion I would say that on judgement of the preview it is not worth spending money on.I love freeware, I also love payware, but the line between the quality of the two is starting to become a bit blurred.Dan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was a case of a minor problem like that I'd fix it myself or ignore it. But when the problem starts with the installation, continues with the panel, flight model & sounds then it becomes a real struggle to be positive about it. How about: Nice wheels?And when it is a preview of a commercial product due shortly then I believe it is right to express the concerns exactly as we have done here. "Money changing hands changes everything," as the saying goes. Yes, even the polite niceties applying to `normal` freeware (which this clearly is not).Once a `payware preview` product is released to the public domain, why should we discuss it directly, quietly, with the developer? I see no reason to defend saying that panel, flight model and sounds are substandard in public, because of that commercial product just around the corner. If it were a genuine freeware release I would do as I usually do - ignore it, correspond privately or remove it. One could just as easily argue that no-one is forcing the developers to read this forum and therefore there is no obligation on them to respond or even improve their payware release from what they have planned. However, if they release a commercial product to the sim community of this poor quality I'm sure you would be among the first to complain that simmers are being ripped-off. ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Randy, And by doing so you have created a divide in your own expectations and actions between how you deal with freeware and payware. That's exactly what I have done too, except that I have decided that this download, however free of charge, is not really freeware.Anyway, the file is removed, the problem's in the public domain, the developers have an opportunity to fix what needs fixing before uploading again. Let's just hope they don't just replace the corrupt files consider the possibility that this release may be damaging potential sales of their commercial product and fix it all.ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO JDH just above this post has hit this nail right on the head. I also have personally given some constructive criticism on a good bit of freeware that I use. I would say that most of the time, if not all the time, the criticism is recieved very well and better freeware has resulted. Its all in the attitude of the designer(and of course the user!). I personally have learned how to paint (still learning too!) due to this being something I see frequently needs attention. I don't have the time to model at this point. I also do my own scenery which is very enjoyable. I have learned that good constructive criticism is important and I SEEK it with my repaints. I know my work is almost always improved by it. I see no reason to not continue doing this and I welcome those who can make my creations that much better! Some designers just don't seem to want to do this. I know who they are and don't bother them anymore, simple as that :)Hornit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like designers who like progress in to the developing world of flightsimulation and want there design as real as it gets. What i see by some is that they don't want progress, what i can't understand. I mean why should you refuse to make 0pening doors in your planes or trust reversres. It is simple, planes without opening doors or working trust reversers and in the near future virtual wings and cabin won't do anymore. The joy of flightsimulation is realism and progress.Best regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a person that is continuely downloading, testing, and evaluating various FS files (aircraft, utilities, scenery, etc.) that are freeware in nature, I do believe that I tend to force myself to see things from a more unbias position. I will expound on the positives of any given file, while I will at the same time, tend to minimize any shortcomings I find.If you were to go back and read my reviews from over the last couple of years, you should recognize, based on my presentation style, that I purposely see things from a glass is half-full attitude. In otherwords, no matter what the

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Bear, where do you stand on `pretend` freeware - such as low-spec introductions to payware products shortly to be released? Do you still treat it as freeware, with all the critical responsibility removed, replaced by sycophancy. Or do you tell it like it is, in the hope that it convinces the developer to raise their game or at least the simmer to consider VERY carefully before making that purchase? Where do YOUR loyalties lie when money is involved? The problem is, if you treat it like `normal` freeware your review may directly be the cause of some simmer wasting time, money and effort on some substandard pap. I can't be the only person who has purchased payware on recommendation of a forum review only to find it substandard in many areas - and then failed to get my money back.ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this