Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

strider

CaptainSim reviews.

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure if it's the fact that AVSIM accepts commercial advertisements, which limits it's ability to tell the whole truth, or just a lack of the reviewer's "long term" testing, but you're reviews of any CaptainSim product fail to mention many undesireable qualities of this developer? I have purchased 3 products from them and I am COMPLETELY dissatisfied with every single one of them (all for FS9). It seems whenever the complaints of bugs and errors reach a certain level...we get the "CaptainSim has stopped developing for this aircraft and will no longer support it". After my 3 purchases, I have managed to break the code and can tell you what it REALLY means..."We made our money off the initial purchase and, now, we are going to dupe some more idiots with a NEW, incomplete and buggy aircraft".1. The Legendary 727. This aircraft was SO innacurate as do defy logic, The FD as AP??? I quickly deleted it after finding the jewel of a 727...the Dreamfleet 727.2. The Legendary 707. Here was my FAVE RW aircraft, I had to have it. We had a thriving community at the old CS website, with performance charts and much more being provided by people with RW experience with this classic. We also had many requests for CS to fix the long list of bugs, fuel usage/flow was WAY off, turbocompressors linked to the wrong engine...I could go on and on. As with so many payware developers, we were expected to come to the "throne", with hat in hand. BS! WE are the customers who paid for an inferior product and we have a right to ask about "fixes". CS's response, their feelings were hurt by all the people asking for fixes. What a bunch of sissies payware developers have become! Grow some thick skin and realize...we paid hard earned cash for an inadequate an uncompleted product...of COURSE we are going to complain vehemently...especially when we get abandoned. Suddenly, CS "updates" it's website and all the old 707 forum users are gone. Go look at it now...if you had seen it before you would describe it as a "ghost town" in it's current guise. Nothing of the major problems has been fixed. In fact, they released the last patch, V1.2, and I have yet to find a single correction in it? Enter the "new" CS...and it's website. Everybody from the old 707 group disappears rather than fight a losing battle.3. The Legendary C-130. After years of ignoring CS, but hearing "wonderful things" about the C-130, I broke down and bought it. I was especially interested in the "Navy Polar" model, which came with the "Extra Pack", because it had skis. So I purchased it also. Imagine my surprise, and the bruising I suffered from kicking myself for ever purchasing another CS product, when I discovered that the "Extra Pac" aircraft do not work with CS's ACE utility. I had no way to select "No VC", 2D views, payload or fuel in the "pre-flight" section, add liveries, or any of the other things the ACE utility was meant to handle. I contacted CS "Support" (I use that word very lightely), after reading in their forums that the expansion pack aircraft would not work with the ACE utility, and requested a refund...for the "Extra Pack" aircraft only (around $25). Now is when the flashbacks and Deja-vu kick in to the "same old CS". I received an e-mail from my support ticket (I dare you to find that "ticket"...I can't on their support site) stating that the "C-130 Extra Pack does work with the ACE utility". It then gave directions to a CS support page which, supposedly, held the answer. Would you like to know what that answer was?Q: ACE has problems with some of the Extra Pack models.A: The ACE might not work with some of the Extra Pack models. Because unfortunately the ACE \'knows\' nothing about the Extra Pack models because the ACE was released 2+ years before the Extra Pack. Sorry but we are not going to upgrade ACE because it is a part of the Legendary C-130 Base Pack development of which for FS9 is discontinued. We would recommend to consider the C-130 X-perience for FSX. The "answer" was...buy a flightsim I do not want (FSX) and purchase their C-130 Xperience. Are you kidding me!!!??? I saw none of these issues mentioned, with any temerity, in any of your reviews. This is why I will never bother with reviews from an FS site that accepts advertising...you or Flightsim...you are required to soft pedal the problems of any commercial product...or lose their advertising. :( I understand your problem...you have become too big to keep the interests of the individual simmer as a priority...you need money. The answer, a subscription only website, with no advertising, which does nothing but reviews, like Consumer Reports for FS. I would pay for honest and truthful reviews, with no holds barred and a more in depth report on bugs, fixes and, especially, the developers support. Vic

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I saw none of these issues mentioned, with any temerity, in any of your reviews. This is why I will never bother with reviews from an FS site that accepts advertising...you or Flightsim...you are required to soft pedal the problems of any commercial product...or lose their advertising. :( I understand your problem...you have become too big to keep the interests of the individual simmer as a priority...you need money.The answer, a subscription only website, with no advertising, which does nothing but reviews, like Consumer Reports for FS. I would pay for honest and truthful reviews, with no holds barred and a more in depth report on bugs, fixes and, especially, the developers support.
As anyone who has ever dealt with us as an advertiser can tell you; your assertion is flat wrong. We are not required to "soft pedal" for any of our advertisers. Just ask the likes of Arnie Lee at Abacus, or the boys over at Flight1, ad nauseam. You see, they recognize, unlike you apparently, that our honest reviews are in their best interests. Our credibility means readership, which means continuing exposure of their products via their ads. Our honesty is in their best interest.Don't confuse an inexperienced reviewer, or a reviewer focused strictly on the product (and NOT all the periphreal issues you seem to want included) with "soft pedaling" on behalf of an advertiser. And, not to put too fine a point on it... Our reviewers have total freedom to pan a product anyway they see it, as long as it meets our editorial / content guidelines. Our business side has absolutely nothing to do with, nor do they influence in any way, any of the reviews posted. In fact, our business folks see the reviews when you do; the day they are published. Oh, and just to fill in an unasserted gap in this conversation, unlike some sites, we do not insist on a company being an advertiser before we'll do reviews. Imagine that; having to effectively pay to have a review done. What kind of objectivity do you imagine is enshrined in those reviews? But, finally, here's an offer... as long as you stick to the facts and don't slander anyone, feel free to write a review yourself. You can post your review or reviews anytime, here in the Reader's Review Forum, which was designed for exactly this purpose; a counterpoint to our reviews and others who you feel are tainted by advertising. EDIT: oh, and by the way, you and the other three flight simmers willing to pay for reviews without advertising would certainly entice from some hapless soul to labor the thousands of hours necessary to satisfy all four of you. The model has been tried before, and it didn't last a year.

Share this post


Link to post

I can confirm that as a reviewer for Avsim, I am completely at liberty to be honest in reviews. Notice the disclaimer at the bottom of each review which states it is the reviewer's opinion. I can assure you that as long as a review more or less follows the format of 'intro, installation process, details, conclusion, and some screenshots', then reviewers are free to either praise or verbally demolish a product based on their experiences of it (or anywhere between those two extremes) and there is no compulsion to be anything other than honest in what is written and submitted. Yes there are review guidelines, but they are merely to cover editorial standards and don't mention anything about having to 'be nice' or otherwise.As Tom notes, you can do this too by submitting your own review, or, you could become a reviewer for Avsim and you would then of course know that the only pressure you get where reviews are concerned, is to get them in on time!I've worked professionally for publications where there was indeed pressure to 'butter up' the advertisers (and that includes writing for supposedly respected UK daily newspapers). These were publications where the awards they presented simply went to the companies that spent most on advertising with them, and frankly, that was why I left those places, because having to write that kind of rubbish is a soul-destroyingly awful job. So if I wasn't prepared to do it for money, I surely wouldn't do it voluntarily for Avsim.I actually had some email conversations about this very matter with Avsim's Reviews Editor, Robert Whitwell less than a month ago; specifically, I asked him why Avsim had not reviewed the Ariane 737, in view of the fact that many were awaiting an NG 737 from PMDG and Ariane already had one released. I won't retell the whole thing here, but I had wondered if Ariane's associations with a certain person (whose initials are PT), who was less than popular with many flight simmers and who had quite a few spats with Avsim in the past might be why the Ariane 737 had no Avsim review, or maybe PMDG were being favoured. So I asked Robert. He assured me that was not the case at all, Avsim have simply not got around to it and the lack of a review is largely because Ariane have not actually sent anything for review and remain somewhat insular. But if they did submit something for review, Robert said that Avsim's policy of honest reviews would not let any acrimonious ancient history stop their product from getting a fair shout (good or bad), so long as its developer was prepared to step up to the plate and let it undergo scrutiny. You can make of it what you will that Ariane have not submitted their 737 for review, although as far as I am aware this seems rather short sighted on their part as from what I know of it, it is pretty good, if a tad pricey. If that anecdote doesn't demonstrate that Avsim has no agenda other than to offer an honest service to flight simmers, I don't know what will.As far as CS products go, I've never reviewed one for Avsim, and I've only actually ever bought one (the CS727 in boxed CD format). I'll be honest, I quite like it and have never had any problems with it. That does not mean that others have not had issues of course, but I could quite easily imagine a situation where I might have reviewed it, found no issues personally and given it good recommendations. Does that mean I'd be dishonest in doing so? No of course not, but in as much as developers stick their heads above the parapet when they present something for review, reviewers too open themselves up for criticism when people disagree with what they have written, and that just goes with the territory. Write one yourself and prepare for an influx of PMs!Along the lines of a user review, it's worth noting that for several days now there has been a thread urging people to beware of CS products on the forums here at Avsim, and it seems hard to imagine that if some sort of advertising contra-deal were in place with CS, then that would not have been deleted. I'd take that as fairly compelling evidence against your assertion; there seems to be no attempt to subdue such opinions given that thread's existence, but feel free to disagree.One thing I can tell you is that if I do find an issue with a product under review, I usually contact the developer and offer them an opportunity to explain if and how it can be sorted out, and if there is a fix forthcoming. This is only fair, because reviews can take a while to appear after they have been submitted and often there is a fix on the way which was not around at the time of writing. This is in no way collusion with the developers, merely an attempt to resolve issues that often manifest themselves with new products. It's often also a good way to find out what support is going to be like for buyers. If that support is not forthcoming, I can assure you I will say so in a review. But this does not mean that a reviewer couldn't have the wool pulled over their eyes in much the same way as a few buyers of CS products say they have had done to them (on this website you will note, with no attempt to suppress such opinions). This is particularly of relevance in view of the fact that Avsim's reviews are often written fairly early in a product's life cycle and sometimes before issues manifest themselves through later circumstances, such as after patches to FS, operating system service packs etc. Or, maybe the reviewer was genuinely happy with the product and simply wrote honestly about that. Again, note that disclaimer about it being a reviewer's opinion, and note the date on the review.If you doubt a reviewer's integrity, there is a simple way to test it of course: Have a look at some of their other reviews of products with which you are familiar, and see if you agree with them or not. Reviewers, like everyone else, have differing things they want from a flight sim products and different opinions, and just like everyone else, you might agree with some people and not others. What they write, provided it is civil and is their honest opinion, is beyond the control of Avsim.Al

Share this post


Link to post

"(and NOT all the periphreal issues you seem to want included)". Those are exactly the issues which should be included in any review of a product/developer. Do they fix the "bugs"? Do they sell you a product with every intention of correcting the problems...or are they going to take your money and run to the next batch of suckers with something new? Does their support system actually offer support...or is it just a waste of time, with ridiculous responses ("buy our C-130Xperience and everything will be fine"? LOL!)? YES the "peripheral issues" you denigrate are exactly what makes a developer "great"...or trash. CS is trash."EDIT: oh, and by the way, you and the other three flight simmers willing to pay for reviews without advertising would certainly entice from some hapless soul to labor the thousands of hours necessary to satisfy all four of you. The model has been tried before, and it didn't last a year." Tried by who? How much money were we talking about for this service? "As far as CS products go, I've never reviewed one for Avsim, and I've only actually ever bought one (the CS727 in boxed CD format). I'll be honest, I quite like it and have never had any problems with it." Really? You found no problem with the AP being totally inaccurate? The FD playing a part in the AP? Was this the "Legendary 727" or their latest attempt at getting more sucker money? I dumped the CS Legendary 727 the minute I reached acceleration altitude in the Dreamfleet 727...many years ago."Along the lines of a user review, it's worth noting that for several days now there has been a thread urging people to beware of CS products on the forums here at Avsim, and it seems hard to imagine that if some sort of advertising contra-deal were in place with CS, then that would not have been deleted. I'd take that as fairly compelling evidence against your assertion; there seems to be no attempt to subdue such opinions given that thread's existence, but feel free to disagree." OK...you're not Flightsim...THOSE people will ban you for any hint of a "bad" comment on their advertisers. Ask me, I know. You mention that the reviews are usually made just after a release. This is what I would like to see, long term reviews. Sure, the darn thing looked fine at first blush, when do they not??...but what about a follow up on bug fixes? What about a review of the developers efforts to correct them? Do they make a concerted effort to complete the product...or do they just move on to the next, knowing that a new batch of suckers is just drooling over the pretty screenshots and could care less about the problems experienced by those who bought older products? Here's a challenge for you. Do reviews of the developers themselves...not one of their individual products. Forget about getting a product sent to you for review...review their entire operation, from the product quality, through it's support and corrections (patches). Review the developer's customer support and RATE it. Look at, and report on, how a developer deals with issues about their products. Do they work on fixing it, or do they hide behind the "development for XXXX has ended and we no longer support it"? Do they blame the users system (LOFL!), when everything else works fine, or do they actually try and correct their problem. TELL US which developers deal with issues and which cut and run. That, to me, is more important than any single product review. After 3 CS products, I can tell you that CS is a trash developer and they will NEVER see another dime of my money. I kick myself for thinking anything had changed. If anyone here had my experience with CS, and would be allowed to write it as a review of a developer, instead of some "first glance" at a single product, CS would starve...well, probably not...but I'm allowed to dream. And that is exactly my point...they have screwed SO many buyers that any kind of review should include this information. The review should include all those problems and past problems. I'm not exactly happy with some of PMDG's products...but I know that they have fairly good support and my issues are either not correctible or are being woked on. I will buy from them again (as long as it's FS9!). After being a 3 time loser with CS...well, you get the idea. Give me useable reviews, of not only the product but it's developer as well. Follow up on it, give me long term with regard to bugs fixed and problems corrected, or not. The current reviews do nothing for a buyer...they are as "breathless" and excited as the rest of us when a new product is announced. Do the follow up, check on the fixes, the patches or lack of. Tell us about customer support (do you remember...WE ARE THE CUSTOMER!). Give us the entire story! The problems with CS products are well documented (well...they were for the 707, 727 before they "upgraded" the website...how handy)...why don't we have a review of that developer, and others? The review of individual products is fine...but I would be more interested in a review of the developers themselves. Vic

Share this post


Link to post

Jeez Vic, are you sure you don't have enough axes to grind?I think I need a program to keep count, but let's see -- you don't like:Captain Sim (unequivocal hatred)Avsim reviews (see above)Flightsim (you want us to ask you about that, but I don't want to!)PMDG (general unhappiness)FSX (don't want)Are there any more? I'd hate to think that we're missing something here. Although, really... just looking at this list... I get the feeling that you're venting. I mean, we have all the classic elements: a whole laundry list of issues, the demands that someone else do something about them, some wild punctuational interludes, and of course, the solemn promise that one would be wholeheartedly grateful to pay if only we were to throw our objectivity out the window to help you tilt at windmills (if only that ever happened even once!). Vic, you aren't the first person to ever get soaked by free enterprise, and unless the planet blows up tomorrow, I don't see that you will be the last, either. I have a pile of software on my desk that doesn't work either, if that makes you feel better.Please remember that this is the Reviews Forum. Usually, we want to hear from people who have contructive and concrete ideas on how AVSIM reviews can be improved. What you have given us is a whole shopping list of demands and accusations. We're not looking for extra work, we just want to know that you're happy that we counted the right number of strut braces on a DH-2 (apparently, I didn't), or that you are unhappy that we misspelled Jim Keir's name (unfortunately, I did). In the future, if you have a gripe, please just stick to one tiny little topic. Maybe then it will be something we can work on together to solve. I'm curious, have you ever met Capatin Sim, say at a FANCON, or other venue? I have. They seem nice enough, although we certainly do not run in the same social circles. If I were compelled to write reviews about developers, I think it's good journalism to actually meet the people I am writing about. I think that trumps making speculative remarks on a fan forum in which you are an invited guest. Jeff ShylukSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post

You don't expect much from AVSIM do you? You totally avoided the suggestion that you could write a review.

Share this post


Link to post

I have been criticized many times about my reviews, and every time I do a review, it's as honest and as unbiased as I can put it. People wonder why I'm not very happy with the community right now, well let's just say that after being accused of crap one too many times, when I fully obey the contract I signed when I signed on here (Any chance of posting a copy of the unsigned contract here so everyone can actually see what our actual contract looks like when we join the team...). Because of my review style, I usually keep revising a review until it is actually published, sometimes after. Anyone who doubts my or any other AVSIM reviewer's integrity needs to read the damn contract we signed when we joined, and it will be ABSOLUTELY clear how unbiased the reviewing process is. Anyone who tries to claim that we are biased, remember, some of us are more experienced than others, I myself am a rookie, I won't deny it. You guys need to realize that we do everything we can to make our reviews as honest and fair as possible. AVSIM reviewers do everything they can to be accurate and honest in reviews, and if you don't like our reviews, do your own.

Share this post


Link to post

After reading all of the above, I'm glad I only fly one aircraft that was perfect out of the box.

Share this post


Link to post

First off, I'm glad to see that many of our readers have different opinions about their favourite and most hated aircraft and developers. Notice the word "opinion". We all have them, and none of them are wrong.I've seen many suggestions in this forum on how to improve "AVSIM reviews", and many of the reviewers who read this forum have tried to incorporate these ideas into their reviews. These are the dedicated reviewers on our staff who have many years experience within the flight sim community and take no offense in constructive criticism. But, with the experts, come the rookies. Those that want to give back to the flight sim community by volunteering their time to write about the hobby they love and the add-ons that are available to all of us.I liaise with approximately 60 developers around the world who work hard on products "they" believe are worthy to be released to the simming public. Some hit and some miss. Some miss real hard, as I expereinced when I first started writing reviews for AVSIM in 1999. How do you write a review about a product that absolutely sucks? I say, "gently, politely", but tell the reading public it sucks.Not all of the developers I deal with, advertise with us. Some are freeware developers, so they have a zero budget for advertising, but enjoy the exposure they get from reviews of their material. I have asked developers that submit press releases about a new product to AVSIM to send me a copy for review, but have said no. That tells me that they're not very confident of their product. I have had developers ask for a preview copy of the review prior to its publishing. I tell them "no", if they are unhappy with the review because it contains inaccurate information, then send me the correct information (it's usually technical detail not content detail) and I'll make an editorial correction.Developers that release a subsequent version often send along a new copy for review and I try to get the original reviewer to take a second look at the new version and make a comparison of the new to the old. Many "bugs" identified in the 1st release are often fixed and get mention in the "re-look" review.I'd love to spent time visiting the various developers offices and see how their operation works. I'd love to see a product from its inception to release, complete with quality control and customer service. But alas, we're a volunteer organization and I have a job in the real world, but could you imaging the airmiles I would rack up? I have visited Just Flight's office in the UK, but only because they were located 30 minutes from where I was visiting. I imagined this huge "World Headquarters" as a major corporation like Microsoft, but alas it was 6 guys sitting at a huge desk in an open office being shared by other developers of the parent company. Yet they still manage to develop great flightsim and trainsim products, in my honest opinion.So in closing, anyone out there that would like to volunteer their time, energy and experience (expertise?) and write reviews dealing with flightsim add-on aircraft, scenery, utilities or hardware are more than welcome to join us in this great hobby. As it states in our reviewer's contract, you must be willing to put the product through its paces and write an honest, unbiased document about your experience with the product; whether that product be good, bad or not worth writing about (it's happened) in your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post

FWIW - I'm a reviewer and had some pretty biting comments for Captain Sim's 757 for FSX here on AvSim's forums. The Captain Sim product never worked on my machine after I paid my own cash for it. The FS9 port just did not make the transition to FSX+Accel well. Nobody in AvSim management "shushed" me up. They did do their best to try to find a fix. In the end the 757 got deleted off the hard drive and the dispute through Pay Pal was resolved in my favor.It is a shame there is not a really good FSX 757 out there, because the 757 and 767 are terrific jets which lend themselves well to FSX because they simply do every mission well.Captain Sim's 757 might be a great product on another machine - other than mine. There is no way the 757 would have made it to market if they were having the same problems I experienced. But, my machine runs the products I test just fine. Some products, like the Leonardo MadDog 2008, requires work around procedures to get full functionality on a FSX, Accel, Vista platform. When that is the case, we try to always provide instructions for the procedures that users will need to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
FWIW - I'm a reviewer and had some pretty biting comments for Captain Sim's 757 for FSX here on AvSim's forums. The Captain Sim product never worked on my machine after I paid my own cash for it. The FS9 port just did not make the transition to FSX+Accel well. Nobody in AvSim management "shushed" me up. They did do their best to try to find a fix. In the end the 757 got deleted off the hard drive and the dispute through Pay Pal was resolved in my favor.It is a shame there is not a really good FSX 757 out there, because the 757 and 767 are terrific jets which lend themselves well to FSX because they simply do every mission well.Captain Sim's 757 might be a great product on another machine - other than mine. There is no way the 757 would have made it to market if they were having the same problems I experienced. But, my machine runs the products I test just fine. Some products, like the Leonardo MadDog 2008, requires work around procedures to get full functionality on a FSX, Accel, Vista platform. When that is the case, we try to always provide instructions for the procedures that users will need to follow.
It should also be noted that products that do require workarounds, usually are the more complex ones. When you have more and more stuff on your product, the more stuff there is to break.

Share this post


Link to post

This is what I've learned from reading a lot of posts on AVSIM (not reviews).Captian Sim kills chidrens' ponies. They have never produced a decent title and never will, and anyone who even thinks about buying something from them is mentally defective. Their "airplanes" are actually KGB spyware that controls your mind.Wilco may not actually kill ponies, but they certainly kick dogs if no one is looking. Their products are garbage and only the stupidest noob would be caught dead with one on his hard drive.Ariane [shudder]... let's just say that even Captain Sim is appalled at what they do. And anyone who would pay $500 for a piece of paper witha Boeing logo and dotted lines to show you where to fold deserves what they are stupid enough to get.Level D 767: if a simmer choked on a dorito until he was unconcious, could a real type-rated 767 pilot finish landing the airplane for him? (Maybe.)PMDG was sent by the gods of light to shower the flight simulation community with perfect products and battle the evil forces of Captain Wil-iane.Coolsky has joined PMDG as its young sidekick and good thoughts toward everything Coolsky are encouraged.Dreamfleet is secretly working to update all its products to FSXXX, which they will also invent and will be "more real than real." Can't say much more about it, except... Tron. (Wink.)Airsimmer's Airbus is perfect and why people are still using trash like Wilco I'll never know.Or my favorite: airplanes deserve to be free. Why pay money for garbage when the best stuff is free?Groupthink and drama. Even if I thought a company had absolutely stolen $60 from me, I would probably get over it and not make it my life's mission to ruin them. I am trying to think if I have ever felt absolutely, criminally cheated by a flight sim product I bought of my own free will. I've bought a lot, and I'm sure there has to be one or two. But generally, I'm happy. Oh, probably a military helicopter from a certain company a few years back. Looked nice, but was death to frame rates. Somehow I survived.A2A? Great Stratocruiser. Hard to manage. Wish I had more time to add it to my jets and stay up with it, because it is a work of art.Wilco? 737PIC, Airbusses, Ejet. These are all very nice with lots of liveries. I can really tell the difference in the Boeing vs. Airbus experience, and the Ejet is just wildly different. They may be ports, but they run on FSX. They're not the most "realistic," but what people fail to get is that one man's realism is another man's bore.Captain Sim? 757, check. 727 check. I guess I live in an alternate universe where I am the only one these work for. Or maybe I'm just gullible.Coolsky? Great product within limits. Love it. Maddog? Another great product. Completely different, probably behind the Coolsky right now for me.I am always surprised by the real hatred people seem to harbor. 757 is patched to 4.3. Maybe it sucked before then, I don't know. Now it doesn't but it will never be judged on its own. Because Captain Sim is hated, we see some really immature behavior concerning it. Some products are better than other. Have better official support. Way better PR. But behind each product are people who are talented, skilled and trying to make a living by producing something they're proud of.Of course, the conspiracy theories floated after the AVSIM hack really showed that there are some poisonous dwarfs lurking in the corners of this community.

Share this post


Link to post

Really good post Tim. :( I guess what people have to remember is that any review is not a scienfitic product. It's not a list of test scenarios that get ticked or not ticked. (that would be dull). It's more art than science in that the review is one person's viewpoint of the product's pluses and minuses. Sure there's a purpose in that it will hopefully be useful in helping people make their purchasing decisions but it will never cover everyone's list of what is important and what is not.Most reviews never make reference to hardware compatibility - to me this is essential, as I always want to map things like the Heading Bug, Course Knob, AP Modes, etc to key commands, which I then map to GoFlight hardware, using FSUIPC.So if you read my AVSIM review of Wilco E-Jets, this is mentioned and Wilco/feelThere (who are often looked at as bad guys in the industry) get praise in my review because they are 'big' on providing custom key commands.....so (in this example), I represent 'hardware users' in my reviews, but I probably leave out reference to other aspects of flight sim that others feel are important.Every review is the result of hard work by the reviewer (unpaid), aiming to help fellow simmers - but the consumer should consider a review alongside other research they do, before deciding a product is right for them and buying it.As for the OP, I agree with Jeff's post - you've just come across as a 'grumpy old bugger', with nothing positive or constructive to say.David Rogers

Share this post


Link to post

All I'll say is this, when a payware title costs more than a PC game that just got released that week, something is severely wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
"(and NOT all the periphreal issues you seem to want included)". Those are exactly the issues which should be included in any review of a product/developer. Do they fix the "bugs"? Do they sell you a product with every intention of correcting the problems...or are they going to take your money and run to the next batch of suckers with something new? Does their support system actually offer support...or is it just a waste of time, with ridiculous responses ("buy our C-130Xperience and everything will be fine"? LOL!)? YES the "peripheral issues" you denigrate are exactly what makes a developer "great"...or trash. CS is trash."EDIT: oh, and by the way, you and the other three flight simmers willing to pay for reviews without advertising would certainly entice from some hapless soul to labor the thousands of hours necessary to satisfy all four of you. The model has been tried before, and it didn't last a year." Tried by who? How much money were we talking about for this service? "As far as CS products go, I've never reviewed one for Avsim, and I've only actually ever bought one (the CS727 in boxed CD format). I'll be honest, I quite like it and have never had any problems with it." Really? You found no problem with the AP being totally inaccurate? The FD playing a part in the AP? Was this the "Legendary 727" or their latest attempt at getting more sucker money? I dumped the CS Legendary 727 the minute I reached acceleration altitude in the Dreamfleet 727...many years ago."Along the lines of a user review, it's worth noting that for several days now there has been a thread urging people to beware of CS products on the forums here at Avsim, and it seems hard to imagine that if some sort of advertising contra-deal were in place with CS, then that would not have been deleted. I'd take that as fairly compelling evidence against your assertion; there seems to be no attempt to subdue such opinions given that thread's existence, but feel free to disagree." OK...you're not Flightsim...THOSE people will ban you for any hint of a "bad" comment on their advertisers. Ask me, I know. You mention that the reviews are usually made just after a release. This is what I would like to see, long term reviews. Sure, the darn thing looked fine at first blush, when do they not??...but what about a follow up on bug fixes? What about a review of the developers efforts to correct them? Do they make a concerted effort to complete the product...or do they just move on to the next, knowing that a new batch of suckers is just drooling over the pretty screenshots and could care less about the problems experienced by those who bought older products? Here's a challenge for you. Do reviews of the developers themselves...not one of their individual products. Forget about getting a product sent to you for review...review their entire operation, from the product quality, through it's support and corrections (patches). Review the developer's customer support and RATE it. Look at, and report on, how a developer deals with issues about their products. Do they work on fixing it, or do they hide behind the "development for XXXX has ended and we no longer support it"? Do they blame the users system (LOFL!), when everything else works fine, or do they actually try and correct their problem. TELL US which developers deal with issues and which cut and run. That, to me, is more important than any single product review. After 3 CS products, I can tell you that CS is a trash developer and they will NEVER see another dime of my money. I kick myself for thinking anything had changed. If anyone here had my experience with CS, and would be allowed to write it as a review of a developer, instead of some "first glance" at a single product, CS would starve...well, probably not...but I'm allowed to dream. And that is exactly my point...they have screwed SO many buyers that any kind of review should include this information. The review should include all those problems and past problems. I'm not exactly happy with some of PMDG's products...but I know that they have fairly good support and my issues are either not correctible or are being woked on. I will buy from them again (as long as it's FS9!). After being a 3 time loser with CS...well, you get the idea. Give me useable reviews, of not only the product but it's developer as well. Follow up on it, give me long term with regard to bugs fixed and problems corrected, or not. The current reviews do nothing for a buyer...they are as "breathless" and excited as the rest of us when a new product is announced. Do the follow up, check on the fixes, the patches or lack of. Tell us about customer support (do you remember...WE ARE THE CUSTOMER!). Give us the entire story! The problems with CS products are well documented (well...they were for the 707, 727 before they "upgraded" the website...how handy)...why don't we have a review of that developer, and others? The review of individual products is fine...but I would be more interested in a review of the developers themselves. Vic
Wow. Why don't YOU review the developers? Why don't YOU take the time to actually write a review, only to have people like YOU completely trash it? From what I gather, the reviewers on AVSIM are not paid to review titles - they do so because they want to offer potential buyers an opinion on the product.Seeing as you have so many ideas on how things should be done, why not submit a review yourself?

Share this post


Link to post