Worst Payware

[northridge 2]

Having been in a foul mood all day I thought that buying myself a present might cheer me up, so hopped over to Simarket. I found two recent sceneries that quite literally shocked me they were so appalling - in fact I had to recheck the FS version because they looked like something from 2002!So after the various "Best Freeware" and "Best Payware" posts here over the years, how about a "Worst Payware" category? Would Avsim allow it? Would it be disrespectful to hard-working developers? Or would it be totally cool?

[altstiff 71]

What did you buy?

[kiwiflyer45 123]

"Worst" is a pretty subjective and inflammatory adjective, though I think the topic is a valid one. How about "Most disappointing?" It's still subjective and likely to tick some people off, but "disappointing" maybe emphasizes the reality that it's an opinion and not really based on any kind of testing criteria like a Consumer Reports evaluation.What do you all think? I certainly have a couple of candidates I'd be happy to mention! It will obviously be controversial but as long as the discussion is courteous, I see no reason why the AVSIM police (just kidding guys!) would ban it...Ian

[gwillmot 31]

What did you buy?

FSX

[northridge 2]

Well done, that man. Kiwiflyer got it right: "Most Disappointing" is exactly right.But these´s a problem here: I was appalled by the look of the products in the screenshots on the vendors site - and NOT after buying it, which bring up two possible categories: "The product (with subcategories) that most diappointed me after purchase"and"Would you buy this product based on initial impressions?".Kiwiflyer: I am going to PM you a cupla URLs so you can see what got my goat - and you can have a think about this if you want.

[kiwiflyer45 123]

Taking a deep breath here as I know this is going to get "flamed" by certain people but here goes...I really do not have any seriously disappointing payware scenery - probably because there is more scenery produced than I can afford to buy from outstanding companies like Aerosoft, FSDT, FlyTampa etc. They are always first-rate products and if I had the money I'd buy their entire product line - then maybe I'd look elsewher and encounter something disappointing but that's not going to happen! :( So I have no payware scenery "disappointments."The two products on my "most disappointing" list are both ones that if the developer had put in some time to "finish" them, they would not be on my list....Wilco/FeelThere 737 PIC. This has some really good features and could be a worthy successor to the classic Dream Fleet 737-400 from FS2002 days. But along with the good features there are all kinds of shoddy items that stop it from coming close to the product it could have been... It is just not "complete" and could have been as the developer demonstrates he has the necessary skills with some of the systems modelling and the excellent overhead panel. Disappointing...QualityWings 757. Beautiful external model, lots of variants and color schemes, nice sound set, okay 2D and 3D cockpit BUT horrible frame rates. No excuse for this - it is a "light" product and yet even on my system the FPS hit is too much for me to bother using it. Why "no excuse?" --- If LevelD could get it right with exactly the same cockpit, using development tools that are over ten years old - there's no excuse for a new product to not be able to do at least equal it in performance. especially as most of the systems in the cockpit are non-functional and LevelD is FULLY functional.... Disappointing...Neither are terrible products - but for me, both were "disappointing" and are no longer on my hard drive, though the 737 lasted longer than the 757OK - hopefully freedom of expression and legitimate discussion among users can be balanced with courtesy and fairness. Let the discussion begin....Cheers :( Ian

FSX

Given that the folks on this forum are sticking with FS9 after 8 years, I think you'll find plenty of company to agree to that choice mate!

[northridge 2]

"Let the discussion begin...."Or not. I actually lost interest in my own thread! It was "inspired" by finding what looked like FS2002 addons on a major distributors site, but after time I realised that the developer was probably doing his best (did the majors start out major or did they learn and grow?) and the real culprit is the distributor, looking first at their 25% (?) and only second at product quality.

[Superpilotv2 2]

"Worst" is a pretty subjective and inflammatory adjective, though I think the topic is a valid one. How about "Most disappointing?" It's still subjective and likely to tick some people off, but "disappointing" maybe emphasizes the reality that it's an opinion and not really based on any kind of testing criteria like a Consumer Reports evaluation.What do you all think? I certainly have a couple of candidates I'd be happy to mention! It will obviously be controversial but as long as the discussion is courteous, I see no reason why the AVSIM police (just kidding guys!) would ban it...Ian

That´s pritty right. Mostly the things why a product/addon is dissapointinbg is cause of the failures on our side. for exapmle I was a big fan of the CS 757 before I switched to my current system. BUT now I don´t fly her anymore cause of some guage problems. That´s very dissapointing but I can´t really blame the developer for that. It´s likely being my system which prevents my from flying that babe. Ther really dissapoining thig is that I didn´t get any support or found the culprit for it till now (Maybe I´ll fry again some time).

[Superpilotv2 2]

"Let the discussion begin...."Or not. I actually lost interest in my own thread! It was "inspired" by finding what looked like FS2002 addons on a major distributors site, but after time I realised that the developer was probably doing his best (did the majors start out major or did they learn and grow?) and the real culprit is the distributor, looking first at their 25% (?) and only second at product quality.

Why do you wanna search products which look like FS2002? To blame someone? I think every developer does it as good as he can (sometimes not but...). And yes, also the majors were small in the beginning. No master has ever been falling out of the blue. Everyone has to learn, someone more, someone less.

[davjones 0]

I just happened on to this thread and am responding only because when I first got the gist of it, one, -- and only one -- title came to mind: the Wilco/FeelThere 737 PIC! Sorry simulation indeed (IMO), very disappointing. So Ian and I are on the same frequency. The Wilco/Feelthere CRJ is also quite incomplete (again, IMO), but has some redeeming qualities. Aside from not completing their work, these people also disappoint by dropping customer support after a short period as they move on to the next project. Didn't give FSX even the first thought because I do not use it.But think of all the really GOOD software we have......DaveDave JonesFort McCoy, Florida USA

[Avantime 81]

psst...Airsimmer.

[gwillmot 31]

Having been in a foul mood all day I thought that buying myself a present might cheer me up, so hopped over to Simarket. I found two recent sceneries that quite literally shocked me they were so appalling - in fact I had to recheck the FS version because they looked like something from 2002!So after the various "Best Freeware" and "Best Payware" posts here over the years, how about a "Worst Payware" category? Would Avsim allow it? Would it be disrespectful to hard-working developers? Or would it be totally cool?

How about FSX?

[northridge 2]

"Why do you wanna search products which look like FS2002? To blame someone? "You misunderstood what I wrote. I was looking at new products on a major vendors site and found sceneries which looked like FS2002 quality even though they were for FS9 and FSX.I later realized that my original idea about "worst payware" was flawed and that it was unfair to criticize developers without knowing anything about them.