MilViz T-38A Thread?

[kdfw__ 542]

That was exactly where the problem started. You were asked about your professional opinion, but you just provided a (partially questionable) bug list.You posted almost 20 negative points and nothing positive at all.Even in FSX it's as in many other cases; only bad news are good news, so guessing the direction the thread was heading was foreseeable.

Now this is just silly. He provided items for you guys to look at based on his 'test flight.' Both tone and content were balanced and extremely fair (and should be helpful to the developer).To sure, there were some subsequent inflammatory/dumb comments from others but blaming Bob is way off the mark.Just don't be defensive, it's a sure way to lose customers.

[Guest bstolle]

As I mentioned in my post, it's not about how the developers see it, but the potential customers.Of course they tend to focus on the negative points (which was easy in this case as there wasn't a single positive point mentioned)That's why I mentioned that just posting bugs wasn't helping anyone. Neither the developer nor the customers.I wouldn't describe just mentioning 20 bad points 'balanced' or maybe I missed the 20 positive points....

[CoolP 283]

I've found it more than impressive that Milviz viewed that list and instantly stated that they are on quite some items and also appreciated additional input.I can't think of a better reputation building method there in the eyes of potential customers.

[Guest bstolle]

I've found it more than impressive that Milviz viewed that list and instantly stated that they are on quite some items and also appreciated additional input.

Well, that's is definitely the goal of every developer at Milviz without any question.The way the 'problems' were communicated in the thread attracted the immediate negativism of some forum members, again, IMHO this was foreseeable.A detailed bug list would have been more appropriate in the dedicated Milviz forum.

[Gazzareth 808]

I've found it more than impressive that Milviz viewed that list and instantly stated that they are on quite some items and also appreciated additional input.I can't think of a better reputation building method there in the eyes of potential customers.

I would agree with you there, shame that was all lost. Getting Bob to join the beta team also came across as someone who wants to provide the best customer service. Unfortunately, it was quite obvious that certain people involved in the project did not respond with the same level of maturity.....G

[Vmc 0]

Fasten your seat belts folks cause, here we go again.

[CoolP 283]

Well, that's is definitely the goal of every developer at Milviz without any question.The way the 'problems' were communicated in the thread attracted the immediate negativism of some forum members, again, IMHO this was foreseeable.A detailed bug list would have been more appropriate in the dedicated Milviz forum.

Bernt, seriously and regardless of the placement of the thread, I was happy with Bob's findings, I was happy with your answers and it all came together as one interesting read, fulfilling a typical and good forum purpose.I think I miss that thread. :(

[Guest bstolle]

Bernt, seriously and regardless of the placement of the thread, I was happy with Bob's findings, I was happy with your answers and it all came together as one interesting read, fulfilling a typical and good forum purpose.I think I miss that thread. :(

Bob did a copy & paste with his findings at the Milviz T-38 support forum, so nothing is lost, and everything he mentioned is being discussed for the first patch :(

[Jim Harnes 13]

That was exactly where the problem started. You were asked about your professional opinion, but you just provided a (partially questionable) bug list.You posted almost 20 negative points and nothing positive at all.Even in FSX it's as in many other cases; only bad news are good news, so guessing the direction the thread was heading was foreseeable.

So comments from a guy with over a thousand hours as an IP in the real thing aren't "professional". Amazing.Jim Harnes

[Milviz 919]

The thing to remember here is that we already had TWO pilots with many hours in the T-38A on our testing team. Are they wrong too? Do you realize that everyone has a different viewpoint on this, a very subjective, subject...?As well, as Bernt has already said, we are in the process of fixing at least some of those issues that Bob has brought forth. Anyway, the idea is... if you want to try it, you can. 30 day money back guarantee. For any reason. That's a good deal.

[vgbaron 3,649]

I never cease to be amazed. I took Bob's comments as a positive. I did not feel he was maligning either Milviz, Bernt or the other T-38 pilots. He was asked a question and gave an honest critique. I had already purchased the product but I was impressed by Bob's comments and that Milviz was taking them under advisement. Frankly, IMHO, if it wasn't for the sensitive ego of a certain individual, the thread might have gone well with a good exchange of information. I'm sorry, but reacting to someone post on the perceived notion of how OTHER people might see it just doesn't make sense.I bought the product. I like the product. Is it good, IMHO? You bet! is it perfect IMHO - you bet NOT! but nothing is perfect, there is always room for improvement.Again, IMHO, I think the reaction from SOME of the Milviz team to Bob's post showed at best a lack of understanding and at worst - no class.That said, will I continue to buy from them - of course. We all put our foot into our mouths occasionally.To Tom & the Mods - Personally I don 't like the way the thread was handled BUT I can't think of a better way considering the way it was headed. Wish I could.Vic

[rightseater 0]

Then the purveyors of nonsense have already won. If the moderators are incapable of separating the wheat from the chaff, then why bother posting anything of substance? :(

Yes Bob, the "purveyors of nonsense" did win that battle. But to say the moderators are incapable of having resolved the issue is inaccurate. Cleaning up both of those threads was #4 on my list, right after helping two people who couldn't log in to their accounts and reporting an SQL error I've been getting when trying to use administrator tools. Tom was just faster than me that day, and decided to remove the whole thread, and I'm not about to argue with him over it. But these same "purveyors" won't win the war because from this point forward I won't be so nice. I'll just start banning accounts if people can't be civil.As for your post, the one which you reviewed the Milviz T-38, it's still here. I can copy it into this thread if you wish.

[Barfly 10]

I never cease to be amazed. I took Bob's comments as a positive. I did not feel he was maligning either Milviz, Bernt or the other T-38 pilots. He was asked a question and gave an honest critique. I had already purchased the product but I was impressed by Bob's comments and that Milviz was taking them under advisement. Frankly, IMHO, if it wasn't for the sensitive ego of a certain individual, the thread might have gone well with a good exchange of information. I'm sorry, but reacting to someone post on the perceived notion of how OTHER people might see it just doesn't make sense.I bought the product. I like the product. Is it good, IMHO? You bet! is it perfect IMHO - you bet NOT! but nothing is perfect, there is always room for improvement.Again, IMHO, I think the reaction from SOME of the Milviz team to Bob's post showed at best a lack of understanding and at worst - no class.That said, will I continue to buy from them - of course. We all put our foot into our mouths occasionally.To Tom & the Mods - Personally I don 't like the way the thread was handled BUT I can't think of a better way considering the way it was headed. Wish I could.Vic

As someone who worked extensively on this project, It's my opinion that Col. Scotts' comments were for the most part very technically accurate, the issues were known with the exception of some minor details, and although the commentary represents an informed perspective on things that could be worked on; it's not an accurate overall assesment of the product. Perhaps it wasn't intended to be, but it was inevitable that in some ways it would be taken that way. That of course is just my very personal opinion. His perspective and knowledge nontheless is very valuable and certainly appreciated - so much so that as mentioned before he's involved in discussions to further develop the product.You have to expect people to have different perspectives.... a developer builds a product from scratch, and after an impressively competent effort, creates something that in very good measure captures the essence of something extremely, in some ways impossibly complex. All on a limited timeline and budget. Suspension of disbelief here is impressive for an FSX product, and JMIG wrote an excellent piece on that in one of the deleted posts. Of course the group that developed this would like to see the effort recognized for what it is and what it does right... we're proud of it, we think it's better than 'good' in a relative sense, and I'm sure in time it will be recognized as such by more customers, many of them also professional pilots. Everyone to some degree will always look at something like this from the perspective of absolute reality, or their version of it, and work backwards through all the things that don't match that reality. We just want to make sure the work is put in a reasonable context, and that is where (I'm pretty sure :)) Bernt is coming from. Thanks vgbaron, for your perspective, and we appreciate your implication that the product is somewhere between 'better than good but not perfect', lol.

[bliksimpie 1]

As someone who worked extensively on this project, It's my opinion that Col. Scotts' comments were for the most part very technically accurate, the issues were known with the exception of some minor details, and although the commentary represents an informed perspective on things that could be worked on; it's not an accurate overall assesment of the product. Perhaps it wasn't intended to be, but it was inevitable that in some ways it would be taken that way. That of course is just my very personal opinion. His perspective and knowledge nontheless is very valuable and certainly appreciated - so much so that as mentioned before he's involved in discussions to further develop the product.You have to expect people to have different perspectives.... a developer builds a product from scratch, and after an impressively competent effort, creates something that in very good measure captures the essence of something extremely, in some ways impossibly complex. All on a limited timeline and budget. Suspension of disbelief here is impressive for an FSX product, and JMIG wrote an excellent piece on that in one of the deleted posts. Of course the group that developed this would like to see the effort recognized for what it is and what it does right... we're proud of it, we think it's better than 'good' in a relative sense, and I'm sure in time it will be recognized as such by more customers, many of them also professional pilots. Everyone to some degree will always look at something like this from the perspective of absolute reality, or their version of it, and work backwards through all the things that don't match that reality. We just want to make sure the work is put in a reasonable context, and that is where (I'm pretty sure :)) Bernt is coming from. Thanks vgbaron, for your perspective, and we appreciate your implication that the product is somewhere between 'better than good but not perfect', lol.

:( :( well said. I truly believe that the col had very much intention for it to be positive as that is how I experienced it as a "customer" and besides his list, he had quite a few very nice remarks made about your fantastic product but also about the company in seperate postings. Email/forums have the negative aspect that thinks can be perceived very differently because the human have no face/body language to read when communicating here.Well done on your product and sure is to be a plane near the heart for many Americans as the T-38 is part and parcel of a HUGE number of real world pilots who had to cut their teeth in the T-38 (after reading the col post he gave me a lot to ponder and I could not but help to go google the history of T-38 and the roll it played in Us airforce history.) So yes I surely think you have a winner here. Well done, awesome product. For only a second full release, you guys can be proud of your T-38.! I would like to think it is WAY above average and MUCH more then outstanding.. :( B)

[vgbaron 3,649]

Thanks vgbaron, for your perspective, and we appreciate your implication that the product is somewhere between 'better than good but not perfect', lol.

No doubt about it, it is an EXCEPTIONAL product that I would highly recommend. As to being perfect - there's not a computer program written that is as yet.But I certainly love the T-38 as I love the C-310. Unfortunately I never had any time in the T-38.Anyway, we're always 'tweaking' FSX, so why not start 'tweaking' add-ons! :( Vic