FSX-MS Regretful purchases for FSX

[737guy1 39]

EZdok Camera.

 

Wilco 737 PIC Evolution.

 

Captain Sim 757/767 I am not overly pleased with but I got them for $12 so it was worth a shot!

[torfih 49]

Just curious Torfi... if you have the PC-6 Porter from FSD (for FSX).

Yes I have, or had. I gave up trying to reinstall the FSD products. Never used it again. I really liked flying that thing but FSD customer support (lack of) prevented me from using it ever again ...

[Wizz84 4]

concorde from flightsimlabs

its nicely done, dont get me wrong but i just dont like to fly it

[Great Ozzie 101]

Yes I have, or had. I gave up trying to reinstall the FSD products.

 

Sorry to hear that... the PC-6 is such a fun (and nice looking) bush plane. I just re-installed mine... and I was thinking there was a hoop or two I had to jump thru... but nothing significant that I can remember.

 

Some companies... no worries about re-installing... others you keep everything (so you think) plug in the license key and it asks you what's the last four of the credit card you used to purchase with. Might as well ask me what I had for lunch that day. :huh:

[simmerhead 885]

Some companies... no worries about re-installing... others you keep everything (so you think) plug in the license key and it asks you what's the last four of the credit card you used to purchase with. Might as well ask me what I had for lunch that day. :huh:

 

Yep. I boycot those last ones. Piracy sucks, but when they make my life miserable because of it I take my money elsewhere. It's too much work keeping FSX running in the first place...

[jjjallen 37]

_{For me would be the flight one Mustang as it's a bit like a high maintenance gf that you know you should walk away from but just can't.}

 

_{Bought it when I had XP, then because of OOM errors was restricted where I could fly it, no photorealistic for example. This prompted me to do a completed fresh install of Windows 8 Pro 64 bit and it's the only add on I have that won't run.}

 

_{Really like this aircraft when I can fly it where I want and will do again when a patch for Windows 8 compatability comes out. It's regretful because it's caused a lot of frustration but you keep sticking with it as you know it's good when everything's just right.}

_LOL

_{For me would be the flight one Mustang as it's a bit like a high maintenance gf that you know you should walk away from but just can't.}

 

_{Bought it when I had XP, then because of OOM errors was restricted where I could fly it, no photorealistic for example. This prompted me to do a completed fresh install of Windows 8 Pro 64 bit and it's the only add on I have that won't run.}

 

_{Really like this aircraft when I can fly it where I want and will do again when a patch for Windows 8 compatability comes out. It's regretful because it's caused a lot of frustration but you keep sticking with it as you know it's good when everything's just right.}

_{Yea I hear you. The F1 Mustang is one plane you luv to hate. On my 3rd build now since I got it and it still is a no go for me. Never completed a flight with it. Maybe if they ditch all the 2d panels it would be more stable. Cheers jja}

[Gregg_Seipp 565]

Yea I hear you. The F1 Mustang is one plane you luv to hate. On my 3rd build now since I got it and it still is a no go for me. Never completed a flight with it. Maybe if they ditch all the 2d panels it would be more stable.

 

That's the one jet I've considered but ultimately had to say no too because of frame rates. It's not a nice long distance bird but, still, seems practical for a sim since it's single pilot certified. Knowing about these other issues makes me just heave a sigh and wonder if there will be another decent one of that kind off in the future. Ah well, I have plenty to learn about the ones I have.

 

Gregg

[Dutch727 543]

I've yet to make a purchase I truly regretted, but that's from being very careful. There are a few airplanes I don't fly much but I can't say that's all their fault. Most everything I've bought does it's job in enhancing FSX. Some are much better than others of course.

 

There's been comments here on developers so I thought I'd give you some perspective from that side of the fence.

 

FS developers are like the rest of the human race - a range from great to awful with most somewhere near the middle, encompassing the good, the bad, and the ugly. But broadly, they fall into two camps: the ones in it for the money (ha!) and the ones who are simmers themselves and who bring some passion and commitment to the job.

 

In the software development world there's a phrase: eat your own dog food. In other words use your own product, don't just test it. I fly with FSCaptain every time I fly in the sim. I've probably found more exasperating bugs in it than almost any other user. Fortunately for me, I can fix them. Many have been quashed before any one else found them.

 

I've bought some add-ons and think to myself: do these developers ever fly their own airplane? I mean not just in short test flights, but realistically.

 

It's easy to tell the difference between those that do and those that don't.

 

Support gets mentioned a lot too. Support is hard, and those in it for the money often can't seem to see why they should spend much of their probably slim profits on supporting their product. The answer is obvious - this is a small community and words gets out. Still, some keep on in the business while providing little to no support. So I suppose this is a way to increase profits for some at least. In the real world if support isn't seen as a moral obligation by a developer, that support will be lacking.

 

You'd think a well made product with great docs doesn't need much support, but you're wrong. Many people don't read docs; and worse, the FS world is a very quirky environment to develop in. Some individual pilots have weird problems that can't be reproduced so they can be fixed. The FSX internal environment is full of strangeness and pitfalls, actually.

 

The bottom line is that any software development is much trickier to do than non-programmers can appreciate. The wonder is not that there are so many bugs but so few. It's difficult to design a stable maintainable platform that endures and can be changed. I think that's why so many products get produced and then abandoned. That and the money lies in new stuff, always new stuff.

 

What I'd say to this community of simmers is: support those that support you. Every time you purchase, you vote. Vote for the best. We all benefit from this in the end.

 

Dutch

[William J.S.S 173]

Captain Sim 777 for me. I know it is in open testing and I signed up for that. I just thought that maybe after all this time it would be at least flyable...or have at least half the info you need on the displays. I still have issues with gear at v.9.

 

I was just in a hurry to get a 777 and signed off on something, my expectations just turned out higher than the developers.

[duckbilled 310]

Captain Sim 777 for me. I know it is in open testing and I signed up for that. I just thought that maybe after all this time it would be at least flyable...or have at least half the info you need on the displays. I still have issues with gear at v.9.

 

I was just in a hurry to get a 777 and signed off on something, my expectations just turned out higher than the developers.

 

I didn't have any regrets until I purchased the 777 during the sale. At the sale price, I figured I couldn't go wrong but this aircraft, beta or not, is not flyable. I know there were a lot of complaints but since I am not in to really deep systems, I thought it would be passable for a good looking long haul aircraft.

[lcole98296 0]

{{Regret may be too strong, but the Dreamfleet Dakota was the only addon I had that couldn't make the transition to Win 7 x64. It did have a problem f me of the aft position light not showing correctly, but it still was good to fly while I was on XP.}}

 

I have the Dreamfleet Dakota running perfectly on my Win7 - 64 setup. You have to replace all original RXP based gauges with the current GNS WAAS (payware) equivalents, and then editing the panel.cfg file.

 

Make sure all UAC Windows security crap is disabled during installation & tweaking..

[jjjallen 37]

This thread brings up the issue about how we make our Flight Sim buying decisions. For my self I usually require at least 2 excellent reviews (minor negatives accepted) especially when it comes to planes. Scenery is another matter and for me there needs to be overwhelming consensus except for ORBX products which I just purchase no questions asked. Needless to say I haven't bought any scenery (except for ORBX) in all the years I've owned FSX.

 

That said there are companies like ORBX, RealAir and PMDG that offer exceptional products by default so its a no brainer to purchase from them if you want the offering.

 

Cheers

jja

[tttocs 301]

For my self I usually require at least 2 excellent reviews (minor negatives accepted) especially when it comes to planes. Scenery is another matter...

 

For my part, I guess I'd qualify things just a bit more. For example, if I'm looking at a plane that I have a special interest in (usually because it's a plane I've flown or want to have flown IRL) I'll look at reviews, support sites, etc, but the degree to which negatives influence me depends on WHAT the negatives are. If they're consistent and in an area I find critical for my use, then its a no-go. If they're performance related, I'll take them under advisement, as often reported performance issues are system specific. And so on. In other words, a lot of factors can be involved in a final decision, including can I return the product, as with Flight1.

 

If it's a Flight1 purchase I also might take a bit more of a chance. This, for example, was the tipping factor when I decided to try Opus. Without the Flight1 return I probably would not have taken the chance.

 

Scenery also depends on where as much as who made it. For example, I purchased NZSI because it was Orbx - and never flew it because I don't (at least yet) fly in NZ - a regretted decision, though I'll probably use it eventually. On the other hand, I took a bit of a chance on MegasceneryX SoCal despite some reservations about photoscenery because I really wanted to start flying in the SoCal area. That ended up being a good decision, and one that led me to MegasceneryX Las Vegas and FSDreamteam's KLAS and others. And so on. All purchases I'm very happy with.

 

In other words, sometimes you do have to take a bit of a chance, even when you're a cautious buyer as I am.

 

Scott

[Nimrod 0]

EZdok Camera.

 

EZDok does seem pretty overpriced, I want it only for the head movement but not bothered about camera angles.

[LHookins 3,102]

I've bought some add-ons and think to myself: do these developers ever fly their own airplane? I mean not just in short test flights, but realistically.

 

It's easy to tell the difference between those that do and those that don't.

 

Profound, Dutch. I've often wondered that myself.

 

Takes me back to the days when I wrote a full screen text editor for an operating system that had only a line editor. I knew I'd arrived when I was able to start using my editor to edit the source code for the editor.

 

Hook