I would tend to agree with Tom. I remember a few years ago when "web site awards" were popular. I and some friends had an award we gave out and gave links (seems dumb now.). I was frankly surprised at how agressively people would self promote and then abuse you if their poorly done site didnt get the little banner. And this was with no money involved. Certifications per se with money involved on payware certainly look like a mess in the making.Quality, price and category density drive the winners and the losers IMHO. I can wait a week and read the threads here and almost immediately know whats crap and whats not. Thats good enough for me.On the freeware side, I always check the most popular downloads page here at avsim and at flightsim.com. I can tell the winners with freeware there as well. Anything still on the monthly popular list is a very-good-to-have and anything on the yearly page is a must have to me.I will say this though... I wont pay over 25.00 USD for any add on and I dont care what it is. To me thats a hard limit... so far. Mainly I fear the reprimand of the Minister of the exchequer around here.Eric

Good post!Peter Sydney Australia

There are plenty of opinions floating around. The discerning prospective buyer...and especially one who's been in the hobby for any time at all...will have a good idea about whose opinions are reliable...or not.Those who buy on release day either trust the vendor from prior experience or take a gamble. Having some pseudo-official approval body is just another opportunity for commercial corruption. I look at the "reviews" on flightsim.com accompanied by "buy now, get 3 month flightsim.com membership free" and my gag reflex kicks in. Are we really that ignorant?The intelligent reader quickly develops a feel for who to trust, and who to approach with scepticism.In the end, "caveat emptor" applies to one and all. Learn or burn, those are your choices...Bob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, DC

"I look at the "reviews" on flightsim.com accompanied by "buy now, get 3 month flightsim.com membership free" and my gag reflex kicks in. Are we really that ignorant?"Cap Mason thinks so.Greg

>"I look at the "reviews" on flightsim.com accompanied by "buy>now, get 3 month flightsim.com membership free" and my gag>reflex kicks in. Are we really that ignorant?">>Cap Mason thinks so.>>Greg>Hehehe - and for goodness sake do NOT argue or the Robber will get you

So, most of the posts seem to revolve around two ideas:1. The scheme is not workable because the criteria are too diverse and subjective and that any reviewers would have inherent bias.2. It's up to the buyer to educate themselves by seeing what other people are saying, reading reviews if there are any, etc.The problem, of course, is that by relying on #2 you place a significant burden on the more casual user who has neither the time or sophistication to evaluate all that may be written about an add-on. Chances are the casual user will simply give up and not buy anything. This is bad both for payware companies and the hobby as a whole.Let's get more specific. Suppose Microsoft offered some sort of certification where the criteria were quite public. Their incentive is to build up a big group of people who not only buy FS but invest in add-ons that keep them interested in the hooby in between major FS releases. Say what you want about them but it MS did this you can't really claim too much bias as they get no direct $$ from payware sales.Now, maybe *you* wouldn't use this information but what about the casual user (think about your mom, if she were interested in simming). Suppose there were two fairly similar add-ons, one with a "certification" and one without. Do you think this would help a person that's fairly new or inexperienced with this hobby?If the answer is yes then we all win by helping build an even stronger simming *business*, which is what powers all the cool innovation we see around here. If it devolves into a mere hobby, where you rely on people devoting their spare time to produce add-ons, I argue you wouldn't get either the quantity or quality that we (almost) take for granted these days.Food for thought...

> by relying on #2 you place a>significant burden on the more casual user who has neither the>time or sophistication to evaluateSorry, but it is absolute rubbish.Those "casual" users ultimately know how to surf one of the major flightsim forums and in the worst case when they are absolutely lazy and don't want to spend an hour they post a question and are either directed to proper sources or get immediate replys when they solicit opinions about specific products. You see it happen ever day.Michael J.

The idea has its good intentions... But lets face it. Who ever is the judging committee is going to want to be paid for their efforts of testing, and then that will raise the prices even further of the product. MS is not going to waste their time testing 3rd party software.... I would like to believe that for the most part the developers have good intentions with their products. Not all are out to rip you off. I think most of the problems remain with the buyer. The buyers computer is not up to par or something like that. I know how graphic intense this game is, plus how much power is needed to run it. Therefore I have taken it upon myself to set up my computer that exceeds the requirements.Buyer beware I always say. Take responsibility for yourself and research before you buy. Make sure your system is going to run the addon. Ask questions. Take part in the forums that these companies might have. (there really are some nice, helpful people there.) It also helps to go with reputible companies like Flight 1, Aerosoft, FSD, Carenado, etc. People that have proved themselves time and time again.:D

The number of posts you see from casual users looking for advice versus the number of copies of FS sold doesn't support your theory but we're each entitled to our opinions. It still remains that most people who buy FS don't buy add-ons so the problem of getting more people interested and buying remains.

>remains that most people who buy FS don't buy add-ons so the>problem of getting more people interested and buying remains.True. Because most of MSFS boxes are purchased by folks who either find the original program sufficient or they simply have no clue about Avsim, Flightsim, etc. Those who frequent these forums are definitely buying. So your number #1 task should be to educate people that there is internet where they can find more info. But I suspect those MSFS users who feel need for something more know this already.Michael J.

All well-intentioned, but one point is not spoken off:If EVERYONE waits until SOMEONE buys the "addon", WHO will give a review? Or are all of You calculating that there will be some "press copies" given away or some poor dummy buying the "addon" and starting complaining or praising?Torsten

I imagine that the idea would be that software developers/sellers would hand over a free copy to the reviewers with the idea that the resultant "seal of approval"(or whatever) would lead to increased sales.Still don't think it would work.Dave

>If EVERYONE waits until SOMEONE buys the "addon", WHO will>give a review? This point is purely academic. Look at reality instead. There are plenty of people who buy an addon on the first/second day of its release. Yes, any addon including those that are even suspected to be not so good. There are plenty of suckers out there - I actually don't mind it ;-) Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg