Archived

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

kaspern83

Purchasing PRO-ATC/X

Recommended Posts

I think they call this "synchronicity"

 

 

 

****Update of where ProATC is of June 1st*********

 

Postby alpha117 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:18 pm

Hi All,

 

Yes, we have both been away for sometime, this is due to 'real world' commitments that both Mourad and myself have.

 

Also Mourad has not been very well over the last few weeks, so that has not helped; but he is getting better and is currently away on a few days holiday. He returns on Wednesday ( June 05th).

 

We are currently working on version 1.2.4.0, which is to add AI ATC voice. So you will now hear the AI talking to ATC, using the voices from ProATC/X, other AI stuff is also starting to take shape.

 

I have been busy also, as you might know I am a full time teacher, here in the UK and it is that time of year when exams(GCSE) for the students in our year 11 (16year olds) are taking place, this now goes on until the end of the school year, which is in July; so we teacher have to meet a lot of deadlines in terms of exams etc. Only 7 weeks left, then we have the summer holidays and 6 weeks off, can't wait.

 

So, I hope you can understand were we are, and yes, I have been looking at the OPUS weather engine with Stephen over on the OPUS site.

Looks like Stephen will have a 'break through' which makes sure that the AI land and take off on the correct runway.

 

So , all in all it has been a very busy 6 weeks and something has to give, and in this case it has been ProATC/X, but that is 'real life' I'm afraid, and with Mourad being sick has not helped either.

 

Once Mourad is back from his holidays, then it will be 'full' steam ahead again.

 

The manual is coming on 'slowly', but every-time I move forward there are changes in the software and hence changes have to be made to the manual.

 

There a lots more to come with ProATC/X still and a update will be out in the next few weeks.

 

Thanks for everyone's understanding.

 

Clive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I'm not going to write it twice and not going to say anything different no matter what forum I post it in........ :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really need to Purchase Pro-ATC, think I've been on the sidelines too long waiting on RC5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really need to Purchase Pro-ATC, think I've been on the sidelines too long waiting on RC5.

 

Its an great addon Vincent, dont think twice about purchasing it, even at the stage it is now =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't my intention to accuse anyone individually in expecting daily updates... my intention was to make a general statement about customers in general expecting daily updates... my point being that if the vendor didn't specifically state it, then perhaps it is not relevant to expect non stated specifics.

 

All customers are at the mercy of the vendor they choose to do business with. Think of all those unfortunates who bought into betamax... ( durn now I given away my age ) ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello @alpha117,

 

If only possible, could you consider a July update?

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a long-time RC4 owner I am having trouble making this decision. RC is not being worked on anymore, RC5 is complete vaporware. At least PATC is being actively developed.

 

Waiting on the PMDG T7, at an unknown price, I cant swing $70Cdn at present without knowing this move is rock solid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


RC5 is complete vaporware

 

Not quite sure about this one. One year ago (to the day) JD informed that RC5 will be but on a hold for at least a year. Who knows, we just might here something about it sooner or later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a long-time RC4 owner I am having trouble making this decision. RC is not being worked on anymore, RC5 is complete vaporware. At least PATC is being actively developed. Waiting on the PMDG T7, at an unknown price, I cant swing $70Cdn at present without knowing this move is rock solid.

Same here.  I use RC4 but am hoping some day we have something better.  RC5?  This?  Whatever.  But, it remains to be seen yet whether PATC can "fix" the "problems" with default and RC4 ATC.  Maybe once PATC has support for controlling AI, I will finally give it a shot.  Until then, I'll stick with RC4 and its problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I plumped for it but it's not there yet. The two big issues for me are thus:

1) tiny selection of voices. Unlike PFE (even RC) you've no hope of selecting a sufficient number of voices to enact a realistic flight. They need LOTS more.

2) the ATC side of it is not realistic. You get weird instructions from ATC to waypoints, transitions and nav aids that aren't even on your flight plan. So you'll be under your own navigation in LNAV and ATC will clear you along the airway you're already on. Errr, ok thanks for that. Then at some point during the STAR you'll get vectored off in odd directions and given clearances to random waypoints off in wild blue yonder. On approach to Stansted I was given a clearance to the Luton NDB!

 

It's a pity, as it has a lot of potential. Setting up a route is wonderfully simple, unlike the brain bender that is PFE and it dynamically gives you SIDS and STARS based on wind and the runway in use. The customisations of voices, runway use, AI chatter are are nice and simple and it comes with an editor which allows you to record and upload to their site your own voice. Cabin announcements and a pretty decent co pilot capability are also included. So there is much to like but until they sort the weird non-realistic ATC instructions and some more voices I'm afraid it's on the shelf for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bennyboy75, on 01 Jul 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:

I plumped for it but it's not there yet. The two big issues for me are thus:

1) tiny selection of voices. Unlike PFE (even RC) you've no hope of selecting a sufficient number of voices to enact a realistic flight. They need LOTS more.

2) the ATC side of it is not realistic. You get weird instructions from ATC to waypoints, transitions and nav aids that aren't even on your flight plan. So you'll be under your own navigation in LNAV and ATC will clear you along the airway you're already on. Errr, ok thanks for that. Then at some point during the STAR you'll get vectored off in odd directions and given clearances to random waypoints off in wild blue yonder. On approach to Stansted I was given a clearance to the Luton NDB!

 

It's a pity, as it has a lot of potential. Setting up a route is wonderfully simple, unlike the brain bender that is PFE and it dynamically gives you SIDS and STARS based on wind and the runway in use. The customisations of voices, runway use, AI chatter are are nice and simple and it comes with an editor which allows you to record and upload to their site your own voice. Cabin announcements and a pretty decent co pilot capability are also included. So there is much to like but until they sort the weird non-realistic ATC instructions and some more voices I'm afraid it's on the shelf for me.

I got ProATC about 1,5 weeks ago and only used it 2 or 3 times to test it after reading a lot about it and checked some Youtube video's. I agree with your post completely by the way. Now i'm back to default ATC because i'm flying GA now, will pick it up again when back to IFR. I had read a lot about this addon and it seemed the best choice, considering the future. I still think it will be, but it's not really there yet.

 

On top of your arguments: Also poor communication with costumers. Almost no status updates on their forums and already charging full price for a beta status.

They should look at OpusFSX as a great example of communicating (here on AVSIM Opus forum and on their official forum), frequent updates of their software (sometimes small bugfixes, sometimes new features), but at least you can see the progress! Also they reply very fast to questions asked and help ppl out. With ProATC there are 1 or 2 users helping ppl out on the forum, almost no feedback from the programmers. Last month not a single post after the 1 june update. Blegh.

 

I was in doubt: VoxATC or ProATC. Chose the latter because Vox has it's own issues, but for now I don't think i will be using it a lot. It's just that i really wanted to replace default ATC and I was hoping that the development would go quicker after reading the June status update.

You better wait a couple of weeks/months for this to ripe more. I was kinda enthousiastic watching the Youtube tutorials, and the guy sounds friendly and ambitious, but they are slacking a bit right now I think. At least give regular updates to your users, even if they are very small. Just let people now you are busy with the right things. They should be a little more open and pro-active giving information and updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, no control of AI is a show stopper for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, no control of AI is a show stopper for me.

It's supposedly coming in the update. I usually fly from smaller regional fields so it's less of big deal to me than someone flying out of Schipol or JFK or somewhere where there'd be carnage. To be honest they need to look at how it gives out ATC commands first before worrying about AI.

 

ATC is very hard to do in FSX. It's annoying as if you look how far we've come in terms of realism with stuff like FlyTampa, FSDT, Orbx, the NGX and the Q400 there isn't much to separate it from what really happens in the lives of everyday pilots but ATC is the one mighty let down. The first person that can come up with really realistic ATC that sounds and acts like the real thing is going to make a few $$$$.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, but that was the main reason for my posts, 'Supposedly coming in update'. That statement was first used last year..

They really should try breaking there workload into smaller chunks and release smaller updates in higher frequency.

 

It is a usable ATC add-on mind you, but it has some annoying bugs and is missing some important features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With ProATC there are 1 or 2 users helping ppl out on the forum, almost no feedback from the programmers.

 

 

I would say that there are more than a few. Some users are doing video tutorials and some are currently writing a manual. I personally try to chip in as much as I can.

 

Having said that, I do understand your point about the communication.

 

- Jarkko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first person that can come up with really realistic ATC that sounds and acts like the real thing is going to make a few $$$$.

I believe the problem is that Microsoft didn't leave an "opening" in FSX code allowing 3rd party developers to take over AI control. By not having that opening, developers basically are out of options.

The only way to take over the control would be to break open the FSX code and replace parts of it by a 3rd party code. That would probably not be allowed by MS (EULA) and all kinds of legal restrictions.

I guess the only way would be to reach some form of agreement with MS to obtain their formal approval. But to be honest, I don't believe the chances of that happening are any larger than me walking on the moon any time soon....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the problem is that Microsoft didn't leave an "opening" in FSX code allowing 3rd party developers to take over AI control. By not having that opening, developers basically are out of options.

The only way to take over the control would be to break open the FSX code and replace parts of it by a 3rd party code. That would probably not be allowed by MS (EULA) and all kinds of legal restrictions.

I guess the only way would be to reach some form of agreement with MS to obtain their formal approval. But to be honest, I don't believe the chances of that happening are any larger than me walking on the moon any time soon....

But the daft thing is, MS clearly don't give a stuff about FS any more. It's 7 years old, unsupported and we're lucky the activation server still works! For them to let a third party developer into the AI code would make precisely zero difference to MS one way or the other. Annoying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I believe the problem is that Microsoft didn't leave an "opening" in FSX code allowing 3rd party developers to take over AI control.

 

Well you say that but RC4 controls AI, on the tarmac and in the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you say that but RC4 controls AI, on the tarmac and in the air.

From my experience with RC4. Radar Contact is able to freeze ground traffic so you can land without AI rolling on to the runway.

 

While RC4 "talks" to AI in the air, I haven't seen any cases, where airborne AI has been "controlled" by RC4. Pilots life gets quite "interesting" if you happen to use Active Sky and have the wake vortex feature enabled.

 

I can't tell you how many times AI aircraft have cut me off on approach and have left me spinning out of control in their wake. All RC4 did in these situations, was to give traffic advisory (, but a bit too late).

 

I might be wrong, but this has been my experience with RC4. (Don't get me wrong, RC4 does many things right, but airborne AI hasn't been my favorite with RC4).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is it worth to have a look on their forum?

 

Which forum? What for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's basically a lack of trust developing, whereby legitimate forum questions and concerns go unanswered and, although reassurances have been made earlier in the summer, nothing has been delivered in terms of promised enhancements and fixes for many months. The forum is eerily quiet, Mary Celeste style, in terms of developer participation.

 

Yet another example of top dollar price/bottom dollar service, sad to say. That seems a recurring theme on here this week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.