Why Freeware Is and Isn't Dead

[ShawnG 1,823]

well, I do appreciate freeware, and those who make it.  i am not a flightsim snob, and to be honest the depth of sims by PMDG, A2A et al, while I admire the achievement, is really more of an annoyance to me, since I don't really need that level of detail for my leisure activity.  I do also agree that excessive pickiness is hurting our hobby as well,  many perfectly flyable and enjoyable medium fidelity sims are absolutely lambasted on the forums by the flightsim elite for not being the equal of the NGX,  that limits development for the second tier product that I feel a majority of simmers would enjoy.

 

Freeware development has downsides as well though.  It was mentioned above that freeware developers can develop anything they want without regard to profits, and that's a true and fair point.  It often seems though, that freeware developers tend to intentionally develop well away from subjects that have mass and broad appeal.  part of this is a simple realization that no payware developer is ever going that direction,  so if they want it to exist they have to do it themselves.  but it does leave the freeware ranks filled with tons of esoteric files, and not many 182's, Dehavilland Otters, king airs, or beechcraft.  (thankfully, posky and project airbus have made sure the "standard" jetliners exist in freeware form).

 

The other issue, is that freeware developers tend to be one of two types:  one man operations working in their free time, that understandably take a while to finish their products, and often lose time or ambition to finish them; or teams of loosely allied enthusiasts that often end up hating each other and withdrawing all their work in a fit of pique over some perceived slight,  none of this leads to stable amounts of software development.  (this applies to all freeware development, not just in the flightsim world, this is not unique)  

 

I love freeware,  half my aircraft collection and a fair bit of scenery on my harddrive is from these folks.  (I am a member of the VC-only crowd though, I hated flying with 2d back in fs2002 days, and it is pretty mandatory to me that there be some sort of reasonable VC, I know how hard they are to develop)  my thanks to anyone who throws that much work into this hobby.

[Pict 15]

I don't mind if a person prefers VC only...i just have an issue when persons start going off on a tangent about "what we've come to expect" i.e. the vc must match the payware offerings...just prior to lambasting the freeware author about the graphical quality not being 2013 standards...

 

To be honest persons have just become waaay too picky lately...and that pickiness deters would be freeware authors from wanting to share any of their hard work only to be bashed left, right and centre, by persons who we're either too young to use a pc or not even around when microwings, sr aircraft collection, Capt. Slug, Jan Visser etc were producing excellent freeware for fs5-98.

[mmann 72]

 

 

To be honest persons have just become waaay too picky lately...and that pickiness deters would be freeware authors from wanting to share any of their hard work only to be bashed left, right and centre, by persons who we're either too young to use a pc or not even around when microwings, sr aircraft collection, Capt. Slug, Jan Visser etc were producing excellent freeware for fs5-98.

 

By deterring freeware authors they are eventually deterring all development. Remember that a great many payware developers started first of all with freeware.

[pilottj 198]

I spend most of my time in the payware stuff simply for the great systems depth, but I don't shy away from great freeware either. Manfred Jahn's free BT-67 is awesome, on par with a lot of payware. I really enjoy the Classicwings.net birds too. I was a big fan of Milton Shupe's work during the FS2k2 and 2k4 days, as well as Piglet's Peculiar airplanes.

 

Cheers

TJ

[Lowflyer 97]

You've missed my point.

 

I tried to say that I can produce stuff as good as PMDA2AAir *for free*, provided I get to invest enough time per day. Which, frankly, isn't possible when you have to pursue another job to pay for your cost of living.

So, unless any side invests *way* more patience in making and waiting for new add-ons, freeware efforts will simply not ever be on the same level as fulltime commercial (team)efforts. Period.

 

Not all payware have to be up to the standard of previously mentioned companies. Baytower RV-7 being a prime example. Looks very good and is great fun to fly. Well worth the pricetag despite no advanced engine modelling or such. Even with a day job you should have time to whip up something like that provided you have the skill you claim that you have.

 

 

Also, you don't realize how much you're twisting the knife in the wound by pointing out that freeware is not your cup of tea. Stuff like this and the pickiness that Pict has mentioned is why way less people are developing for free.

Silliest thing I've read in a good while. I never said freeware developers should just give up because their quality isn't up to the highest payware standard. I was just pointing out that flying freeware planes does nothing for me personally. As long as they love what they do there's reason to go on doing it, right? Why should they care about what I think?

 

 

[Pict 15]

Actually if you visit the Tinmouse support forums (and other freeware groups for that matter) you will see what Bjoern's referring to.

 

Tinmouse releases an (for me at least) excellent 737...but very few actually commend them for putting their energy (and free time) into it over the years...you more see comments about why there's no vc, or when will a vc be made...normally written in a tone suggesting they owe us something. In the FS98/2K days the comments would more be along the lines of someone with 3D modelling skills offering to help, or a repainter offering to take the load of painting various liveries for the core package.

 

When you look at the dominant attitudes present in the hobby today, many persons are deterred from sharing their work. Why share it if persons who prefer payware offerings (who in most cases never downloaded the freeware aircraft/panel/scenery in the first place) are just going to be whipping them with a poui branch for their work for it not matching what PMDG, Aerosoft or CaptainSim offers in graphical quality. I say graphical quality because there are A LOT of freeware with perfectly accurate systems and great systems depth out there...you just have to look for them. With persons/groups like HJG, Rick Piper, David Maltby, Bentoit Guarant, Section F8, Fraser Mckay etc....i have no need to buy a payware version of the aircraft they offer as they cover them perfectly...but again that's my preference.

 

I use FS9/X because I enjoy flying various types of aircraft i'll never get to fly in real life (outside of what I currently fly). Whether the addon has emergencies/failures simulated or not isn't a game changer for me (i practice those in a sim every six months so i have no intention of doing the same in my hobby time at home). Hence I'm one who has more freeware than payware in my hangar.

[Lowflyer 97]

Pict, on 12 Jul 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

Actually if you visit the Tinmouse support forums (and other freeware groups for that matter) you will see what Bjoern's referring to.

Well obviously I'm not going to but I'll take your word for it. I can't speak for anyone but myself but at least I have never gone on a freeware developers forum and told them to give it up for whatever reason. Also I have never demanded or expected payware quality from them. Doing so would be highly disrespectful indeed. All I've ever done was wasting time downloading and installing a bunch of planes only to realize I wasn't having any fun with them. It's only lost time however so no harm done and I would never dream of slagging them off for it.

 

Pict, on 12 Jul 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

I use FS9/X because I enjoy flying various types of aircraft i'll never get to fly in real life (outside of what I currently fly). Whether the addon has emergencies/failures simulated or not isn't a game changer for me (i practice those in a sim every six months so i have no intention of doing the same in my hobby time at home). Hence I'm one who has more freeware than payware in my hangar.

A bit like me then. It's just that I prefer addons with good engine failure modelling and such because I think it adds to the experience knowing that if I fly it like the default C172 it'll eventually punish me for it. Also I want A2A/PMDG/Realair class VCs so that's what I'll stick to. Call me picky if you like, I can agree with you on that. I will however not agree that it's a bad thing, only that it is a thing.

[ti_dabbelju 6]

Scenery - That stuff you see out the window.

 

 And to think that's just aircraft! Want some freeware scenery? Look no further than here. http://www.freewares...ry.com/fsx.html Most, not all, but very close to all freeware FSX scenery is linked by this site.

 

I am a total fan of freeware and I'm constantly looking for it. Some freeware add-ons that I have I don't want to miss.

 

The idea behind freewarescenery.com is great. To list freeware by location and from different flightsim websites is what we need. What it lacks is a USER FEEDBACK (great stuff gets five stars). If you just go by the number of downloads it can be very misleading because the description is very good but the add-on is not.

 

Quite often I look at the size of the downoad to get a feeling, how much work was put into it. Annoyingly often there are BITMAP (!) screenshots in a 6MB zip download and the add-on itself is only 5KB. I know AFCADS can make a huge difference while being small.

 

But disappointment like this can make people turn away from freeware.

[Bjoern 1,157]

Even with a day job you should have time to whip up something like that provided you have the skill you claim that you have.

No, you don't. At least not on a level to satisfy the nit-pickers.

 

 

Anyway, go enjoy your payware.

 

 

Tinmouse releases an (for me at least) excellent 737...but very few actually commend them for putting their energy (and free time) into it over the years...you more see comments about why there's no vc, or when will a vc be made...normally written in a tone suggesting they owe us something. In the FS98/2K days the comments would more be along the lines of someone with 3D modelling skills offering to help, or a repainter offering to take the load of painting various liveries for the core package.

 

When you look at the dominant attitudes present in the hobby today, many persons are deterred from sharing their work.

A general "Freeware Appreciation Day" would be cool.

 

The "support and sharing" thing quite is true. I'd kill for more people willing to contribute to projects.

[Clutch Cargo 384]

User comments can be just as mis-leading as product descriptions.  Just read some of threads out there :rolleyes:

 

The "Freeware Appreciation Day" is a good idea.  It would be nice to recognize those who have labored so many ungawdly hours just for the enjoyment of the hobby and maybe a little pat-on-the-back.

 

One could have all the opening pages with articles on freeware, reviews on freeware, interviews on freeware modelers... you get the idea.

[meshman 109]

A general "Freeware Appreciation Day" would be cool.

 

Didn't you get the memo? It's February 29th. Time to mark the 2016 calendar!

[N2056 33]

I feel that freeware is a dying breed. Many of the well-known names have moved on for assorted reasons, and there is not much "new blood" in the pipeline that I have seen on the developer forums. My interest in doing it is pretty much gone.

[gojozoom 21]

I'd like to add another aircraft tot he Awesome Freeware List:

 

The Basler BT-67 from  Manfred Jahn and his team (basler_bt67_v2.zip). It's one of the best turboprop simulations I've come across. Not many turboprop add-ons have a proper startup sequence animation out there... The VC is outstanding and it has a very nicely balanced FDE with a "heavy feel". I use it daily with AirHauler and I can't get bored with it....

 

Dan

[CaptainAdlai 15]

I feel that freeware is a dying breed. Many of the well-known names have moved on for assorted reasons, and there is not much "new blood" in the pipeline that I have seen on the developer forums. My interest in doing it is pretty much gone.

 The thing is, it's not. As an example, there was just a great Polikarpov Po-2 released the other day. Full VC with 3D gauges and instruments, a nice model and texture set, and good flight dynamics.

[snowingairlines 20]

Freeware still serves a vital role for people who cannot afford, or do not want to spend the money, on payware planes. I started out not being able to get the money to get a payware plan, and the sim was still a ton of fun. A project airbus plane with a good VC merge was hard to beat. In some ways, I think that the fact that I got some of the really good payware planes, took some of the fun out of the hobby. No longer is it just hop in and fly, now I always end up looking to see what is new, and a must have, and listening to all of the people complaining about pay ware. Freeware was just hop in and fly.