High expectations vs. customer satisfaction

[Jimmy RFR 406]

It's been very interesting to follow the two 'hot' threads about both the Twin Otter Extended and the Flight1 B200.  I've taken part in them both, since my interest in following those threads is due to purchasing both planes.

 

While you can't really compare the two planes, the threads are somewhat similar in that they both have extended discussions about perceived shortcomings in the products.  This invariably turns into a debate where one side wants every perceived issue fixed, while the other side claims that we should be grateful to the developers and/or "you get what you pay for".

 

I find it interesting, because it's a continuing issue - with each (stellar) release, the various developers keep pushing the bar so far up that our expectations keep rising and rising - eventually becoming too high for any developer to ever meet.  We all want a "perfect" plane, with zero faults, zero issues (and all the fps!).  Is this even possible?  I doubt it; as has been pointed out in both threads, there are trade-offs required in almost every aspect of FSX.

 

I do see both sides of the argument:

 

I feel sorry for the developers.  Our expectations are almost always too high, especially for inexpensive software running on a very dated platform.  Too many of the discussions about new products turn negative - which I'm sure drives the developers to distance themselves from the community they serve.

 

But, I also feel that we should never ever stifle criticism of a product we pay for - as a customer, I feel we have a right to voice our complaints or opinions.  I generally save my gratefulness for those things that are given to me.  These things aren't.

 

I, for one, need to know my opinions matter to the people who receive my hard-earned money.  If I am dissatisfied with something, I would like to air it - not out of spite, but in hopes that the reason for my dissatisfaction may get fixed.  To be honest, I want to give these developers my money; I am happy to do so.  But in return, I never wish to be told to feel that I should just take what I get and be happy with it.

 

So rather than have threads about a new product descend into complaining while ignoring all the numerous positive qualities - or equally as bad, give pure praise while ignoring or withholding comment on what may be unsatisfactory - how should a conversation about a product move forward while avoiding both pitfalls?  Is it possible?

[KingGhidorah 209]

uh oh.  I better steer clear of this discussion (I probably won't be able to, but I'll try as hard as I can! :lol: )

[gandy 18]

The way i see it is that you cant keep everyone happy all the time so there is no point trying so developers should always carry on as normal.

 

Make a really nice procduct, release it then fix the bugs but dont take to long doing this, add more content/features in future service packs if the budget allows

[beoxx 6]

Considering how expensive addons have become criticism should be allowed. For some reason I have often seen forum users on each others throat when it comes to a quality and/or price discussion.

One strange attitude (from my perspective) is that some people say that we, the customers, have to keep the developers happy. Paying high prices and being grateful for what we get and so on.

 

I may be old fashioned and  conservative in this regard but I think that it should be the other way around. No addon will ever be perfect, but if you, lets say pay $ 60 for an addon, you should be allowed to expect something. As long as criticism stays reasonable and constructive it should be allowed in my opinion. And I have often seen that this leads to fixes/patches and a better product...

 

 

[xplanery 250]

 

 

Considering how expensive addons have become criticism should be allowed.

 

In general addons aren't that much more expensive than they were 5 years ago although quality has risen significantly. I think nowadays many developers do more for same amount of money than they did some years ago. 

 

But yeah criticism should be allowed, however it should also be accepted that not every developer has the time and money to do everything in extremely high, PMDG like quality. 

 

Also I think one should not expect anything based on the price of a product but rather based on what is promised, if someone wants to sell average freeware quality stuff for 70 dollars there's nothing wrong with that as long as the developer makes it clear to the customer what to expect. 

[FSMP 95]

Most of the time, purchaser's criticism seems to fall into two main categories.

(1) Inaccuracy of the modeling of systems (often due the the limitations of FSX)

(2) Bugs, that are often simple mistakes, that the developer overlooked, or were not caught in beta testing.

What frustrates me the most, is to see "(2) Bugs, that are often simple mistakes", not being fixed by the developer and released in a timely update.
Even worse, the reported bugs, that have not been corrected then appearing in later products from that developer.

I am not going to mention any names .. no need -- as you read this, I suspect you already have a name (or two) buzzing around in your head.  :fool:

[mikea76 184]

Most of the time, purchaser's criticism seems to fall into two main categories.

 

(1) Inaccuracy of the modeling of systems (often due the the limitations of FSX)

 

(2) Bugs, that are often simple mistakes, that the developer overlooked, or were not caught in beta testing.

 

What frustrates me the most, is to see "(2) Bugs, that are often simple mistakes", not being fixed by the developer and released in a timely update.

Even worse, the reported bugs, that have not been corrected then appearing in later products from that developer.

 

I am not going to mention any names .. no need -- as you read this, I suspect you already have a name (or two) buzzing around in your head.  :fool:

 

 

I only get upset when I buy a plane that is billed as HIGHLY ACCURATE and the systems modeling is full of compromise and " AHHH F it they will not notice"

[Lawyer+Pilot 126]

Two words: Caveat Emptor.

[mmann 72]

Two words: Caveat Emptor.

 

Which means the only way buyers will know what they are buying is by reading the comments (positive and negative) from those who have already bought the product. Look before you leap.

[Lawyer+Pilot 126]

Which means the only way buyers will know what they are buying is by reading the comments (positive and negative) from those who have already bought the product. Look before you leap.

Exactly.

[1mikel151 71]

Which means the only way buyers will know what they are buying is by reading the comments (positive and negative) from those who have already bought the product. Look before you leap.

 

 

Again, that boils down to the "perceived" part of the discussion. What is an issue to one will not  be to another. I never go by anyone single review on any addon, because usually half the people have issues with something that I didn't .

 

I am all for pointing out issues, but how many times have we seen in the forums that users really have no common sense and lack a little tact. Posts like "this is crap, the developer should quit, not better than freeware" are more common than not, yeah, we are going to take you seriously talking like that, please.

 

Everyone has there own pet peeves and things they want included in an addon, probably why freeware isn't as prevalent as it used to be, to many expectations, reasonable or not. Personally I could care less about systems depth, i want visuals that create a realistic immersion for the sim experience. I also want a realistic looking 3D copilot, I am sick of sitting in an empty plane. Which means for me, you can lose the glass and throw in some extras polys next to me, LOL.

I sometimes wish developers never went outside the box with systems modeling, then everything would be the same as default and there would be no issues. As is stands now, if a plane comes out with default, following the SDK systems, it is lacking in many simmers eyes, unbelievable.

[ShawnG 1,823]

Then you have people like me who don't want all this extensive systems modeling, who have to listen to endless realms of crap being poured on what I consider to be otherwise solid products because people feel entitled to A2A/Pmdg on every release.

 

On another note, we will have in a week a release of FTX Global.  A very highly anticipated product.  one that the dev has been very forthcoming about what the limitations of it are.  yet judging by the commentary here and on orbx's forum:  1) a ton of people are going to buy it.  and  2)very few of those people have a good idea about what it does.   Popcorn is ready.

[1st fltsimguy 466]

Not that complicated for me...while I don't own the planes....any plane you pay $60 for raises the bar and invites purchasers to offer constructive criticisms on how to improve the products.

 

I just bought a place from CR1 the other day...cost me $6 bucks...I have absolutely no criticisms because of the level of investment.

Then you have people like me who don't want all this extensive systems modeling, who have to listen to endless realms of crap being poured on what I consider to be otherwise solid products because people feel entitled to A2A/Pmdg on every release.

 

On another note, we will have in a week a release of FTX Global.  A very highly anticipated product.  one that the dev has been very forthcoming about what the limitations of it are.  yet judging by the commentary here and on orbx's forum:  1) a ton of people are going to buy it.  and  2)very few of those people have a good idea about what it does.   Popcorn is ready.

 

 

I am glad that I have learned much of the SDK and understand how the sims architecture works therefore I do understand what it is I will be getting and what the limitations are and therefore you won't be getting complaints from me unless there are major issues and it doesn't live within its stated product offerings.

[Q_flyer 766]

Interesting subject and a good post, Jimmy.

We have a saying in my country (and many other English-speaking countries too).... it goes:-

"Cutting off your nose, to spite your face".

It refers to those that grip onto their principals and 'standards' so aggressively and inflexibly that they ultimately suffer from that grip, themselves.

Some people do appear quite extreme about their standards, and how they "won't touch this and that, because the Yaw Damper button is the wrong shape, etc, etc", and whilst I may sometimes agree on some fundamental common points of weakness, some people take it really far.

Ultimately, as I said on one of the other threads, only they lose out of the fun.

And so be it. :smile:

[Jude Bradley 659]

Some people do appear quite extreme about their standards, and how they "won't touch this and that, because the Yaw Damper button is the wrong shape, etc, etc", and whilst I may sometimes agree on some fundamental common points of weakness, some people take it really far.

Ultimately, as I said on one of the other threads, only they lose out of the fun.

And so be it. :smile:

 

Exactly, I don't mind if the ** A320 is not 100% correct,as long as I can enjoy a flight.