High expectations vs. customer satisfaction

[KingGhidorah 209]

I don't recall reading any threads lately in which somebody was complaining about something so trivial as a "misshapen Yaw Damper."  

 

Customers and potential customers have a right to air their concerns and wishes.  Its what a discussion forum is about.  Just because person A thinks something is trivial doesn't mean that person B will.  When a product is released it has to run the gauntlet of consumer opinion and people get to make a choice.  Developers can read what is said and decide if they want to fix something, or they can ignore it.

 

The person who decides that they won't like a particular product because of bug X, or the lack of feature Y, isn't missing out on any fun at all.  If they won't like a product, then what will they be missing out on?  In fact, they are sparing themself the frustration.

[Jude Bradley 659]

It's an example to emphasise the point.(not an actual example),

[KingGhidorah 209]

It's an example to emphasise the point.(not an actual example),

 

Understood, but let it be said that Q400 was substituting a trivial, hypothetical example to stand in for what was actually being discussed in those two threads in question.  That ain't fair to reduce somebodies (mine) valid concerns like that....

 

I think some people need to start understanding that critisicm is a valid and necessary part of the marketplace.  If all anybody ever did was praise hallelooya every time some plane is released, and make auto-purchases, there would never be any incentive for a developer to fix anything.  In the end, I think a lot of airplanes become better for everybody as a result of discussions like that on Avsim and other places, and unfortunately that means that sometimes a staunch fan of a particular airplane doesn't always like what somebody else has to say.  But that  is the way it is.

[Clutch Cargo 384]

Yes, a two-sided street.  Buyer beware (ie: do your research, read reviews, study user's comments), while on the other side the developer must manage the customer's expectations.  If the developer say this is "the most detailed", or "every system modeled" you are just opening up yourself to a world of hurt.  Best to describe what the the add-on has and maybe even what it does not have.  More information - less headaches I would think after the sale.

 

I think ORBX has done a great job of this with their upcoming world landclass so it will be interesting to read the negative comments.  Don't forget, just like how some developers can gain a bad reputation so can users with regards of not only what they say but how they say it. 

 

It's a great hobby.  Let's keep it that way.

[ryanbatc 12,798]

I will gripe about flight issues on the main forums all day long.

 

I usually take other issues to the developers forum.

 

Since flight is what we are simulating flight related issues will get complaints from me.

[pocketwatch50 6]

I think a lot of this is the old glass of water half full or half empty mentality.

 

I've been doing this flight sim thing since the first version of flight sim 1.0 came out back in the 1970s. When I fly now I'm just amazed how realistic the overall experience really is. What gets me is how many folks expect absolute realism. If that is your expectation you're just a dog chasing his tail. Just slow down and smell the roses and realize what we do have. Afterall, even a professional sim used by the military or the airlines has it's limitations too.

[Jude Bradley 659]

I think a lot of this is the old glass of water half full or half empty mentality.

 

I've been doing this flight sim thing since the first version of flight sim 1.0 came out back in the 1970s. When I fly now I'm just amazed how realistic the overall experience really is. What gets me is how many folks expect absolute realism. If that is your expectation you're just a dog chasing his tail. Just slow down and smell the roses and realize what we do have. Afterall, even a professional sim used by the military or the airlines has it's limitations too

You only have to look at F-16 Combat Pilot to see the difference,that was amazing stuff!

[KingGhidorah 209]

I've noticed  that some people seem to think of their flight simulator as a collection of parts, each of which can be evaluated independent of each other.  You can have a plane that is excellent in 5 different ways, but only terrible in 1, and so that comes out as a +4.

 

I see my fs setup as a carefully balanced system of hardware, network, environment, addons, and airplane systems all working in harmony with each other to provide a system that supensds disbelief.  I look at problems that arise not so much from an individual standpoint, but more in how they affect the balance of the entire experience.  I am likely to prefer a plane that is merely good all around instead of excellent in some ways but mediocre in others.  Peaks and valleys where the immersion is lost in the valleys is not to my liking, no matter how lofty the peaks may be.  I'm not going to likely reject an addon for something smallish but even small things can add up really fast when viewing your flight simulator in this way.

 

When it comes to discussions, I think this can sometimes lead to some meaness between members who are coming from different ends of that spectrum, who might not understand the signifigance I'm putting on a particular item, or to frustration with developers who appear to have designed their airplane for "the other guy."

 

I find it interesting that there are a lot of people who actually desire more simplicity and less detail in a new airplane.  I hadn't thought about that aspect much before.

[ShawnG 1,823]

 

 

I find it interesting that there are a lot of people who actually desire more simplicity and less detail in a new airplane.  I hadn't thought about that aspect much before.

Yep, I'm one of those.  Don't get me wrong,  what companies like PMDG and A2A do is phenomenal, and I respect it, to be honest, I wish I could invest the time to be able to fly things like the NGX, because I'm sure that at some level it's rewarding.  However, I am likely never to buy one of either company's products,  I'm not after real flight training, I don't have time to train myself to be able to use them properly, and these are furthermore some of the most expensive addons as well.  Now, I'm not bitter about them existing, If you guys love that level of detail, more power to you.  I will be upset though, if someone makes an aircraft that fits my level of detail, does it well, and ends up getting slagged off by the avsim community because it doesn't model every switch of the original.

 

I haven't bought any of their aircraft, but I've been intrigued by the Alabeo stuff.  decent looking, good flying, low maintenance addon aircraft for around 20 bucks each.  while the parent company makes more detailed models for more (No, I'm not comparing Carenado to A2A, but their aircraft have more detailed systems than Alabeo)  I have no trouble imagining that a market exists for such models of commercial and business aircraft as well.  It pains me that I've waited for years for a good Dash-8 and now that it's here, its systems heavy, and 70 bucks.

[fppilot 4,347]

I have recently adopted a 30 day "cooling off" period before I buy, and now also if I see a developer immediately list a brand new model on their "Completed Projects" page on their own website (there just seems to be some danger there, re: caveat emptor) then I am from now own going to wait 90 days before considering purchase.

 

What I would like to see from developers is a low entry price, post-beta, quality-check release to "X" number (finite number) of customers, each of who accept a license agreement that stipulates understanding of a post-beta, still-in-final-testing purchase environment that allows complete cost-free progression to the final product upon completion of development. That followed by an intense and ultra timely development period to accept identification of issues and remedy of the same.

 

I have begun to loath SP1's and SP2's that closely follow or are customer-demanded after initial release.

 

Since October 1, 2012 I estimate I have spend more hours at the "customer service" request of multiple developers than I have logged flying hours, all to document issues, go through countless uninstall/reinstall cycles, and numerous other dead-end requests, only to find those issues fixed by SP1's and SP2's.

 

No Mas!!!!!

[mmann 72]

 

 

I have begun to loath SP1's and SP2's that closely follow or are customer-demanded after initial release.

 

The best beta testers are those that pay for the privilege, as they are trying (sometimes vainly) very hard to get their money's worth out of a defective product.

[Tabs 2,790]

We're getting talked about here as if we're the company that never sees these types of complaints about our stuff. Not true at all lol (and I'm sure it's the same way for others mentioned like A2A and Majestic too) - half of my job after we release the 777 is going to be responding to tickets and posts about how we got this or that little thing wrong and how disappointed some person is. As hard as we try to include everything, there's going to be some subset of the users whose favorite feature on the entire airplane is the one little thing we didn't include. Happens every single time and always will.

[Manny 1,293]

Yep, I'm one of those. Don't get me wrong, what companies like PMDG and A2A do is phenomenal, and I respect it, to be honest, I wish I could invest the time to be able to fly things like the NGX, because I'm sure that at some level it's rewarding. However, I am likely never to buy one of either company's products, I'm not after real flight training, I don't have time to train myself to be able to use them properly, and these are furthermore some of the most expensive addons as well. Now, I'm not bitter about them existing, If you guys love that level of detail, more power to you. I will be upset though, if someone makes an aircraft that fits my level of detail, does it well, and ends up getting slagged off by the avsim community because it doesn't model every switch of the original.

 

I haven't bought any of their aircraft, but I've been intrigued by the Alabeo stuff. decent looking, good flying, low maintenance addon aircraft for around 20 bucks each. while the parent company makes more detailed models for more (No, I'm not comparing Carenado to A2A, but their aircraft have more detailed systems than Alabeo) I have no trouble imagining that a market exists for such models of commercial and business aircraft as well. It pains me that I've waited for years for a good Dash-8 and now that it's here, its systems heavy, and 70 bucks.

That's a very interesting post and educational for me. I think Aerosoft understand there are many customers who fall in that segment and they cater to that.

 

Although I prefer heavily authentic and system modeled aircrafts like PMDG does, I don't use all the systems as they would in the real world.

 

In the upcoming 777 I'd be glad that I would have to go through all the process to go from Dark state to take off state.... and I am glad that is the case and would be willing t pay for it.....but guess what, 95% of the time I am going to load the 777 as already started condition. I don't want my Sim experience to be actual work. No one is paying me oodles of money to fly a 777.. So I just want to lick the cream from the Orios. Ha Ha! But I want the option of flying it as I should a real aircraft as possible and I am willing to pay for it.

 

I have spent lots of time learning to fly the PMDG 747 from start to finish... and I love it...but 9 out of 10 times I like it started and ready.... I'd do 4 or 5 landings (Manually) in my favorite airport addons if I don't have too much time for simming. Thats why I hate it when I get an aircraft that forces you to fly by the book and don't give you the option to yes...jump in and fly.

 

[Tabs 2,790]

Manny, we recognize that most people do what you do and that's why we include both options in the tutorials - with the NGX for instance the first tutorial shows you the steps that get you in the air within a few minutes without going through the whole cold and dark startup. The second more advanced tutorial has all of the super in depth stuff that a real crew would do. We certainly don't intend our products to be only for people who want real flight training as Shawn implied they are.

[mmann 72]

 

 

We certainly don't intend our products to be only for people who want real flight training as Shawn implied they are.

 

I think Shawn was thinking that if the product wasn't being used to the fullest extent, a person would be paying more than they should for the product.