Had our time? You mean like AirlinerXP and Air Simmer?

 

We're doing fine - we're quiet because we're busy wrapping up the A320-X. Maybe because most of us at FSL have been developing MSFS products for around twenty years now, we have a different approach: call us old fashioned, but we believe in releasing a complete, tested product. Of course we could flood our forums with updates, screenshots, videos - but you won't get the product any faster. In fact, it derails our development as time then needs to be dedicated to such press releases.

 

What we're doing with the A320-X hasn't yet been accomplished for FSX. We're actually very proud of what we have accomplished in four years, and we're excited to see this project through to completion.

 

Take your time, there are many of us who appreciate the extraordinary efforts to which some developers, like yourselves, go to in order to produce add ons of the highest quality, and we don't mind the wait, knowing that this sort of quality takes time. Personally, I have lready added your A320 to my list of definite purchases.

Living in England most of the airlines fly Airbus with only one flying the B737. I looked at the Aerosoft version and although looks good, does seem to lack a few qualities that I would like.

 

I have been looking at the FSLabs version, myself wondering if it would ever see the light of day, or whether it will match up to more recent releases. After all product have started later and will, at the base, be a more modern start where as the FS Labs base is 4 years old. Such as the Majestic Q400 with it's external FDE. Only time will tell.

 

One thing that did put me off is some of the comments in this thread from the developers. To turn round and quote other developers who did not see light of day sounds more like desperations. You can quite see, after people waiting for these products, why 4 years after announcement with very little updates people can get worried. Many people have held of purchases because of your announcement and have nothing to show for it,

 

A simple, "We're sorry for the delay and lack of updates", then explain why you have not updated people.

 

I for one don't expect constant updates, some developers do, some don't. It is nice as a buyer to be able to plan your future purchases, however I can see why developers don't. For one you are showing an incomplete product, two you are showing your competitors your work and lastly you are taking development time.

 

But just bear in mind that the people you are arguing with are your future customers. They have a right to be annoyed if you tell people you are releasing a product and then leave people waiting. Maybe next time it would be better not to say anything until you are near the end of development, that way you wont get the criticism.

One thing that did put me off is some of the comments in this thread from the developers. To turn round and quote other developers who did not see light of day sounds more like desperations.

 

A simple, "We're sorry for the delay and lack of updates", then explain why you have not updated people.

Hi Craig,

 

My comment was merely to illustrate that we are still actively working on the A320-X, and also to remind people that this is not an easy aircraft to simulate - as others have tried and failed in the past. My intention was certainly not to put down those who have tried, on the contrary I only have admiration for them. The Airbus series have long had a reputation of a basic button pusher - takeoff, hit autopilot and do very little until finals. Whilst this may hold true in the basic sense, the A320 probably remains the most complex single isle jetliner in our skies today. We certainly underestimated the complexity of the aircraft, and the amount of work required to get the systems up and running properly - as I'm sure others have done too. In fact, if you read our forums - you'll see we stated exactly that earlier this year. I bet any of the developers working on various Airbus projects at the moment who have first hand experience at getting their simulation flying in FSX, will fully appreciate the hurdles that make this aircraft quite difficult to develop for a desktop simulation.

 

Right now we are maintaining our internal schedules and fast approaching beta. More news on that will follow in the coming weeks and I anticipate once we're in beta - we'll be ramping up publicity towards release and showing exactly what we've been working on these past four years.

 

Incidentally, our software isn't four years old - we're using the very latest technologies (C++11, for example) and many 'new tricks' that haven't been seen before in MSFS.

Right now we are maintaining our internal schedules and fast approaching beta. More news on that will follow in the coming weeks and I anticipate once we're in beta - we'll be ramping up publicity towards release and showing exactly what we've been working on these past four years.

Well thanks for that update Andrew I truly had given up on waiting for it.

 

There is only so long you will wait for a bus...before you buy a.....

Keep up the good work Andrew. FS needs a good a Airbus. Don't let the taunting bother you. Everyone always says they have given up but when it's released its funny how they are the first to purchase it. No one has given up.

Thank you Andrew for your reply and I do appreciate the work you are doing, the problems that happen during production and the fact that the time scale has to be extended. Having done programming before I know that you start with a vision and as you go not only does the vision expand, but the goal tends to be harder to get and needs more work then expected.

 

My point wasn't about the work you are doing, it was the fact that you have people upset about the lack of updates and after 4 years, people start having doubts. It is good customer service to be humble and just apologise, not to quote other products and try and defend yourself. Like a said, a simple "Sorry for the lack of updates but....". You could have even added "There are a few more updates on our Facebook page, in case you missed them".

 

The only people that are to blame for this is yourselves. I totally agree with not giving release dates, or wanting to leave development to make announcement but you can't moan when people start having doubts, especially as there are other versions on the market that have been released quicker.

 

The fact that you say that the programming and new tricks are up to date is the point exactly. I, like many others did not know this, but your lack of updates don't tell people. Your future customers will only make assumptions if they have no other information. I know that you are not the only developer who does this.

 

I am not being funny other this as I am looking forward to a new bus with all the features, it was just a point that, as a future customer I look at how the forum is answered and whether, should I have a problem, I will be treated with respect. Many developer fail on this point, some like FS2Crew, MSE and a few other excel.

Will this be allowed to be installed into P3Dv2 before the actual P3Dv2 release ? Or will an EULA block this. Just wondering as I know some developers allow it and some don't. Not trying to start a debate, just would like to know before hand, as I own the AXE, but have been looking at this for a while now and you guys seem to have a good reputation. 

My point wasn't about the work you are doing, it was the fact that you have people upset about the lack of updates and after 4 years, people start having doubts. It is good customer service to be humble and just apologise, not to quote other products and try and defend yourself.

Hi Craig,

 

I think there might be some confusion here. The post I was initially replying to, as I read, was stating that our product had been in development for 'too long'. I fail to understand how such a conclusion could be reached, given the lack of any high fidelity Airbus simulations for MSFS to date. We are in uncharted waters - how long is too long? The NGX took 4 years, did it not? What about the Level-D 767? PSX? Yes there are other versions that have been released quicker, but these are not as detailed as the A320-X, nor are they marketed as such.

 

We have been consistent with our updates, and whilst these may not have been as detailed or as frequent as some might have liked, we are limited on what we can show given the competition in this small market place (and by completion, I'm not only referring to those working on A320 aircraft at this time). We did give a, at the time - rather uneducated guess at a completion date, which was later retracted and we offered our reasonings and apologies in a forum post pinned on our website. Since then you'll understand why we've been slightly less forthcoming with information. Of course, we are consumers too - and can completely understand how frustrating it can be to be on the other side of the fence. Fortunately now, the wait is almost over.

 

Great to hear you're looking forward to the A320-X. I'd love to hear your initial thoughts if you'd like to drop me a mail sometime.

 

All the best.

Will this be allowed to be installed into P3Dv2 before the actual P3Dv2 release ? Or will an EULA block this. Just wondering as I know some developers allow it and some don't. Not trying to start a debate, just would like to know before hand, as I own the AXE, but have been looking at this for a while now and you guys seem to have a good reputation.

Hi William,

 

This is something our legal advisors are still looking into. I suggest monitoring our forum as we're likely to advise our position on P3D nearer to the time of release.

PSX will be released in a few days :-)

 

For me, who completely gave up on FSX and X-Plane, the only Airbus alternatives are:

 

- FSLabs A3XX

- http://www.a3xxflightdeck.com/ also fully compatible with  FMGS database format ARINC 424

 

the 2nd being too expensive, even if very professional....

Andrew,

 

I understand where you are coming from, I also understand the time it takes for development. It is not a case of how long it takes, it's how long your customers perceive it takes. Time goes quicker when there are constant updates, slower when you do not hear anything.

 

Different developers have different attitudes towards customers, some release a version that is not finished, state this then release updates, such as Blackbox. Some release lower versions then updates with more features, such as Aerosoft and some don't release until the product is complete and does everything it needs to, such as PMDG.

 

Some developers are in constant communication with it's customers through out the process, some keep quite, some release updates only when something new is to be added.

 

This is the developers choice and people should respect that, I myself hate the "when will it be released" post, however these will surface and so will the "is it still being done" post. There are so many products that have been advertised, with all sort of claims, that never see the night of day, RC5 being one of them. The grander the description is the greater chance of it being cancelled, some goals get too much to reach, sometimes home life makes a difference. People don't know until you tell them.

 

I understand what you was saying in the post, I understand the problems and delays, I understand why you don't make constant updates, but you have to make allowances for some people and you have to be a little humble when dealing with them. I am a 40+ year old man with a thick skin. Some people take offence and will never even look at your product because of comments.

 

It's just my opinion, I meant no offence. I may be wrong, it was just some friendly advice.

 

Like I said, I am waiting with patient breathe to look at your model. I would have bought you Concorde model, unfortunately I have a thing about aircraft that are not in service. That and the fact of having a family to look after limits the money I can spend. 

 

Maybe because most of us at FSL have been developing MSFS products for around twenty years now,

 

1994? Mmmm.

1994? Mmmm.

What's wrong with 1994?  The Flight Sim product goes back to 1979, possibly earlier.  94 would put it at around FS5.0, my first copy was FS3.0 on the Amiga.

yeah but making addons, even free ones, did not begin to take off until FS98 and beyond. So unless Bruce Artwick is on the team, this statement is "fluff".

I remember Flight Simulator for the ZX Spectrum. No add-ons, no VC, no ATC, no AI traffic, solid ground in either green or blue, but on the plus side no OOMS. It had 8 colours and 8bit sound out of one little speaker. Power was on a pink bar, fuel was next to in as a bar and a total of 5 gauges. Ages to load from tape but was worth every minute.

I very much respect FS Labs for just doing their work and not giving people the big song and dance pr routine for years on end.   I look forward to their Airbus very much so, when the subject comes up, but I don't think about it very often.  One day I'm going to log on to Avsim, and it will be ready, and it will be a pleasant surprise, not something that I've been getting all antsy about, or frustrated because I wanted it yesterday.