I don't have a problem with A2A covering their &@($* as far a liability is concerned by charging more for the Prepar3D license than the FSX. I take issue with that argument being used to justify the difference in price of the C172 license for the academic version of P3D Vs the Professional version. Based on the liability argument you would think that academic version of the C172 should be more expensive than the Professional version for two reasons. Reason 1: A student would be more apt to be able to pin a bad habit they had that caused a real world accident on something they learned in a simulator than a seasoned pro. I can tell you that at my flying club student pilots are directed to get the go ahead from the CFI before they use a simulator for training for that very reason. Licensed pilots have no such restrictions placed upon them. Reason 2: And this applies to most of the P3D V2 Academic license holders. Purchasing the Academic license for P3D V2 when you do not in fact qualify for it indicates that you exercise and demonstrate exactly the kind of poor judgement and character respectively that would make you a bad and dangerous pilot if you ever decided to abandon your cheap mindedness and get a real pilots license. To cut a long story short your the kind of person who thinks you can get away with it. In a real plane people like this kill themselves and their passengers.

 

So based on reason 1 and 2 above A2A should charge  more for the Academic License for the C172 than Professional License because they are far much more likely to find themselves on the receiving end of a lawsuit from a holder of the Academic license then the Professional license. The mark of a professional is that they take responsibility for their own actions and don't look to blame someone else:-)

 

Don't get me wrong I have no gripe with subsiding the legitimate academic user. I.e. an undergraduate in full time education. That could be anyone from kinder garden to a full time undergraduate from university to community college.

 

An LM spokes person made clear sometime back that the Professional version of P3D V2 could be purchased by anyone interested in learning about aviation and thats the version that hobbyist who does not qualify for academic should be buying. The vast majority of which will never fly a real C172 and the Academic should be buying after they graduate and nolonger qualify for the academic version. (Does LM allow for an upgrade paying the difference once you graduate? Will A2A also have that facility?) 

 

What grinds my gears is as I stated above wink wink nudge nudge the majority of Academic license holders do not qualify for it and I am then not only subsidizing the legitimate student but also the kind of people who are not the right stuff.

 

As More developers start to implement this policy the greater the need for LM to require those who are purchasing an academic license to prove they are Undergraduate Students. It is not difficult to implement this and If LM do it, it means that none of the third party developers need to do it.

Alan, Redbird uses P3D across the board for all their products. They began with FSX, migrated to ESP1, and now use P3D for new builds, IIRC.

Without wanting to reopen a can of sleeping dogs (apologies, but that's my all-time favorite mixed metaphor), the blurring of lines between professional and consumer is the basic thing we're all struggling with.

 

Understood, thought I think much (not all, but much) of the angst some have is misplaced.  'nuff said about that.

 

BTW, I love mixed metaphors, so feel free to open cans of sleeping dogs when replying to my posts any time.  Kerchunk - WOOF! :lol:

 

Scott

 

 

BTW, I love mixed metaphors, so feel free to open cans of sleeping dogs when replying to my posts any time.  Kerchunk - WOOF!

 

We'll burn that bridge when we come to it.

 

 

We'll burn that bridge when we come to it.

 

Just be sure you've got all your ducks on the same page before you do.

 

Scott

There is a Canadian TV comedy show called Trailer Park Boys....while the humor and language of the show is certainly colorful, they do come of up with great 'metaphors'...known as 'Rickyisms'

 

Worst case Ontario

Get two birds stoned at once

It doesn't take rocket appliances to know how...

:biggrin:

TJ

Are people serious when they talk about liabilities from there products used in training,have they stopped flying exams where they test your knowledge/skill at flying,this to me sounds like bull poop ,surely if you learn anything technical/professional  you Follow a professional course and follow a licensed method of training and take the correct exams to prove you are proficient and capable  of  being awarded the required qualification,the best these products will do is allow you to practice what you are being taught or could I  obtain a pilots license with out all those hrs and costs in a real Aircraft ?,it is also  funny that the developers who did not/would offer support for so long know see it as the next big thing in flight slimming and feel it is so big an technical improvement they need to charge for it,but we always have the answer if we feel their actions are unfair,

peter

 

 

Are people serious when they talk about liabilities from there products used in training

 

Good points, but the sad fact is that people sue people (and companies), and the suits are costly to defend.  The general aviation industry in the US was nearly put out of business in the 1980s and early 1990s because of product liability claims, until the US Congress provided a shield.  More here.

Back to A2A ... it would be nice if they did toss in a little something extra with the Professional version ... LM does with the Professional Plus, ok so it's not much, but it is something  B)

 

BTW, has anyone bent the prop's in the A2A C-172?  I have, trying to put her down on a sandbar that was too short and nosed over ... doooh ... thank goodness for simulations!   Anyway, that might be a nice feature for a professional version, enhance the damage modeling a little.

 

Cheers, Rob. 

They will probably enhance the damage Model for the Gamers using the Academic Version for entertainment  and use the extra premium us serious hobbyist are going to pay to cover the development costs for that. :-) The flight sim community is starting to bare a striking resemblance to a society with a Liberal government.

I see A2A are going to penalize those P3D users who where honest and shelled out the $200 for the appropriate license that they where qualified for and reward the no doubt majority of Academic license holders who do not qualify for the Academic license by giving them a discount. I really hope LM start locking for proof of eligibility for the Academic license so those who where honest don't continue to have to pay for the addons of those who where dishonest. Based on hundreds of posts I've read here and on the LM site I would say that most who purchased the Academic license for P3D do not qualify for it :-|

LM don't care. They never have. This whole Academic license thing was to give everybody a shot at p3d without stepping on the toes of the legal agreement that they have with MS.

That's it, plain and simple.

I'm amazed that we still have this Eula fiasco within these forums. LM don't care yet on here the debate is laughable at best and damaging at worst.

Based on armchair lawyers and addon makers who clearly have way too much money to spend on legal advice in a system designed to make money for lawyers by the hour, we may manage to screw this whole thing up for everybody yet! Bravo everyone, keep it up!

A2A should of sent this announcement back to the PR department before release.

 

More like... The proffesional version will be $X but for all you

struggling students out there the will be a discount price of $Y.

 

 

gb.

What a load of crap this is... All I want to say about this is that this has nothing to do with the right interpretation of licenses but only with the fear of being sued. Can't blame them (or for instance PMDG) for that but it's annoying that honest P3D Pro-users has to pay for all this while illegal Academic users get things cheap. But hey, who said life is fair...

What a load of crap this is... All I want to say about this is that this has nothing to do with the right interpretation of licenses but only with the fear of being sued. Can't blame them (or for instance PMDG) for that but it's annoying that honest P3D Pro-users has to pay for all this while illegal Academic users get things cheap. But hey, who said life is fair...

 

Those who decided to be dishonest already saved $140, saving $20 more isn't that much. I agree that they should've taken into account the amount of users who got the Academic licence without qualifying for it.

 

Besides, you might be able exchange your FSX licence for a P3D Professional licence without the extra cost, though I don't think that this has been clarified.

 

 

Besides, you might be able exchange your FSX licence for a P3D Professional licence without the extra cost, though I don't think that this has been clarified.

 

I've read that but I presume pro-users will have to pay extra for that. We'll see though. But if I am going to get their upcoming Piper does depend on how things work out right now. Most addon devs don't charge extra for pro-users so why should A2A?