FSX-SE Kudos to DoveTail and Vendors

[mgh 89]

Of course that's not going happen.

[robert young 2,897]

Great, "DTG & DLCs" has become the new "P3D Licensing".

 

Stop it, guys. Seriously. Stop.

 

Do please calm down. Posts like yours assume that every discussion must be shut down because you say so. In fact quite a lot of knowledge is coming out here. There is nothing wrong with knowledge. No-one has been aggressive, and no-one is violently disagreeing. In their effort to prevent perceived aggravation, some moderators step in as an over-reaction to posts exactly like yours, when in fact there was no unreasonable behaviour or rude, intolerant posts. Your very words "Stop it guys" implies that there is some desperately violent argument going on. There isn't. It is an exchange of views, so far polite and civil. if you don't want to contribute then look at other posts. In the meantime, there is nothing bad happening here, except an exchange of intormation and views. ok? 

[robert young 2,897]

Sure, if a company develops a new sim, the devs are there to provide addons. What other rights would they have? Like giving one of my clients rights to tell me how to run my company? Nah, not going to happen…

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nuance

[mgh 89]

Regardless of nuances, any company has the right to select its suppliers and the price it chooses to pay them.

[robert young 2,897]

Regardless of nuances, any company has the right to select its suppliers and the price it chooses to pay them.

 

Quite right, almost. Prices and contracts are usually subject to negotiaion. In fair contracts, there is no imbalance between the parties. Both have equal bargaining power. If they don't then contract law steps in and declares the contract void.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability

[JB3DG 225]

Sure its their right....But that doesn't justify their abuse of it at any prospective developer's expense. In the moral aspect of it, just because someone has the power and right to dictate what their underlings must give them doesn't make abuse of that power right. And from a financial perspective, if they want to prosper, being considerate would help them a great deal. Unfortunately they cannot see past the short term benefits rather than the long term. So should they offer sour deals for their new sim, it will be a double loss when 3rd party devs refuse to work with them.

[Bjoern 1,158]

Do please calm down. Posts like yours assume that every discussion must be shut down because you say so. In fact quite a lot of knowledge is coming out here. There is nothing wrong with knowledge. No-one has been aggressive, and no-one is violently disagreeing. In their effort to prevent perceived aggravation, some moderators step in as an over-reaction to posts exactly like yours, when in fact there was no unreasonable behaviour or rude, intolerant posts. Your very words "Stop it guys" implies that there is some desperately violent argument going on. There isn't. It is an exchange of views, so far polite and civil. if you don't want to contribute then look at other posts. In the meantime, there is nothing bad happening here, except an exchange of intormation and views. ok? 

 

This thread started out on a positive note on Dovetail's work on FSXSE and deviated towards a discussion on policy regarding 3rd party content for a flight simulator that isn't even released yet. With a different wrap on the same core arguments and statements over and over and over again.

 

If the role of an independent 3rd party developer is so important to you guys, why don't you directly discuss this with the CEO of Dovetail? Because that's where the big decisions are happening. Not in a thread in a random flight simulator forum.

[htuna 2]

Robert, if their dealings are not fair then do not work with them. I'm sure their en devour will fail if they do not have the same awesome add ons available that FSX has had for the last few years. And there is no reason that they should get a higher percentage, nevermind ridiculously higher percentage when all the work is done by the developer.

 

Yeah it's great there have been improvements. But if the addons which a lot of people in this niche have invested a lot of money in, do not work, then they will fail.

 

Your company is one of the best, in Product Quality and fair pricing, so don't stop doing what you do!

[tttocs 301]

 

 

If the role of an independent 3rd party developer is so important to you guys, why don't you directly discuss this with the CEO of Dovetail? Because that's where the big decisions are happening. Not in a thread in a random flight simulator forum.

 

I'm sure Rob understands this completely and it sounds as if Rob and others have discussed this with Dovetail (though doubtless not the CEO).  But Rob obviously wants the community to hear and understand his perspective, and for that I'm most grateful.  I've found this discussion useful and informative, and really don't understand your desire to stifle it.

 

I certainly understand if you're not interested in the discussion and don't care to participate, but the solution for that is pretty obvious.  That's not meant to be offensive, it's just that I really don't get why you want to stop what's been for the most part a reasoned and valuable discussion.

 

Scott

[Dash8Q4 4]

Great, "DTG & DLCs" has become the new "P3D Licensing".

 

Stop it, guys. Seriously. Stop.

+1

It's ridiculous isnt it? Makes me wonder what am I still doing around these forums.

[robert young 2,897]

Thanks Scott. The voice of reason, as always. 

 

I have already said several times that FSX-SE has been an improvement and already praised it. I, and others, have tried to also carefully explain why the core sim was being sold dirt cheap. What appears to be a triumph for the consumer is not always so or to coin a phrase: all that glitters is not gold.

 

If you search around the whole of Avsim and other websites you will see that a significant body of independent authors and developers are trying to tell consumers that things are simply not as they appear at first sight, and eventually the consequences will impact on consumers.

 

This is not a normal process of "let's negotiate a deal" so that the consumer receives decent value and quality addons. The whole process for some authors has been "before we even start sign this document in which you agree that not only can you not discuss the lousy terms we are giving you, but you cannot even discuss the fact that negotiations started". This is not a normal NDA. It is a gagging order with one sole purpose: to stop it being known what lousy terms are offered.

 

As a friend of mine intelligently pointed out, this is like saying "I am going to cut your ears off, but before I do I want you to sign this piece of paper agreeing that you cannot tell anyone that it was me who cut your ears off!"

 

Even that would not matter except that it is tied in with an implication that if you "play ball" we might cut you in when the time comes that we release a new sim whose addons we have complete control over, but if you do not.....etc. etc. 

 

Added to the mix are one or possibly more middlemen who have been going around initially claiming they exclusively represent DTG as their agent in negotiating deals, for yet another cut. In fact it turns out that these middlemen had no right to say they had any such exclusive authority. I wrote to DTG pointing this out but have not had a satisfactory written reply.

 

The consequences of all this will at some point have an impact on consumers, and I am a consumer as well as an author. I have tried to point out that you can see the consequences in the way that DTG has marketed train addons, the cost of which to the consumer, when totalled, comes to a staggering figure, but for which DTG has given extremely poor support. Either that or thousands of addon train product users are making things up.

 

This is a complete contrast to LM's P3d team's attitude which has been open, co-operative, encouraging and supportive, both to consumers and authors, and has involved no gagging, and no NDA's other than those which protect their intellectual property. The contrast with DTG could not be more obvious.

[Wobbie 938]

Thank you, Robert, for clarifying & for telling us how it is.

I'm sure this is much appreciated & clears up a lot of rumours for us.

 

All I can say is..."#####!" (pardon the exclamation!)

 

Keep up the good work, & thanks for what you have done for this 'interesting' hobby of ours.

 

Kind Regards,

Robin

[Pastaiolo 1,688]

 

 

The consequences of all this will at some point have an impact on consumers, and I am a consumer as well as an author. I have tried to point out that you can see the consequences in the way that DTG has marketed train addons, the cost of which to the consumer, when totalled, comes to a staggering figure, but for which DTG has given extremely poor support. Either that or thousands of addon train product users are making things up.

 

This is a complete contrast to LM's P3d team's attitude which has been open, co-operative, encouraging and supportive, both to consumers and authors, and has involved no gagging, and no NDA's other than those which protect their intellectual property. The contrast with DTG could not be more obvious.

 

 

While on a certain point i agree with your point of view, there are some facts to consider:

 

- I won't judge the percentages involved for the simple reason that i do not know you, nor DTG in that regard. You might try to push readers to think in a certain way as much as it might be DTG actually trying to hide some things.

 

- DTG distributed FSX on Steam, they are the ones opening up a new market to you, like it or not. And of course they are free to do it at their own terms. The result of which, we will see later on.

 

- What DTG did with trains, i believe, is a little different for a simple reason. Before DTG stepped in there wasn't a real market of payware addons for trains, even tho there were some relevant addons for, say, Train Simulator. More over, they offer frequent discounts (thanks to the fact they are in the Steam circuit now) every few months lowering the price of the addons by far.

Now take Flight Simulator instead, it's a series that goes back decades, with a market that managed to grow, developers offering payware addons of all times, an engine that hasn't been updated in years (which surely helps developers into not getting worried about updating their products each and every time something is changed on the core of FSX). FSX is still the main simulator out there and was being kept alive without official support, with an increasing competition with an active development (XPlane).

 

 

 

So in short, i am not saying things might go the way you think they will go. I am saying we are in no position to judge anything until we get to their new simulator. As for now, they have every right to deal with it as they please since it's their license, their action releasing FSX on Steam.

 

There is also another fact to consider. You still have access to the market since FSX won't be changed much and there is backward compability between addons used on FSX and FSX-SE (more or less). So it's not like you are cut off. No one is going to stop FSX-SE  customers to just buy your addons the way all of us have been doing it for the past years.

[robert young 2,897]

 So it's not like you are cut off. No one is going to stop FSX-SE  customers to just buy your addons the way all of us have been doing it for the past years.

 

Quite right. I never stated otherwise. 

[mgh 89]

To follow up up an some points:

 

Both have equal bargaining power. If they don't then contract law steps in and declares the contract void.

 

True but, as you say, the contract in void and both parties can walk away from it. It won't affect the amounts that are paid so it's really much no use.

 

The whole process for some authors has been "before we even start sign this document in which you agree that not only can you not discuss the lousy terms we are giving you, but you cannot even discuss the fact that negotiations started". This is not a normal NDA. It is a gagging order with one sole purpose: to stop it being known what lousy terms are offered.

 

I worked in construction engineering in the UK where those terms are standard in any NDA. In particular, they will cover the terms of conditions on offer - even if you think they are "lousy terms". No company is going to broadcast those terms to the world and, in particular, to other suppliers. It may be a surprise, but a company may chose to offer different terms and conditions to different suppliers depending on how much they need them.

 

Added to the mix are one or possibly more middlemen who have been going around initially claiming they exclusively represent DTG as their agent in negotiating deals, for yet another cut. In fact it turns out that these middlemen had no right to say they had any such exclusive authority.

 

Then I'm afraid you got conned by these middlemen.

 

I have tried to point out that you can see the consequences in the way that DTG has marketed train addons, the cost of which to the consumer, when totalled, comes to a staggering figure, but for which DTG has given extremely poor support. Either that or thousands of addon train product users are making things up.

 

DTGs business model appears by working given "the staggering figure" it appears to be earning from Train Simulator even though "DTG has given extremely poor support for thousands of addon train product users."  Perhaps DTG has decided that support is a low priority. It is possible they are right.

 

This is a complete contrast to LM's P3d team's attitude which has been open, co-operative, encouraging and supportive, both to consumers and authors, and has involved no gagging, and no NDA's other than those which protect their intellectual property. The contrast with DTG could not be more obvious.

 

Then why don't all developers refuse work with DTG but work with Lockheed Martin instead? Have all developers have actually refused to work with DTG or only some?

 

At the end-of-the-day, DTG will do what's in its own interests and I suspect that none of here will affect that. DTG put up its own money into a new simulator so that's it right.  If the developers had put up their money (and I understand that some thought about it),  they might have a different business plan. However they didn't and now have to live with reality - not might- have-been.