VRS F/A-18E and its tacpack has been release for P3D academic

[Lorby_SI 2,038]

VRS cannot tell if the end user is using P3D Pro for commercial purposes. You cant exactly expect them to take your word for it. So if you want to run on Pro you have to pay a Pro price. If you want to run on academic you will get the academic price. No commercial user would want the watermark.

 

Funny that. As a normal person with a daytime job I'm not eligible for the academic license - but i'm not a professional user either. I would love to buy the Superbug and Tacpack. But I can't, because I'm not entitled to the academic if I want to stay straight. Students and pupils on the other hand are supposed to have little money, how are they going to cash out $100 for the bug? I don't really get it.

[Mickeyj 35]

Either way unfortunately you gonna break the EULA. That is hilarious

[Alan_A 1,650]

At the risk of repeating - IRL, "professional" and "commercial" are not necessarily the same thing.

 

VRS is entitled to its own interpretation, of course.

[Mickeyj 35]

At the risk of repeating - IRL, "professional" and "commercial" are not necessarily the same thing.

 

VRS is entitled to its own interpretation, of course.

 

That is true and should be respected. It is their choice and decision however it is not quite comprehensible for a lot of users including me. But this is our decision.

[JB3DG 225]

At the risk of repeating - IRL, "professional" and "commercial" are not necessarily the same thing.

 

VRS is entitled to its own interpretation, of course.

This. Perhaps I should have stated it more plainly....VRS doesn't offer "professional" licenses like LM does. They only offer "commercial" licenses for P3D pro and as they need to protect their commercial interests there, they can only sell non commercial licenses for the Academic version of P3D.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

It looks a heck of lot better in DX11 also. The explosions and smoke effects are far more realistic. Keep in mind that it is not likely that anyone would run TacPack aircraft and or the Bug in FSX with DX10, because the FLIR didn't work properly. That detracts a bit from the realism. So far, all the TacPack-enabled aircraft that I have except one work perfectly in P3d for me. That includes all of Dino C.'s great freeware planes (the F-35 Lightning variants, the F-14D Tomcat, the T-45C Goshawk, the Aermacchi MB-326 and the S3B Viking) the Aerosoft F-14 and of course the VRS SuperBug. People claim that the IRIS A-10 Warthog works also, but I am having trouble getting the gun to fire. It's probably just me. IRIS is working on a new version of the A-10 just for P3d.

[rparson99 32]

The Vrs F18 is on fantastic display in P3d. The intricacy of the 3d modelling comes alive with shadow and lighting effects adding the required highlights! If a modeller is going to go to this extent to model features... anything less is just a veil.

[shipdriver 20]

This. Perhaps I should have stated it more plainly....VRS doesn't offer "professional" licenses like LM does. They only offer "commercial" licenses for P3D pro and as they need to protect their commercial interests there, they can only sell non commercial licenses for the Academic version of P3D.

By stating more plainly, you actually showed why it is wrong. Since VRS doesn't offer professional licenses, they shouldn't be tying their product to LM's license structure...at all.

Are the VRS non-commercial licenses only for academic use since they are tied specifically to the academic license? VRS should feel free to "protect their commercial interests", they just chose a poorly-thought out and illogical method which unfairly penalizes numerous potential customers and in a way that no one else in the industry does. I'm sorry, but not a single person here or on VRS' forums has been successful at reconciling VRS policies with logic, common sense and the English language. Most defenders of the policy (whether those not affected by it or those who created it) resort to irrational statements that frankly don't make sense or just a "that's how it is".

In a world that makes sense, P3D Pro would be required for the VRS commercial license and not the other way around, and non-commercial wouldn't be tied to any LM license since the vast majority of classes of users under LM's Pro license are not commercial. Now if you feel there are potential losses, then charge a little extra for the LM Pro license like A2A which, since non-commercial users vastly outnumber commercial ones, potential losses from thieving commercial operators are mitigated or eliminated. There are lots of ways to sensibly do this, but VRS appears to stubbornly refuse to do so. Do I like paying more for a Pro license from A2A? Not really, but at least I don't feel like they are being irrational. I hate to break it to you, but almost all of the high end add-on makers have commercial channels and none resort to shenanigans like this. To recap, if VRS refuses to align their license structure with LM's, they should not tie their non-compliant licenses to LM's licenses at all.

[ivo09 23]

I would love to buy the bug for P3D, but not if I have to spend another $60 buying an Academic license on top of the Professional one I already own. This is stupid.

[Lorby_SI 2,038]

Obviously dropping virtual bombs on your home town and shooting down passenger airliners has some major educational value - as it is not entertainment of course, and very few people do this professionally or need to train for it. The whole thing just escapes me.

[EngineRoom 205]

I'd like to get it, but I have a pro license so I'm locked out by VRS. It's a shame really because the Super Hornet is an extremely well crafted addon, so much so I could maybe, possibly just swallow forking out another $110 for it.

 

Alas, as I've been told so many times, the lack of an entertainment license for P3D is a non-issue and stuff like this isn't a problem because it won't happen.

[rparson99 32]

Gents... Not everyone flying the NGX in p3d are doing it for training :-}

 

Similarly not everyone flying vrs is trying to bomb their home town....

 

.... it is not entertaining to have to edit a config file... or having to know what adjusting fiberframe does...

 

To maximize the sims operation you have to raise your expectation on having to do some homework.... and once you do that.... you have left entertainmentville.

 

Contrast that to xbox. There is nothing left but entertainment when everyone gets the same Rendition aside from monitor.... they even get the same interaction through the xbox controller.

 

We almost had a version as such... called Ms flight.

 

Btw.. notice the realism obtained in allot of the xbox titles lately... some would say "not for entertainment".

[vonmar 123]

For FSX I only did some training with VRS Bug and VLSO .. I have FSX TacPack but just never got into it.

Interesting to learn that P3D TacPack is working properly with other quality P3D freeware aircraft.

I am interested mostly in navigation and carrier landings.

Can anyone comment on VRS Bug/TacPack P3D version doing carrier landings with VLSO?




 
 

[Jimmy RFR 406]

Wowsers, a lot of people get up in arms about pricing...

 

While VRS may lose some sales by enforcing both the version used, as well as the requirement for both the Superbug plus the TacPack, it's very likely that it's far more worthwhile for them to protect their commercial interests.

 

People tend to forget that niche aircraft like this sell in the hundreds of units, not in the thousands, and certainly not in the tens of thousands.  So, depending on pricing, it may only take a handful or two of commercial clients (whose fee may scale with number of installations, service required, role specific programming / functions, etc) to equal a lot of entertainment customers.  Us entertainment customers may not like the reality of the situation, but the alternative would be for them to simply not offer it for the P3D platform.

 

Unfortunately, I'm sure many developers are also looking at P3D as being a labor-intensive platform to support.  Custom programmed aircraft like the Superbug are going to require updates as P3D moves through point releases and adds / changes features.  While it also sucks for our wallets, there are likely developers such as VRS that are considering the expense of that future labor, and front-loading the purchase price to account for it.

 

I'm not a commercial developer, so I can't speak for them, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that a developer who releases the same addon for FSX and for P3D, given equal pricing, is going to see a lower profit margin in P3D, even if it's just time spent bug-testing your release in every new version of P3D.

 

Also, this idea of an 'industry standard' is utter nonsense.  This 'industry' is so tiny, and the sales accumulated by the developers (excepting a very, very small handful) so small, that it's completely reasonable for each developer to decide how they want to market and sell their products.

[Alan_A 1,650]

This 'industry' is so tiny, and the sales accumulated by the developers (excepting a very, very small handful) so small, that it's completely reasonable for each developer to decide how they want to market and sell their products.

 

Agree with all your points - which is why I'm maintaining a $5 hedge position in FSX;SE.  I love P3D but it doesn't hurt to have a lifeboat.