23 minutes ago, Chock said:

Seems developers can't win with some of you guys: They can either hit a deadline and be accused of rushing something out untested, or which lacks depth: Or, they can take their time and get accused of lagging and a lack of communication if they don't issue up to the minute news every time they type a line of code.

Really guys, you've put up with FSX for eleven years, surely DTG missing a deadline by a day or so doesn't warrant immediately having a tantrum about it. 

I, in all honesty, am lookng forward to what DTG come out with, when they do.  MSFS has been the only Flightsim I have flown for any period of time, have dabbled with Xplane and others, but always come back to MSFS, which I have used since probably 4.0 (or so),  I can't remember exactly which one I first used, but I do know that the scenery was bad (triangles for mountains, for example) compared to what you get with FSX, and the only way I could fly long distance was VOR/NDB to VOR/NDB, but that only worked in the US.  Made for an interesting flying experience.

For now, will cruise along with FSX, and when DTG do eventually release something, will also try it out.  Or, if they don't, guess will move onto something, either way, I must be able to fly my PMDG fleet in it.

 

 

 

I think its not the case of a couple of days, it is just that the deadline repeatedly gets put back.

Well yeah, they may have put their deadline back, but I don't see why anyone should get irate about it, after all, there are far more serious things in the world to get narked off about, and a post about a potential bit of news or some such is in no way a contract with anyone, nor something they have sworn in blood to adhere to.

I can certainly understand when people get annoyed at service updates and patches for existing software getting delayed or taking a long time to show up, because that's when people have actually spent money and are not receiving the service they have paid for. That can be particularly annoying if a company bangs out a new product before sorting out an outstanding issue with something which has already been bought by people - yes, I'm looking at you Caranedo/Alabeo lol - but that's not the case with DTG's forthcoming sim product, neither has it been the case with their Flight School sim or FSX-SE. So if their new flight sim is taking longer to arrive than they projected, it speaks louder than any press release could, in saying that they are working on it rather than rushing it out the door. Given the number of software products these days which get released in an obviously rushed out fashion in order to grab some cash even before that product is of an acceptable quality, then a company which is not doing that is to be admired rather than admonished.

Hi guys

It is totally understandable that some of you are frustrated, however even something as seemingly simple as talking about the new sim is not something we can rush. It's not just development we have to consider, but business and legal elements as well (aka the boring stuff). Unfortunately it's usually the boring stuff that gets in the way of the fun stuff like announcing titles and showing gameplay.

I just want to make it clear that we really appreciate the patience you have shown so far, and your ongoing enthusiasm for what we are doing . To those of you who are frustrated, I offer you our deepest apologies for the delays - it's no fun being disappointed, but we are doing great things here and I can't wait to share them with you once we are able to. 

Aimee

22 minutes ago, DTG_Aimee said:

Hi guys

It is totally understandable that some of you are frustrated, however even something as seemingly simple as talking about the new sim is not something we can rush. It's not just development we have to consider, but business and legal elements as well (aka the boring stuff). Unfortunately it's usually the boring stuff that gets in the way of the fun stuff like announcing titles and showing gameplay.

Aimee

This is a good point, i.e. it's all very well someone knocking out a freeware Piper Aztec or some such, but in a commercial product, and the litigious world we live in these days, Piper may want a licensing fee if their logo is on the yoke, or even if it just looks a lot like an Aztec, as may all the makers of those realistic-looking avionics in the cockpit if they look or function in a manner similar to the real gizmos. Stick some realistic-looking Dunlop 6.00-6 tires on it, and guess who you're gonna be getting a phone call off if you don't ask for permission, and even Lycoming might get in on the act when you can't even see an engine under that nicely modeled cowling lol. Granted, some manufacturers take a more enlightened view that it constitutes free advertising and may even convince a flight simmer to buy the real aeroplane somewhere down the line, but not all of them are smart enough to realise that is the case. A good example of that was Flight 1's ATR-72 - the real ATR company liked it so much, they used to give out free copies of it on CD to people who toured their factory.

But as for Gulfstream, well, if you've got a few million quid to spare...

 

Sad to hear that there are no news today, I was really excited (well, I am still excited to hear something about the new sim, even if not today, but in the future).

But in my opinion: take your time and create a working sim, it is more important to me, that I do not have to make it run without bugs or optimize it, because this is the annoying thing and costs a lot of time, which I even could use for flying.

Hi Aimee, any chance that some information can be released i.e. the expected number of aircraft types? DTG wouldn't need to release make and models for licensing reasons. Really disappointed to hear this news again, been reading everything I can since the announcement of this game last February, can't comprehend why DTG is unable to announce any kind of detail with a preamble that says everything listed is liable to change. With no image assets or in-game experience information released in over 12 months it's like we're paying attention to a ghost of a game. 

54 minutes ago, Phalanx said:

Hi Aimee, any chance that some information can be released i.e. the expected number of aircraft types? DTG wouldn't need to release make and models for licensing reasons. Really disappointed to hear this news again, been reading everything I can since the announcement of this game last February, can't comprehend why DTG is unable to announce any kind of detail with a preamble that says everything listed is liable to change. With no image assets or in-game experience information released in over 12 months it's like we're paying attention to a ghost of a game. 

Hi Phalanx,

In announcing something like this, it's not just the information we put out that needs to be considered, but what questions will be asked as a result. What we definitely don't want is confusion as a result of unclear communication.

We would much rather be fully prepared to give out detailed information and respond to the questions which follow clearly and directly. Putting out vague messaging which may turn out not be accurate contributes to speculation and doesn't do us (or you) any favors. 

Having to delay comms is frustrating (not just for you, but also for me - I wanna talk about it!) but there is a good reason for doing it. 

Apologies for any inconvenience caused,

Aimee

2 minutes ago, DTG_Aimee said:

Hi Phalanx,

In announcing something like this, it's not just the information we put out that needs to be considered, but what questions will be asked as a result. What we definitely don't want is confusion as a result of unclear communication.

We would much rather be fully prepared to give out detailed information and respond to the questions which follow clearly and directly. Putting out vague messaging which may turn out not be accurate contributes to speculation and doesn't do us (or you) any favors. 

Having to delay comms is frustrating (not just for you, but also for me - I wanna talk about it!) but there is a good reason for doing it. 

Apologies for any inconvenience caused,

Aimee

Aimee, thank you for the rather polite and direct responses.  I'm sure it's not easy to hold back what you really want to say, but I understand.  Would I be out of line to ask whether it would be fair to say that new information could be coming at FlightSimCon in June?

Any updates? 

To what?! 
If you mean, DTG Simulator please look here

(No offense, but come on, people... it's 1 page back)

2 hours ago, Phalanx said:

Hi Aimee, any chance that some information can be released i.e. the expected number of aircraft types? DTG wouldn't need to release make and models for licensing reasons.

As far as I recall, they said that there won't be choppers; not necessarily because the sim won't support rotary wings, but because there is nobody on their team who knows much about them. They were also unsure about whether they'd do airliners or leave that to third party developers, so my guess is that it'll probably be GA singles and twins, much like Flight School was, but with more expansion capabilities than that sim had. This, I hasten to add, is more speculation on my part than fact or any kind of insider knowledge, but I reckon it's a good bet that it won't be too far wrong.

19 hours ago, pmb said:

I am not a newcomer, I have been simming for more than 25 years now, I have flown nearly any sim around in this time span and I have seen many sims coming and going - some with tears in the eyes. I reserve the right to have a very bad feeling, if not about the sim than at least about customer communication.

I do not dispute any persons right to feel bad, nor do I even consider for even a moment censoring their expressions of disappointment here, so long as it is not inflammatory, profane, et cetera. What I do roll my eyes at however is a "Virgin Post" from some anonymous stranger (I know, that's redundant) that is entirely negative and provocative.

I too was disappointed with the DTG "Flying School" release, but I did not feel the need to write about my feelings. I simply uninstalled it and wrote it off as a business expense. Although the frame rates were astonishingly terrific, when I considered the near total lack of systems depth, such a high rate was no longer so surprising...

1 minute ago, n4gix said:

I simply uninstalled it and wrote it off as a business expense

Lucky you! lol

I tried to stay informed by following the forums dealing with DTGFS, because I was under the impression that we were getting something new.  Yeah, I know, I was gullible and naive, but hey, these days you can't help but be attracted to anything that touts itself as new and improved.  So I passed on DTGFS, but kept an ear to the rail about the developments of the new simulator that DTG was putting out, but with the delays and lack of credible and productive comments, I have to step back and just wait to see how this all unfolds. 

DTG Having Boeing as a partner one would think this gives them some scope on which aircraft they can include.

Ray Fry.