9 minutes ago, DTG_Aimee said:

That's fair enough. We aren't going to be all things to everyone, and it's such an exciting time to be a flight simmer with four major players in the space. Competition keeps us on our toes and it's a good thing for customers. 

(On a personal level I quite like Aerofly 2 - I find it relaxing!)

O yes, absolutely, this certainly is an exciting time and as I posted already (maybe elsewhere, I forgot) I am happy you are releasing FSW! It's a good thing indeed! And you can never please everybody, that's for sure. 

And yes, I also find Aerofly relaxing: that is why I fly nowadays. And so I can imagine others who are in this hobby for different reasons not liking Aerofly or preferring another sim. It is great to have so much options today!

my opinion? beat me if you want, but I think FSX is dead, and anything that will be built on it is OLD. There are so many engines out there to build up a new sim, costs money I know,  but trying to resurrect FSX more times again for me it's a fail. There is already another FS based on FSX that people is enjoing...

2 hours ago, Rimshot said:

Ofcourse! Naturally I do understand everybody has a different taste. If you don't like the landclass, vector, mesh and texture world Microsoft created, fine. Switch to an alternative, as you have done. I know which one it is Not directed at you personally, but the point I'm trying to make is that I very much dislike the fact a lot of comments are predominantly negative, only emphasizing things folks don't like, stressing what hasn't been changed, instead of acknowledging there have been changes for the better and that more things will change in the near and not so near future. I've said it in other posts as well; I try too look at this new project with a positive approach, I try to focus on the potential instead of shooting it down before it is even released, simply because not all issues have been addressed and the sim therefore has no right of existence.

Rimshot, I general I agree with you in regards to seeing the positive sides of things.

But, look at the facts. What is really new???

7 GA aircraft, raindrops and a rendering engine. Oh yes and an update UI.

A 'Next Gen' should have been 'Next Gen' period. But it's not!

I think we can only get a 'Next Gen' sim, if we criticize the heck out of them and not applaud them for a mediocre job. 

I applaud them for the raindrops and maybe for some of the planes, but it is not enough for me to get excited at all. 

1 minute ago, Silicus said:

Rimshot, I general I agree with you in regards to seeing the positive sides of things.

But, look at the facts. What is really new???

7 GA aircraft, raindrops and a rendering engine. Oh yes and an update UI.

A 'Next Gen' should have been 'Next Gen' period. But it's not!

I think we can only get a 'Next Gen' sim, if we criticize the heck out of them and not applaud them for a mediocre job. 

I applaud them for the raindrops and maybe for some of the planes, but it is not enough for me to get excited at all. 

agree.. better nothing than another copy of fsx, doing that we will never move on....

2 hours ago, Paraffin said:

The other side of this, is that they are putting it out here for Early Access, and they're asking for feedback. If the community only provides positive feedback, then that isn't very helpful unless it's perfect as-is.

I agree there should some balance, but if flight simmers don't ask for what they want, then they're just telling developers they're happy with the status quo. I don't ever plan to stop griping about the simplistic weather model, missing seasonal terrain, and unrealistic water colors in a certain other sim, for example. Not until they fix it. 😏

Well yes, ofcourse. My dislike is in the fact some of us are shooting DTG's effort down without having tried it, without being that simmer that gives positive and constructive critisism for DTG to build upon.

32 minutes ago, Silicus said:

Rimshot, I general I agree with you in regards to seeing the positive sides of things.

But, look at the facts. What is really new???

7 GA aircraft, raindrops and a rendering engine. Oh yes and an update UI.

A 'Next Gen' should have been 'Next Gen' period. But it's not!

I think we can only get a 'Next Gen' sim, if we criticize the heck out of them and not applaud them for a mediocre job. 

I applaud them for the raindrops and maybe for some of the planes, but it is not enough for me to get excited at all. 

I can see your point, but again. It is early access! It was not my point to argue that everyone should put on pink glasses and only praise this new sim (and I do think it is new in the sense it is a break with how the MS technology worked in the past) but it sure couldn't hurt to praise the efforts they are making. Ofcourse DTG needs critisism and feedback to make it better. That's why they are releasing it as EA as we all know. But there is a negative vibe around to not give this sim a chance at all, because of the state it is in now.

I'm with the argument in this link

https://www.helisimmer.com/articles/why-give-dovetail-games-flight-sim-world-chance/

Well...

"You can put lipstick on a pig ... but ... still a pig!"
(Sorry, I couldn't resist) 

22 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

I can see your point, but again. It is early access!

Haha, I don't think the 'two camps' will be able to convince each other (which btw ins't necessary at all) but as I said before: the problem has nothing to do with the sim being early access. Nothing at all. Let me put it in another way. The problem a lot of people are having here is that no matter if it is early acces or 'late access' or a finished product: it still is based on an old sim! That will never change. The MS FS foundation is here to stay. You WOULD have a very valid point if during the early access period the core engine would change because of user feedback but we all know for certain this will not change. You can call it early access as long as you want but it won't change any opinions because we know that what some (or a lot of) people would like to see changed will never ever change in this sim.

To quote from the link you posted: "On that point, this is an Early Access, a public Alpha / Beta, so we ALL need to keep that in mind as we explore what is released. Is it going to be perfect? No. Is it going to have everything we want at launch? No." He is missing the same point! What is the use of keeping in mind this is EA if we know for certain the changes we would like to see won't be coming? That is the point here and that is why quite a few simmers are disappointed and not interested, even without having used the sim themselves.

I don't think I can put it any clearer.

22 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

I can see your point, but again. It is early access!

I grow weary of dev's hiding behind "early access". In many cases, it reminds me of the guy saying "psst, hey, for only $xxx I can get you in on the ground level". You see way too much of it on Steam in my opinion. Let me say that in no way, shape, of form do I believe that's the intention of DTG. I just balk at "early access" anything.

I still want to remain optimistic with regards to DTG and FSW even if it's for selfish reasons (...wanting a true next gen simulator ).

9 minutes ago, Anders Gron said:

Well...

"You can put lipstick on a pig ... but ... still a pig!"
(Sorry, I couldn't resist) 

LoL...I just used this line in another post!

1 hour ago, J van E said:

Haha, I don't think the 'two camps' will be able to convince each other

J van E. Couldn't have said it better myself. I also agree with you other posts in this thread.

54 minutes ago, J van E said:

The MS FS foundation is here to stay. You WOULD have a very valid point if during the early access period the core engine would change because of user feedback but we all know for certain this will not change.

Exactly... so why bother complaining about it?  I find it interesting that the most vocal critics on this thread tend to be die-hard X-planers.  I guess this should come as no surprise since they have already made the decision to forego the FSX/P3D engine in favor of something different.  I've tried X-plane 11 and I understand the allure... it's a good-looking sim and the night-lighting is fantastic; but for me, it still lacks a lot of things under the hood that have been requested for years.  Using the "pig" analogy, would anybody argue that XP11 isn't also lipstick on a pig?  It's just a pig of a different sort.  Personally, I still like the old Microsoft pig, it has been a faithful companion for many years and, despite not being perfect, it has gotten even better with age.  That's why I think DTG's decision to build off of FSX was a wise one.  I consider FSW to be more of a "piglet"... it carries many of the traits that made the old sim so popular; but with the future promise of a next generation.

41 minutes ago, MadDog said:

 

We are on the same wavelength MadDog, well said!

7 hours ago, HighTowers said:

The raindrops look pretty sweet and nice to finally see with an FSX background although not sure why they never put the wipers on to clear the windshield.

Do you think that might be because precious few GA have wipers? Certainly none of them currently in FSW have 'em.

Nice video. Some things to like, and of course, some things to point out.

However, DTG seems committed and they are "listening", making changes etc. With this approach, it looks like a promising future for DTG as it will only get better over time.

We gave LM and LR 5+ years to evolve, lets see what DTG can do with their sim.

 

Folks, PLEASE quit quoting the entire post you are replying to! It just wastes screen space and slows down the system for those who are using mobile devices to read the forums.

Highlight everything in your quote that is unnecessary, then press the DELETE button on the keyboard.

Thank you in advance.

3 minutes ago, n4gix said:

Folks, PLEASE quit quoting the entire post you are replying to!

Hoo-bloody-ray!