Jordan King: First impressions

[vc10man 732]

@barrel_owl

Another well-thought out evaluative post on the topic in hand +1

[barrel_owl 304]

1 hour ago, Ceebee said:

I cannot believe all of the negativity about this sim.

If you can't believe it, then you clearly do not know this community. And indeed, your six posts here may be a good indication for such surprise.

Believe me, my friend. Each and every time a new simulator appeared on the horizon so far, it was always welcomed with a wave of destructive overcriticism and negativity even before it was released. It happened several years ago with Microsoft Flight, it happened two years ago when DTG announced their decision to invest in FSX and develop a new platform, it happened more recently when IPACS released AeroFly FS2 and it is still happening now, at least in part, with X-Plane, despite the long list of improvements introduced with version 11. When I read, here or on YouTube, comments like "FSW is already grounded" with a grin of self-satisfaction and smiling complaisance, in all honesty I ask myself if I am in a community of adults. It is not redundant to remind that we are a very small niche within the gaming community and that we strongly need to grow our user base and attract investors. Instead of encouraging the few software developers who decide to invest money and time into this complex market, our community appears to have an incredible capability to scare them and keep them away with preemptive criticism, speculation, unreasonable expectations, personal bias and partisan bickering.

I will be very happy to be proven wrong, but I strongly doubt this attitude will bring us very long. To be completely honest, I can't blame Microsoft for dropping us years ago and sometimes I wonder why smaller and bigger houses like IPACS, DTG and Laminar keep on investing money, time and resources in this market just to receive eggs on their faces, often even before Day 1. While I admire them, I do not envy them at all. I for sure wouldn't do it.

 

[Orlaam 306]

4 hours ago, barrel_owl said:

If you can't believe it, then you clearly do not know this community. And indeed, your six posts here may be a good indication for such surprise.

Believe me, my friend. Each and every time a new simulator appeared on the horizon so far, it was always welcomed with a wave of destructive overcriticism and negativity even before it was released. It happened several years ago with Microsoft Flight, it happened two years ago when DTG announced their decision to invest in FSX and develop a new platform, it happened more recently when IPACS released AeroFly FS2 and it is still happening now, at least in part, with X-Plane, despite the long list of improvements introduced with version 11. When I read, here or on YouTube, comments like "FSW is already grounded" with a grin of self-satisfaction and smiling complaisance, in all honesty I ask myself if I am in a community of adults. It is not redundant to remind that we are a very small niche within the gaming community and that we strongly need to grow our user base and attract investors. Instead of encouraging the few software developers who decide to invest money and time into this complex market, our community appears to have an incredible capability to scare them and keep them away with preemptive criticism, speculation, unreasonable expectations, personal bias and partisan bickering.

I will be very happy to be proven wrong, but I strongly doubt this attitude will bring us very long. To be completely honest, I can't blame Microsoft for dropping us years ago and sometimes I wonder why smaller and bigger houses like IPACS, DTG and Laminar keep on investing money, time and resources in this market just to receive eggs on their faces, often even before Day 1. While I admire them, I do not envy them at all. I for sure wouldn't do it.

 

That's a pretty insulting post you've made there.  Insinuating that MS closed down shop on ACES because of the community.  Try looking at the facts -  MS closed ACES and many other game development departments due to the financial downturn, internal management conflicts and development delays..  If the community were the reason MS were to close the doors, than they would have done so much sooner.  MS was truly innovative and brought new ideas and features into each version.  The community kept their product alive by allowing people like you and me to tweak or add software, both pay and free.  MS actually had the money and team to deliver new concepts, knowing full well that the fan-base were the reason the product was alive.  Add-ons were crucial in keeping people interesting in the product while they wait for a new version.  For you to malign the community for resistance to a DLC product is asinine. 

There are too many people who just don't understand the deleterious nature of DLC with respect to flight sim or other games.  I for one welcome new life in FS.  I have nothing against AeroFly, or X-plane, or even DTG.  They can do as they wish.  They just need to understand that the demand is with high end scenery, aircraft, and other features.  Until those companies realize that the drive is for as much realism as possible, they will be a lower tier earner.  XP for example has been around for 23 years!  They still have neglected ATC, Wx and AI.  Seriosuly?!  MSFS2002 and 2004 didn't give them the idea that people want those features?  X Plane would have a much larger following if it were to make some important changes to the features list.  

Here's the deal, it's the community that drives the market, not the companies.  Don't forget that.  It's elemental economics. 

[toprob 105]

24 minutes ago, Orlaam said:

That's a pretty insulting post you've made there.  Insinuating that MS closed down shop on ACES because of the community. 

That's certainly not what I took from the post, which seemed to me to make the point that luckily the flightsim developers see past the community negativity. Like barrel_owl, I've seen enough new sim releases to know that they follow a pattern, which at the moment for FSW is up to the phase where many are just parroting lists of negative reports they've read in passing, without giving any real thought to whether they are likely to be true, or even make sense, all before we ever get to see a working simulator. Sure, it will be financial considerations which determine whether FSW is a success, but it seems that some people are trying to influence this negatively already. I have my own thoughts on why people do this, which I won't put here -- now THAT would be insulting.

Barrel_owl's comments on one part of the community is spot-on. In some respects we appear to be closer to teenage gangs than adult simmers.

[Orlaam 306]

14 minutes ago, toprob said:

That's certainly not what I took from the post, which seemed to me to make the point that luckily the flightsim developers see past the community negativity. Like barrel_owl, I've seen enough new sim releases to know that they follow a pattern, which at the moment for FSW is up to the phase where many are just parroting lists of negative reports they've read in passing, without giving any real thought to whether they are likely to be true, or even make sense, all before we ever get to see a working simulator. Sure, it will be financial considerations which determine whether FSW is a success, but it seems that some people are trying to influence this negatively already. I have my own thoughts on why people do this, which I won't put here -- now THAT would be insulting.

Barrel_owl's comments on one part of the community is spot-on. In some respects we appear to be closer to teenage gangs than adult simmers.

He clearly said that he didn't blame MS for dropping us, and that's not what happened at all.  We appreciated MS and their platform.  Nevertheless, show me a community where negativity or divisiveness doesn't exist?  There isn't one.  I got out of ham radio because people were rude and malicious.  I've encountered it in the fly fishing community, motorcycle community, gun community, and electronic/computer world.  A lot of negativity stems from opinion. 

My resistance to this whole sim didn't start out that way.  I was excited to see a new sim that would further the ACES model since FSX is so dated.  Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case.  I hope I'm wrong and enhancements are made, whereby creative developers like PMDG, Majestic, HiFi and others can deliver high end goodies to my computer.  Until then, I won't have a use for another sim.

[ukplane1 37]

Can you imagine in 2 years and 6 months it will be 2020 and a flight sim still won't have sloped runways , more concerning is if this flight sim is aimed at GA operations those are the airfields that tend to have more pronounced slopes in their runways then fully sized international airports.

One problem with the current flight sims is airports can look 99% accurate but what's the point if the plane lands on the same flat runway.

 

e.g an uphill landing vs downhill will produce different stopping distances.

[toprob 105]

5 minutes ago, ukplane1 said:

One problem with the current flight sims is airports can look 99% accurate but what's the point if the plane lands on the same flat runway.

Fair point, but I believe that the best way to fix that is to support and encourage the sim developers so that they thrive, and then they might be prepared to put enough development time and resources into specific community requests. A long-shot, I guess, but I'm going for that.

I did comment in another discussion elsewhere that on seeing the default windsock in FSW, my soul died a little, but overall my post was positive -- I am already planning a community push to get nice textured windsocks, if FSW survives and thrives for the next 5 years! My favourite sim, by the way, is Prepar3d at the moment, but I'm fully aware that it didn't spring fully-formed and perfect, but it is still in development -- I don't want a perfect, finished sim, I want a lively, growing sim.

[anden145 2,285]

Frankly I'm kinda tired of the constant argument which keeps being thrown around:
'Your critism of what you've seen so far isn't valid, since this is 'Early-Access' hence you don't know what the end-result might look like!".

That might partial be true, but most of the points of critism which are brought up, are things they won't change. Lighting engine, terrain and autogen depiction, and in general the way mesh, landclass and vector scenery is drawn. All these are 'relics' or characteristics of the old ESP engine. It's within the core of FSX/P3D and the new FSW and won't/can't be changed .... 

Still I'm crossing my fingers for some revolution. I'm sorry to be the 'party-pooper' but to be honest, I'm not holding my breath.

 

[toprob 105]

Ah, I remember the first time I was disappointed by a new simulator/version... I don't recall which it was, but it was when MS introduced elevation mesh to the sim, and although the nearby mountains were there, the Port Hills, where I lived, weren't, as they were probably below the mesh resolution -- 1200 metres, maybe?

Never crossed my mind that I wouldn't upgrade then, and I'm happy to give anything new a try. In this case, a free copy makes it easier, but I would have scraped up the $25 somehow.

Back then, after discovering that coverage of my home country wasn't great, and that third-party addons were few and far between, I looked at making my own. If I can't develop for a particular sim, I have no use for it, but that's just me, I still get excited with anything new. There are things I KNOW about FSW -- it is based on FSX/ESP, the things which are important to me -- the scenery -- are not hugely improved. Since these are facts, it doesn't serve any purpose repeating them endlessly. If it isn't for you, step away -- Orlaam seems to have made that decision, which is great. Now he can step away from the FSW discussions. Common sense tells me that as people do this, the discussion here will become more positive. That's a joke, by the way. Or maybe not...

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Anders Gron said:

Frankly I'm kinda tired of the constant argument which keeps being thrown around:
'Your critism of what you've seen so far isn't valid, since this is 'Early-Access' hence you don't know what the end-result might look like!".

That might partial be true, but most of the points of critism which are brought up, are things they won't change. Lighting engine, terrain and autogen depiction, and in general the way mesh, landclass and vector scenery is drawn. All these are 'relics' or characteristics of the old ESP engine. It's within the core of FSX/P3D and the new FSW and won't/can't be changed .... 

My point exactly. Thanks because I didn't want to post this a third time.  

But I will leave it at this. There clearly is no use in repeating this and I can understand it annoys those who look forward to FSW. The future will tell if FSW is indeed the sim of the future. One thing I do like to repeat: despite my view on FSW I am sincerely happy the flight sim market is alive and kicking and that Dovetail is adding their part to it!

[Lenny777 299]

Looks good. 64 bit. Full on ORBX. Crank up all the graphics. Very nice start with GA craft. Great rain effects. I had Flight School so very much looking forward to another addition to the 64 bit flight sim world. Moved on from FSX/P3D with its incessant VAS issues and tinkering. Regular user of XP11 and now Dovetails entry. Bring it on guys.

[n4gix 4,947]

17 hours ago, toprob said:

Since these are facts, it doesn't serve any purpose repeating them endlessly. If it isn't for you, step away -- Orlaam seems to have made that decision, which is great. Now he can step away from the FSW discussions.

It's ironic that you mention this, as I was just thinking that perhaps AVSIM should have a new rule that only one "negative post" be allowed by anyone per thread...

[G-RFRY 1,712]

It`s the same on the steam forums XPlane fans are lambasting it before it`s seen the light of day.

Ray Fry.

[CaribbeanCLANK 134]

On 2017-5-12 at 7:52 PM, barrel_owl said:

Are you seriously expecting an airliner of the like of PMDG, Majestic or even Aerosoft being included in the stock hangar? In an early access simulator, which will have an entry level price of $ 25, except for those like me who will get it for free? Seriously? Again, may I ask you which kind of "bigger aircraft" are you talking about, guys? Liners? Turboprops? Take a look at the current offer for FSX/P3D. You will not find any of these aircraft with very complex systems and avionics for less than $40. Or are you asking for those simplified toys which came with FSX?

Complex aircraft are a third party thing. Period. It is not reasonable to ask such complex birds as default aircraft in an entertainment level simulator.
 

I am NOT expecting an airliner as complex as PMDG, Majestic or Aerosoft to be included in Early Access. And I did not ask that DTG include one. Where did I say that??

FSX is an old sim so I would expect any default airliner (if offered in FSW) to be a lot better than what we can find in FSX's default hanger. It is not unreasonable to have hoped for an airliner with a certain degree of complexity. 

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, CaribbeanCLANK said:

I am NOT expecting an airliner as complex as PMDG, Majestic or Aerosoft to be included in Early Access. And I did not ask that DTG include one. Where did I say that??

FSX is an old sim so I would expect any default airliner (if offered in FSW) to be a lot better than what we can find in FSX's default hanger. It is not unreasonable to have hoped for an airliner with a certain degree of complexity. 

I think it actually is a bit unreasonable. Nowadays more than ever before the sims mainly offer the basic world for which 3rd parties can create the more complex things. None of the currently available sims have payware quality default planes or even medium quality when it comes to systems. Expecting default planes to LOOK a lot better is reasonable, and also clearly the case, but not when it comes to system complexity. Because FSX has been the only sim out there for quite a few years 3rd parties were able to create truly complex addons and it is also due to this fact that the developers of sims seem to leave this to 3rd parties completely. It is a waste of resources and money to spend too much time on planes when you know 3rd party developers will do a better job no matter what. 

I do know there is one sim developer who is working on adding more system depth in all default planes but that developer is also working on a plane with truly deep systems and afaik it will be DLC. Again, expecting system depth in a default plane is a bit unreasonable. ;)