VERY Bad Reviews so far on Steam

[tonywob 4,769]

7 hours ago, vortex681 said:

That's because we are important! We (members of the flight sim community) represent by far the largest part of the potential market that DTG is aiming at.

I'd disagree with that somewhat. The biggest target I think are the casual gamers who will pick up the sim on Steam and may after some time buy some DLC if they enjoy it. If we actually compare the numbers for the amount of people who have downloaded FSX-SE or X-Plane from Steam compared to the amount of people active here or on other flight sim forums, there is a big difference. Lots of people also use the mobile phone version of X-Plane or Aerofly FS and purchase DLC, but we very rarely hear from any of them here, and the revenue from the mobile phone version helped fund the desktop version. IMO, if someone takes offence by calling flight-simulation a game, then that person is probably not DTG's target market, but perhaps Lockheed Martin's . The amount of people using our current batch of sims as a game and a bit of fun almost certainly massively outnumbers those who treat it as a serious training tool.

One thing I see a lot in this community is fierce brand loyalty, especially for PMDG, A2A, ORBX, etc. I can't count how many times I've seen "Sim A can't survive without PMDG, I won't even look at it because there is no ORBX" etc, and often arguments will break out over it. My biggest hope to come from the recent batch of new flight sims (Mainly DTG and Aerofly FS) are groups of new enthusiastic users and developers to help break away from this somewhat stale circle and bring some new life into the hobby. 

 

 

[Wobbie 938]

     7 hours ago, vortex681 said:

That's because we are important! We (members of the flight sim community) represent by far the largest part of the potential market that DTG is aiming at.

I love this comment. Once again, it shows the elitism & arrogance that some simmers tend to show.

It is, by now, pretty obvious that DTG is targeting their own market within Steam, starting off by introducing the now defunct Flight School to the gamers, & now releasing an alpha game, free to the Flight School owners. We (members of the flight sim community) are actually a small part of the potential market within Steam.

[chelmo 42]

8 hours ago, vortex681 said:

That's because we are important! We (members of the flight sim community) represent by far the largest part of the potential market that DTG is aiming at.

Nonsense.

There are 125 million Steam account holders. If DTG sold their product, with a couple of bits of DLC, to just 0.1% they could all retire to their Caribbean islands. 

[pmb 5,137]

8 hours ago, vortex681 said:

That's because we are important! We (members of the flight sim community) represent by far the largest part of the potential market that DTG is aiming at.

Despite some criticism, this remark has something. It's (mostly) "us" who write the first Steam (and otherwise) comments/ratings which the casual gamers on Steam will read. If "we write" bad reviews others tend to copy them (even if the Sim itself isn't that bad) and it's virtually dead.

Kind regards, Michael

[HiFlyer 9,360]

35 minutes ago, pmb said:

Despite some criticism, this remark has something. It's (mostly) "us" who write the first Steam (and otherwise) comments/ratings which the casual gamers on Steam will read. If "we write" bad reviews others tend to copy them (even if the Sim itself isn't that bad) and it's virtually dead.

Kind regards, Michael

Still gives us too much credit. A quick perusal highlights the stark fact that essentially no DTG release (except fsx, I think) is treated well by Steam. Period.

FSW just joins the club with similarly mixed reviews.

I have no feelings about that either way. Just noting a fact.

[barrel_owl 304]

4 hours ago, tonywob said:

One thing I see a lot in this community is fierce brand loyalty, especially for PMDG, A2A, ORBX, etc. I can't count how many times I've seen "Sim A can't survive without PMDG, I won't even look at it because there is no ORBX" etc, and often arguments will break out over it. My biggest hope to come from the recent batch of new flight sims (Mainly DTG and Aerofly FS) are groups of new enthusiastic users and developers to help break away from this somewhat stale circle and bring some new life into the hobby. 

I absolutely subscribe your post. However, brand loyalty is not a peculiar mark of flight simmers or the members of this forum. Navigate in any high-tech forum where smartphones are debated and see yourself. The mentality is always the same: my tool is better than yours no matter what. 

I understand that many people develop a preference for a particular platform and particular addons for whatever reason. Why this should lead to a constant bashing and disqualifying of any alternative product, though, is beyond me. 

Edited May 22, 2017 by barrel_owl

[vortex681 806]

I stand by my previous comments (it's my prerogative, after all). I don't think that I'm being arrogant in thinking that we're very important to the future of FSW. Perhaps when FSW gets out of early access into a proper release, more casual users may buy it. I certainly wouldn't want to try an early access version of a game genre I'm unfamiliar with when there are good, well-supported, established versions already available for me to buy - I'd at least wait until it was finished and then see how it looked. Casual users are not going to help DTG move forward at the moment other than to provide them with more development revenue. Someone without any previous experience of desktop flight sims would have no point of reference by which to judge what needs doing to FSW to make it fit for a full release. Without that kind of feedback, DTG are unlikely to succeed enough to attract the essential big-name developers. Remember that DTG is trying to make a sim which will be better than the likes of X-Plane or FSX:SE, which are also available through Steam, or why would anyone be attracted to buy it?

I can't see casual users being interested in DLC which costs more than the sim if they don't even notice the inadequacies that the DLC is supposed to correct or enhance. Why would they want a better flight model, performance figures which more closely match the real aircraft,  more accurate systems reproduction, better ATC and more realistic weather (just as a few examples)? 

Like it or not, for the foreseeable future at least, I think that we are DTG's target audience. These are my opinions and, clearly, not everyone is going to agree with me! Healthy discussion is what these forums are all about, after all.

[Wobbie 938]

vortex681, I think we can agree to disagree on this...

Each and every business survives on numbers. We, the so-called serious simmers, are very much the minority when it comes to gamers & gaming in total. Just have a look where a 'serious flight sim is sitting in Steam's best game list. 

I'm sure the directors of DTG are responsible to their shareholders, & thus sales numbers are critical (Look what happened with Microsoft's Flight! when sales figures tanked)

Do we actually really know that DTG is trying to make a sim better than X-Plane or FSX:SE? They are trying to make a game that will mass sell to their target market.

FSX:SE, was, let's call it, a very good experiment on taking a dead product from Microsoft, & tweaking it to run on modern PC's, no more, no less. DTG's Flight School was targeted at a totally new market on Steam, the gamers, & we, established simmers, for want of a better name, all slated it, even though it was not meant for us. So that also tanked, & DTG stopped selling/marketing it. 

So now, they are giving FSW away to previous Flight School purchasers, & selling an alpha/early access incomplete version. (future development funding?) & sweet talking us by saying that they want us to be 'testers', partners, & general debuggers, fault finders whatever for any future sim/game that they may release at some future date.

Flight School was supposed to be a big attraction, now, they have basically taken that, added rain drops,more planes & a bit of lipstick, & this is supposed to grow to be better than the likes of X-Plane, that actually does have superior flight models.

 

Just saying....

 

[vortex681 806]

38 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

FSX:SE, was, let's call it, a very good experiment on taking a dead product from Microsoft, & tweaking it to run on modern PC's, no more, no less.

I agree that FSX:SE wasn't a significant improvement on the boxed version (other than being more convenient). However, I don't agree that FSX is a dead product. If it is, why are so many developers actively supporting it?

38 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

Do we actually really know that DTG is trying to make a sim better than X-Plane or FSX:SE?

It would be pointless, not to mention commercially suicidal, to produce something that wasn't better (or at the VERY least, as good) as what is already available. Why would anyone buy it? They'd just buy the alternative, better product.

38 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

DTG's Flight School was targeted at a totally new market on Steam, the gamers, & we, established simmers, for want of a better name, all slated it, even though it was not meant for us. So that also tanked, & DTG stopped selling/marketing it.

But the same thing is just as likely to happen if established simmers continue to criticise FSW if DTG doesn't eventually produce what they promised - the next generation of flight sims. Consumer support can make or break a product, as they have already found.

Edited May 22, 2017 by vortex681

[bedgie 12]

A T.U.R.D can be polished "Mythbusters proved it" .....but DTG better start polishing this if they want it FSW succeed and not be a stinking pile of crap. From what I see so far it has a very long way to go to be successful. and Yes I hedged my bet and purchased it

I am not sure early access was the right thing to do for a beta test. There are already young people porting over their FSX files and making youtube video on how to do it.....Yep the first video I saw was someone porting over the FSX default 737.  and they will be the first to write a bug report because their install got pooched.

Just shows to DTG what people want, and not what DTG think they should have.

Although FSW is a 2017 release, it is really just 2009 technology and a re-compiled 64-bit client. The ramifications of that are unsettling for a new flight sim.

You can put lipstick on a pig, color its hair even put on a pretty dress..............but its still a pig.

 

Edited May 22, 2017 by bedgie

[Paraffin 2,197]

27 minutes ago, bedgie said:

I am not sure early access was the right thing to do for a beta test. There are already young people porting over their FSX files and making youtube video on how to do it.....Yep the first video I saw was someone porting over the FSX default 737.  and they will be the first to write a bug report because their install got pooched.

I'm amazed that DTG hasn't included a built-in block for this kind of thing, to avoid sending mixed messages.

As you point out, a search for FSW content on YouTube will now show things like that ported 737, instead of default content. This will compromise the ability to gather feedback and track down bugs. 

Did DTG know this would happen, and are tacitly allowing it to spur interest in the new sim? That's one possibility. Or maybe they just couldn't figure out how to block add-ons with DRM limiting "non-official" content without compromising the sim's performance. I suspect it might be this, but I'm just guessing.

Edited May 22, 2017 by Paraffin

[bcuomo 143]

If people expended as much energy giving feedback to DTG on what to improve instead spewing poison on these forums, perhaps we would end up with a simulator that is a worthy successor to FSX. 

I've read many complaints about "this feature is missing" and "this sim is incomplete."  Well, I seem to remember DTG saying that in this initial release there are parts of the code that are not "turned on" yet, so of course there will be missing features.

Like most of you, I have owned every version of FS since the Bruce Artwick days and have also owned every version of X-Plane since version 3, Right now I am primarily using P3D and FSX and, because I don't have a cutting edge system, the ONLY add-ons I have ever installed in either of them are aircraft.  No scenery, no weather engine, no CFG tweaks, nothing.  So I can pretty much compare vanilla with vanilla.   One thing that I have noticed about FSW is that the autogen density is much higher than I get in P3D or FSX, with absolutely smooth motion, even with FPS in the low 20's.  Even with autogen set in P3D at very dense, the autogen is still denser in FSW. If I were to be running FSX or P3D at those frame rates, it would be very noticeable and a stuttery mess.  So I think there may be things under the hood that are at least some cause for optimism.

Although we may be in the minority, I too believe that we are important in that we are the ones that should be giving DTG the most useful feedback to improve FSW, as there is such a wealth of experience here.  If, instead, our negativity scares away a company from producing a new flight simulator (regardless of the engine its based on), in the end, we lose.     

[bonchie 2,305]

1 hour ago, bcuomo said:

 

I've read many complaints about "this feature is missing" and "this sim is incomplete."  Well, I seem to remember DTG saying that in this initial release there are parts of the code that are not "turned on" yet, so of course there will be missing features.

 

You know what would be really easy? If DTG just put out a roadmap of what they want to do in the future.

Simple. No more speculation, no more blind faith, no more criticism of things they may be indeed working on. And before someone says that's unreasonable, if you play any other games, you know that's absolutely standard fare for an early access release. You let your buyers know what to expect down the road. Even XP11 keeps a blog that has ongoing development news and future goals. There's no reason to keep this stuff secret and by doing so, you build bad faith with your community.

The fact that DTG remain so quiet on what's actually coming doesn't speak well to the certainty of the future feature set. If you think there's some master plan at work, you might be disappointed in a few years.

Edited May 22, 2017 by bonchie

[dz006 0]

@bonchie - agree 100%

[bcuomo 143]

1 hour ago, bonchie said:

You know what would be really easy? If DTG just put out a roadmap of what they want to do in the future.

 

I don't think anyone would disagree with this statement, including me.  I hope they are indeed putting together such a roadmap.  But I am willing to cut them a little slack considering after such a rapid outpouring of derogatory comments I would want to choose my words very carefully.  Time will tell...I suppose.