HiFlyer

Flight Sim World - First Impressions

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Most of what is said in that video is very ill informed, or at best doesn't make a lot of sense.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Chock said:

Most of what is said in that video is very ill informed, or at best doesn't make a lot of sense.

Agreed. But he mostly does news shows now anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post

I thought that was a very balanced review, i am inclined to agree that the Matt Davies review was incredible one sided, but 'Froogle' i think was very fair indeed.

What parts do you feel he was ill informed on or that don't make sense???

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, WotanUK said:

What parts do you feel he was ill informed on or that don't make sense???

Lots of comments are misleading or incorrect. I won't list them all, but there are many. Here are a few:

Saying that there is a requirement for third parties to sell through Steam may be ostensibly true, but it disregards the fact that they can also be sold elsewhere too (more on this below).

Stating that 'it would have been nice to see DTG involving other developers earlier so that it has add-ons ready when out of the gate, as per LM and P3D' is nonsensical too, since it isn't 'out of the gate' at all yet, it isn't even out of early access, yet as we've seen already, it is getting regular tweaks and feature updates (three to date that we know about, two of which have been released and one coming shortly) and it disregards the fact that numerous developers have demonstrably been involved in the development of right from the off as we know (and even prior to that, since some of their content was in Flight School), including A2A, Carenado, Turbulent Design, Orbx, and there are many more who are also working with DTG on the quiet to have stuff ready for it too, as most people are aware, and some have even said this.

So it should be readily apparent that there will be stuff in the pipeline ready to go when it makes it to a release date. Yet with this in mind, there is still the tiresomely oft-repeated notion that developers will have a problem with getting on board with the sales model, which, given the aforementioned, is not only not correct, but also completely disregards the rather obvious fact that TPDs have been perfectly happy to sell through Steam for FSX-SE content, so it should be more than evident to anyone who takes more than a second to think about it, that if TPDs were happy to do that, then they will more than likely be happy to continue such arrangements with selling stuff for FSW. And as I've already pointed out plenty of times, there is also the rather obvious fact that when suggesting that selling through Steam and having them take a cut is an unpalatable option, completely disregards the fact that it provides exposure to a truly massive new market for a developer, and is quite clearly the reason why many developers went with that arrangement to sell stuff for FSX-SE.

Yet even if one were to disregard all of that, it's quite evident that DTG know what they are doing when selling add-ons for their products, as the success of that exact sales model with their train sims has more than made apparent.

Now I know the caveat of 'it is early access' is repeatedly mentioned in the video, but when we know that is the case, why bother trawling up all the above nonsense in a video when a second or two's thought should have made it obvious that it is indeed nonsense?

If one is going to set oneself up to be some kind of self-appointed youtube pantheon of flight sim knowledge and opinions, then one should at least have some opinions which appear to have been well thought out, instead of trotting out the same old rubbish we've heard from numerous others who clearly haven't thought about it with much insight either.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Chock said:

Lot's of comments are misleading or incorrect. I won't list them all, but there are many. Here are a few:

Now I know the caveat of 'it is early access' is repeatedly mentioned in the video, but when we know that is the case, why bother trawling up all the above nonsense?

Before i reply in earnest, may i ask you a question Alan?  Have you got some involvement in this Sim...you seem awfully wedded to it.  Apologies if not and you are just passionate.

Your argument appears to boil down to Steam, yes he does mention that in passing, he actually spends less time mentioning it in the video than you do in your reply.  I am not sure that making legitimate concerns known over developers who have active said they are worried regarding the Steam platform qualifies as "nonsense" i mean we are talking some major players.  

So, your entire "most of what he said" boils down to the 20 seconds or so he spent mentioning the above entirely valid point?  I think that you have been unfair to this review, perhaps because it doesn't echo what you feel about the sim?

DTG's Train Sim strategy is basically, lot's of low quality DLC, is that what you want to see...A2A or PMDG aircraft swamped by Wilco quality re-skins of default aircraft?  If DTG are talking to developers in the background, how is he supposed to know that...everything i have read from developers is pretty negative, PMDG's statement being the standout, Aerosoft haven't committed to the Sim either, saying they will be waiting until A, it's out of early access and B, the full SDK is released.  

I think the primary points he brought up we can agree on, i have experienced them as well:

LOD set low enough that a circle around the aircraft is clearly visible (yes i know this can be changed in the cfg file)

Simplified settings screen

He doesn't mention the horrific brightness of the runways (somewhat fixed), my first view of EGCC from above and i thought the runway had been replaced with polished white marble

The night lighting is somehow even worse than FSX.

They are just the points i can remember.  I am not even including the bugs with the aircraft because i feel they are to be expected.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
59 minutes ago, Chock said:

Saying that there is a requirement for third parties to sell through Steam may be ostensibly true, but it disregards the fact that they can also be sold elsewhere too (more on this below).

But it's not just ostensibly true, it's actually true! He didn't specifically say that they can only sell through Steam.

59 minutes ago, Chock said:

...and there are many more who are also working with DTG on the quiet to have stuff ready for it too, as most people are aware, and some have even said this.

I've obviously not been keeping up with this. Most comments that I've read have been from developers complaining about not having access to the SDK.

59 minutes ago, Chock said:

Yet with this in mind, there is still the tiresomely oft-repeated notion that developers will have a problem with getting on board with the sales model, which, given the aforementioned, is not only not correct, but also completely disregards the rather obvious fact that TPDs have been perfectly happy to sell through Steam for FSX-SE content, so it should be more than evident to anyone who takes more than a second to think about it, that if TPDs were happy to do that, then they will more than likely be happy to continue such arrangements with selling stuff for FSW.

I agree that those who already sell on Steam will probably be more than happy to continue. However, some of the big players like PMDG and A2A, to name just two, don't currently sell on Steam and may not want to do so in the future. We just don't know.

59 minutes ago, Chock said:

If one is going to set oneself up to be some kind of self-appointed youtube pantheon of flight sim knowledge and opinions, then one should at least have some opinions which appear to have been well thought out, instead of trotting out the same old rubbish we've heard from numerous others who clearly haven't thought about it with much insight either.

I don't think that Froogle does think of himself as some sort of self-appointed expert - he always seems quite open to criticism. I watched his video and think he gave a fair account of how HE perceived FSW. Indeed, I think there were things that he could have mentioned but didn't - the terrible state of the PAPIs and the very short range at which objects on the airfield popped into view, for instance. Far from just "trotting out the same old rubbish", the points he raised were clearly illustrated in the video and, as such, were difficult to argue with.

Share this post


Link to post

DTG's FSW will have to make front to those intrerested in derrating it... It is still, for me, the best option in terms of investment, for the sequel to teh MSFS Saga...

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Chock said:

Saying that there is a requirement for third parties to sell through Steam may be ostensibly true, but it disregards the fact that they can also be sold elsewhere too (more on this below).

The economics of that situation are still a potential drawback for some developers. But I don't think it's even the most important aspect of DTG's marketing plans. The requirement for all developers to pay their own separate license fees for use of trademarked names, logos, etc. is going to have a major impact on how many smaller developers sign on. It will hit the freeware content providers even harder.

As far as I know, FSW is the only one of the four new 64-bit platforms with this additional licensing requirement for 3rd party developers.

Share this post


Link to post

And the elephant in the room is: No Fsuipc

Apparently DT have snubbed Peter Dowsons efforts at communication.

That alone is enough that I will not go anywhere near FSW.

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

However, some of the big players like PMDG and A2A, to name just two, don't currently sell on Steam and may not want to do so in the future.

Actually without looking too deeply I can say that a2a, aerosoft, carenado, orbx, 29 palms, rex, milviz and hifi simulations all sell on steam. A lot  of others are more sim lite  but those I listed are all serious sim companies.

Not all of their products are necessarily published but it shows they are happy to sell on there. Steam is great to get exposure to new people and then once they realise they like a2a or aerosoft they might go looking and then buy direct. There are lots of ways this can work out.

Don't write anything on steam off yet and don't underestimate the desire for expanded markets by all these companies. If fsw spreads they will all want to expand their horizons either through steam or from their own sites.

I'm happy to keep flying p3d or xplane with all my add ons for now but I'm also hopeful for fsw.

Chris

Share this post


Link to post

Just Flight have stated on there forum they will looking to support the sim with product and are looking to upgrade some FSX products to FSW .

I also note the review is posted on here by a aerofly2 ######, that like me posting P3Dv4 vid reviews that are not complementary to the sim as some are but why would I.

the sim of your choice is yours alone.

Ray Fry.

Share this post


Link to post

He did mention in the reviews that the missions are a lot of fun.:biggrin:

At $25 it's a bargain for the beginner. IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, rjfry said:

the sim of your choice is yours alone.

And the choice of what I post is mine alone, as long as it's within the TOS. 

And..... I've seen the Froogle vid of which you speak, and made no comment, here or elsewhere.  I thought it was pretty fair and balanced given the information available at the time, and roughly equivalent to this one, which I also believe is fair.

In fact, I liked his Aerofly review and I hope he revisits the sim in the future.

You and anyone else has a perfect right to disagree with that, but hopefully in an adult manner.

 

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, DJJose said:

He did mention in the reviews that the missions are a lot of fun.:biggrin:

Exactly. He seemed to be trying hard to find good things to say, specifically to try and keep the video relatively even-keeled.

Share this post


Link to post

Seems a fair enough opinion to me if you're putting your expectations for a full sim on an early access product. "It's not that bad" is certainly where I am now with FSW. If DTG actually act on the feedback they're getting we might be able to move to the next stage; 'Cautiously optimistic'.

Share this post


Link to post

I like froogle's videos including this one. But he shouldn't lead off talking about the "community" views when the "community" was complaining even before release. He's also giving a one-sided account of the third party development issues that doesn't seem to take into account what DTG has said about it.

On the other hand he does point out its early access. He also does a good job showing how ugly FSW in certain areas including the problematic LOD. 

Looking forward to more videos. Hopefully DTG makes improvements by the next video.

 

Share this post


Link to post

I somehow don't see how labeling a product as "early access" is some kind of defense against criticism. Laminar took the same route with XP11 and the first few weeks were a combination of oohs and ahhs at new features and complaints about major gaps and goofs. Give me back the good old days when software users didn't have to pay to be amatuer beta testers.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, WotanUK said:

Before i reply in earnest, may i ask you a question Alan?  Have you got some involvement in this Sim...you seem awfully wedded to it.  Apologies if not and you are just passionate.

Nope, it's nothing to do with me at all, I'm just inclined to dislike it when people won't give something a truly fair chance and I can never understand when people who like aviation and flight sims get partisan about one flight sim and let that feed dislikes or misinformation and inaccuracies about another, as that can genuinely affect development and support for other products. Now I'm not suggesting this is the case with the video in question, but what I did observe is that there was a definite touch of laziness in the content, in repeating misconceptions and inaccuracies which have been floating around from other sources with regard to the wider policies of DTG and what they do and do not have planned.

Thus trotting out and compounding such misinformation, even in a small way, then calling it a 'first impression', particularly if one has something of a following from having made numerous other videos, is frankly, lazy journalism if one doesn't bother to really check stuff. And it is this which is my real dislike of the video. To elaborate a little on that (for anyone who is interested in what makes me tick), I worked for over ten years as an editor, sub-editor and writer for a number of UK daily newspapers, and during that time, I was always insistent on being meticulous with checking facts and telling the truth, which as you can probably easily comprehend, is not always a comfortable stance to hold in the media, because in such a position, one is always somewhat fighting the agenda of the medium's owner, who generally has some kind of political bent, so a desire to report the truth can be a difficult line to adhere to and it was in fact the desire of the newspaper group's preference for lazy and biased journalism which eventually led to my decision to leave that job, in fact, I actually walked out of it one day rather than handing my notice in, which might give you some idea of how bolshy and passionate I can get about things I truly hold as beliefs lol. That's something my dad taught me which I never forget and is something I try to uphold. He said to me when I was young: 'Never do anything which will damage your reputation for upholding fairness, truthfulness and honesty, because once your reputation for that is gone, you'll never get it back' (fairly unbelievable when you consider he was a politician and the mayor of my home town lol, but nevertheless true, he was a cool guy). Why mention this? Well, people who set up their own video blogs, youtube channels etc, are under no such pressure from masters above, they can be their own man (or woman) and set their own standards for accuracy and fidelity. And so they should. Thus to me, when one finds oneself in such an enjoyably unconstrained position in one's chosen media outlet, honesty can be manifest but more importantly, accuracy and true insightful commentary can become a hallmark of one's desire to report things accurately. It's one of the reasons why I never read newspapers any more, because frankly, the only thing I'd believe in most of them, is the date at the top of the page, and I'd check that against other sources as well, because even that can only be true for 24 hours lol.

Like a lot of people who frequent Avsim, I am accutely aware that when there was the announcement that MS were ditching the FS fanchise, and then had an abortive attempt at doing a half-assed version of it with Flight, it was a hugely disappointing and frankly depressing time for those who like civil flight sims; lots of ideas were bandied about, with even Aerosoft at one point suggesting they might consider developing a base sim platform, but all the suggestions came to nought and we found ourselves floating along in the doldrums for quite some time. Thus when LM and DTG (and others of course, not forgeting those such as XPlane and AeroFly FS2) announced they were going to drag flight simming kicking and screaming into the modern era, I, like most other people was very happy indeed. And again like many who frequent Avsim, or who love flight sims, I make a point of supporting them all, I even bought Aerosoft's Ready For Take-Off for that reason.

Thus I will admit that I'm inclined to defend DTG's efforts at doing that (and LM's too), but partcularly that of FSW at the moment because it is still in the process of being born and is thus somewhat fragile, whereas P3D is out there and I doubt a juggernaut like Lockheed Martin needs me to come to their defence. There is also the fact that where P3D is concerned, I have an Academic license for it because I use it for training and teaching and not for entertainment, so it isn't my 'fun sim', which makes it a bit less pertinent to Avsim's forums, as I doubt anyone would be too interested in the stuff I do with P3D on this forum. So FSX-SE is my main flight sim, therefore I'm particularly interested in where the developers of that are heading.

So yes, that could lead to the impression that I am somehow 'wedded' to FSW, but it's more accurate to say that, given the different 'pro' focus of P3D as opposed to the unashamed 'entertainment' focus of other sims, I'm wedded to those sims more, and the support of what is coming in that arena. If that makes me appear biased, then so be it, but I'm really not, I'm just inclined to fight the underdog's corner a bit on occasion. :cool:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Chock said:

I'm just inclined to fight the underdog's corner a bit on occasion. :cool:

...and actually i entirely appreciate that.  In fact i was the same as you, on the day of release i personally thought FSW was getting a massively unfair hit on Steam and posted (despite the flaws) a positive review, which i am still defending.  Equally i thought that Matt Davies was very unfair to the Sim, his first look 'review' was terrible, which i found rather odd, normally he is pretty good.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

I somehow don't see how labeling a product as "early access" is some kind of defense against criticism. Laminar took the same route with XP11 and the first few weeks were a combination of oohs and ahhs at new features and complaints about major gaps and goofs. Give me back the good old days when software users didn't have to pay to be amatuer beta testers.

Couldn't agree more! I'm quickly tiring of the constant "but it's early access" excuse for almost every poorly implemented or missing feature of FSW (and there are plenty). If DTG hadn't been prepared to accept a lot of flack for FSW, they shouldn't have released a half-finished product to the general public. In my opinion, they should have asked for beta testers and then released it as a finished product when it was actually ready. Releasing something that is at a very early stage of development is more likely to lose you customers than it is to attract them. "No Man's Sky" is a case in point. No amount of telling potential customers how great a product may eventually become will prevent people who try it from saying how it actually is now. "Early access" can be a dangerous strategy if you release something too early, particularly if you don't publish some sort of roadmap to give everyone an idea of what to expect in the final product - it makes it look as if you're just reacting to criticism rather than having a plan.

Share this post


Link to post

"Early Access" is not an "excuse", it's a plain and simple fact that the sim is a work in progress and is unfinished, un-optimized and likely buggy. It's not a completed, "released" product (in the traditional sense of what "released" means). In some sense FSW EA (and also Flight School) is a strawman to provide the foundations of community interaction. DTG was very up-front and clear in their communications about this, and they stated that simmers were invited to take a look at this early version and provide constructive feedback. Nobody was forced be involved, you are entirely free to sit on the sidelines and let others do the work of helping DTG improve their product, so I don't understand the cause for complaint here. I've said it before though, DTG needs to work harder on their communications and management of expectations.

Personally, I much prefer that we get to be involved in the development of this product

I think some of what I'm reading is the Agile versus Waterfall debate. As a software developer for over 30 years, I have no question in my mind that Agile results in better products that more closely match customer needs. Here's a fair writeup describing the pros and cons of each: http://www.seguetech.com/waterfall-vs-agile-methodology/.

2 hours ago, vortex681 said:

"Early access" can be a dangerous strategy if you release something too early, particularly if you don't publish some sort of roadmap to give everyone an idea of what to expect in the final product - it makes it look as if you're just reacting to criticism rather than having a plan.

This I somewhat agree with, it would be very helpful to understand what goals and phases DTG has envisioned and how they are prioritizing the work. This is also something for which I'm sure the community would have plenty of feedback.

Keep in mind DTG is a relative newcomer to the flight sim market, so it's reasonable for them to think they don't fully understand flight simmers and what they want, and in that situation trying to develop to a fixed plan of assumed requirements is not a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post

I was just about to post a Wiki link for Agile software development. I believe that the fastest way to ###### off a client is not to educate them and make them a partner in the process when switching from Waterfall to Agile. This is what I see happening here.

It would be helpful for everyone to understand how important their feedback is to the process and how much of an impact they can have on the final product.

This of course assumes sufficient budget exists to continue development!

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now