Flight Sim World - First Impressions

[HiFlyer 9,360]

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.

 

[HiFlyer 9,360]

10 minutes ago, DJJose said:

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

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

[scotchegg 4,186]

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'.

[carbonbasedlifeform 179]

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.

 

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

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.

[Chock 17,769]

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.

[WotanUK 289]

1 minute ago, Chock said:

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

...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.

[vortex681 806]

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.

[fs4fun 366]

"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.

[Oracle427 45]

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!

[Murmur 3,944]

41 minutes ago, fshobby said:

they don't fully understand flight simmers and what they want

Let's be honest here, it's easier to understand what a woman wants than what a flight simmer wants.

[flyforever 267]

Sometimes developers make simple mistakes in calling their new product a new product. I am sure that if DTG had called FSW FSX64 or FSX Plus, people would not be saying that this is like fsx. It is fsx, just like P3D4 is  an extension of FSX. Besides, what's wrong with FSX? I have not loaded it with every conceivable add on and have no OOM issues. I use because, after 10 years, I am very comfortable with it.

 

What is an "early access"? Have people heard of Alpha and Beta?  I'd rather see this as a $30 opportunity to see what's coming-- even if it's an alpha.

I don't expect to see everything right, nor will I decide how good or bad it is until DTG declares it a "final" version.

For perspective, AS2 has managed to provide us with good scenery( partial), but incomplete aircrafts and no features like ATC. So, should we knock it for being incomplete? By the way, it's $59.

XP11 64 has been out for sometime now, yet not everyone is flocking to it. It is, to some extent, a reflection of what different users are accustomed to and prefer.

I am not ready to bash any new  sim until the developer decides that it's their final product and, for some reason, it turns out to be a less than a complete one.

I like my xp11; I like my fsx; I like my p3d. Please give me more. It's fun, just like collecting different cars.

tony

I

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

11 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Give me back the good old days when software users didn't have to pay to be amatuer beta testers.

Well, nobody is forcing you to be a beta tester. You can just sit on the fence and watch until it's officially out of the gate. Which is exactly what I am doing with regard to FSW, because my impressions are too conflicted to really commit to trying it out at this point in time. 

(On a side note: One of the things that comes up a lot with regard to P3D is that some people think that you should be thankful to LM for letting you beta test their product for their professional clients. I find it quite funny that beta testing is something you should be thankful for when it's LM's 60/200$ product, but is somehow unacceptable when it's DTG's 30$ product.)

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

22 minutes ago, flyforever said:

What is an "early access"? Have people heard of Alpha and Beta?  I'd rather see this as a $30 opportunity to see what's coming-- even if it's an alpha.

No, it's just a marketing term for, "The market is so competitive for our offering that we are afraid of being left behind, so we released an unfinished product." Since you enjoy collecting cars, would you buy a car that was early access? The closest that anyone has come to that is Tesla. And they were very careful to screen their "beta testers". Fortunately, so far for Tesla, there has only been one sad news story about a loose nut behind the wheel:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/business/tesla-model-s-autopilot-fatal-crash.html?_r=0

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

6 minutes ago, domae001 said:

Well, nobody is forcing you to be a beta tester.

Correct me if I'm wrong. A beta is a full-featured version of the software which might still have minor bugs that need to be corrected before the final release. On the other hand, "early access" may have bugs, but it is also missing features that may be added before the final release. I have no problem with either approach, as I have participated in both open and closed beta tests and also the recent "early access" for XP11. But let's not fool ourselves as to what "early access" is  all about. It's not some gracious gift from a software developer.