45 minutes ago, Chock said:

As it stands, the base simulation's LUT text config file method of flight modeling will already support choppers, jets etc and all their engine types, since that is the ESP platform's way of doing things, so there is really no need to help them to develop that part of it, since it is already developed, and that's a good thing because it is what most developers are happy to use.

So that's it? We're all happy with how far the ESP platform went in modeling engine types, and we don't want the core sim engine to go any further than that?

XP11 just "broke" turboprop modeling in XP10, requiring Carenado to charge full price for their v11 upgrades (to no end of gripes in the forums). That's because the sim is moving forward, improving the older engine modeling. I think P3D will eventually reach a threshold like that at some point, now that they've gone 64-bit. Nobody wants these sims to stand still, or at least I don't.

I don't think "already developed" will pass muster, in the year 2017 with 64-bit sims. But that's just my perspective on this.

I know early access games. I've watched many crash and burn.

I personally think FSW was released too soon. You never get another chance at the first release, early access or not, and I do not feel there was enough "there" there at release to maximize it. But moving forward, they've got to start rolling out more in their updates than tweaks to already existent planes and mission editor stuff. Major features and improvements need to come quickly or the game will die out. They also continue to kneecap themselves by not simply releasing a detailed road map with exactly what major features they are looking to implement. That's how you build excitement and dedication to your product. Vagueness kills early access games.

No amount of wishful thinking or saying it's "early access" for the next 12 months will change that if they don't manage the player base properly. I've seen it happen too many times.

You have to bear in mind that DTG have said they are in it for the long haul. Releasing FSW with the present flight model LUT doesn't mean they'd be stuck with it like that, it would be no different from what MS used to do; i.e. they would occasionally tweak it and add functions, invariably driven by what TPDs had done as workarounds, sometimes Aces would even dumb functions down, as they did with chopper handling.

11 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

Maybe that's the official position, and this is just my opinion, but I don't believe that for a second.

 

You can choose to not believe them...

I actually believe they are sincere in wanting to create a new (and better) flight sim.. possibly for a new audience..

2 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

You can choose to not believe them...

I actually believe they are sincere in wanting to create a new (and better) flight sim.. possibly for a new audience..

What they want isn't really relevant. Money doesn't grow on trees and so far I do not see an early access release that's chalked with success.

5 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

You can choose to not believe them...

I actually believe they are sincere in wanting to create a new (and better) flight sim.. possibly for a new audience..

I don't think their sincerity is in doubt, but there is nothing to stop them being shrewd with that.

5 minutes ago, Chock said:

I don't think their sincerity is in doubt, but there is nothing to stop them being shrewd with that.

Yeah, I was going more for shrewd, in the way FSW so easily imports FSX assets. 

6 hours ago, bonchie said:

What they want isn't really relevant. Money doesn't grow on trees and so far I do not see an early access release that's chalked with success.

Any fool can sit at a keyboard and type "Worst. Sim. Ever." That doesn't impress anyone and misses the point of an Early Access release completely. The point of an Early Access release is to get some feedback on customer expectations before investing in further development which may fall short in some way. In other words, it isn't the simmers who'll get fed up of waiting for DTG to deliver - DTG are going to get fed up of waiting for ALL OF YOU to deliver and tell them what you DO want. Such as? Such as: properly modelled Turboprop functions and controls, properly modelled Helicopter functions and controls, Heli's with more than one rotor (there are man-carrying drones now with 4 independent rotors you know), realistic Heli rotor-wash effects, fuel control systems where the wing tanks can flow into the center tanks OR vice-versa, properly modelled autopilot functions such as Bank. Start thinking you clowns, you've never had a better chance than this to get what you want. To paraphrase JFK: Ask not what your game developer can do for you, ask what you can do for your game developer!

6 hours ago, Paraffin said:

Maybe that's the official position, and this is just my opinion, but I don't believe that for a second. It would be trivial to block import of legacy FSX aircraft and scenery files in the core sim engine.

Just because it's possible to do this now doesn't mean that this will continue to be the case. Listening to Stephen Hood DTG seem to be taking a step by step approach with regards to development. By this I mean revamping an area, or related areas, of the sim whilst leaving the rest unchanged or with the bare minimum of changes required to make things work.

DTG were also careful to rule out backward compatibility. Why do that unless they are planning to make changes that will invalidate backward compatibility? It's possible that you will turn out to be correct but I think my view has a greater chance of being correct.

 

The last few updates have been relatively small in comparison to what we have planned. We are looking to drop some huge updates later this month. 

 

https://forums.dovetailgames.com/threads/update-from-stephen-hood.1520/#post-9628

Be interesting to see what the larger updates entail. We knew they were coming of course, but it was quite exciting to learn that they would be arriving fairly soon. As we know, most of the updates have been stuff which downloaded in less than a minute or so when cranking up the sim, thus fairly minor in the grand scheme of things. My guess is some weather changes, but as we know, the animated passengers is one of them which is definitely on the way, so I could be completely wrong about that weather, and probably am, lol.

5 hours ago, A32xx said:

Any fool can sit at a keyboard and type "Worst. Sim. Ever." That doesn't impress anyone and misses the point of an Early Access release completely. The point of an Early Access release is to get some feedback on customer expectations before investing in further development which may fall short in some way. In other words, it isn't the simmers who'll get fed up of waiting for DTG to deliver - DTG are going to get fed up of waiting for ALL OF YOU to deliver and tell them what you DO want. Such as? Such as: properly modelled Turboprop functions and controls, properly modelled Helicopter functions and controls, Heli's with more than one rotor (there are man-carrying drones now with 4 independent rotors you know), realistic Heli rotor-wash effects, fuel control systems where the wing tanks can flow into the center tanks OR vice-versa, properly modelled autopilot functions such as Bank. Start thinking you clowns, you've never had a better chance than this to get what you want. To paraphrase JFK: Ask not what your game developer can do for you, ask what you can do for your game developer!

I didn't type "worst sim ever." In order to have a real discussion, skip the hyperbole. You clearly are extremely defensive toward this game for whatever reason.

If you think yelling "it's early access" and blaming the player base for the developer's lack of vision is a smart strategy, you'll probably be disappointed in the results of that. The fact is that DTG aren't dumb. They aren't waiting around on you or I to tell them that basic features and graphical improvements need to exist in order to be commercially successful.

I'm not one of these "omgz, where are the jets!" or "no weather, this sucks!" people. My view of FSW is broader than that. Just saying something is early access isn't a get out of jail free card in the gaming market. It's a very fine line to walk and I do not think DTG have walked it very well to this point. I think they released too early without enough to hook users in the product. They didn't need the current early access to know weather and jets are going to be wanted. What you need in an early access release is a wow factor and a way to draw in users for long term support. You get that one of two ways. Either you release a really killer early access with the wow factor (usually graphically and with some innovative features) or your early access is more limited but you lay out a detailed plan of what's coming over the next 12-18 months along with your early access release. 

Just throwing a very incomplete game out there and saying "alright, tell us what you want even though we'll remain completely vague as to our plans" is not, historically, a very good strategy. Now, I could read into DTG's chosen strategy in several ways, some of which aren't very charitable, but I'll refrain for now. 

2 hours ago, bonchie said:

If you think yelling "it's early access" and blaming the player base for the developer's lack of vision is a smart strategy, you'll probably be disappointed in the results of that.

LOL! I'm not at all disappointed! Those who are yelling "we want it all and we want it now" are though, and because they haven't got it yet the whole project is a failure in their opinion. Says more about them than it does about DTG.

DTG may have figured the default planes were the wow factor. They really are very beautifully modeled and rendered, with some nice animations. There were too many avionics/systems bugs at release time, but the game is stable and playable nevertheless. It's very helpful in the software development process to get the product out in front of people to get feedback, but a closed beta period might have been prudent. I'd guess their viewpoint was that none of the bugs were showstoppers and getting a product out to the community was the more important thing. One problem with closed betas is that you really need a good base of reliable and thorough testers, and as a relative newcomer to flight sim they may not have been confident about who to invite.

Anyway, even the fact that many people are still a bit "meh" is useful input for prioritizing where they focus on next. Personally I quite like FSW and am also enjoying the mission editor more than I expected. As for backward compatibility, I think it's just that they didn't go out of their way to break compatibility, but have not tried to maintain it either. I added Ant's Eaglet to FSW and it's useable, but nothing clickable in the VC, so it seems to me that at least some backward compatibility has been completely broken, and probably more things will break as they move forward.

40 minutes ago, fshobby said:

I added Ant's Eaglet to FSW and it's useable, but nothing clickable in the VC, so it seems to me that at least some backward compatibility has been completely broken, and probably more things will break as they move forward.

All the gauges, switches, buttons etc., in the FSW VC's are now 64-bit and all earlier sims' VC gauges were 32-bit, so no, they won't work.

I wonder if anyone's tried VirtualCol's CRJ in FSW yet?