QualityWings 787 Feedback

[Chock 17,769]

There have been plenty of flight sim products which have come out half finished, gained a poor reputation, and never been able to recover from that despite patches eventually sorting things out. It seems QW, in delaying their release, are wisely treating such experiences as a salutary tale. They can only launch it once, and if that launch went badly, it would probably spell the end for them as a developer.

[Egbert Drenth 250]

9 minutes ago, Nuno Pinto said:

I can't believe they're releasing it for FSX first. Weird decisions.

Most likely they are waiting for P3D V4.1 release.

[spearmint_flyer 579]

If everyone remembers a couple months ago the 717 from TFDI a great aircraft now but when released several users (including me) were not able to use the aircraft for weeks because of a rushed release. Even with the open beta tag I think it's best to wait now and enjoy fully then give money for a parked plane. The real dreamliner had the problem I don't want my version to do the same. 

[Nighthwk 566]

42 minutes ago, Egbert Drenth said:

Most likely they are waiting for P3D V4.1 release.

They're releasing for FSX first to iron out all of the bugs that remain then port a stable product to P3D. It was originally developed for FSX in the first place. 4.1 has nothing to do with their P3D release. I doubt we'll see it released for P3D until around summer next year.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Chock said:

Yup, that's up there with 'army intelligence'.

Another oxymoron is : " quality wings " 

Which quality pertains to a bunch of existents which keep on posting false myths like " released soon " since 10 years ago ? 

[tamsini 278]

I'm wondering which is better: Do not announce a release date and thus avoid customer hype (which all sales-oriented enterprises crave), or announcing a release date, hoping for the best and constantly delaying it.

I am liking the PMDG approach (i.e J4100): announce it, provide little details and ask for details at your own risk.

[odourboy 1,289]

1 hour ago, Chock said:

There have been plenty of flight sim products which have come out half finished, gained a poor reputation, and never been able to recover from that despite patches eventually sorting things out. It seems QW, in delaying their release, are wisely treating such experiences as a salutary tale. They can only launch it once, and if that launch went badly, it would probably spell the end for them as a developer.

With the apparent complexity of this add-on and the vast diversity of the sims systems out here, I predict QW will have there fair share of problems on release despite their desire to release a finished and polished product. I also believe that the community understands this (despite all the complaining we're seeing with complex product releases) and is pretty forgiving and resilient. Even if the initial release goes badly, as long as they support us and work towards a solid product, they'll be rewarded with our loyalty.

[Captain Kevin 586]

On 9/20/2017 at 7:25 AM, Nuno Pinto said:

I can't believe they're releasing it for FSX first. Weird decisions.

That would be because they had already started developing it for FSX long before P3D came into the picture. In fact, development was started so long ago that there was still debate as to whether they were also going to be making it for FS9 or not.

On 9/20/2017 at 9:05 AM, odourboy said:

With the apparent complexity of this add-on and the vast diversity of the sims systems out here, I predict QW will have there fair share of problems on release despite their desire to release a finished and polished product. I also believe that the community understands this (despite all the complaining we're seeing with complex product releases) and is pretty forgiving and resilient. Even if the initial release goes badly, as long as they support us and work towards a solid product, they'll be rewarded with our loyalty.

This one's debatable. Sure, it's likely they're going to have their fair share of problems after release, but you wouldn't release something knowing that there were issues. It's one thing if something comes up after release that wasn't caught. It's an entirely different situation to release something with known bugs. There are people out there who are forgiving, but on that same note, there are some people who aren't so forgiving, given that they think they've taken a long time as it is for the release.

[Nighthwk 566]

40 minutes ago, Captain Kevin said:

but you wouldn't release something knowing that there were issues

Tell that to Aerosoft 

[Captain Kevin 586]

6 hours ago, Milton Waddams said:

Tell that to Aerosoft 

Okay, MOST sane people wouldn't release something knowing that there were issues.

[swiesma 625]

Well, I does not matter how good the product will be on release. There will be the same threads on AVSIM as on every other release.

- Why does this not work?

- Why does that not work?

- Why didn't they release it earlier?

- Why are there so many errors despite they released it so late?

- Why is it so expensive?

etc. pp.

 

They cannot do it "right". No matter what they do.

[Guest]

14 hours ago, Captain Kevin said:

but you wouldn't release something knowing that there were issues. It's one thing if something comes up after release that wasn't caught. It's an entirely different situation to release something with known bugs.

Every single software product I've used and coded within the last 30+ years has been released with known bugs.  The issue is the severity of the bugs and if there is a work around.  If software was never released because of known bugs, we wouldn't be here today typing in this web site forum (it would take decades longer to produce and progress would move at a snails pace). 

Microsoft seem to operate on 70% rule, Apple a little higher around 85% rule.

I'm sane (well I guess that's debatable), but I hate to let you down, imperfect humans in an imperfect world ... you can extrapolate that to just about everything in life from building houses, bridges, airplanes, cars and software.

Cheers, Rob.

[SteveW 1,792]

52 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Microsoft seem to operate on 70% rule, Apple a little higher around 85% rule.

Wow, and there I was using 99%. Great post Rob!

[Boomer 1,619]

On 9/20/2017 at 9:05 AM, odourboy said:

With the apparent complexity of this add-on

I am understanding it to be fairly shallow in complexity, say relative to PMDG.  Am I wrong?

[odourboy 1,289]

1 hour ago, Boomer said:

I am understanding it to be fairly shallow in complexity, say relative to PMDG.  Am I wrong?

Damned if I know.    I based my remark on their video demo from last year. Even if it's not as deep, the sheer breadth of systems, not to mention the extended testing period would suggest an apparent complexity of this add-on.  Are you saying if it's not as deep as PMDG, it's simple?  ;-)