Interesting topic.... the comments are even more interesting

[fs4fun 366]

17 hours ago, steve310002 said:

Fair point. I suppose because they already have the flight plan map which is pretty decent, I had hoped they would somehow make this accessible in flight

Do you mean while the flight is going on without pausing? In FSW the map can be seen in flight by pausing the sim. In FSX accessing the map also pauses the sim, so it's pretty much equal to FSX except I'd like to see more map details and flight planning features added to FSW.

One thing I think is neat is that in FSW you can edit your flight plan mid-flight and it updates in the GPS automatically.

[FlyBaby 659]

21 hours ago, WotanUK said:

I agree with most of what you said; but this is wrong.  FSW doesn't fill any niche, that is the whole problem. 

FSW missed the boat, it effectively had an open goal but releasing with no airliners, no significant 3rd party support (or at the very least questionable business decisions), not manifestly different from FSX (something that could also be said about P3D) and perhaps most significantly no SDK.  I just don't see any market for FSW beyond people who buy when Steam have a sale and never touch it again.

The cold and dark start "hand holding" and the ability to create new mission is a niche within itself for newbies.

BTW, FSW is in early-access mode and not "release mode" as you stated above (releasing). So, perhaps they didn't miss the boat, but you missed the point of early-access.

 

[FlyBaby 659]

22 hours ago, neumanix said:

DTG are just here to milk the cow. Time to realize that guys. There are better ways to spend your $.

This is the real world and DTG is a business; every business is here to the milk the cow. 

Both LM and LR have released new "versions" (meaning you have to pay again) of their sims over the years with very little advances. FSW has offered low cost access to their sims and a free upgrade for FSW from FS, so DLC is the only option to recoup their investment. Not to mention the 100s of dollars simmers have spent on P3D and XP to get things looking good.

So is DTG milking the cow anymore than any other DEV; or, are you just "beating a dead horse" of one sided complaints that many post here at DTG's expense.

 

[pracines 823]

23 hours ago, Chock said:

Yup, with the attendant level of intelligent comment a mob usually contributes, i.e. none whatsoever. What part of the concept of third party developers being businesses, is it that these people are not getting?

Hi Alan,

They are making themselves quite clear. A couple snarky remarks, but mostly thoughtful but candid resistance. 

They say that the "CORE" sim lacks so much, and I totally agree with the majority mob. They have nothing against 3PP, just against requiring 3PP for what should be core elements at this point in history. 

I quote from the post made by Cryss:

 Some of you have expressed concern that add-on content is taking the focus away from the development of the core sim, however this is not the case. These add-ons are handled by our Third Party team, who are solely focused on bringing the best and brightest developers into the world of FSW. Meanwhile, most of our development team are hard at work developing the SDK, which we expect to release before the end of this year.
 

Cryss saying that "this is not the case" yet saying that most of the team is developing an SDK, is plainly contradictory. Yes the SDK is important, but if the core sim comes second to the SDK, there is where the mob says bassackwards and unacceptable to us.  This is good feedback to help DTG decide how they want to proceed, nothing wrong, all is well.   

DTG has an opportunity to listen to the majority or take a chance on the minority. With currently less than 100 FSW players a day [  https://steamdb.info/app/389280/graphs/   ] DTG should not gamble on the view of the minority. 

It does not matter if the majority is right or wrong, smart or dumb, they will determine the success or failure of FSW.

I think they are more informed than some think. Its simple to see a business model forming in the shadow of Train Simulator with over $7,000 worth of DLC for a simulator valued at $39.99 that has very little to begin with. It used to be that a base program could satisfy just about everybody (FSX), but now its becoming required to buy basics, and the mob is lighting the torches.....good for them and us all if you think carefully about it; "value" can finally return to consumers. 

All this talk about "buy the routes/trains/planes/airports you want" is nonsense, because it takes us backwards. We must never forget how flight simulator progressed from a 5x6 square fictitious area to the whole planet and over 24,000 airports in the core product, for a fair price. We should be moving forward from FSX core features, this is right and good for everybody. I think Stephen Hood wants to do this too, the question is does Stephens boss agree.

[WotanUK 289]

1 hour ago, FlyBaby said:

The cold and dark start "hand holding" and the ability to create new mission is a niche within itself for newbies.

BTW, FSW is in early-access mode and not "release mode" as you stated above (releasing). So, perhaps they didn't miss the boat, but you missed the point of early-access.

 

Despite your somewhat insulting tone i assure you i didn't "miss the point of early-access".  I am one of the people who purchased FSW when it was released, i used it for perhaps an hour or so, uninstalled it and have never looked at it again. 

At the moment despite being in early access for what nearly 6 months i don't see a compelling reason to return, should that change i will happily reinstall.  My point 'Flybaby' is that whilst all this development is occurring people are moving to other sims.  I'll repeat, the 64-bit market was wide open, FSW missed the boat.  The "newbies" as you describe them are not going to be impressed with the 64-bit tag when it looks and acts substantially the same as FSX, Aerofly looks much better and offers better performance, DCS looks better, offers better performance and allows you to shoot things (it's also free), P3D is much more expensive (if you buy the license most simmers require) but already has many high end add-ons available for it, albeit at a premium price.

I also (rightly or wrongly) think that some of the comments relate to the business model Dovetail have used with there other sims, whatever they may eventually do with FSW they don't have a stellar reputation in the wider gaming world.  Personally, i was never impressed with various iterations of train sim, but too balance this slightly, performance / physics issues aside Train SIm world is a massive improvement.

Given the costs of the various add ins i have i am personally pretty much locked into P3D, so i could be accused (probably correctly) of being a little biased.

[WotanUK 289]

39 minutes ago, pracines said:

Cryss saying that "this is not the case" yet saying that most of the team is developing an SDK, is plainly contradictory. Yes the SDK is important, but if the core sim comes second to the SDK, there is where the mob says bassackwards and unacceptable to us.  This is good feedback to help DTG decide how they want to proceed, nothing wrong, all is well.   

Actually Paul, i think that this is a good move by DTG, i think that one of the most important missing features was the SDK.  DTG can't possibly develop everything that the simming or causal community want, this will allow them to 'outsource' the development of some of the requested things.

The risk to the FSW user is, ironically, exactly the same as the positive aspect; that FSW can outsource the development and sit back making only very minor changes.  I would argue that this was the exact strategy employed with Train Sim, up until Train Sim World.

[Chock 17,769]

1 hour ago, pracines said:

They say that the "CORE" sim lacks so much.

How exactly does it 'lack so much'? Disregarding the fact that it isn't actually in beta yet, let's examine that contention, because truly I don't see how that is the case at all, quite the reverse in fact. And remember, we are talking about the core sim here, right as it comes out of the proverbial box with nothing added...

It has the same viewing and slewing functionality as FSX and P3D, yes you can add a camera add-on for it if you choose, just like with P3D, FSX to give it more, but by default it is no less capable than either of the other two ESP-based sims.

It has the same map facilities as FSX and P3D, but you can add a map facility to enhance that, just like with P3D and FSX.

It has the same airport and nav aid database as FSX and P3D (actually it is slightly updated in comparison to FSX and P3D, but not greatly, nevertheless, it is more up to date), and like FSX or P3D, you can add more functionality if you choose.

It has the same weather capability as P3D (i.e. no downloadable weather without an add-on, but manually tweakable with some themes). DTG have said the realtime function is coming. Which might possibly be payware, or included, we don't know at this point, but if it was payware, it would be no different from P3D in that regard. Technically, the weather modeling system which FSW uses, is a far superior one to either FSX or P3D, but it is still in flux and is somewhat heavy on the host computer, which hopefully can be addressed, but it is nevertheless, undeniably superior in this regard from a technical standpoint.

It has some default aeroplanes which used to be payware, like P3D and FSX SE have. Sure FSW doesn't have airliners nor helicopters by default, but one suspects it might get them to make it a bit more of a rounded base package (particularly since Just Flight are a development partner, so I don't really see the difficulty in JF throwing their A320 and 757 F-Lite aeroplanes in there with a contra-deal of some sort, this would be no different from AeroFly FS2, which has the Aerosoft A320 included in it as a default aeroplane, or indeed P3D, which has numerous old payware aeroplanes in there, including some JF ones), but even if it does not, you can add them, in fact I already have done so with FSX choppers, and they did fly okay. It's been the case that most flight sims have been products which can have additional content added since the days of FS 5, this is something everyone who is into flight sims knows. Less aeroplane-nerdy FSW users, who may be primarily gamers, know that too unless they've been living under a rock, because nearly every game of the past thirty years has had sequels, mission disks DLC etc. One of the most popular games ever - World of Warcraft - lives and breathes off adding DLC every once in a while, so it should hardly come as a shock to gamers on Steam that this is going to be the case with software which uses aeroplanes and geographical locations.

It has lessons and missions and saved flights, like FSX and P3D have. It has a mission creation function but this is built in, unlike with P3D and FSX, where it can be done, but with an add-on, so it is a bit more capable in this regard, though not exclusively so if one is prepared to make the effort.

It has built in ATC, like FSX and P3D have and in fact this is another function which has been tweaked a bit in FSW in a manner similar to the database

It has built in Orbx terrain (unlike FSX or P3D), so by default it looks improved over either FSX or P3D, and that is also true for the appearance of the skies, which even at this early stage look vastly better than either XPlane, P3D or FSX.

Unlike XPlane, it has no plane maker capability, which did used to be a function in FS years ago, but was dropped, however, you can still make aeroplanes for it with an add-on.

It has the much loved 'rain on the windshield effect' which everyone apparently thinks is essential. Regardless of whether one thinks it is, there is an inferior effect just recently added to P3D and it can be done in FSX with some effort, but it looks better in FSW, and is perhaps only bettered by the recent TrueGlass effect and the rain effect in Euro Truck Simulator 2.

It has a far superior training mechanism built into it as part of the 'Cold and Dark' update. The name of that update was a bit misleading, since it did not merely add the ability to start with systems shut down, but more importantly featured the ability to have the checklists be interactive in the simulation, highlighting controls for learning procedures. This is part of the SDK functionality and was implemented on the Just Flight PA-28 add-on for FSW since they are part of the development process of that SDK. As a learning tool it's a vastly superior system to what we are used to for tutorials, where the standard method is normally a PDF which one either has to print, or alt+tab to in order to utilise. Things such as complex airliners would greatly benefit from using that and even if you've not tried it in FSW, you can also try it in CSX Heavy Haul, where a very similar function is used to teach the various throttle and brake systems on the locomotives.

It has AccuFeel built in, so the flight modeling is arguably a bit better than default FSX or P3D. Granted you can't tweak it easily like you can when you add AccuFeel to FSX, but then again, you can't even get AccuFeel for P3D V4 yet.

It has less capable flight planning than either P3D or FSX, which is supposedly to be addressed, but this is one area where it could certainly use some improvement and hopefully that will transpire.

It has less tweaking capability than either FSX or P3D, and like with XPlane 11 where they simplified what could be tweaked graphically, this isn't popular with many people, so hopefully that too will be addressed although whilst it is still in early access one can understand why they might limit what could be tweaked in order to simplify the testing process, but, one hopes that is the reason.

I'm sure I might have missed the odd thing, but overall that doesn't seem to be particularly lacking in comparison to the alternative ESP-based simulations, and particularly for something which isn't even in beta testing yet. So, I maintain that when people are complaining it lacks so much, they are talking nonsense. In most respects it has more, not less than its competing offerings. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's perfect and I'm not going to blow sunshine up DTG's @ss for no reason, the flight planning needs to be better for example and it definitely needs more GPU tweaks available, but I will readily acknowledge when they are doing stuff right with it, and for the most part I think they are. A few people reaching for the pitchforks when there are thousands of users of the thing is not something to be completely ignored of course, but it isn't the tidal wave of aggression many seem to want to portray it as.

And yes, there may be pressure from 'the suits' to get it out the door; that is indeed a valid point and a concern when investors want to see some return, but that's pretty much the case with every sim add-on as we see from the patches which generally get rushed out over the few weeks after a release. But if it comes to a board room battle over that, all anyone has to do is point out the hassle Aerosoft are getting over that CRJ to argue against the wisdom of putting things out when there are still some fixes pending.

If it goes out the door as a finished article and has severely lacking functionality, I'll perhaps not be reacing for a pitchfork, but neither will I be praising it unduly, however, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it, and so should everyone else.

[A32xx 129]

And all this because there are no jets in FSW. I'm starting to hope that there never will be.

[Chock 17,769]

8 minutes ago, A32xx said:

And all this because there are no jets in FSW. I'm starting to hope that there never will be.

LOL. There are going to be airliners for sure, you can see that is part of the GUI already. Whether there will be any in there by default is another matter although my guess is yes, same with choppers, as to not have those would unduly invite criticism and could easily be achieved with some sort of contra-deal with a developer, as it was with some of the other content.

[carbonbasedlifeform 179]

Remember when people were worried that no third party developers would want to work with DTG?

If we get live weather and maybe one jet included for the Steam crowd, I think you'll get more out of the box than any other sim. P3D doesn't come with orbx or accufeel. X-Plane doesn't have seasons or decent autogen (ortho doesn't work for everybody). P3D and X-Plane ship with bugs.

[WotanUK 289]

Alan made an interesting comparison earlier with Euro Truck 2.  When you look at that sim even fresh out of the box it offers a complete and entertaining experience.  Not one of the flying sims currently in development or released really offers that.

[A32xx 129]

It's becoming clearer to me that jets are for morons who've never attempted to create an add-on of their own and have no understanding of the processes involved. "Work on the core sim instead of the SDK" - seriously? Don't these idiots realise that the SDK is a result of core sim development? Let them play with their little jets somewhere else, I don't want them dumbing up my sim of choice.

[fs4fun 366]

I don't really get the controversy here. DTG has limited resources and needs to prioritize and focus and have made public their near term goals: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/522857-current-development-focus-october-2017/. It looks reasonable to me, and note the focus is on core sim functions and SDK, all of which are important things to work on.

None of the DLC's currently on offer are essential to having good flights in FSW. Once the SDK is out there will probably be freeware tools such as moving maps and camera GUI's for people that are interested in such things.

[switch686 50]

4 hours ago, pracines said:

 

I quote from the post made by Cryss:

 Some of you have expressed concern that add-on content is taking the focus away from the development of the core sim, however this is not the case. These add-ons are handled by our Third Party team, who are solely focused on bringing the best and brightest developers into the world of FSW. Meanwhile, most of our development team are hard at work developing the SDK, which we expect to release before the end of this year.
 

 

The Third Party Team probably couldn't code thier way out of a paper bag...I myself test product in a lab for customers, but I can't make the stuff.

[ca_metal 2,017]

1 hour ago, fshobby said:

None of the DLC's currently on offer are essential to having good flights in FSW. Once the SDK is out there will probably be freeware tools such as moving maps and camera GUI's for people that are interested in such things.

That's why I don't get it. People say "DTG is selling core features as ADD-ONS", but I don't see those core features being sold... 

I know FSW lacks some features and others are not that good, but they're still developing. Most of the things people are complaining Stephen already talked about, he said they have the intention to improve, still people keep complaining.

As I said a while ago, DTG released with a fast update policy, but now it has slowed a little. I get the reason why, but most part of the simmers have no patience, that's why people are complaining a lot.