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

[steve310002 1,198]

4 minutes ago, torium said:

fs-flightcontrol already sold their software for FSX, FSX: SE, P3D, X-Plane 10/11 and FSW on their own website. Many do not like Dovetail allowing a 3rd party developer selling the same (downscaled) product on Steam. Humans are mostly irrational.

 

 

I agree and thought of that fact when I wrote my post. However, the difference is that this is an early access release, something that didn't exist at the time with FSX and earlier flight sims. I appreciate thought that X-Plane in a sense is in early access on an endless basis which is now seen as one of it's key strengths largely due to the freeware market and the respect that Laminar have with simmers. Releasing content like maps and camera slew when the base sim isn't finished just confuses the average user. Bare in mind the average user is not you or me but more the average gamer on Steam who takes a mild interest in flight sim or sims in general (of which there a loads). For better or worse, these are the customers that will make the difference through steam sales in whether flight sim succeeds or not, at least at first until it gains momentum and popularity amongst us simmers. There is still a long way to go in that regard based on the level of interest in these forums.

If you look at other games/software that is in early access there have been similar points raised by Steam users when paid DLC has been released whilst a game is still in early access. I think it's a reaction to be expected. People are often impatient by nature and when they are eagerly awaiting the next 'big' update but instead see paid DLC there tends to be a backlash. It's just human nature. People always want more and early access just exasperates that.

In any case, this of course is an over reaction based on some of the comments which are clearly at little too strong and unfair to say the least. But in the end its to be expected and DTG need to be aware of that and the spiraling effect it can have.

[honanhal 1,420]

35 minutes ago, WotanUK said:

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.

Ian, you have hit the nail squarely on the head; couldn't agree more. And today's PR fiasco just closes the window further.

James

[flyforever 267]

What people forget is that software is all about the future and not the past. To this end, most users will quickly forget about the past if a new piece of software is truly worth buying. For example, Just Flight had a reputation of putting out poor, unfinished products, just as some other TPDs( and we know who they are) do. It was not one day that someone didn't swear that they would stop buying anymore Just Flight products.

Then one fine day, Just Flight introduced a new plane( the arrow) that is getting great reviews---unanimously. Guess what? People are buying their product, and forgetting all about its past "poor" reputation.  That's the nature of software. If Just Flight continues in this new path, users will forget its  past sins and buy again.

Unlike an old simmer who has already invested in his or her sim thousands of dollars and starts getting picky on some small detail, a new simmer will look at the three or four sims currently on the market and decide which one to buy based on entry cost, ease of entry into the hobby and perceived present and future value. Moreover, he or she will look at available third party options and determine if they fulfill their fantasies, yes, fantasies. I never had any problem spending money if I thought that that expenditure would gratify my sim needs. I love classic airliners, and so I buy them all-- the good ones and the bad ones. And yes, many times I've gone against my inner rational self.

Lastly, Stephen Hood has spoken about FSW breaking new ground, being truly disruptive. I am willing to wait until he either quits, gets fired, or truly succeeds in giving us a revolutionary product.  He's not a stupid developer. He knows what's against him., but I like his approach. It's new and innovative. I am on his camp.

My opinion is that in these times of immediate gratification and "internet" arrogance( people say whatever they feel like), putting out an "early access" is risky business. Putting out an early access flight sim is sheer madness. DTG may yet turn out to be the little engine that could.

The story has yet to be fully written..... Let the races begin.....

[spesimen 135]

1 hour ago, neumanix said:

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

lockheed martin already gets $30+ billion of usa tax dollars already every year, but they still charge for prepar3d. some epic milking right there. maybe DTG should have become a defense contractor and then nobody would criticize them for trying to be a profitable business... just like every other business that wants to stay afloat...

cheers,-andy crosby

[G-RFRY 1,710]

I was not aware that FSW and DLC content was a compulsory purchase in you don't want it don't buy it.

[steve310002 1,198]

Just now, rjfry said:

I was not aware that FSW and DLC content was a compulsory purchase in you don't want it don't buy it.

True but when people pay for early access they expect basics to be added to the core game like a basic moving map and not sold as DLC during this period of development.

[G-RFRY 1,710]

1 minute ago, steve310002 said:

True but when people pay for early access they expect basics to be added to the core game like a basic moving map and not sold as DLC during this period of development.

Well when it comes out of early access we can make a judgement, AF2 is still early access 18 months after release on steam and there`s DLC content available,  I get the feeling that whatever DTG do with FSW it will not be enough for some, I also think there`s a bit of if FSW is a big hit my sim will suffer and may lose users. No one complains about DLC on steam for XP.

[vortex681 806]

47 minutes ago, steve310002 said:

True but when people pay for early access they expect basics to be added to the core game like a basic moving map and not sold as DLC during this period of development.

Why do you consider a moving map to be a core feature? There isn't one in FSX, just a very basic static map. Once the SDK comes out I'm sure that the likes of Plan-G and LittleNavMap will look at supporting FSW for free.

[torium 207]

11 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

Once the SDK comes out I'm sure that the likes of Plan-G and LittleNavMap will look at supporting FSW for free.

And the fear and screams will continue .............

[himmelhorse 1,276]

Hello all,

I am an owner but not a user of this sim and this for various personal reasons, largely stated in previous threads.

One aspect of this is that FSW is of course, still in development ... conjecture and uninformed personal opinions are not very helpful (you could probably include my opinions in this)

However, I see as one entirely relevant point, the cost factor.  If one was fortunate enough to get this sim for the cost of "Flight School" AND the conjecture, rumours and predictions come to a remotely correct fruition, which, ultimately is hinted at being a totally unfinished core sim with TPDs taking over the DLC, one is very likely to pay very much more for a P3D comparable end product.

I think we really should be remembering though, that this is still in development and give the Dev (DTG) a fair chance. As a tube flier, this has very little appeal for me at the moment, but I lie in wait for a finished product (with TPD DLCs or without) before I make a final decision on whether or not to pursue it with gay abandon and reckless alacrity.

Patience, my friends is called for ... not vitriol nor wild speculation.

Regards to all

Tony

[steve310002 1,198]

1 hour ago, vortex681 said:

Why do you consider a moving map to be a core feature? There isn't one in FSX, just a very basic static map. Once the SDK comes out I'm sure that the likes of Plan-G and LittleNavMap will look at supporting FSW for free.

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. And also X-Plane has a moving map (albeit a rather poor one). Anyway, I think this topic can be viewed in different ways. Let's hope that FSW continues to grow and become a success!

[Chock 17,769]

20 hours ago, WotanUK said:

FSW would have to offer something remarkable for me to move from P3D and thus end up purchasing everything again.

It is going to have that, actually it already does, albeit not yet rendered from real time METARS (on the way apparently), that being trueSky. You can already see the difference this makes right now in FSW, in that the weather and air mass is physically linked to what you see, which is not the case with any of its contenders. This is a big deal for anyone who appreciates aviation realism...

In FSX, P3D or XPlane, rain/snow is a visual effect which is either on or off, it has no bearing on the cloud formations and the way the sim handles the effects on your aeroplane bear no relation to the locations of the clouds, which is of course not in the least bit how the real atmosphere is. In FSW with trueSky however, you fly under a rain cloud and rain hits you, fly clear of it and there is no rain falling. This is because the volumetric clouds in FSW are a physical presence in the simulation depicting the conditions. Additionally, because they are a physical presence, there is no need for any shaders to be tweaking an atmospheric visibility condition, the weather depiction itself will do that. Since aeroplanes fly in the air, and it depicts the air realistically, FSW's realism in depicting the conditions which your craft is affected by, is exponentially more realistic than any other competing simulator. For a kick off it means weather radar simulation can be done completely realistically.

If anyone doesn't think that is offering something remarkable which other flight sims do not have, then they don't understand anything about how the air mass affects how aeroplanes fly, and how all the other simulators do not depict that phenomenon with visuals which match the conditions realistically. The fact that DTG are trying to implement that should be more than enough evidence to demonstrate they are not simply sticking FSX in 64 bit and calling it done, it is a genuine attempt to move us on in terms of how things are simulated.

[ca_metal 2,016]

2 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. And also X-Plane has a moving map (albeit a rather poor one). Anyway, I think this topic can be viewed in different ways. Let's hope that FSW continues to grow and become a success!

The sim isn't finished yet, I'm pretty sure they will update FSW for years to come, like they do with their other products. 

As they are a small team and have some other priorities, the 3rd parties, and soon the freeware developers (SDK will be ready before the end of this year), will fill this void until DTG can catch up. FSW is just taking it's first steps.  

I'd rather see real 3D lighting (Like X-plane), new autogen, new scenery technology, new data (airports, cities, roads, rivers etc), than seeing some small features like a moving map or a cam add-on. 

P.S: I'm as excited as everyone else to see how FSW will evolve, but I'm realizing that's a long term project. So I will just try to be more patient. 

[SmokeDiddy 262]

I'll continue to support FSW until it's in final release, then make my decision.  Speculating on things that may or may not be in the core sim at this juncture is not constructive at all.  A moving map and view & Slew are very low on my priority list of features that I think should be included in the core sim.  Those are cheap add-ons compared to some others I can think of.  I'd rather DTG look at including some of those more pricey features as part of the core sim vs these tiddly wink features which will come along from 3rd party sources anyway because there will be those who will complain about almost every feature included in the sim for one reason or another.

[rtodepart 761]

Wiki definition of a flightsimer 

: a person who works at a DMV window ,no matter how many documents you bring he’ll always complaint.... 

lets give FSW some time till they finish guys than we can talk about it ..