Update from PMDG

[WestAir 2,522]

2 hours ago, honanhal said:

For the record, I suppose you can simultaneously accept that the original justification was true — their legal costs really were higher — and that their planned MSFS price is just a standard price hike, unrelated to the P3D price hike and justified by nothing other than maximizing profit. I’m not sure I buy it, but...

Honestly, if RSR came out and just said that was the case, I'd probably be more inclined to pay the hike. Honesty gets you further with me than deception.

[WestAir 2,522]

Double Post

Edited September 28, 2020 by WestAir

[eslader 1,783]

15 minutes ago, WestAir said:

Honesty gets you further with me than deception.

Same here, but I require *evidence* that you are deceiving me before I assume you are. There isn't any hard evidence here - just speculation based on a set of statements (made *years* apart from each other). That's not enough for me to assume that PMDG is trying to rip me off. Especially since if they wanted to rip people off, it'd be a lot easier to be a lower-tier developer, churn out flash-n-trash aircraft, and charge $30 (+$20 for a Navigraph upgrade that breaks the nav system!)

[ShawnG 1,823]

1 minute ago, eslader said:

Especially since if they wanted to rip people off, it'd be a lot easier to be a lower-tier developer, churn out flash-n-trash aircraft, and charge $30 (+$20 for a Navigraph upgrade that breaks the nav system!)

Actually if they really wanted to rip you off, they would make you pay again, plus a 40 percent markup on a product that contains 98% of the same code and modeling that you bought from them before...  I don't care about the base price so much,  Having to buy the same thing multiple times is what grinds my gears.  (I should point out, I'm not saying it should be free, before some chucklehead tries to put words in my mouth. upgrade fees are fine if they are in line with the work done)

[eslader 1,783]

I get what you're saying, but that's not a ripoff. They sold you a (whatever) for P3d. They aren't taking that away. They didn't sell you a plane for MSFS. It's *nice* when devs give you a discount on a product for a new sim, but it's not required in order to not be a ripoff.

After all, if you want to upgrade your Airplane DVD from SD to HD (cripes I'm dating myself), you're gonna pay full price. And you'll pay full price again when you go from HD to 4k. And it's not like they have to re-make the whole movie each time. 😉

 

 

[Chock 17,769]

6 hours ago, wthomas33065 said:

MS, Asobo, PMDG, LatinVFR, FSDT, et al.  don't "owe us" a thing.  They create a product, we buy it.  $$$ changes hands. Transaction over.  Just because you buy a bunch of scenery from FSDT or planes from PMDG doesn't mean they owe you a debt of gratitude.  You didn't "give" them your money.  Your purchased a product, nothing more, nothing less.

In my honest opinion it's time we start climbing down off the pedestal we've placed ourselves on.

Not really.

Asobo and MS actually do owe us something, and that's a sim which we paid for which had a bunch of features listed and was sold on the basis of having them, yet some of these it does not currently possess, or which need some work to function properly.

Now before anyone thinks this is a rant, it isn't. I am sure Asobo will fix it, and I'm not going to start throwing my toys out of the pram quite yet, because it is obvious enough that Covid 19 impacted the development process to the point where it ended up being released on schedule whereas the work to complete it could not adhere to that schedule. And before anyone suggests that they could have held off on releasing it because of that, I suggest you look up what media buying is, to understand why it's not always as simple as that once a PR ball is rolling.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that for my 120 quid, Asobo and MS actually do owe me something. 🤣

Edited September 29, 2020 by Chock

[harrry 322]

Yes although I do realise Asobo and Microsoft are working to fix the sim I would understand it if it had been merely bugs.  Mistakes in the code or poor integration with the pc.

What I find harder to forgive and be patient for in what was marketed early as a sim which has all the airports in the world etc which shows that as released it came nowhere near meeting the route simmer's needs.  This shows very poor requirements analysis.  It seems that Asobo thought if it could give a sample of airports that would be fine..  It may be fine for the casual simmer (an important cohort and from the ranks of them a fair percentage will get hooked and join the "serious simmer"  The sim is full of such failures to meet the requirements of the regular current simmer though they did say it would be.

I find this hard to understand as they did have the basis of a good sim in FSX.  Yes it needed to go to 64 bit.  Yes it needed its interfaces polished and bought up to date.  The Geographical database of airports needed to be correctly located on a proper global model.  Magnetic variance had to be bought up to date and runwaysa alligned with those in todays real world.

I do not mean they should have just cleaned up fsx.  Programming design has changed as has hardware and expectations but they did have a pretty fair template to follow.

We have little of that though we do have the start of a good VFR sim. My guess is when it was released,  Too early but that is marketing Microsoft sudenly realised from the dismal feedback that they had a lot of work to do.  I think they will do it but it will not be months but a year or more I think.  

[wthomas33065 994]

1 hour ago, Chock said:

Asobo and MS actually do owe us something, and that's a sim which we paid for which had a bunch of features listed and was sold on the basis of having them, yet some of these it does not currently possess, or which need some work to function properly.

Actually legally that is false.

26. Warranties and Limitation of Remedies. TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED UNDER YOUR LOCAL LAW, MICROSOFT AND ITS SUPPLIERS, DISTRIBUTORS, RESELLERS, AND CONTENT PROVIDERS MAKE NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, GUARANTEES, OR CONDITIONS, INCLUDING FOR MERCHANTABILITY, SATISFACTORY QUALITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WORKMANLIKE EFFORT, TITLE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. PRODUCTS OR SERVICES SOLD OR AVAILABLE IN THE STORE ARE WARRANTED, IF AT ALL, ONLY UNDER ANY LICENSE AGREEMENTS OR MANUFACTURER’S WARRANTIES THAT ACCOMPANY THEM. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED UNDER AN ACCOMPANYING LICENSE AGREEMENT OR MANUFACTURER’S WARRANTY:

YOUR PURCHASE AND USE ARE AT YOUR OWN RISK;

WE PROVIDE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES "AS IS," "WITH ALL FAULTS," AND "AS AVAILABLE";

YOU ASSUME THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THEIR QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE; AND

SHOULD THEY PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE ENTIRE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING OR REPAIR.

 

Philosophically I agree with you.  But legally you bought the license to use the product as is.  And unlike most other software, you had the option to try the standard version for almost no cost to you via Game Pass before you laid out your 120 quid.  

 

[Pugilist2 878]

11 hours ago, wthomas33065 said:

What is so untrue about suggesting people take an individual's statement at face value before determining otherwise when they don't have a complete set of facts.  The statement by PMDG is what was said.  That's not disputed.  And unless you can come up with some "facts" to convince us that what they said wasn't what they meant, then you are simply reading tea leaves.

 What was being inferred was the fact that a company will continue to work on other projects simultaneously for other platforms is somehow an indictment of the existing platform.  If I inferred anything it was the fact that they don't have in house fanboi arguments about what platform is better.  Ok you got me there.  Everything else I said was true.  

 

Depending on your tilt, you "could" take the statement to infer that PMDG see's MSFS as a dumpster fire, and won't go near it, or that it is THE future of Flight Simulation and will be the only viable player within 1 years time.

Neither statement is most likely true.  PMDG wants to make money, like every company.  They understand the potential of MSFS, but they're not going to destroy their existing income stream prior to having a product ready for MSFS.  They will continue to develop for whatever platform continues to supply their income stream.  Plain and simple.  They don't have Xbox vs Playstation fan boi arguments that some here love to participate in.  They want to make money, and they will make it where the income stream is.  Period.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOL, did you not read what I posted! The point that I am making is in reference to the the above listed post from you that is simply, "Your opinion". Just as others have said their opinions on these forums. So you my friend are the one simply ,"Reading tea leaves". Unless of course you work for PMDG?

Edited September 29, 2020 by Pugilist2

[harrry 322]

On 9/28/2020 at 3:56 AM, ErichB said:

Yes  The NGu would be free.  

No it was the ngu would have a !00$ discount in MSFS not free.

[harrry 322]

39 minutes ago, wthomas33065 said:

Actually legally that is false.

26. Warranties and Limitation of Remedies. TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED UNDER YOUR LOCAL LAW, MICROSOFT AND ITS SUPPLIERS, DISTRIBUTORS, RESELLERS, AND CONTENT PROVIDERS MAKE NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, GUARANTEES, OR CONDITIONS, INCLUDING FOR MERCHANTABILITY, SATISFACTORY QUALITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WORKMANLIKE EFFORT, TITLE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. PRODUCTS OR SERVICES SOLD OR AVAILABLE IN THE STORE ARE WARRANTED, IF AT ALL, ONLY UNDER ANY LICENSE AGREEMENTS OR MANUFACTURER’S WARRANTIES THAT ACCOMPANY THEM. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED UNDER AN ACCOMPANYING LICENSE AGREEMENT OR MANUFACTURER’S WARRANTY:

YOUR PURCHASE AND USE ARE AT YOUR OWN RISK;

WE PROVIDE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES "AS IS," "WITH ALL FAULTS," AND "AS AVAILABLE";

YOU ASSUME THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THEIR QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE; AND

SHOULD THEY PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE ENTIRE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING OR REPAIR.

 

Philosophically I agree with you.  But legally you bought the license to use the product as is.  And unlike most other software, you had the option to try the standard version for almost no cost to you via Game Pass before you laid out your 120 quid.  

 

Actually as Steam has found out this is not the case in Australia.  The software must be of merchantable quality and must match any claims made for it.

[harrry 322]

2 minutes ago, harrry said:

Actually as Steam has found out this is not the case in Australia.  The software must be of merchantable quality and must match any claims made for it.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-au/legalau/australian-consumer-law

Quote

Microsoft and the Australian Consumer Law

The information on this page applies to products and services supplied by Microsoft to consumers within the meaning of the Australian Consumer Law. It also applies to Microsoft products supplied by third parties to such consumers. For Microsoft products and services:

 

Our goods come with guarantees that cannot be excluded under the Australian Consumer Law. You are entitled to a replacement or refund for a major failure and compensation for any other reasonably foreseeable loss or damage. You are also entitled to have the goods repaired or replaced if the goods fail to be of acceptable quality and the failure does not amount to a major failure.

Australian Consumer Law rights are additional to Microsoft's express warranties

Your Microsoft product or service may also come with a limited express warranty. If applicable, the details of the limited express warranty will be available to you at the point of purchase, and may be in the packaging or online. This limited express warranty is in addition to any rights you may have under the Australian Consumer Law.

 

In some cases, Microsoft offers optional extended service plans. These extended service plans are provided in addition to any rights you may have under the Australian Consumer Law and have their own sets of terms and conditions.

 

Non–Microsoft branded products purchased from Microsoft may also come with guarantees that cannot be excluded under the Australian Consumer Law and may also be covered by the manufacturer's express warranty.

Making a claim

Should your product or service be defective, you can choose to make a claim under Australian Consumer Law, the limited express warranty or the optional extended service plans (whichever is applicable). It is your choice whether you contact the supplier of the product or service (which may be Microsoft), or Microsoft as the manufacturer of the product.

To contact Microsoft about a defective product, please call 13 20 58. If you would like to leave feedback, please do so at the following page: www.microsoft.com.au/feedback. For all other support, please visit https://support.microsoft.com/en-au.

Rights under the Australian Consumer Law

The following table outlines the principal consumer rights under the consumer guarantee provisions of the Australian Consumer Law. It is not a complete summary of the law and is not intended as a substitute for legal advice relevant to your particular situation.

 

Repair, refund or replacement	When the product or service is not of acceptable quality (e.g. it has a manufacturing defect or is unsafe), your remedy will depend on whether the failure is major or minor. For minor product failures, the supplier can elect to repair, replace or refund. For major product failures, the consumer can return the product to the supplier and insist on a refund or replacement, or keep the product and ask for compensation for the drop in value caused by the problem.
When is a product failure a major failure	You would not have purchased the product if you had known about the problem. The product is significantly different from the description, sample or demonstration model you were shown. The product is substantially unfit for its normal purpose and cannot easily be made fit within a reasonable time. The product is substantially unfit for a purpose that you told the supplier about, and cannot easily be made fit within a reasonable time. The product is unsafe. You would not have engaged the service if you had known the nature and extent of the problem.
When is a service failure a major failure	You would not have engaged the service if you had known the nature and extent of the problem. The service does not meet the reasonable expectations for that type of service, and the problem cannot be rectified within a reasonable time. You told the supplier that you wanted the service for a specific purpose, which was not fulfilled, and the problem could not be easily rectified within a reasonable time. You told the supplier that you wanted a specific result, yet the service and end result failed to meet your specifications and could not be easily rectified within a reasonable time. The supply of the service has created an unsafe situation.
How long do your rights last	A reasonable period from date of purchase, which will depend on the nature and cost of the product or service.
Do I have to pay for this coverage	There is no additional cost for repairs, replacement or refunds.
Can Microsoft limit its obligations or restrict your rights under the Australian Consumer Law	No, unless the product or service you purchase is not of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use, in which case Microsoft can limit your remedy by excluding refunds.

For more information on your rights under the consumer guarantee provisions of the Australian Consumer Law, please visit https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees/consumer-guarantees.

 

[ShawnG 1,823]

3 hours ago, eslader said:

I get what you're saying, but that's not a ripoff. They sold you a (whatever) for P3d. They aren't taking that away. They didn't sell you a plane for MSFS. It's *nice* when devs give you a discount on a product for a new sim, but it's not required in order to not be a ripoff.

After all, if you want to upgrade your Airplane DVD from SD to HD (cripes I'm dating myself), you're gonna pay full price. And you'll pay full price again when you go from HD to 4k. And it's not like they have to re-make the whole movie each time. 😉

 

 

Sometimes its instructive to spend some time contemplating the vast gulf that exists between “legal” and “right”.  The particular incident to which I am referring is between the change from fsx to p3dv3.  The dvd analogy would be if the airplane dvd had a version engineered by the studio to not work on Samsung DVD players, and then making a Samsung version at a markup.

 

 

 

[Janov 2,383]

3 hours ago, harrry said:

The software must be of merchantable quality and must match any claims made for it

Well, good luck taking MS to court over this 🤭

[harrry 322]

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-04-20-valve-fined-usd3-million-after-misleading-steam-refund-policy-found-in-breach-of-australian-law

Steam learned and MS has too.