1 minute ago, The Moose said:

Anyone demanding anything deserves nothing.

 

As for "mediocre" $25-$50 planes...   Can someone explain what's mediocre about the FI Spit or P-38L? The Just Flight Arrows? The Milvis planes out so far? I could go on....    Mediocre my word not allowed!  We have better planes in that price range than we've ever had in other sims.

Not to mention all those great freeware mods eg. FBW, Working Title and so on.

Not sure I completely understand the term "demand" in original post. I fly GA.  It is easy for me to say however that I am spoiled by a number of aircraft in previous simulators.  The Realair models come to mind immediately, followed closely by the Milviz Cessna 310R and Baron B55.  Add to that without a doubt the A2A Cessna 182. I am watching the addon models for MSFS as they arrive, keeping a keen eye on user created mods, and waiting out hands on reviews before considering a purchase.  Based on that, the only only addon model I have purchased to-date has been the Carenado Mooney, and for much of the time since that purchase I have been remiss. 

I also continue to watch what is happening with the development of GPS avionics.  At this point particularly Garmin GNS and GTN gauges and mods. Like the aircraft models, those GPS models are still not up to the standard I have come to accept, and that is clearly influencing my purchase decisions of addon aircraft.

There is the notion of supply and demand.  So far what I am seeing is not creating demand from me.  Like I stated above.  I am spoiled.

Nobody is stopping anyone from demanding better for themselves. If you don't buy stuff you don't like because it's not up to your standards, that's exactly what you have done.

1 hour ago, ThomseN_inc said:

I think we should be happy with what we have today and enjoy the Sim as it is. I dont feel entitled to demand anything as long as i havent contributed anything significant to the system myself.

Be humble! 

True..

Not everyone wants 'high quality' add-ons... Thats actually a perception by the buyer/user/gamer, Also, instead of complaining, why not learn to create better aircraft?

Which brings up the point that....

MSFS is still just a game that simulates a simulator..  (I'm sure that puts the cat amongst the pigeons! & NO, not a debate as to what defines a sim or a game)

So, do your homework, & also support the freeware developers as well, they are actually the backbone of our hobby! - Many have become pay-ware developers, thanks to support that they have been given

3 hours ago, AviatorMan said:

Yet aircraft addon developers seem to think they can just continue to sell their products without any significant upgrade in quality and accuracy.

Not sure that is true... Addon developers are currently working within the constraints of an incomplete and changing SDK when developing their aircraft.  SU5 broke a number of addon aircraft, forcing the developers to go back and fix existing offerings, instead of working on new airplanes.  The fact that a2a has still not launched a single airplane tells you something..

The basic avionics and autopilot code in MSFS is far from perfect, as the WT team will tell you, and I am not sure that Asobo and WT even have their priorities aligned at present..

The basic flight model is also still under active development by Asobo, as we know from the SU6 discussion.

So, demanding perfection is unlikely to have much impact, until the base functionality is fixed and stable.

Could be a while.. 😉

 

Edited October 18, 20214 yr by Bert Pieke

I demand that you personally create a state of the art,  high fidelity simulation project,  one that must be wrapped in state of the art artwork.    Don't stay on the bleachers,   get in the game.   Ok,  I'm not being serous. 😁

But what I mean is, we are talking about people.  We are talking about people with different talents.   We have the old school devs who can build systems that would make NASA proud,  yet they lack that intrinsic thing that allows them to create beautiful textures that bring home that visual representation.    They build great simulations,  but they let your eyes down compared to others.      Faithful systems,  but FSX looks.

We have devs that have very strong artistic talents,  and are able to give us a rich,  state of the art visual experience.    But some of them don't have what it takes to build a faithful in depth representation of the systems.    Some don't even want to,  don't even consider it an important factor.

What we are talking about is artists,  and art.   I don't walk up to a piece that doesn't appeal to me and start telling everyone who'll listen why it's utter word not allowed.     

Then you throw the realities of the sim into the mix.   Half of the people don't know and don't care what the sim allows,  or doesn't.    Personally,  I wouldn't ever want to be a dev.     

 

19 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Not sure that is true... Addon developers are currently working within the constraints of an incomplete and changing SDK when developing their aircraft.  SU5 broke a number of addon aircraft, forcing the developers to go back and fix existing offerings, instead of working on new airplanes.  The fact that a2a has still not launched a single airplane tells you something..

The basic avionics and autopilot code in MSFS is far from perfect, as the WT team will tell you, and I am not sure that Asobo and WT even have their priorities aligned at present..

The basic flight model is also still under active development by Asobo, as we know from the SU6 discussion.

So, demanding perfection is unlikely to have much impact, until the base functionality is fixed and stable.

Could be a while.. 😉

 

IMHO that is the top award winning post around here this month.

I demand A2A to release high quality add on for MSFS at once!🙃🙂 Now lets wait and see if it worked !😆

22 minutes ago, Waldo Pepper said:

I demand that you personally create a state of the art,  high fidelity simulation project,  one that must be wrapped in state of the art artwork.    Don't stay on the bleachers,   get in the game.   Ok,  I'm not being serous. 😁

But what I mean is, we are talking about people.  We are talking about people with different talents.   We have the old school devs who can build systems that would make NASA proud,  yet they lack that intrinsic thing that allows them to create beautiful textures that bring home that visual representation.    They build great simulations,  but they let your eyes down compared to others.      Faithful systems,  but FSX looks.

We have devs that have very strong artistic talents,  and are able to give us a rich,  state of the art visual experience.    But some of them don't have what it takes to build a faithful in depth representation of the systems.    Some don't even want to,  don't even consider it an important factor.

What we are talking about is artists,  and art.   I don't walk up to a piece that doesn't appeal to me and start telling everyone who'll listen why it's utter word not allowed.     

Then you throw the realities of the sim into the mix.   Half of the people don't know and don't care what the sim allows,  or doesn't.    Personally,  I wouldn't ever want to be a dev.     

 

Although I don't disagree with the work in progress that is MSFS, a lot of it boils down to developer not wanted to write custom LNAV/NVAV  Autopilot and wants to rely on Asobo instead.  WT has proven that you can do all the things you want in the sim if you go the custom routes. It's a lot more work for developer so I can see why some are hesitant to go that route. That being said, it's true the SDK needs some features and better documentation but what I have seen so far after only 1 year is nothing short of outstanding. I never seen so much content created for MSFS. Some of us will just needs to hang on for the ride, it might be bumpy but we will get there.

5 hours ago, AviatorMan said:

 We flight simmers should not put up with this! We should demand high quality models, even if we have to pay more, and stop rewarding mediocrity. We need to get their attention. Vote with our wallets.

... and then you went and "... purchased their PA44 and M20R out of desperation". Sorry, but you lost me there!

3 hours ago, Chock said:

Nobody is stopping anyone from demanding better for themselves. If you don't buy stuff you don't like because it's not up to your standards, that's exactly what you have done.

Too true.. if there aren’t rave reviews on a forum such as this one or a YouTube review out there I don’t buy it. It’s that simple. It’s not easy to be duped nowadays. Arm yourself with information it is all out there.

Edited October 18, 20214 yr by Azapata87

17 minutes ago, SierraDelta said:

... and then you went and "... purchased their PA44 and M20R out of desperation". Sorry, but you lost me there!

So often first adopters are their own worst enemy. Helps developers pass break-even with the first release.  It rewards underdevelopment.  Guess what we need to protect us from us is a 30-day money-back guarantee. 

I *might* be in the minority here, but I for one think there are multiple sweet spots in price / quality / systems for different users But there is an area that is definitely lacking, and that is super model with easier systems. I think the default airplanes, including airliners, do a fantastic job in this regard, and while I understand a some/ a lot of user want more accurate systems and complexity, I love the balance of the default aircrafts. However, it seems most third party aircrafts have (or will have since a lot are not out yet) either abysmal textures and systems, or superb modeling and systems that are near study level and take an hour before flying and required custom nav databases, don't support the default flight planner, etc.

So to be back on topic, I agree there should be of higher quality in general, but I also think not everything needs to be PMDG level.

Basically, I would like to see something like the Aerosoft CRJ, but with support for the default nav database and integrated checklist for a decent price. I think this area of the market (call us casual simmers if you will) is severely lacking, and offers from Virtual Col are just not cutting it in a world where default aircrafts look 5 times better.

3 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

As much as I would like to believe you when you say "pay more" the reality is the majority of DLC consumers don't want to pay more.

Overall I agree. But give me a GA twin with the dynamics and systems depth of a Realair Duke or Turbine Duke v2, with available and equivalent addon avionics, and I will pay more than I paid for MSFS itself.  Just putting my mouth where my hours have been....  So far, after now 14 months, there are only two such addon aircraft, and neither is in my sweet spot!  Not wanting to start a viral argument, I will not name those two.  They know who they are.... 🙄

When  I started this topic my goal simply was to point out that there is a fairly large difference between the progress made in the simulators, from FS9 through FSX and P3D and now MSFS, and the little progress made during that period by aircraft addons. Some of you  have mentioned other good addons, e.g., Milviz C310 and B55 and RealAir's Duke B60. Yes I agree that these are all good. I have them all. But they came out several years ago. In the meantime the sims have progressed through several versions of P3D and now MSFS. The aircraft addons could have progressed more during this period. Yes I confess: I bought Carenado's PA44 and M20R. I did shortly after I installed MSFS and saw on this forum that several people recommended them. It was early days and I was hoping for better. And sorry if the verb 'demand' has annoyed some of you, but as customers we deserve more and I think it is not unreasonable that we demand more of ourselves as well as the developers. Lockheed has delivered and now Microsoft has delivered. The aircraft addon developers can do better as well, but they may not if we as consumers do not make it clear that we want them to.