11 hours ago, bendead said:

We will get a SU in February mostly on bug fixing, but will it be enough?

Considering Asobo's proven track record, fixing bugs will more than likely introduce other bugs, no it won't.

25 minutes ago, liamp51 said:

If he would just specify what exactly Asobo needs to change/implement, I think we'd be a lot better off. The whole "update" strikes me as more of an attempt to rile up the community than to actually inform us about the development of the product. RSR of all people should know that the "hardcore simmers" don't want to beat around the bush. 

 

He talked about one of the issues in the live stream.  Not sure abut the others.  It sounded like it's more sim related and not aircraft related.  I think it was regarding loading and saving sim states, which is integral to the overall QOL of the aircraft.  Not sure about the rest.  He probably figured it wasn't really worth getting in to.  He did say these issues directly benefit all devs, not just them.

Either way, we need to be on their side whether we like RSR or not...lol.

Could be a bit slow going with the required fix for the moment, things will likely slow down over the new year. We'll see what the next year brings.

13 minutes ago, Jeff Nielsen said:

He talked about one of the issues in the live stream.  Not sure abut the others.  It sounded like it's more sim related and not aircraft related.  I think it was regarding loading and saving sim states, which is integral to the overall QOL of the aircraft.  Not sure about the rest.  He probably figured it wasn't really worth getting in to.  He did say these issues directly benefit all devs, not just them.

Either way, we need to be on their side whether we like RSR or not...lol.

Hmm interesting. I'm sure they'll get it ironed out. 

10 hours ago, Krakin said:

I've seen him admit that updates were rushed out the door and I've seen him speak candidly many times about issues 3PDs are facing with the SDK. Y'all need to stop.

All that does is make Neumann a master of the incredibly obvious and telling us what he thinks we want to hear.  We've seen little to no positive effort in resolving these issues.

Edited December 9, 20214 yr by JeffF

50 minutes ago, Jeff Nielsen said:

He talked about one of the issues in the live stream.  Not sure abut the others.  It sounded like it's more sim related and not aircraft related.  I think it was regarding loading and saving sim states, which is integral to the overall QOL of the aircraft.  Not sure about the rest.  He probably figured it wasn't really worth getting in to.  He did say these issues directly benefit all devs, not just them.

Either way, we need to be on their side whether we like RSR or not...lol.

I didn't want to intervene on this topic, which I'm following and reading nonetheless*. I've also listened to about half the live stream so far and I find his intervention courageous and bold, knowing that today's news won't be pleasant to hear but the truth is the truth and I believe he spoke it rightfully.

Nevertheless I'm quoting you not only to confirm I've eared pretty much the same items you've listed, but I believe I've also eared him saying something along the lines of: "They require something to be installed on their customer computers and they need Asobo to build the necessary facilities for this"

I'm not sure I eared it right though?!

 

*if not by curiosity, at least because today's comments are highly resonating to me with the comments I made a while back about the limitations of the FS2020 SDK, how it is limiting 3rd party vendor creativity in general, and how it is preventing us from making our own products in particular (and why this has nothing to do with the Garmin trainer in itself either).

Edited December 9, 20214 yr by RXP

Just now, RXP said:

I didn't want to intervene on this topic, which I'm following and reading nonetheless*. I've also listened to about half the live stream so far and I find his intervention courageous and bold, knowing that today's news won't be pleasant to hear but the truth is the truth and I believe he spoke it rightfully.

I'm quoting you not only to confirm I've eared pretty much the same items you've listed, but I believe I've also eared him saying something along the lines of: "They require something to be installed on their customer computers and they need Asobo to build the necessary facilities for this"

I'm not sure I eared it right though?!

 

*if not by curiosity, at least because today's comments are highly resonating to me with the comments I made a while back about the limitations of the FS2020 SDK, how it is limiting 3rd party vendor creativity in general, and how it is preventing us from making our own products in particular (and why this has nothing to do with the Garmin trainer in itself either).

No, you're pretty much right on.  I think a lot of people are hearing it wrong.  Robert is just being 'literal'....kind of word for word spelling it out so to speak.  He's not mad at ASOBO, but that the situation itself is just frustrating and they need these things to get the 37 out the door in a timely manner.  It's perfectly understandable.

4 hours ago, Jeff Nielsen said:

I do, still think they will.  How soon is the big question.  It needs to happen soon, IMO.

I wholeheartedly agree.  Plus, I believe the long interlude between SU7 and SU8 is sufficient to get a lot of buggy issues sorted it out, versus introducing new features.

3 minutes ago, Noel said:

I wholeheartedly agree.  Plus, I believe the long interlude between SU7 and SU8 is sufficient to get a lot of buggy issues sorted it out, versus introducing new features.

Even if you take out the 37 and whatever else....I think it's just time.  We need to get these core issues ironed out and the APIs, SIMVARS (whatever else), done and ready to go.  

This 2nd year for the sim needs to be the start of it's maturity and golden age...platinum age for us if all goes right...hehe.

9 hours ago, JDWalley said:

I know RSR is viewed as a god around here (and, considering the contributions PMDG has made to flight simming, I can well understand why), but I fail to see how we could go from a confident "end of this year, maybe beginning of the next" to "Asobo needs to implement this (unspecified) additional functionality if we're going to be able to release this product at all, and there's as yet no indication they plan to do so."  Certainly, you'd think PMDG would be perceptive enough to identify the needed functionality a long time ago, possibly even before coding began, and not proceed all the way to beta stage before suddenly discovering these things are needed.  There's a certain air of "I'm shocked - shocked! - to find out gambling is taking place on these premises" about this.

So I think Randazzo's estimates are all over the place.

Having said that, in software development, sometimes the you complete 90% of the project, and the last 10% of the project looks easy to do and you think you will complete the project soon, but it turns out the last 10% of the project takes 90% of the time to complete.

I have underestimated a lot of tasks in software development because on the surface, the task looks easy to do.  But when you actually do the task and you get into the details, you find out that it's not that easy to do at all.  Conversely, I rarely overestimate a task in software development and end up completing the task earlier than expected.

So based on the interview that Randazzo gave with Fabio, it seems like PMDG + Asobo estimated a few tasks were easy to do, and Randazzo based the release date of the 737 on that information.  But when Asobo had to actually implement the feature, it is much harder and it's taking much longer than anticipated.  I can sympathize with this, because this is the nature of software development.

14 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

So I think Randazzo's estimates are all over the place.

What else is new? I have been following development cycles at PMDG since the 737 was developed for FSX.

And that is how it went all the time. "Soon" translates to 9-12 Months on average. "We are entering Beta" means up to 6 Months until release. 😉 

Edited December 9, 20214 yr by Farlis

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

So based on the interview that Randazzo gave with Fabio, it seems like PMDG + Asobo estimated a few tasks were easy to do, and Randazzo based the release date of the 737 on that information.  But when Asobo had to actually implement the feature, it is much harder and it's taking much longer than anticipated.  I can sympathize with this, because this is the nature of software development.

I understood it a bit differently. Asobo doesn't estimated anything, Asobo is just supporting PMDG (when they have the time/resources to do so), like they are doing for the other 3rd party devs. PMDG needed a feature that's essential to the release of their fleet, but Asobo didn't have answered until now and they have decided to hold the announcement of any release dates.

He didn't say Asobo is taking longer to implement it, they just haven't answered to the request yet. He also stated he knows Asobo isn't working exclusively with them, so they have their own schedules and roadmaps.

4 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

I understood it a bit differently. Asobo doesn't estimated anything, Asobo is just supporting PMDG (when they have the time/resources to do so), like they are doing for the other 3rd party devs. PMDG needed a feature that's essential to the release of their fleet, but Asobo didn't have answered until now and they have decided to hold the announcement of any release dates.

He didn't say Asobo is taking longer to implement it, they just haven't answered to the request yet. He also stated he knows Asobo isn't working exclusively with them, so they have their own schedules and roadmaps.

That's now what I heard in the interview with Fabio.  Randazzo mentioned there were some features that "they" estimated was easy to do at first.  By "they," I think Randazzo was referring to Asobo, and I believe Randazzo was also referring to the SDK.

But it turned out that those features ended up more complex and weren't very easy to do.  That's what I heard in the interview with Fabio.

Randazzo also said Asobo hasn't answered some requests yet, but was that later in the interview?  

Anyways, did you tune in to the interview late?  Because Randazzo talks about the issue with Asobo earlier, then Fabio and Randazzo talk about some other stuff completely unrelated to the 737 and Asobo, and then they go back to talking about Asobo/737 again.

Edited December 9, 20214 yr by abrams_tank

2 hours ago, Farlis said:

What else is new? I have been following development cycles at PMDG since the 737 was developed for FSX.

And that is how it went all the time. "Soon" translates to 9-12 Months on average. "We are entering Beta" means up to 6 Months until release. 😉 

Sometimes I fail to understand this community. This sim is a little more than a year old and PMDG already delivered 1 complex aircraft. And it means nothing to the people. But as soon as PMDG faces issues, people see those as an unsurmountable wall. And people point their guns exclusively to Asobo/MS. People forgot all the other PMDG products that are taking forever to get released? Where's the airplanes they once promissed to develop for X-Plane? 

All that to say I believe their fleet will be released one day and that's not anyone's fault it will take longer, things are what they are.

Asobo has their own Agenda, as PMDG. Eventually both will converge and users will have amazing aircrafts on an amazing sim.

26 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

That's now what I heard in the interview with Fabio.  Randazzo mentioned there were some features that "they" estimated was easy to do at first.  By "they," I think Randazzo was referring to Asobo, and I believe Randazzo was also referring to the SDK.

But it turned out that those features ended up more complex and weren't very easy to do.  That's what I heard in the interview with Fabio.

Randazzo also said Asobo hasn't answered some requests yet, but was that later in the interview?  

Anyways, did you tune in to the interview late?  Because Randazzo talks about the issue with Asobo earlier, then Fabio and Randazzo talk about some other stuff completely unrelated to the 737 and Asobo, and then they go back to talking about Asobo/737 again.

I watched the VOD, the stream was already finished, so I watched it as a whole. But I think we have understood his statements quite differently. But my whole point is to say no one is really "guilty" of anything. PMDG and Asobo have their own agendas. And RSR himself knows that, he isn't "angry" with Asobo dev, and of course he shouldn't be. He has his own concerns about the MSFS development of course, and this is his role as a manager.

Also, we, the community, shouldn't be charging Asobo as the only culprit on this "mess". I really doubt Asobo has anything to do with the decision process of choosing a date to release the 737. PMDG should have done that when they were sure about everything. If they set that date believing Asobo would deliver feature X, Y and Z on any given day, they were naive. They are on the right direction now, they will announce a date when they are sure about it. 

And it's not, by far, the first time PMDG cancelled/postponed any of their releases, accross all platforms and working with different groups of developers. I'm still waiting for the updated 777 and the Global Flight Operations. LOL

Edited December 9, 20214 yr by ca_metal