Randazzo from PMDG on demand for P3D products

[flycln 435]

22 minutes ago, threegreen said:

Communication on this matter has been messy and he's not always been clear about it.

But that's the thing. Communication is messy because he changes what he says all the time. There's no need for you to make excuses for his marketing spin. He says whatever will sound good to customers at the time of posting. When he was trying to sell the 200ER, he told people the virtual cockpit update is incoming soon-ish.

Then suddenly it all depends on the MSFS development when originally he states only the full next version of the 777 is dependent on MSFS development, not the cockpit.

I'm amazed people still fall for Randazzo's posts. Randazzo and Aerosoft's big Kok are infamous for their long posts that look like they're being transparent when in reality it's all just marketing drivel. They're the worst guys in the flight sim scene when it comes to that.

Edited February 12, 2022 by flycln

[Tim_Capps 474]

10 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Anyway, time to unfollow this thread, it was more bait anyway.

Boy that's the truth. Fourteen pages of word not allowed that does not in the least advance my enjoyment of this hobby. My joke about a subforum "Reports of the Death of P3D" feel a little less like a joke by now. I am nearly a free speech absolutist and believe people should be able to discuss whatever they want. I'm beginning to wonder if the P3D forum is the right place. I'm enthused about P3D. There's a compact, knowledgeable community here. But this is getting old.

[pgde 571]

Agreed Tim. I think moderators need to take a more active role (and yes I am a moderator in other sites).

[threexgreen 3,135]

1 hour ago, flycln said:

But that's the thing. Communication is messy because he changes what he says all the time. There's no need for you to make excuses for his marketing spin. He says whatever will sound good to customers at the time of posting. When he was trying to sell the 200ER, he told people the virtual cockpit update is incoming soon-ish.

Then suddenly it all depends on the MSFS development when originally he states only the full next version of the 777 is dependent on MSFS development, not the cockpit.

I'm amazed people still fall for Randazzo's posts. Randazzo and Aerosoft's big Kok are infamous for their long posts that look like they're being transparent when in reality it's all just marketing drivel. They're the worst guys in the flight sim scene when it comes to that.

I'm not making excuses for anyone or anything. I've followed all the development updates on this from the beginning and what I posted is how I understand what he said and I'm well aware that there is quite a lot of marketing. It's getting a bit tiring that whenever one doesn't join in on the criticism one gets called out for making excuses, falling for whatever or being a PMDG-sycophant. Especially now with the sentiment they're abandoning P3D it's like you have to be careful not to get your fingers burned. I just don't see this topic as being much of an issue except that they should be more direct in communication on it, that's all.

[OzWhitey 3,353]

10 hours ago, Tim_Capps said:

Boy that's the truth. Fourteen pages of word not allowed that does not in the least advance my enjoyment of this hobby. My joke about a subforum "Reports of the Death of P3D" feel a little less like a joke by now. I am nearly a free speech absolutist and believe people should be able to discuss whatever they want. I'm beginning to wonder if the P3D forum is the right place. I'm enthused about P3D. There's a compact, knowledgeable community here. But this is getting old.

OP is literally MSFS’s biggest booster and P3D’s biggest detractor, if you go over and read the MSFS forums.

Yes, this is actually bait, and the P3D forum has fallen for it yet again.

I would genuinely support a subforum for this kind of thread. They’re all effectively the same and they all insinuate that P3D is dying or dead.

It’s not healthy for a community to have so many negative threads about the worth or future of its core product.

P3D is the best it’s ever been. It’s a great platform for simulating airliner ops, and we can certainly use it proudly without feeling we’re somehow using a lesser or obsolete sim.

 

Edited February 13, 2022 by OzWhitey

[psolk 3,037]

5 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

and we can certainly use it proudly without feeling we’re somehow using a lesser or obsolete sim.

 

People can say whatever they like but only you can control how you feel and there is no reason to feel like that regardless of what people say.

[abrams_tank 7,393]

1 hour ago, OzWhitey said:

OP is literally MSFS’s biggest booster and P3D’s biggest detractor, if you go over and read the MSFS forums.

Yes, this is actually bait, and the P3D forum has fallen for it yet again.

I resent you saying this.  From the very beginning, I have said I was interested in the business side of the P3D home consumer market and what this information from PMDG means.  There was a fruitful discussion about this on pages 6 and 7 of this thread, when simbol responded and virtuali responded with their analysis of the PMDG sales numbers, and shared their own sales experience with their P3D sales numbers.  Those were some of the best posts in this thread that shed some light on what is happening in the home market for P3D add-ons. While the sales for aircraft add-ons from many 3rd party aircraft devs are not so good right now for P3D, virtuali responded that FSDreamTeam products for P3D are still doing okay - this is something I wouldn't have known without virtuali's contribution.

There was also some other good information to come from this thread, such as thegreen mentioning PMDG still plans to make the updates for the 777 VC for P3D, which some people either didn't know about, or had acquired bad information about.

Anyways, since simbol's and virtuali's posts, I have not seen any more productive discussion on the sales numbers, and no other contribution by 3rd party devs like simbol and virtuali.  So for me, this thread has outlived its usefulness (unless different 3rd party devs aside from simbol and virtuali come and contribute, which I would then be interested to read).  If I were deliberately baiting, as you accuse me of, then I would not ask for this thread to be closed.

And as of now, I ask the mods to close this thread. 

Edited February 13, 2022 by abrams_tank

[jcomm 5,890]

If simmers could be more objective about what they look after in a flight simulator ( and I'm a good example of someone who quite often does not... ) these sort of threads wouldn't grow in the very 1st place because they would be busy playing their sims instead, and enjoying what each offers.

The OP is also a frequent contributor at the XP forums, and the mindset is that of someone who is really very happy, or needs to believe he feels that way, about a flight simulator platform he owns and wants to invest in. It's a kind of situation I often find myself in as well, posting / starting threads just like those the OP posts / starts - no problem with that I guess because this is the place ( a flight simulation forum where we all gather to share our passion, sometimes in a passionate way..., and naturally looking after more people who enjoy this or that just like we do, or trying to get them to also enjoy what we like so much), athough with age I have tried to develop some strategies to avoid acting sometimes silly trying to rise what I want to like about some sim to the highest levels of relevance...

The energy spent in starting and maintaining the resulting thread for this kind of posts would probably be used more effectively playing our preferred sims, doing what pleases us about it, trying to train using scenarios for various possible RW situations that a flight simulator provides us a safe way to reproduce in a desktop PC.

In my case everytime I found myself falling in the temptation of starting some kind of thread ike those that the OP usually starts, and that happened and still happens to me many times, here at AVSIM and other forums, it was mostly due to getting very decepted with some flight simulation platform from which I was expecting / dreaming of getting a lot more. Being disappointed makes us search for some compensation and when a tittle like MFS is released, with all of the associated marketing hype, it is just the right lifebuoy to fetch and embrace, sometimes being a bit blind about it's true qualities / capabilities. I have started quite a few threads about how Great! MFS IS ! here at AVSIM, and also, sometimes, comparing it to another sim ( usually XP )...

I can't blame the OP, I feel his enthusiasm, and I myself felt very enthusiastic about MFS eventually being able to become the reference in terms of civil flight simulation, but with time and although I still see it as an excellent platform, and a project that is growing and getting a lot of support from a dedicated and skilled team, I also found myself revisiting P3D ( now in v5 ) and the few but excellent add-ons I have for it, like AtiveSky, ORBX Global and their freeware enhancement products and the FSLabs A319/20. These can create just the right environment I look after when simulating airline flying in an Airbus is what I look for, although, I must confess, the FBW A320 freeware for MFS is now more often my choice, even being a lot less complete than the FSLabs fleet, and I am really looking fwd for the Fénix...

As a RW glider pilot I have long wanted to be able to find in a flight simulator something that could be of use to my RL trainning and proficiency. It was never possible with MS FS / P3D, and even XP presented so far a lot of limitations. There were titles like SFS v3, SilentWings and Condorsoaring which provided me with the closest to real representation of soaring flight. In the end I decided not to use desktop flight simulators to "play" glider flying because I know for sure I will always smash against their limitations in reproducing what I look after in a flight simulation of soaring, but, again, I can try to be more objective and decide to use a tittle like MFS simply for task reparation and terrain familiarization, something that MFS offers extraodinarily well without a huge investment in payware sceneries, or having to build my own areas using some tools ( like in XP ). So, if I want to simulate soaring, I pick Condor or MFS depending on the specific objective, if it is an A319 / 320, I choose P3D + FSLabs ( I also used to use Toliss n XP11 but I am now on hold for XP12 ), if it's a NEO I go FBW A320 NEO in MFS, and so on... I couldn't care less about the finance / sales of a particular platform, and even less about what Randazzo or the like want to pass about their plans or opinions on a given platform - All I want is to use it and feel it's worth using while it lasts ...

 

Edited February 13, 2022 by jcomm

[Ray Proudfoot 8,927]

5 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

And as of now, I ask the mods to close this thread. 

Request granted.