1 hour ago, Cognita said:

 I have lost a good deal of confidence in what they say -- for example, where has been the bi-weekly updates to the 737? We are nearing 6 weeks since release with one small update.

 

 

And this is another example where I can't get my head around this guy.

Why would he make such statements, I don't get it. Unfortunately, none of his releases are/was finished!

Really, he needs to stop interacting with people in this way and let somebody professional, with skills and no ego to take care of his business. 

All these misleading statements are just hurting.

And to be honest, I'm just speaking for myself here, when I want to buy a product and I hear that a company has financial difficulties or they are in need of money for whatever reasons I stay away. We all know that companies like that cut corners on everything.

 

 

2 hours ago, LRBS said:

And this is another example where I can't get my head around this guy.

Why would he make such statements, I don't get it. Unfortunately, none of his releases are/was finished!

Really, he needs to stop interacting with people in this way and let somebody professional, with skills and no ego to take care of his business. 

All these misleading statements are just hurting.

I agree in principle, but to be fair, he's not talking about bugs here but about releasing products that are feature complete, which the 737 for MSFS is not because it has yet to receive features communicated pre-release like an EFB, new cabin, new LNAV, etc. which was never the case before. Going by bugs only would make any other aircraft addon unfinished too, like the Fenix which needs polish in some areas. It also isn't far from what PMDG are doing, since IAEs and sharklets are features yet to come.

I was only referring to the wrong statement where he says "In the past, PMDG held development cycles until a product was fully finished and then released it." 

Which, I hope that we agree (or perhaps not) that all his products are not fully finished based on even their acknowledgment and statements of the nature that they are testing different items.

In my opinion, based on what was said I strongly disagree with that.

I'm not even touching MSFS.

5 hours ago, LRBS said:

I was only referring to the wrong statement where he says "In the past, PMDG held development cycles until a product was fully finished and then released it." 

Which, I hope that we agree (or perhaps not) that all his products are not fully finished based on even their acknowledgment and statements of the nature that they are testing different items.

In my opinion, based on what was said I strongly disagree with that.

I'm not even touching MSFS.

you're confusing "fully finished" with "perfection."  has there ever been a software product that was released in the perfect state, besides windowsME? 

Edited June 17, 20223 yr by kdfw__

2 hours ago, kdfw__ said:

you're confusing "fully finished" with "perfection."  has there ever been a software product that was released in the perfect state, besides windowsME? 

Yes.

Windows 2000 SP4.  Absolute bliss 😄

4 hours ago, kdfw__ said:

you're confusing "fully finished" with "perfection."  has there ever been a software product that was released in the perfect state, besides windowsME? 

Red dead redemption 2.  Flawless. 

Déjà Vue... in times of Fly! 2 they did exactly the same, leaving customers with useless / unsuported 757 abd 767...

 

I really do not know what is going on with some flight simmers these days. I purchased the 737NGX and 777 for FSX in the past, and then the 737NGX/777/747 for P3D after that. Can someone please enlighten me as to what was incomplete about any of them?

Edited June 17, 20223 yr by Christopher Low

7 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I really do not know what is going on with some flight simmers these days. I purchased the 737NGX and 777 for FSX in the past, and then the 737NGX/777/747 for P3D after that. Can someone please enlighten me as to what was incomplete about any of them? The P3D version of the 737NGX is now eight years old (and based on the FSX version that was released in 2011), and it is still a magnificent piece of kit. The suggestion that none of PMDGs products have ever been "finished" is ridiculous.

I had no problems with the ngxu. The 777 still lacks pbr virtual cockpit. It’s still pretty low quality. Also lacks rain effects.  Now if visuals are unimportant, then people probably wouldn’t care about that stuff. 

10 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I really do not know what is going on with some flight simmers these days.

I agree with you. There's so much dissatisfaction about little things. I guess it is because the competition of the sims. Some may feel the need to have the better planes. Some fear their sim is discontinued if it does not become better than the other. Addon aircraft are important and graphical advantages like @micstatic mentions. I really feel bad, that I don't mind no pbr in the cockpit. 😉

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

I really do not know what is going on with some flight simmers these days. I purchased the 737NGX and 777 for FSX in the past, and then the 737NGX/777/747 for P3D after that. Can someone please enlighten me as to what was incomplete about any of them?

It's a question of the way users can expect support for a given platform, based on the expectations / promisses and their investment, I guess.

I never bought the NGXi, and actually one of the worst decisions I made was buying the 777 twice, first for FSX and then for P3D ( which costed a "little fortune" for no real benefit, but that's another story, and yet I did buy the DC-6 and the 737 for the new platform - MFS ), but I read from NGXi users and in this thread that the so called LNAV v2 ( wasn't even aware of it ... ) which was suposed to become available for P3D, still an active flight simulation platform, will apparently no longer see it's way into it.

This unfortunately reminded me of when I bought the PMDG 767 / 757 for Fly! 2 and then with the advent of fsx ( maybe fs9 ? I don't recall exactly which one... ) Robert announced that they would cease further support for the Fly! platform, leaving an unfinished product in the hands of their customers. I don't think this is fair, so, although I no longer use P3D, I came across this thread and couldn't avoid showing my simpathy to those who are unhappy with it.

Edited June 17, 20223 yr by jcomm

The criticism of the 777 VC will probably remain one of the world's greatest mysteries. I simply do not understand it. Maybe it is because I only see it at 1080p resolution (with 2048x2048 texture quality) on a 24" widescreen monitor, but it looks very nice to me in P3Dv4.5HF2. Maybe some people do not like the lack of PBR textures, but that cannot be classed as an unfinished item. I am perfectly happy with a VC without PBR textures, but I appreciate that some people consider it to be more important to their daily life than water

5 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

The criticism of the 777 VC will probably remain one of the world's greatest mysteries. I simply do not understand it. Maybe it is because I only see it at 1080p resolution (with 2048x2048 texture quality) on a 24" widescreen monitor, but it looks very nice to me in P3Dv4.5HF2. Maybe some people do not like the lack of PBR textures, but that cannot be classed as an unfinished item. I am perfectly happy with a VC without PBR textures, but I appreciate that some people consider it to be more important to their daily life than water

My biggest complaint about the 777 since fsx is the way they modeled the C*U law.. IMO they didn't get it right since the beginning and were never able to fix it ...

Out of curiosity: Understanding the "Boeing FBW" C* U Law... - PMDG 777 - The AVSIM Community

In my case I couldn't care less about VC. Actually I would rather prefer to use 2d panels if theyr were available, just as I did with the FSLabs A320 / 19.

Edited June 17, 20223 yr by jcomm

1 hour ago, jcomm said:

It's a question of the way users can expect support for a given platform, based on the expectations / promisses and their investment, I guess.

I never bought the NGXi, and actually one of the worst decisions I made was buying the 777 twice, first for FSX and then for P3D ( which costed a "little fortune" for no real benefit, but that's another story, and yet I did buy the DC-6 and the 737 for the new platform - MFS ), but I read from NGXi users and in this thread that the so called LNAV v2 ( wasn't even aware of it ... ) which was suposed to become available for P3D, still an active flight simulation platform, will apparently no longer see it's way into it.

This unfortunately reminded me of when I bought the PMDG 767 / 757 for Fly! 2 and then with the advent of fsx ( maybe fs9 ? I don't recall exactly which one... ) Robert announced that they would cease further support for the Fly! platform, leaving an unfinished product in the hands of their customers. I don't think this is fair, so, although I no longer use P3D, I came across this thread and couldn't avoid showing my simpathy to those who are unhappy with it.

I think the LNAV v2 will probably make it to the P3D products eventually. As most of the logic developed would be transferrable between the P3D and MSFS lines.

Although the 777 VC almost certainly is dead I'd say. 

1 hour ago, jcomm said:

although I no longer use P3D

Well that explains it right away. Why should PMDG further invest time and money into P3D if people leave it?

The initial problem is, they sell products not finished and we buy it without hesitation even knowing it's not finished.