flightsim.to premium

[RALF9636 1,646]

24 minutes ago, vbazillio said:

    

 

 

Hey guys, you're going to put too much light there... c'mon, I'm just a passionate and really (really) amateur freeware scenery developer 😉 At first, I was suspicious on how regular users would get treated on flightsim.to (premium), then was concerned by the ToS. AFAIK, I never announced anything 😉. For those interested: I've decided to stay on flightsim.to.

I benefit widely of the exposure, publicity, features and ease of use of the fs.to platform. Part of my dedication and passion of sharing my amateur work is also having the simmers feedback and building a community (other developers build object for my own scenery for free). Flightsim.to played a big role there, as well as forum like AVSIM, official MSFS forum and Facebook groups, just to name a few. All participate to create a new exciting momentum to give back to the sim. community. For example, I receive a message from within flightsim.to platform from a passionate simmer asking me to continue to share my sceneries on fs.to. 

I fully understand that some freeware or payware developers decided to leave fs.to. Fair enough. I respect their choice. No misunderstanding, I also benefit from this buzz allowing some room for improvement on fs.to. Personally, I can easily make all my uploads at fs.to, useless and outdated.to. And I really pay attention to the users of my work via fs.to and was initially much concerned by the Premium access which seems finally a no brainer. But I’ll keep paying close attention there.

All this story, burn off too much of my spare time, yet sparse as I have to work to pay the bill (and the flight hours), nor I have ambitious to make a sim. business 😉. I prefer getting back to my Blender/MSFS Scenery Editor/Gimp and continue my future Page, KPGA airport. 

This is the most reasonable post in the whole thread.

Thank you!

And I am already planning a flight from Oceano to Page. Looking forward.

I enjoy your work a lot!

 

[Stearmandriver 1,848]

6 hours ago, Sonosusto said:

Flightsim.to Terms Of Service have been the same for over a year now. It was not new.

Where did I say it was new?

[Stearmandriver 1,848]

2 hours ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

and creators would have just left without looking back.

Many creators did.  What we're discussing here is the odd community temper tantrum in response to them doing that; this entitled attitude that somehow people deserve to have all mods in what they deem to be a convenient place.

The important point is, it doesn't matter what you or I think about what someone else does with THEIR work.  It's not our work; we aren't even entitled to an opinion over it.

I don't have any opinion on people leaving .to or not; I've said I can understand why some chose to do so.  But I'm not saying I think they should or shouldn't have.

I'm saying that they should do what they decide is right for their work.  I'm further pointing out the silliness inherent in random Internet people claiming that they're somehow wrong for doing so.

[Reader 1,889]

On 2/17/2023 at 7:35 PM, superspud said:

https://flightsim.to/premium/
Interesting that this hasn't been raised here yet. 
The flightsim.to premium experience has arrived.
Are you cock-a-hoop or waiting for the walls to close in? 
For me my internet is so painfully slow the main premium benefit would make no difference at all.
And I adblock the hell out of everything anyway. 

This is how it all started.
33 pages later......

[mrueedi 702]

7 hours ago, edu2703 said:

I understand the concerns of certain devs with the intellectual right over their content. If they feel the site's deletion policy in any way infringes their intellectual rights iver its content, it's their right to think that and post their content elsewhere.

Indeed, the choice for a dev basically is either "deleting my addon is cumbersome" or "Yes, I can delete my addon, but I dont have to anymore, because on that other platform most users won't bother to even find it".

Its also a bit misleading looking at the large famous devs. Hendriks ships maybe will live on when hosted somewhere else (and they deserve it!). But e.g. my 5-6 addons, which are hosted on fs.to, are downloaded less than 10 times per day. I have no doubts, that moving them to another platform in principal would be the same like actually deleting them alltogether. As a small dev I do have users in mind and the convenience for users. I do appreciate the range fs.to is giving me. Without that, my freeware work would probably not exist.

[mamu82 278]

6 hours ago, Sonosusto said:

This has been discussed several times already.

Flightsim.to Terms Of Service have been the same for over a year now. It was not new. Well over a year ago. There are several posts discussing this. In fact, if those developers were so frustrated with FSTO's decisions then they should have stopped updating their mods well over a year ago.

Not to mention that GotFriends would never had the exposure they have now (the deserve all that exposure as their products are awesome). Not to mention we have only heard one side of the story as of yet.

 

Wrong, TOS changed, without a notice or approval to NO ONE (developers and users)

in autumn 2022 (november 2022 iirc)

tos was still ok in August 19th 2022

Proof:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220819150640/https://flightsim.to/legal/terms

 

That tos was ok for Developers, cause contained the ability to remove user content avoiding .to transfer their hard work under another (theirs) username.

This is the core of the problem

Luckily the drama happened, user reacted, Dev reacted, .to reacted, and now the TOS is ok back again ☺️

Hope .to had is lesson and will avoid sudden terms of services changes without express confirmation (illegal in most of the civil world)

 

 

 

[Der Zeitgeist 1,575]

21 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

Many creators did.  What we're discussing here is the odd community temper tantrum in response to them doing that; this entitled attitude that somehow people deserve to have all mods in what they deem to be a convenient place.

The important point is, it doesn't matter what you or I think about what someone else does with THEIR work.  It's not our work; we aren't even entitled to an opinion over it.

Thank you very much, but I can assure you people here can decide for themselves perfectly fine what "we" are discussing here and if they have an opinion about something, without you trying to police the thread. 😏

[superspud 421]

16 minutes ago, Reader said:

This is how it all started.
33 pages later......

I feel like a proud parent. 

[andy1252 3,354]

3 minutes ago, superspud said:

I feel like a proud parent. 

Nice one!

Shame the kid grew up to be such an obnoxious teenager <grin>

[Dominique_K 9,913]

2 hours ago, andy1252 said:

grew up to be such an obnoxious 

Why ? The fact that it went to 33 pages without the need for moderation reflects well on this community. Heated debate but mostly courteous. 

[honanhal 1,419]

2 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

The important point is, it doesn't matter what you or I think about what someone else does with THEIR work.  It's not our work; we aren't even entitled to an opinion over it.

Your argument is that if someone is legally allowed to do something, then no one is allowed to criticize them for doing it? Sorry, that’s pretty wild! Maybe think through all the implications of that proposition.

You can side 100% with the IP creators without needing to make the claim that “we aren’t even entitled an opinion.”

James

[BrammyH 334]

3 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

Many creators did.  What we're discussing here is the odd community temper tantrum in response to them doing that; this entitled attitude that somehow people deserve to have all mods in what they deem to be a convenient place.

I feel its best to address this at least in my specifics.

For me, it's either it's on FSTO or it's not, in a very literal sense. My add on are generally in to buckets: liveries, and international airports. The last mini bucket are the minor QOL adding like SimPanel, and a pushback panel.

I went to flightsim.com and looked for liveries. The side bar when I clicked on "MSFS Liveries" in the pull down was literally 0. It said "airbus liveries available 0; Boeing Liveries available 0" Flywaysimulations had some, but the ones I found were for the default a320. None of the sites seem to be good at easily displaying how old the add on is.

The developer for the KLGA freeware add-on just released a new one. Searching for KLGA on flyaway simulations yielded a lot of FSX and P3D airports and, oddly, a ton of autocad files. Flightsim.com at least let me view scenery by date uploaded, but no fine grained sub categories like I get on fs.to.

After that, Googling anything related to liveries was a hot mess.

I am loyal to fs.to in the same way I am loyal to Amazon. If a book exists, I am likely to find it on Amazon. If an add-on exists, I am likely to find it on .to. If one of the other sites rises to the challenge, and folks upload their add ons there, I have zero issue going there to find what is new.

 

[Twenty6 670]

3 hours ago, Reader said:

This is how it all started.
33 pages later......

Longer than some marriages, but with many more "lawyers."

[Nemo 1,253]

5 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

A great and refreshing post, Vincent  !

For me Vincent is one of the best. Passionate, too unobstruive and very friendly. And I really enjoy his work.

[Nemo 1,253]

5 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

Why ? The fact that it went to 33 pages without the need for moderation reflects well on this community. Heated debate but mostly courteous. 

Yes, imo this is one of the best threads in the recent time. Goes up and down with some heat, but mostly very respectful and it has a development which is not always the case here on AVSIM when you find yourself in an argumentation circle ...

Edited February 24 by Nemo