On 3/14/2023 at 5:40 PM, Doering said:

Reviewers are doing no favours for anyone trying to convey accurate product information without doing the homework and studying the product adequately.

A very good point in my opinion. Reviews can be helpful, there's no question. But as someone else pointed out, there is a growing trend to be first on YT with the infamous "first look" reviews. Without naming names I can think of more than a few videos which are first-look for products that are at least a year old. So take what you see with a grain of salt and remember that while some reviewers are indeed popular they're also trying to monetize their channels.

I used to watch quite a few of them but I'm so put off now by how many wrong assumptions are made simply because someone didn't learn to fly the thing correctly. Or because it doesn't feel "like they imagined it would" yet they offer no real-world basis for comparison. It's unfortunate, because well-researched videos would have much more value for the flight sim community.

Jerome- once more into the breach mate….

I for one would like to see added depth and detail in the fuselage skin and VC. Despite all the dialogue, I feel it has room for improvement. As someone who spends the vast majority of time I the VC I’d suggest starting there first. As you state the canvas is large and thus the opportunities great. In re. your point about the DC-6, did you see the price tag for the DHC-4?

Then I’d really be interested in the start sequence and sound set. I shall keep searching YT but if you now have anything shareable, I’d be obliged.

I am happiest about your comments about ponderous flight feel as I would expect that from this aeroplane. I have not seen much commentary on her water behavior.

Please know that she holds great charm for many of us, and we are all hoping Pilot’s will smash her for a Six…

C

 

Edited March 16, 20233 yr by cavaricooper

17 hours ago, Dillon said:

4. Your documentation still states, 'P3D' proving it's a port.

Where in the two PDF files did you find "P3D" and how exactly does it prove that it's a port?

1 hour ago, bobcat999 said:

I agree also.   

I think Avsim forum members have tried to be been reasonable with their comments, and I am appalled to see decent people on here I have known for many years spoken to in such a way.

If I didn't know better I would say an account has been hacked! 

I also think everyone has had a right to reply, and the tone isn't getting any better, so I hope the moderators consider if the thread has outlived its usefulness now.

Anyway, to carry on with the Dragon's Den analogy - I'm out as well!

Rob, please go ahead and make me understand how this is a reasonable comment:

Your documentation still states, 'P3D' proving it's a port.

It is in no way, shape or form "reasonable"!

And so if I understand correctly, it should be perfectly acceptable for an AVSIM forum member to write such utter rubbish here, and that a developer has no right for calling it out as being just that, utter rubbish.

Jerome

19 minutes ago, crimplene said:

Where in the two PDF files did you find "P3D" and how exactly does it prove that it's a port?

Absolutely nowhere, this was made up by Dillon!

And by the tone of responses here, a developer is supposed to find it perfectly acceptable that an AVSIM forum member writes something like this.

Jerome

15 hours ago, Doering said:

...
Critical appraisal is a lost art as people believe what they read and hear without a second thought. You just have to read video comments and see that the readership follow these videos as absolute Gospel without a second thought. Hats off to Beckett for deleting the video.

Staying on track, we can hope that the updates turn this classic towards a better path.

Well said, Doering! I fully second your statement above and would like to remind everone of the good old days, when developers and vendors offered trial versions with limited capabilities like running time, only one airport or things like that.
Unfortunately modern times have made greed and fast profits (even if they are short lived only) the order of the day and I regret that very much 😞

Best wishes to all

5 hours ago, jarmstro said:

Agreed. I'll be spending my money elsewhere. If I'd seen some acknowledgement that the plane was less than perfect and that there would be ongoing improvements I might feel differently.

Now this is also absolute nonsense! Can´t you read and understand English? 😞
It has been said often enough by quite a few posters here -and that includes Jerome!- that it is imperfect and needs more work.
Even a first fix was announced for tomorrow!

Please read before posting such rubbish (sorry for that harsh word)

Edited March 16, 20233 yr by Scorpio47

15 hours ago, andy1252 said:

robably quite a few of us out here for whom that alone is enough. Just as long as we can get it in the air.

What you may not realize is that this would add significant development time and cost, which means the retail product would cost more. You can't just tell the sim "turn off all the button things!" Those buttons did stuff the sim requires in order for the plane to fly, so you have to reprogram the "easy mode" to do those things automatically. Same with wanting to eliminate secondary control surfaces. You'd have to code it to perform those functions automatically, because flaps have a real impact on how the plane flies so you would need some way to convince the sim that flaps are being used.

I certainly don't go down the sim-elitist road of thinking everyone should only fly PMDG and higher level planes, but it is a little unreasonable to expect a flight simulator to not simulate flight...

 

11 hours ago, PILOT'S said:

My posts here have been factual, if you wish to interpret them as defensive or offensive, so be it.

 

 

Yeah, on that. I work in public relations, and if you were one of our clients we'd be convening a crisis team right now. You are making potential customers decide they don't want to deal with you or your company which means that even if you are 100% right in everything you said, you are giving yourself a pay cut. Is lowering your income your objective?

You really should take a deep breath and think carefully about how your posts are perceived. Even if it is all the other posters' problem that they've "misinterpreted" you and you're purely "factual,"  (they haven't, you're not) when you're trying to sell things to other people, perception is everything. If they perceive you as being offensive and defensive, then whether you are or not, you are. Accusing customers of going off the deep end and forcefully asking what the "hell" they're on about is something a business owner should reserve for people who recruit for hate groups on their platform, not something you do to paying customers who don't happen to like some aspects of your product.

I'll give you an example of how you could change your messaging to actually achieve what you want. Take the p3d in the pdf bit. Let's say the person who accused you of that is wrong. Post "I'm so sorry that happened, would you be willing to tell us the page number so we can make that correction?"

Now you've come off as nice, reasonable and concerned about making sure your product is as it should be, and the other guy will come off as a blowhard when he can't pony up the details because they don't exist. 

Of course, that only works if the other guy actually is wrong, which is why you first open the pdf and do a search for "p3d" to make absolutely sure he's wrong.  It's entirely understandable if you copy/pasted stuff from the old plane's manual into the new one, because a lot of stuff isn't going to change just because it's a different sim platform, and it's entirely possible that in doing that, someone missed a reference to the old platform.

 

 

 

Edited March 16, 20233 yr by eslader

58 minutes ago, Scorpio47 said:

Can´t you read and understand English?

Yes, it's my native language. And I would never use a hyphen instead of a comma.🤣

6 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

And I would never use a hyphen instead of a comma.

Nor I.  Such bad form! 😎

10 minutes ago, btacon said:

Nor I.  Such bad form! 😎

Oh - I don't know!  

Please gents- let’s stay focused so this thread stays open. It would be a shame for this to be the reference post for future purchasers. 

I for one am looking forward to positive news after tomorrow’s update, and hope Pilot’s can steer the conversation towards civility instead of acrimony.

C

I think a new separate thread on user experience is the way to go from here. The purpose of this thread was to announce the release. What we ended up with is a mixed bag of everything from a user asking questions about a inop switch to how the developer rep bungled his reply. I’m ready to move away from this word stew onto something useful. 

 

4 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

I agree also.   

I think Avsim forum members have tried to be been reasonable with their comments, and I am appalled to see decent people on here I have known for many years spoken to in such a way.

If I didn't know better I would say an account has been hacked! 

I also think everyone has had a right to reply, and the tone isn't getting any better, so I hope the moderators consider if the thread has outlived its usefulness now.

Anyway, to carry on with the Dragon's Den analogy - I'm out as well!

Avsim forum participants can indeed decide to do their best to destroy a product and have in the past.

About 15 years ago their was a developer of the B737 from the UK that become a target like it was a birthday party game of kiddies, Pin the tail on the donkey, to compete for the most damage done. I had a copy of their 737-900 and it for the time was very good. Different than PMDG buy still very good. The attackers would go after anyone who dared to support this developer with personal attacks and spread BS. I remember it well as i was one of those targeted. Reminded me of being back in high school and watching the in crowd go after someone they wanted to stomp.

I see this thread going down the same road so it is time for the MOD to consider closing it. It would be interesting to know how many of these detractors have actually bought it.

What's really sad is that there is payware out right now that is real garbage  by developers who do not respond to support requests and it gets a pass.

Personally I will buy it after i finish upgrading my computer in the next 6-8 weeks.

 

Edited March 16, 20233 yr by dbw1
spelling (again)

15 minutes ago, dbw1 said:

Avsim forum participants can indeed decide to do their best to destroy a product and have in the past.

About 15 years ago their was a developer of the B737 from the UK that become a target like it was a birthday party game of kiddies, Pin the tail on the donkey, to compete for the most damage done. I had a copy of their 737-900 and it for the time was very good. Different than PMDG buy still very good. The attackers would go after anyone who dared to support this developer with personal attacks and spread BS. I remember it well as i was one of those targeted. Reminded me of being back in high school and watching the in crowd go after someone they wanted to stomp.

I see this thread going down the same road so it is time for the MOD to consider closing it. It would be interesting to know how many of these detractors have actually bought it.

What's really sad is that there is payware out right now that is real garbage  by developers who do not respond to support requests and it gets a pass.

Personally I will buy it after i finish upgrading my computer in the next 6-8 weeks.

 

Of course.  And this can happen on any media not just Avsim; such as YouTube etc.  People can tend to follow the baying crowd; it's a human thing.

I have seen it before like you have.  Sometimes with justification, sometimes not so much.

However, whatever the state of the product at release, there is genuine concern, and certain responses by the developer on this forum haven't exactly helped matters.  

I know where I stand also; mainly based by the responses to the criticism, rather than the product itself - it worries me.  Anyway, that's the great thing about freedom of choice isn't it?

EDIT:  Just to answer this point...

"It would be interesting to know how many of these detractors have actually bought it."

That wouldn't make sense.  By then they have already purchased it and it is too late.  That is what the reviews are for.  It is fine to be concerned about other people being concerned, otherwise we would all just dive in. 

Edited March 16, 20233 yr by bobcat999