PMDG June 3 update

[nrunning24 151]

1 hour ago, F737MAX said:

OK, real simple for those of you sat at the back.

One is a new developer striving to achieve the most realistic representation of a popular narrowbody airliner on a new platform at a ridiculously reasonable price point. When it failed to land properly in a crosswind, it received negative feedback, which was acted upon alongside numerous other fixes.

The other is an established player who has rested on its laurels to deliver a different popular narrowbody airliner that it has decades of experience in building, yet had the same faults as every previous iteration. Not only have new issues cropped up in updates that should not have passed QC, it's also the second most expensive airliner add-on to purchase (and that's before anyone interested buys the other 3 variants to complete the family set).

No hate. Just critical appraisal.

 

My comment was biased off your quote "the occasional comment on progress gives them somewhat of a pass with regard to their lengthy development timeline."  When it seems that when PMDG does the same thing its widely trashed.  It seems like there are very different standards being applied. 
 

You might say well PMDG is porting from FSX->P3D->MSFS, but isn't the whole Fenix systems taken directly from Prosim, which is also available in P3D?  They are both ports, at least PMDG wrote the code for the systems themselves (granted maybe a while ago).  I've seen nothing to make me believe that the Fenix team can or is able to do the same, especially apparent when they begin to start deviating from the Prosim database (hence V2, IAE, Sharklets).  I would love to be proven wrong, just seems like the facts at this point though.

[Sonosusto 681]

13 hours ago, Poppingcork said:

Some of you need to pick up a different hobby.  One where you'll always be satisfied and another that costs less money.

Here here! Although I think we add to the mix. We are complaining about the complainers complaining about a virtual plane that only exists in a computer.

Seriously. Some of you need to stop your whining and enjoy the hobby. There are several planes that have tablets that are not exactly the best in terms of other areas.

[Lucky38i 1,095]

7 hours ago, nrunning24 said:

You might say well PMDG is porting from FSX->P3D->MSFS, but isn't the whole Fenix systems taken directly from Prosim, which is also available in P3D?

Fenix is a fork of Prosim, its very different from what you're implying. You need to remember the Prosim is an ECAM simulator first and foremost, everything else is second class.

7 hours ago, nrunning24 said:

They are both ports, at least PMDG wrote the code for the systems themselves (granted maybe a while ago). 

Which has demonstrated it's flaws as MSFS users still experience the same core issues that the P3D offers. Forking a project has as much pros and cons as does re-using pre-existing code. The same goes for just doing something from scratch.

7 hours ago, nrunning24 said:

I've seen nothing to make me believe that the Fenix team can or is able to do the same,

Except for how they've explictly re-written various modules to replace what they've forked from Prosim because again, it's an ECAM simulator, you can see all its weaknesses in other various departments of the aircraft. That is the entire point of V2. Hell it's why from Fenix announcement to release they were still constantly modifying code to better suit their needs to better simulate the aircraft, not just the ECAM.

7 hours ago, nrunning24 said:

especially apparent when they begin to start deviating from the Prosim database (hence V2, IAE, Sharklets).

Database? I don't think you're not really fully understanding how this all works.

7 hours ago, nrunning24 said:

  I would love to be proven wrong, just seems like the facts at this point though.

You have facts but you're understanding of the differences here looks a bit skewed.

[MikeH99 156]

More looking forward to the WT update to the 787.... 

[Gazzareth 808]

13 minutes ago, MikeH99 said:

More looking forward to the WT update to the 787.... 

I do laugh at comments like this, half the people here seem to be frothing at the mouth because there is no EFB in the 737, other people looking forward to an aircraft that will (most likely) never have one.

All my flying is either Exec or Cargo, but the 787 might tempt me to do some PAX flights .. .. resisting the BETA this time though.

G

[LRBS 948]

12 hours ago, F737MAX said:

Not only have new issues cropped up in updates that should not have passed QC,

 

Regrettably, there's more to it than just that. In fact, it's even worse than that. They know about bugs but don't make any effort to fix them or investigate them. They claim that the issues can't be reproduced in their systems, even though some users have reported them. To add insult to injury, certain beta testers together with RSR combat, discredit and block even real pilots on their forum from bringing up these issues.

It might be assumed that over the course of many years, a company would become skilled at identifying and addressing any bugs in its products. However, it seems that in many cases, product quality is sacrificed in the pursuit of profit.

This type of treatment is not something that customers anticipate.

[Gazzareth 808]

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

Regrettably, there's more to it than just that. In fact, it's even worse than that. They know about bugs but don't make any effort to fix them or investigate them. They claim that the issues can't be reproduced in their systems, even though some users have reported them. To add insult to injury, certain beta testers together with RSR combat, discredit and block even real pilots on their forum from bringing up these issues.

It might be assumed that over the course of many years, a company would become skilled at identifying and addressing any bugs in its products. However, it seems that in many cases, product quality is sacrificed in the pursuit of profit.

This type of treatment is not something that customers anticipate.

 

Really ?? Kind of bizarre that they post this amongst replies in their forum regarding the engine spool up issue (which they have confirmed and are investigating).

 

Quote

All a warning.

Attacking other users because they do not see something that you are seeing will not be tolerated here. I have removed the offensive post and I would like to ask you to refrain from doing such posts.

As for the issue.again it affects only the spool rate below 40% N1. It is there? Yes. It causes the plane to be non flyable? No

Clearly no sign of them "hiding" the issue. 

 

G

[carlanthony24 577]

Lets not forget a streamer on Youtube who bashes every product besides PMDG does not understand the concept of early access besides being told by PMDG etc. He really hates the FSS 175 and says this is not how it should work even though real pilots have told him how its actually flown and does not take that advice...

[LRBS 948]

1 hour ago, Gazzareth said:

 

Really ?? Kind of bizarre that they post this amongst replies in their forum regarding the engine spool up issue (which they have confirmed and are investigating).

 

Clearly no sign of them "hiding" the issue. 

 

G

Indeed, very bizarre.

Despite being claimed to be investigated, there are several issues that still remain unaddressed. Unfortunately, due to the workload on similar projects (over and over again), these issues have been repeatedly overlooked and carried over. It is unacceptable that some of these issues have been completely ignored. Because the average "simmer" has limited understanding or no knowledge at all, they count on this situation. Despite being clearly visible to people, some bugs persist and are still being combated by RSR and many beta testers even though they have been flagged by real pilots who are currently or previously qualified in the equipment. Some bugs are being deleted, hidden from the forum, or they are blocking people calling out these problems who want to see improvements in the product.

Not a pretty picture that is going on for years.

See this please

This is known to happen from time to time, a few users has reported this but until now it is not reproduced in our systems.

 

Chris Makris
Customer & Product Support
PMDG Simulations, LLC
www.pmdg.com

Edited June 7, 2023 by LRBS

[LRBS 948]

1 hour ago, carlanthony24 said:

Lets not forget a streamer on Youtube who bashes every product besides PMDG

It seems like this individual heavily favors PMDG, to the extent that it raises doubts about his authenticity as a pilot. One might question whether he is being paid to conceal the bugs associated with the PMDG brand. I can't accept the idea that he has no integrity left and that he would stoop to such levels.

 

[Jeeeno 314]

PMDG forum is widely known as one of the most toxic forums regarding flight simulation. 

[threexgreen 3,142]

People need to get a grip. The turmoil that erupts without fail around anything PMDG has long exceeded a reasonable response to what PMDG admittedly have brought on themselves in some cases, especially seeing as we're - once again - at the point of making accusations with legal implications.

[jarmstro 2,405]

I very much enjoy the Fenix. But it's basically the ProSim core with a pretty shell around it. Easy peasy and none the worse for that. But given the time it's taking them to release a V2 I'm left wondering if they possess the necessary skil and knowledge?

[LRBS 948]

38 minutes ago, Nixoq said:

People need to get a grip. The turmoil that erupts without fail around anything PMDG has long exceeded a reasonable response to what PMDG admittedly have brought on themselves in some cases, especially seeing as we're - once again - at the point of making accusations with legal implications.

I fully understand and respect opinions. 

I am having difficulty comprehending the concept of "legal implications". By being on the World Wide Web, they exposed themselves to criticism. How is it that if a customer is expressing dissatisfaction by pointing out issues/problems that unfortunately are true, are twisted as "accusations"?

I think that is not appropriate to vehiculate the idea of any implications more so legal ones when people call the obvious. It must be emphasized that our country is one of freedom where individuals have the right to express their opinions without the threat of legal repercussions (unless the is a personal threat), regardless of personal beliefs.

[threexgreen 3,142]

47 minutes ago, LRBS said:

I fully understand and respect opinions. 

I am having difficulty comprehending the concept of "legal implications". By being on the World Wide Web, they exposed themselves to criticism. How is it that if a customer is expressing dissatisfaction by pointing out issues/problems that unfortunately are true, are twisted as "accusations"?

I think that is not appropriate to vehiculate the idea of any implications more so legal ones when people call the obvious. It must be emphasized that our country is one of freedom where individuals have the right to express their opinions without the threat of legal repercussions (unless the is a personal threat), regardless of personal beliefs.

I'm not talking about legal repercussions to criticism. I'm no legal expert but I'd assume paying people to spread misinformation about one's product and disparage competitor's products is somewhere in the not-so-legal zone or at least on the edge.

That's a serious accusation that's come up a few times based on nothing other than personal discontent with the company and/or disagreement with the affiliated individual's views and that's not just "a customer expressing dissatisfaction" like you're trying to mask it as, nor is it in any shape or form obvious. I personally find that distasteful and even sad that this is where we're at now. It's still just a flight sim dev and people don't have to like them but should probably ease up a bit.