1 hour ago, threegreen said:

The 'clear evidence' is that they're making a killing on MSFS that doesn't even compare to P3D/FSX, as by their own statement and that of numerous other developers. What they're doing is prioritizing bringing all their products to the new platform, as more products = more profit, which in itself is the only reasonable thing to do for a business, so can't fault them for that. As much as we hope they iron out some stuff that needs attention, the number of sales that not catering to these issues is going to cost because some people may stop buying a new product is miniscule in relation to the sales it garners nevertheless across the whole market.

In the end, it's a tough place right now for us as we'd like to see some stuff being given attention to, while that however doesn't make much sense for the company at this point. I'm personally well aware I'm probably going to have to wait quite some time for roll behavior improvements, for example, as unfortunate as that is.

I also feel this thread is getting carried away again with over the top negativity though, so as much as I hate some of the stuff that's not right I can also appreciate that it's still a darn good aircraft addon. Balance and perspective.

I hope that we can agree on the fact that this excuse is getting old  " they're doing is prioritizing bringing all their products to the new platform, as more products = more profit, which in itself is the only reasonable thing to do for a business, so can't fault them for that " and not attending to what they promised to have fixed or ignoring the obvious.  All their products suffer from bugs of a certain magnitude for the same excuse "reasonable thing to do for a business" for a very long time.

 

 For some, it might be a satisfactory explanation, and for others not.

 

As customers, we are primarily interested in buying a product and not concerned about sales. However, it appears that you are more focused on their profits and sales.

 

I agree that there are people who do not know or understand systems and how they are supposed to operate and see no discrepancies, or like in your case, where you see only an issue with the roll behavior while the other bugs seem normal. This is what they count for. 

 

I really don't understand this conclusion,  " I also feel this thread is getting carried away again with over the top negativity " when many of these complaints are very obvious and correct. Bringing up bugs that need to be fixed is not something to be silenced or dismissed. It's a reality and space for improvement. 

 

Regrettably, in the PMDG forum (and sometimes here, there are some individuals that, no matter what the reality is, will deny it), pointing out issues can result in personal attacks and members being banned; despite the obvious facts, the developer denies any wrongdoing.

 

I believe that discussing legitimate concerns about a developer is not a negative thing. In fact, it could be beneficial for everyone involved. Ignoring potential issues would not be productive.

3 hours ago, Sethos said:

Heh, imagine the irony of the mighty PMDG becoming a second rate developer on the flight sim scene, because they had to cater for the Xbox users

And its also why they cant deliver a realistic turbine engine spool model, because they cant use an external engine simulation like fenix can on the xbox or marketplace.  Even with the current "internal" fenix engine model and its issues it still behaves closer to a cfm56 than the pmdg model does aside from engine start.  Heck, even the free flybywire a320neo has a much more accurate feeling turbine engine model with proper spool up delays irrespective of the thrust lever position.  You go to do a config check on the pmdg and you are already at 50% n1, and after the latest "patch" you will hit takeoff power in a second. 

Edited July 21, 20232 yr by Pilot53

38 minutes ago, LRBS said:

I believe that discussing legitimate concerns about a developer is not a negative thing. In fact, it could be beneficial for everyone involved.

I want to emphasize that, just in case anyone concerned reads it...

1 minute ago, Pilot53 said:

ou go to do a config check on the pmdg and you are already at 50% n1, and after the latest "patch" you will hit takeoff power in a second.

Uh that's still not fixed with todays update? I thought that was the sole purpose of the update, at leats that's what RSR said IIRC.

Just now, Fiorentoni said:

Uh that's still not fixed with todays update? I thought that was the sole purpose of the update, at leats that's what RSR said IIRC.

No... unfortunately they said in their latest news post that it will come in a later fix unfortunately with no actual eta.  I wish that would mean a vastly improved engine spool model even compared to what we had before but I doubt it,  Ive been asking for that for years back in fsx and p3d and they always give reasons why its not possible for them. 

44 minutes ago, LRBS said:

 

Regrettably, in the PMDG forum (and sometimes here, there are some individuals that, no matter what the reality is, will deny it), pointing out issues can result in personal attacks and members being banned; despite the obvious facts, the developer denies any wrongdoing.

 

 

FuLL nAmEs oN aLL PoStS HeRe PleaSe.

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

I hope that we can agree on the fact that this excuse is getting old  " they're doing is prioritizing bringing all their products to the new platform, as more products = more profit, which in itself is the only reasonable thing to do for a business, so can't fault them for that " and not attending to what they promised to have fixed or ignoring the obvious.  All their products suffer from bugs of a certain magnitude for the same excuse "reasonable thing to do for a business" for a very long time.

 

[...]

You keep confusing explanation with excuse. There is a difference. When I say they are prioritizing bringing all their products into MSFS, I'm explaining what is likely their rationale for running the business at this point, and that's just what a business does. That has nothing to do with excusing anything. Also, in this context sales absolutely matter because it's the whole reason for their decision, regardless of whether the customer cares or not.

I'm fully aware of the bugs. I mentioned roll behavior as an example because it's the most annoying one to me, personally.

You're interpreting way too much into my reply. These threads often turn out to be overly negative, because after some initial, justified criticism, it usually devolves into complaining just for the sake of it. The conclusion was a reminder that despite its flaws, it's still a very good high fidelity aircraft in plenty of other parts. That is meant to provide some balance, not to silence anyone.

Edited July 21, 20232 yr by threegreen
Truncated quote

Ok .. I've been out of town for a few days .. new patch is out ?? ok  any fundamental changes ?? nope... ok  looks like background work .. ill download it when i get to it and carry on. 

Thanks..

23 hours ago, DavidP said:

Then everyone would be bashing them because it's unrealistic. They can't win whatever they do. 

I dont see Inibuild, Working Title, Leonardo, etc. getting bashed for using MS default "radar", a simple disclaimer would suffice IMO

3 hours ago, Wise87 said:

FYI, 3.0.65 is the installer version on PMDG site under your account. .

A good pointout--thanks.  I uninstalled the updated 737, downloaded the current (3.0.65) installer from the PMDG store website, reinstalled and though the LNAV roll behavior is still not very smooth, at least it's not trying to throw meal trays across the aisles like the updated versions (3.0.69 and 3.0.70).

So...if you're like me and had installed the 737 long ago using an earlier installer and kept it updated in due course along the way, might not be a bad idea to go grab the 3.0.65 installer that's there now before that gets broken errrr...I mean "updated".

21 minutes ago, 757FO said:

I dont see Inibuild, Working Title, Leonardo, etc. getting bashed for using MS default "radar", a simple disclaimer would suffice IMO

That's because they're not PMDG. When they announced, for example, that they're not going to update for P3Dv6 at this point, they got a lot of heat for it, while iFly and FSL or even A2A said the same thing but I didn't see anyone complain about them. I think most would be okay with a default WX radar in a PMDG plane, but I can see how some would spin this into them being lazy or something. Just saying.

Edited July 21, 20232 yr by threegreen

3 hours ago, Saucey12 said:

Yea it amazes me.. They have done more and communicated more than any other developer out there.  And they take a lot of heat from the critics out there.  

They have to communicate and then get things done!

not just write walls of text, and then nothing.

how often and how much has been said about the efb?

The first projected release date was summer, last year.

we still don’t have a screenshot of it! 

1 hour ago, threegreen said:

You keep confusing explanation with excuse. There is a difference. When I say they are prioritizing bringing all their products into MSFS, I'm explaining what is likely their rationale for running the business at this point, and that's just what a business does. That has nothing to do with excusing anything. Also, in this context sales absolutely matter because it's the whole reason for their decision, regardless of whether the customer cares or not.

I'm fully aware of the bugs. I mentioned roll behavior as an example because it's the most annoying one to me, personally.

You're interpreting way too much into my reply. These threads often turn out to be overly negative, because after some initial, justified criticism, it usually devolves into complaining just for the sake of it. The conclusion was a reminder that despite its flaws, it's still a very good high fidelity aircraft in plenty of other parts. That is meant to provide some balance, not to silence anyone.

It's interesting how in almost any post, you keep on bringing up "their killing sales, profits." Despite all this, many (previous/actual customers) start to wonder about their business "decisions/priorities," as you mentioned; more troubling, it appears to be true "regardless of whether customer cares or not." 

And this is the biggest concern; they should care a lot. There are many examples of businesses that vanished just for this attitude despite having a good product. 

 

PMDG must reevaluate their approach and acknowledge that they are on a dangerous path. It's important to remember that the customer is most of the time right. Already, people are drawing comparisons between PMDG and CaptainSim, which is not a desirable situation.

42 minutes ago, threegreen said:

for example, that they're not going to update for P3Dv6 at this point, they got a lot of heat for it, while iFly and FSL or even A2A said the same thing but I didn't see anyone complain about them. 

Its possibly because the realization finally sunk in that they have no short term intention of supporting the P3D platform any longer. Years of verbal feature updates and bug fixes "coming soon" influenced quite alot of buying decisions to the benifit of that company. Unfortunately the same thing is happening here again but far as I can see people are becoming a little less tolerent to it.

Edited July 21, 20232 yr by Garys

19 minutes ago, LRBS said:

It's interesting how in almost any post, you keep on bringing up "their killing sales, profits." Despite all this, many (previous/actual customers) start to wonder about their business "decisions/priorities," as you mentioned; more troubling, it appears to be true "regardless of whether customer cares or not." 

And this is the biggest concern; they should care a lot. There are many examples of businesses that vanished just for this attitude despite having a good product.

I keep bringing that up because it's the point I'm making... The fact is developers are making a ton of money off of MSFS, so it makes sense to sell as many products as you can, i.e. bring your existing products to the platform, while sticking to one isn't as profitable. That's likely their reasoning, and given the sheer demand in the market they are going to sell plenty, whether some existing customers choose to stop buying their products or not. The numbers are probably way too far apart for the latter to make a significant difference (in contrast to P3D times, I would assume). I'm just saying what I think is likely the explanation for why there is still no navdata update to facilitate better LNAV and RF legs, etc. That doesn't mean I'm excusing whatever or that I like it. I'd certainly take a couple of fixes at any time.