33 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

The unnecessary elitism is what’s embarrassing. Let people have fun how they want to. There’s still going to be developers who make planes that suit your needs and vice versa. 
 

why gatekeep how people decide how to flight sim?

While your general judgement is something we all would agree with, you are missing some important points:

a) you assume the people that buy it will have fun with it, knowing exactly what they buy (and what they don‘t get). This is actually elitism, too, because you assume they‘d all be as knowledgable as us here. If I could talk to my younger Me, I‘d definitely tell him to avoid buying certain aircraft because he‘d soon find out he‘s not having fun with them. I think we all started that way, no one starts a flight sim for the very first time in his life and immediately buys the PMDG 737 for 120 dollars. E.g. anyone on Avsim that bought the 777 from CaptainSim back in 2021 and still uses it? Or did they rather settle on the 737 and Fenix and what else by now…

b) Of course - again generally speaking - there will always be devs for all needs, but you are simplifying the situation: It‘s not about that they generally *exist*, no matter what - it‘s about a shift in the industry, leading to devs investing their time and money rather in many low-fidelity aircraft projects rather than one or two high-fidelity projects. You can clearly see that in MSFS already, actually just look at CaptainSim themselves, they had some quite decent addons back in the days of P3D. 
So for those that like hi-fi addons, the more people buy that CaptainSim-ish stuff, the more the industry shifts to it, and the worse it will be for the hi-fi lovers. So it‘s actually not about dictating about how other people should have fun or not, but about our very own fun.

56 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

The unnecessary elitism is what’s embarrassing. Let people have fun how they want to. There’s still going to be developers who make planes that suit your needs and vice versa. 
 

why gatekeep how people decide how to flight sim?

I think if people were having fun with their planes, the customer ratings wouldn't be so low.  No?

8 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

So for those that like hi-fi addons, the more people buy that CaptainSim-ish stuff, the more the industry shifts to it, and the worse it will be for the hi-fi lovers

The problem with this is it assumes industries work in binary, it can only be one or the other. Except if you look at any industry there’s a low quality variant of something and a high-quality variant. They both coexists within said industry. Now more often than not low-quality ones tend garner more sales than their higher-priced counterpart which is true but it doesn’t prevent the high-priced option from existing or better yet, being profitable because they are. You can look to many industries for example of this. So I don’t know why it wouldn’t work in those one either. PMDG’s DC6 sales eclipsed all of their previous sales in a week (so I’m told by some sources) and this is a high-priced, less sought after product. There’s more than enough market cap that both low-quality, mid and high quality devs to coexist at various market shares, this is especially true with msfs.

 

13 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

This is actually elitism, too, because you assume they‘d all be as knowledgable as us here

I actually assume the opposite. 

 

14 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

d definitely tell him to avoid buying certain aircraft because he‘d soon find out he‘s not having fun with them.

My approach would be to ask what are they looking for. Do they just want to fly? Do they want to learn a deeply simulated airliner? I introduced my brother to this and he was the former but has slowly seeked more out of simming and eventually went into more detailed aircraft. This is just one of many approaches and I don’t completely disagree with your point here

11 minutes ago, tgsweat said:

I think if people were having fun with their planes, the customer ratings wouldn't be so low.  No?

 Not having a dog in this fight, I could only suggest only the whiners publicly complain, people who are happy regardless of the product rarely say so...

59 minutes ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

So you think its OK to buy a payware addon to be modified by freeware. I'm not down with that.

 

1 hour ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Hey I'd  rather fly the default  excellent 787 or 747 for free than fly that nonsense (money grabbing) from CS or LVFR any day of the week. But that is just me.

 

1 hour ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

People advocate the logic around Captain word not allowed and their business model is what is  wrong with MS and Flight sim in general today. Complete jokers  with not seriousness in flight sim world. It kind of embarrasing.

Hey! You all quit having so much fun with addons I don't consider "therious thimmer busineth enough".

I'm losing sleep even at the thought of someone buying a CS or LVFR product with thier own hard earned money.

Look! Just let me gatekeep the flight sim hobby through my own personal bias of what actual flight sim enjoyment should be FOR YOU!

You all are WRONG and embarrassing until you start thinking more like me....besides I know what's best for the ENTIRE flight sim culture and community after all!

 

Edited October 3, 20232 yr by blueshark747

16 minutes ago, Delta111 said:

 Not having a dog in this fight, I could only suggest only the whiners publicly complain, people who are happy regardless of the product rarely say so...

Should that not also be the case for those products with much better ratings?

21 minutes ago, blueshark747 said:

 

 

Hey! You all quit having so much fun with addons I don't consider "therious thimmer busineth enough".

I'm losing sleep even at the thought of someone buying a CS or LVFR product with thier own hard earned money.

Look! Just let me gatekeep the flight sim hobby through my own personal bias of what actual flight sim enjoyment should be FOR YOU!

You all are WRONG and embarrassing until you start thinking more like me....besides I know what's best for the ENTIRE flight sim culture and community after all!

 

Nice post and a like from me. Unfortunately my tone has not change from this subject.

Edited October 3, 20232 yr by JBDB-MD80

30 minutes ago, tgsweat said:

I think if people were having fun with their planes, the customer ratings wouldn't be so low.  No?

From what I can see captainsim’s store doesn’t have a rating system so I’m guessing the marketplace.

i have no idea how the marketplace works in that regard, I don’t use it. I don’t know if anyone can rate a product, I don’t know if review bombing is allowed or we’re seeing negative bias at play here where people with negative experiences are more likely to voice it as opposed to those with positive experiences.

though I do have to ask, if the aircraft were so poorly rated why does each subsequent CS release still garner enough sales to garner enough revenue for even further subsequent releases? I’m not nullifying what you’re saying, it does make sense, but if it’s continuing to generate revenue then there’s a subset of people that do like it and enjoy them.

2 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Nice post and a like from me. Unfortunately my tone has not change.

I have to accept it honestly. That's how you feel.🍻

Edited October 3, 20232 yr by blueshark747

On 9/26/2023 at 5:34 PM, blueshark747 said:

while waiting on the TFDi version.

Yup, I purchased it already. TFDi version will be maybe ready for MSFS2028... 😅

7 minutes ago, edpatino said:

Yup, I purchased it already. TFDi version will be maybe ready for MSFS2028... 😅

Yup I was thinking the same!😂

Was honestly hoping the 717 would be worked on and released before the MD-11.

We can see that this topic was created for no other purpose but to bash a developer and get everyone worked up "again" about CS.  But let's be real here and it's real simple.  You don't like it, you don't buy it.  You label a developer a scammer, that's on you and perhaps better served contacting them directly to explain yourself.

Like others here have mentioned, they've produced a 717 with a custom made model and  VC using default systems and flight model to run it.  If that appeals to you then go for it.  If not, there's plenty of other developers out there that would service your needs.

Jase

 

Edited October 4, 20232 yr by JaseMelbo

I have seen some mention of LVFR and comparison with this product. I wanted to clarify a bit.

Truth we did release the A321-neo with the default A320 cockpit. As the cockpit on the A320neo is very similar to the A321neo.

However, we have invested in improving significantly the systems, and continue to do so to this very day. Our system implementation is not like the other offerings from Fenix or FBW, however we are working upwards from being the default to something entry level, without thinking we can reach the levels of those developers yet. We only basically have less than a year doing this and having developers who know how to work systems was hard to do, and thankfully this has changed in the past months. We hired very talented individuals that are helping us with the 'under the hood' implementation of things

We understand the criticism and we have dealt with it, understandably we know people are expecting more, and we respect that. Our goal now is improving things and working them from the base/default code. We have released dozens of updates to the A321neo and other variants. We have just finished an update where we allow for the simbrief flight plan to be downloaded into the CDU, worked on many other system things.

Developing planes takes time, and in these past months we learned a lot, and in the coming weeks you all will see some of the things we have been improving.  We won't be the next fenix or FBW or PMDG, but we are gearing towards that middle ground type user.

But we won't be doing any of what we did initially of just using default cockpit. These past months have shown we have moved away from that. Thank you

3 hours ago, LVFRicardo said:

I have seen some mention of LVFR and comparison with this product. I wanted to clarify a bit.

Truth we did release the A321-neo with the default A320 cockpit. As the cockpit on the A320neo is very similar to the A321neo.

However, we have invested in improving significantly the systems, and continue to do so to this very day. Our system implementation is not like the other offerings from Fenix or FBW, however we are working upwards from being the default to something entry level, without thinking we can reach the levels of those developers yet. We only basically have less than a year doing this and having developers who know how to work systems was hard to do, and thankfully this has changed in the past months. We hired very talented individuals that are helping us with the 'under the hood' implementation of things

We understand the criticism and we have dealt with it, understandably we know people are expecting more, and we respect that. Our goal now is improving things and working them from the base/default code. We have released dozens of updates to the A321neo and other variants. We have just finished an update where we allow for the simbrief flight plan to be downloaded into the CDU, worked on many other system things.

Developing planes takes time, and in these past months we learned a lot, and in the coming weeks you all will see some of the things we have been improving.  We won't be the next fenix or FBW or PMDG, but we are gearing towards that middle ground type user.

But we won't be doing any of what we did initially of just using default cockpit. These past months have shown we have moved away from that. Thank you

Here is another thought why not make more scenery (Airports) you know something you're more decent at and not paper airframes?

8 hours ago, LVFRicardo said:

I have seen some mention of LVFR and comparison with this product. I wanted to clarify a bit.

Truth we did release the A321-neo with the default A320 cockpit. As the cockpit on the A320neo is very similar to the A321neo.

However, we have invested in improving significantly the systems, and continue to do so to this very day. Our system implementation is not like the other offerings from Fenix or FBW, however we are working upwards from being the default to something entry level, without thinking we can reach the levels of those developers yet. We only basically have less than a year doing this and having developers who know how to work systems was hard to do, and thankfully this has changed in the past months. We hired very talented individuals that are helping us with the 'under the hood' implementation of things

We understand the criticism and we have dealt with it, understandably we know people are expecting more, and we respect that. Our goal now is improving things and working them from the base/default code. We have released dozens of updates to the A321neo and other variants. We have just finished an update where we allow for the simbrief flight plan to be downloaded into the CDU, worked on many other system things.

Developing planes takes time, and in these past months we learned a lot, and in the coming weeks you all will see some of the things we have been improving.  We won't be the next fenix or FBW or PMDG, but we are gearing towards that middle ground type user.

But we won't be doing any of what we did initially of just using default cockpit. These past months have shown we have moved away from that. Thank you

I want to intervene here and advocate for Ricardo.

Ricardo has been in touch with me for many months and FSReborn is always willing to help LatinVFR via different ways of collaboration regarding aircraft development, I can confirm everything Ricardo has said above, LatinVFR is working very hard to increase their offerings and hit a middle ground in the market as their business model wishes to stablish.

I am sure LatinVFR will reach their goals and we will see many cool things from them in the future.

Best,
Raul