11 minutes ago, nrunning24 said:

Sure I respect them, they should take their time.  But if PMDG did the same we would be having complaints on end.  The reality is Fenix came out with a forward plan with dates (near term too, and pretty solid) and has COMPLETLY missed them.  PMDG had vague forward dates on the EFB on release and got killed for not meeting them.  Lots of double standards.

Your missing the mark...

My complaint is not about asking PMDG to post firm or even approximate release dates. That's a nice to have .. not a must have..

My issue is the stupid tease shots like we are at a stupid burlesque show. You got previews and you stated youre going to show previews ? .. great!! .. show the actual previews.. otherwise .. for me personally i'm not interested.

Edited December 26, 20232 yr by Maxis

The great thing is we have PMDG, Fenix, iniBuilds, JF, FSReborn, FSW, A2A, Milviz, even FSL , etc etc all out there focusing on and building great content for MSFS.. they all have different communication and marketing strategies, and different personalities.. some of them choose to stick to the old school techniques (and more power to them), some of them are very engaged with the userbase and do it the "new school" way. Bottom line, we the users of MSFS (who're also of different mindsets) ultimately benefit🙂 What a time for flight simming.
 

6 minutes ago, Maxis said:

Your missing the mark...

My complaint is not about asking PMDG to post firm or even approximate release dates. That's a nice to have .. not a must have..

No you misunderstand.  The fault is that PMDG is held to a standard that no other developer is.  Just because people dont like the CEO basically as far as I can tell.   They have the most complete and realistic product line in MSFS (737-600-900ER).  Their next competitor has just a CFM A320 with a continuously delayed IAE, A319 and A321.  At this point anyone who constantly nitpicks and puts down PMDG's constant updates has shown themselves as a not serious judge of product unless they are also doing the same for Fenix.

Edited December 26, 20232 yr by nrunning24

1 minute ago, nrunning24 said:

No you misunderstand.  The fault is that PMDG is held to a standard that no other developer is.  Just because people dont like the CEO basically as far as I can tell.   They have the most complete and realistic product line in MSFS (737-600-900ER).  Their next competitor has just a CFM A320 with a continuously delayed IAE, A319 and A321.  At this point anyone who constantly nitpicks and puts down PMDG's constant updates has shown themselves as a not serious judge of product.  

facepalm...

 

ok then..

1 minute ago, Maxis said:

facepalm...

 

ok then..

Ok so who has done better than PMDG in MSFS? Like really, take all the stupid wordy updates by the CEO out.... Who has provided more product that meets the high bar that serious simmers demand?  Seems like your quite critical of their public info provided for future releases but I dont see anyone but Fenix who competes and they have only modeled one engine variant for one model.

9 minutes ago, nrunning24 said:

No you misunderstand.  The fault is that PMDG is held to a standard that no other developer is.  Just because people dont like the CEO basically as far as I can tell.   They have the most complete and realistic product line in MSFS (737-600-900ER).  Their next competitor has just a CFM A320 with a continuously delayed IAE, A319 and A321.  At this point anyone who constantly nitpicks and puts down PMDG's constant updates has shown themselves as a not serious judge of product unless they are also doing the same for Fenix.

I would not call it realistic if you can't do proper RNAV approach etc and a port over product/cutting corners. Where as Fenix used Prosim code then have written own code and not use the Prosim code anymore something like 85% percent of the aircraft is not using Prosim code. Fenix unfortunately ran into problems with MSFS SDK. I beg to differ Fenix are lying compared to the lies PMDG used. Lets not forget LNAV 2.0 still waiting and GFO 😂

Edited December 26, 20232 yr by carlanthony24

1 minute ago, nrunning24 said:

Ok so who has done better than PMDG in MSFS? Like really, take all the stupid wordy updates by the CEO out.... Who has provided more product that meets the high bar that serious simmers demand?  Seems like your quite critical of their public info provided for future releases but I dont see anyone but Fenix who competes and they have only modeled one engine variant for one model.

Its not exactly easy to model an external engine model and do all the adaptions for IAE

1 minute ago, carlanthony24 said:

Its not exactly easy to model an external engine model and do all the adaptions for IAE

So we should give them a pass for their original engine model being + 5% off in some situations?  This is my whole point, of course its not easy.  It just seems like all these defenses are used only for non-PMDG dev's.  Its hard for everyone.  Either take the standard you apply for PMDG and use it for everyone FENIX included or apply the Fenix standard for PMDG.  That's all I'm asking for.  

15 minutes ago, nrunning24 said:

Ok so who has done better than PMDG in MSFS?

Don't you get it ??

I don't care! This topic was not about that ... No one was comparing a thing between developers. (At least i wasn't)

 

Edited December 26, 20232 yr by Maxis

1 minute ago, nrunning24 said:

So we should give them a pass for their original engine model being + 5% off in some situations?  This is my whole point, of course its not easy.  It just seems like all these defenses are used only for non-PMDG dev's.  Its hard for everyone.  Either take the standard you apply for PMDG and use it for everyone FENIX included or apply the Fenix standard for PMDG.  That's all I'm asking for.  

A lot moaned people are more forgiving because of problems that arise and they have to jump through. Rather the Fenix standard than PMDG BS. Again we have a developer that only blames Asobo when they need to and not constantly blame them. People blamed Fenix so much for the teleport into the ground and said it only happens to Fenix even though others were saying it happened to them in other aircrafts.

9 minutes ago, Maxis said:

Don't you get it ??

I don't care! This topic was not about that ... No one was comparing a thing between developers.

 

This is a PMDG thread.  You had quite the negative comments about the update, so I think the fact that you cant say one negative word about Fenix (their basically only competitor) for missing promised RELEASE DATES by at least 2X even though the dates were provided only a month or two in advance shows a lot about what I'm saying.

Edited December 26, 20232 yr by nrunning24

Just now, nrunning24 said:

This is a PMDG thread.  You had quite the negative comments about the update, so I think the fact that you cant say one negative word about Fenix (their basically only competitor) for missing PMROMISED RELEASE DATES by at least 2X even though the dates were provided only a month or two in advance shows a lot about what I'm saying.

LOL

You're a funny one..

53 minutes ago, Maxis said:

They put their hands up. Said they missed the mark and then shut up and put their heads down getting to work.

That i can appreciate.

Technically they did post a lengthy update on October 31st featuring... screenshots of the plane and the progress they are making on the visual aspects of the plane. All of which looks fantastic, I might add. Teasing? Sure. Building anticipation? Absolutely. However, it's welcome so that we can get a look into their progress and see how much effort they are putting in.

I do not think that anyone should be throwing critical comments at other developers as a defense of PMDG. What we really need to do is accept that we have no control over how developers market and sell their products, and concentrate on enjoying the products that we already have installed.

Can we just all agree on that 2 pictures of a half airplane is not a „preview“ in any kind of way?