BeyondATC official poll - release now or later?

[Lucky38i 1,100]

3 hours ago, tup61 said:

No one will force you to buy BATC before traffic has been added. I don't see a problem here. Those who think traffic is mandatory can wait and all others can buy it. Of course the development of traffic might (or probably will) slow down a bit due to an EA release and the to be expected flood of bugs being reported but still, everyone is free to wait.

I do find it kind of ironic this rationale is being used here while, FSS did the same exact model and was met with this community ,and several other news outlets, great displeasure.
 

I would prefer they wait till traffic is ready but I’m not bothered if they release now, it’s not that deep. Though the duality of this forum (at times) is surprising to see nonetheless 

[tup61 1,586]

5 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

I do find it kind of ironic this rationale is being used here while, FSS did the same exact model and was met with this community ,and several other news outlets, great displeasure.
 

I would prefer they wait till traffic is ready but I’m not bothered if they release now, it’s not that deep. Though the duality of this forum (at times) is surprising to see nonetheless 

I don't even know what FSS is or did so my duality is alright luckily. 😉

[MrBitstFlyer 3,882]

On 3/27/2024 at 3:42 PM, Fiorentoni said:

BATC is not controlled by ChatGPT. Only the voices are AI generated.

I think this is partly the point.  With SayIntentions so, so good already, I think BATC ought to get their product out sooner rather than later.  I am smitten with the intelligence and human like ATC SayIntensions has - if BATC isn't out soon it is a product I may not need to consider.

SayIntentions was VFR, but its IFR is already very good in Beta and Controlling AI traffic is also in the works.

[Fiorentoni 4,264]

9 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

FSS did the same exact model

Uh no.
1) It would be the same model if BATC would sell us the default ATC with a nice colorful new UI.
2) The displeasure as you name it came mostly from how FSS made it sound pre-release that it was close to study level, while it was in fact the opposite. Oh and then the lead dev came around saying "real world E-Jet pilots never use VNAV" and all that stuff (fact check: real world pilots use VNAV on the E-Jets all the time, because it's actually the best working VNAV in all airliners). So the problem was not one of incompletion, but one of deception and fraud (or if you're euphemistic: of falsely managed expectations).
 

Edited March 29 by Fiorentoni

[Lucky38i 1,100]

8 minutes ago, tup61 said:

I don't even know what FSS is or did so my duality is alright luckily. 😉

Fair play haha, just a more general I suppose then.

6 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

The displeasure as you name it came mostly from how FSS

You’re more than free to refer to positings across various outlets including here about the release of the E175 and find people commenting on how EA was the worst thing to come to the community etc etc. not denying the things you pointed out cause it’s definitely true but EA was also a strong negative point.

[Gazzareth 811]

4 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I think this is partly the point.  With SayIntentions so, so good already, I think BATC ought to get their product out sooner rather than later.  I am smitten with the intelligence and human like ATC SayIntensions has - if BATC isn't out soon it is a product I may not need to consider.

SayIntentions was VFR, but its IFR is already very good in Beta and Controlling AI traffic is also in the works.

 

SayIntentions costs vastly more than BATC though, in fact it's by far the most expensive add on I have ever seen for a Sim.

I like the concept, but the price makes it an absolute no for me (and I suspect many others).

G

[Bobsk8 12,788]

1 minute ago, Gazzareth said:

 

SayIntentions costs vastly more than BATC though, in fact it's by far the most expensive add on I have ever seen for a Sim.

I like the concept, but the price makes it an absolute no for me (and I suspect many others).

G

It should be advertised as" Only for the rich".

 

[Fiorentoni 4,264]

15 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

but EA was also a strong negative point.

Yes, but because it was in such a bad state and people drew general conclusions from that for EA in general. Compare it to e.g. the Early Access (that was/is the official denomination) of the Flightsimware Learjet, no one complained about early access there because the aircraft was in a good state.
So if people (like me) say "yes" to early access for BATC, it means those people think that BATC is in an acceptable state. Now whether they'll complain afterwards will largely depend on what the actual state is on release compared to those expectations. The pattern you're warning about (demanding early access -> complaining about early access after release) is not given, there are many examples for success and failure of early access, be it in flightsim or in general.
Personally I actually dislike the general effects on early access on the quality of products (devs will only add as many features afterwards as copies are sold, instead of doing their best and completing the product and then hoping this brings many sales [as it was normal before early access was born]). But EA is here to stay whether I like it or not, so I'll just support it when I think EA for this product is beneficiary and critisise when I think it's harmful.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,882]

17 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

It should be advertised as" Only for the rich".

 

Its value is equal to the advances made with the technology IMHO.  Considering what it brings to flight simming, I find the price to be very acceptable.   Flight Simming and gaming are my hobbies and the costs involved are FAR, far less than many hobbies.

You continue with your robots controlling ATC and I'll spend a very small sum indeed to experience human like ATC - oh, and I don't consider you to be poor, just making a choice acceptable to you.

[UAL4life 239]

Release later. 

[rutrA 282]

Thousands upon thousands of responses and the results are in. It wasn't even close - "release it sooner" was the overwhelming response by a landslide. 

So, that's our plan. I still won't give a date (you know me better than that by now 😉 ) but our intention is to put BeyondATC out as Early Access, without Traffic as an "alone in the sky" IFR experience for both airlines and GA aircraft as soon as possible and when we feel it's ready.

Traffic will be our second highest priority right after launching a stable 1.0. This remains very important for us and we'll do our best to get it out as soon as able. 

Many people brought up some really good points that launching in 1.0 will slow down progress on traffic as we work on support tickets, but we have some ideas how to mitigate this, so stay tuned.

Thank you all for taking the time to fill out the questionnaire and for your feedback in the main channel. Onward to 1.0!! 🎉

[Tuskin38 6,573]

[thepilot 584]

Small wonder, patience is a fading virtue these days. Will ATC still address other aircraft, even if it doesn‘t control them?

[Fiorentoni 4,264]

1 hour ago, thepilot said:

Small wonder, patience is a fading virtue these days. Will ATC still address other aircraft, even if it doesn‘t control them?

They said „alone in the sky experience“. So most probably it will ignore them or not even see them at all.

[nomad71 16]

No it won't.  All other AI traffic will be invisible to Beyond ATC