BeyondATC official poll - release now or later?

[Gazzareth 819]

8 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

Of course that's pointless. I didn't say they should program anything for the interim. I'm questioning the value in this state, or what value people see in it.

 

From my perspective, at the moment I fly without traffic (just have parked aircraft from FSLTL) and will remain that way until I get ATC that can properly control and space them (currently using p2atc and that doesn't talk to them at all). So for me it makes absolute sense for me to get the initial version, as that effectively gives me the BATC version of what I have now, until they get further along the track.

If having actual traffic is a "MUST" for you then, granted the initial version would be less tempting .. ..

 

G

[threexgreen 3,152]

41 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

 

From my perspective, at the moment I fly without traffic (just have parked aircraft from FSLTL) and will remain that way until I get ATC that can properly control and space them (currently using p2atc and that doesn't talk to them at all). So for me it makes absolute sense for me to get the initial version, as that effectively gives me the BATC version of what I have now, until they get further along the track.

If having actual traffic is a "MUST" for you then, granted the initial version would be less tempting .. ..

 

G

That's completely fair. I was actually looking forward to getting a lite experience of BATC myself, and I may still get it when it releases in early access. Since I do fly with traffic though, the early version won't be of as much value as I was expecting, so I'm unsure if this is the right move just because most people want it now rather than later.

[tup61 1,613]

7 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

That's completely fair. I was actually looking forward to getting a lite experience of BATC myself, and I may still get it when it releases in early access. Since I do fly with traffic though, the early version won't be of as much value as I was expecting, so I'm unsure if this is the right move just because most people want it now rather than later.

Anyone who plans on getting BATC with traffic might buy the EA release anyway just to get a taste of what's coming (and to help iron out the remaining bugs LOL). Those who are in doubt if they'd go with SI or BATC might better wait and see how things will evolve.

Imho even BATC without traffic is fun to use. I mainly fly it without traffic but used FSLTL (with moving traffic) a few times and I will probably use FSLTL more for just the static aircraft. It's nice to be in contact with ATC with nice sounding voices and realistic phraseology: it really does add to the immersion imho, even without BATC controlling traffic.

[ricka47 611]

2 hours ago, threexgreen said:

That's completely fair. I was actually looking forward to getting a lite experience of BATC myself, and I may still get it when it releases in early access. Since I do fly with traffic though, the early version won't be of as much value as I was expecting, so I'm unsure if this is the right move just because most people want it now rather than later.

I think I'll get it but stay with FSHud until the traffic is implemented, I'll probably play with it a little to see how it works but mostly get it now to support the work of the developer(s).

[RALF9636 1,984]

5 hours ago, tup61 said:

BATC will be progammed in the nearby future to inject and control all traffic. In order to make the current version see traffic (default or FSLT or whatever) they would have to program something completely new that would become totally redundant as soon as the planned traffic injection and controlling would be added. So that would be a complete and utter waste of time.

I completely agree with that. 

5 hours ago, tup61 said:

I do find it funny though that in the past, when it was normal for an ATC addon to not control anything else but the player, I was always frowned upon when I said an ATC addon needs to do its job, control traffic, in order to be called an ATC addon. No one seemed to mind if an ATC addon could see nothing but the player and either ignored the traffic completely or, at most, could see it and just fake communications. And now BATC comes along with complete control of traffic on the horizon and people laugh about it and ask what's the use of BATC if it doesn't control traffic... How quickly things change.

Actually it always was one of my pet peeves in flightsimulation. But we had no choice because no so called "ATC" addon could do it.

What has changed is that meanwhile we have a real ATC addon that controls AI traffic as well - including sequencing and separation in their latest update. And many simmers who have experienced how immersive that is just can't go back to these fake "ATC" addons which really aren't ATC.

Of course FSHud is still far from perfect so I would appreciate to have more choices when it comes to real ATC addons. That's why I regret that BATC reversed their previous decision to implement AI control on release. As others have said that will most probably slow down development significantly.

[Bobsk8 12,826]

2 hours ago, RALF9636 said:

I completely agree with that. 

Actually it always was one of my pet peeves in flightsimulation. But we had no choice because no so called "ATC" addon could do it.

What has changed is that meanwhile we have a real ATC addon that controls AI traffic as well - including sequencing and separation in their latest update. And many simmers who have experienced how immersive that is just can't go back to these fake "ATC" addons which really aren't ATC.

Of course FSHud is still far from perfect so I would appreciate to have more choices when it comes to real ATC addons. That's why I regret that BATC reversed their previous decision to implement AI control on release. As others have said that will most probably slow down development significantly.

Successful integration with good ATC and control of AI, sounds like something that might be years away, frankly. 

[b1bmsgt 207]

As someone who has used Radar Contact for however many years its been around (and still do in XP), I just want an ATC addon that uses CORRECT FAA/ICAO  PHRASEOLOGY!!!!! I'm quite tired of hearing "continue as planned" and crud like that. I really don't care if I have to taxi through 10 planes to get to the runway when I'm cleared for takeoff. Just control my flight with the right words and I'll be happy!

BATC says they have been working with real air traffic controllers around the world, so I have high hopes, but we'll see...

 

Russ

Edited April 4 by b1bmsgt

[Drumcode 1,907]

Did they post the results?

[b1bmsgt 207]

Just now, Drumcode said:

Did they post the results?

Yeah. Early access won. Yay!!

[Drumcode 1,907]

Just now, b1bmsgt said:

Yeah. Early access won. Yay!!

Sorry for dragging this out, did they provide a timeframe or just provided results and moved on?

[b1bmsgt 207]

Just now, Drumcode said:

Sorry for dragging this out, did they provide a timeframe or just provided results and moved on?

Just "as soon as they are ready" or something like that...

[b1bmsgt 207]

20 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

Here ya go...

[tup61 1,613]

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

Successful integration with good ATC and control of AI, sounds like something that might be years away, frankly. 

Frankly, I think BATC can pull it off within a year. But we'll see.

1 hour ago, b1bmsgt said:

BATC says they have been working with real air traffic controllers around the world, so I have high hopes, but we'll see...

They did. And still do. And it's looking good. Lots of very deep discussions are going on between the dev and real world ATC on the beta Discord! Take note though that even real world ATC'ers may see things differently or do things in another way depending on where they work. The trick is to combine all that real world information into a system that will work worldwide. But you can rest assured that almosteverything that BATC will say to you is being said in real life too at least somewhere in the world! 😉 

[Farlis 2,310]

I really don't get this community at times.

First they rightly change the developers mind a year ago, that making a program that doesn't actually controll traffic is no use.

But then a year later when that part is still in production, they want the program released prematurely in exactly the state that they said it should not be in a year ago.

Just on the promise that actual traffic control will be added later.

Edited April 5 by Farlis

[tup61 1,613]

18 hours ago, b1bmsgt said:

"continue as planned"

BATC says 'resume own navigation'. Is that better?