1 hour ago, Sethos said:

Having users beg for support after it was dropped, is not a win, it's never a win. That is the most unsustainable, synthetic way of gauging actual interest rather than just some community led temporary campaign that doesn't actually show real interest, rather than user-lead action.

So I guess people who beg inibuild to bring their A310 to MSFS after seeing it for the first time as you put it "is the most unsustainable, synthetic way of gauging actual interest" with a good portion of that market who just want to jump in and fly and look at the graphics. But if its ok for them why isn't ok for XP users where pilot can make use of it was well?

The "unsustainable" can be corrected by better communication to generate interest. How else are user going to know if some news like this is bury in forums or news outlet they don't venture in. That is what Sayintention.AI beef was about  "that the word did get out enough" and it had nothing to do with the number of users on the other side. But the Pilots spoke up and support has been restored and that's all that matters. There were technical issue that was also a barrier that may have been resolve that Sayinterntion was requesting with LR.

 

 

Edited May 16, 20242 yr by BobFS88

2019: [Unnamed flight simulator] VR support not planned -> Community persuades developers to give priority to VR support -> "GREAT NEWS FOR [UNNAMED FLIGHT SIMULATOR], USERS HAVE PERSUADED DEVELOPERS TO GIVE PRIORITY TO VR SUPPORT!!!"

2024: ATC add-on support for X-Plane not planned -> Community convinces ATC add-on developers to support X-Plane -> "THAT'S NOT GOOD NEWS FOR X-PLANE!!!"

4 minutes ago, Murmur said:

2024: ATC add-on support for X-Plane not planned -> Community convinces ATC add-on developers to support X-Plane -> "THAT'S NOT GOOD NEWS FOR X-PLANE!!!"

Oh look, he leaves out the part where it was already on the platform and then removed because it had barely any users and the numbers were declining rapidly. Classic.

Quickly, someone like his awful comparison that has nothing to do with the situation because it defends X-Plane!

Edited May 16, 20242 yr by Sethos

1 minute ago, Sethos said:

Oh look, he leaves out the part where it was already on the platform and then removed because it had barely any users and the numbers were declining. Classic.

I know it hurts that they're adding back support for X-Plane. Just deal with it.

Edited May 16, 20242 yr by Murmur

1 minute ago, Sethos said:

it had barely any users

Wait a sec, are you conflating products here? "It" meaning a beta ATC software package on an underdog sim platform had few customers? Now you're making sense. "It" meaning XP in general? Obviously wrong.

1 hour ago, Sethos said:

You could try reading my other two posts where I explained exactly that. I don't think you quite comprehend that it has been available for X-Plane 12 already but it did so badly and the numbers were 'shrinking rapidly' that they pulled support. You'd have to be on some very, very strong medicine to see that as a positive outlook for the product. Then it's being brought back because of a recent user campaign, showing synthetic interest which is the absolutely worst way of gauging ACTUAL interest. So it's essentially a bunch of people coming together to back for the product to come back, which is a shaky platform to base a product on at best. Hence why I also said; I'll call it a win, if as mentioned, it was just poor advertised or flew under the radar so to speak, which is a very distinct possibility as I didn't even know it was available for X-Plane. However, that remains to be seen. Just bringing the product back on a basis that has nothing to do with X-Plane's numbers, success, Navigraph data or anything of that sort, is not some automatic win for X-Plane.

I understand now what you mean. I had no clue about that product before and was just getting the news that they pulled it and then they changed their mind. But c’mon, regardless of the reason, what is a better outcome? That they completely pulled it definitively? Or that it will be available again? That’s the point I don’t get from you guys. You don’t seem to write a balanced comment by simply adding some reserves, in which case it would be much more understandable. You immediately jump to a cynical or negative comment, when in reality it’s hard to defend that these facts are not a win compared to the product being pulled. Products like that will attract users who wants to use it. So it contributes to the success f XP. So I still struggle to see how you can not see the benefit for us users, when a product becomes available (again) after having been announced to disappear. 

And about the second part: facts are that almost no ones writes on avsim anymore or post any news, although many things happen that are worth being communicated. But more and more, the reactions to those news are extremely toxic and delusional. They are way more balanced on the org. So I still struggle to understand why there is so much toxicity and negativity here compared to the org or on discord and if your goal is to only react negatively (or not at all). Because it’s what seems to be the case when reading such comments.

Edited May 16, 20242 yr by Franz007

44 minutes ago, Sethos said:

because it defends X-Plane

A better word would be: they support X-Plane. Because they like it and are happy when good news are coming. On the other side we have a minority bashing it at every occasion they can, even making fun of people dedicated to it.

I think everyone can make their own opinion about which of both reactions are the most apropriate. I have zero problems pointing out to some negative aspects or issues (I do it as well). But the way it is done more and more slowly reaches an underground-level that is really embarassing and hurts the whole community as a whole.

Edited May 16, 20242 yr by Franz007

1 hour ago, Sethos said:

where I called the sky in MSFS bombastic

I see you've edited your comment. If that was indeed your meaning way back when, it was entirely incorrect English. What you actually typed was 100% talking about XP in an XP thread. But Shaggy approved for sure :)

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/635345-sky-and-cloud-comparison/?do=findComment&comment=5103470

 

Edited May 16, 20242 yr by blingthinger

1 hour ago, Sethos said:

Oh look, he leaves out the part where it was already on the platform and then removed because it had barely any users and the numbers were declining rapidly. Classic.

Quickly, someone like his awful comparison that has nothing to do with the situation because it defends X-Plane!

I don't doubt that Brian over at SI was speaking the truth when he talked about dropping XP support because the number of users using XP was low and dropping. But here's the thing. During that initial period when the XP users were small and dropping, SI wasn't actually available to just anyone. It was in a closed Alpha or Beta phase with the users tightly controlled. 

It was really only after SI opened up their service to paying and or trial customers (first by a trickle of invites to the Beta and then a week or so later to pretty much anyone who wanted to sign up) that the demand for XP started to gain some traction but by then, SI had pulled support for it.

I signed up for an SI account on the day that they started sending out invites to people who asked for one on their Discord. At that point, XP support was still in the client but it got pulled a day later. So I didn't get a chance to contribute to their XP user base.

But now I will. So whether this happened because the XP community clamored for the support to be added back in or because -- as I suspect -- Laminar worked out some sort of support deal to get SI to put XP support back in, I really don't care. I just care that now I will be able to use SI regardless of which sim I decide to fly each day. And that makes me happy.

As for the "outrageous" pricing that everyone seems to lose their minds over, yes; it's expensive and doesn't fit into everyone's budget. But for me, personally, I was willing to pay US$300/year for a PilotEdge subscription that confined my flying to the western US and only during their operating hours. For the same money, I can now fly anywhere in the world at any time and have reasonable ATC service. SI isn't as good as the live ATC controllers on PilotEdge. At least not yet. But it's good enough for me. So it was a simple decision to take the annual $300 I'd budgeted for PE and move it to SI instead.

Everyone else will have to make their own value assessment. That one is mine.

31 minutes ago, Malaromane said:

As for the "outrageous" pricing that everyone seems to lose their minds over, yes; it's expensive and doesn't fit into everyone's budget. But for me, personally, I was willing to pay US$300/year for a PilotEdge subscription that confined my flying to the western US and only during their operating hours. For the same money, I can now fly anywhere in the world at any time and have reasonable ATC service. SI isn't as good as the live ATC controllers on PilotEdge. At least not yet. But it's good enough for me. So it was a simple decision to take the annual $300 I'd budgeted for PE and move it to SI instead.

This ^^^^^ is what I have been saying in the other SI threads.

I just don't do subscription services if I can at all avoid it.  This move across all computer venues is milking us of hard-earned monies and more importantly, removing our ability to be free to choose....cripes I'm still using MSWord2007...and it works perfectly for my needs.

54 minutes ago, 1st fltsimguy said:

I just don't do subscription services if I can at all avoid it.  This move across all computer venues is milking us of hard-earned monies and more importantly, removing our ability to be free to choose....cripes I'm still using MSWord2007...and it works perfectly for my needs.

If we could have done it without a subscription, we would have. Unfortunately, the required backend services are also subscription based, and the price it almost "at cost" without extra for development time, profit, etc. Pretty much all the 1000s of man hours put into this project are essentially volunteer. And that's not changing any time soon... Even with the announcement of the ChatGPT price drop, we announced we will be dropping our price as soon as we figure out what the new model actually costs.

Back in the school days I remember thinking: "This linear algebra stuff is useless! Let's go back to the integrals!" Ooops.

Well,

Say Intentions is an expensive ATC software and presently I use FSHUD + FSLTL in MFS 2020 or FSHUD standalone in P3D v5 and v6, and I am more than good with both, but I have nothing comparable in XP12 unless I spend in Pilot2ATC but will not get AI traffic controlled ... 

OTOH, just as FSHUD can be used with P3D and MSFS 2020, it would be great to be able to use the same subscription for XP12 and MSFS ( I guess P3D is not covered ? )

Finally I would gladly add Aerofly FS4 to my list of active use flight simulators should such a program cover it too 🙂 

Well, all in all, Great Times for Flight Simulation !!!

Never before was I feeling so happy using both platforms. There would always be big gaps... These days when I write down a checklist of items I like / don't like or miss in each sim, and compare it, the obvious conclusion is - USE'EM'ALL 🙂

18 hours ago, lpburke86 said:

If we could have done it without a subscription, we would have. Unfortunately, the required backend services are also subscription based, and the price it almost "at cost" without extra for development time, profit, etc. Pretty much all the 1000s of man hours put into this project are essentially volunteer. And that's not changing any time soon... Even with the announcement of the ChatGPT price drop, we announced we will be dropping our price as soon as we figure out what the new model actually costs.

If you say "services", I assume you have separate ones for speech recognition, to process the recognized text and to generate the verbal outputs?

Gotta say that the preview videos are very impressive. Kudos!