Sign in to follow this  
Guest Jimbofly

Another example of why flightsim is headed downhill

Recommended Posts

I agree fully - nothing is going downhill here at all.EXCEPT OUR PRICES, THAT IS! We're OVERSTOCKED on repaints and our owners say we gotta move 'em out for the '08 models! So c'mon down to Stoopy's House O'Kustom Kolors so you can BUY NOW AND SAVE! OH-6A Cayuse's for as low as $1.99 each! Aerospatiale AS-350's for as low as $1.11! And Bf-109's for only 50 cents...you heard us right!We've got free hot dogs for the kids so bring the whole family! And if you can find you a better deal on a new or used Super Decathlon external texture set, I'll...I'll eat a bug! :)(J/K and No offense meant to my newfound-fellow quality payware vendors out there either....)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>>vgbaron said...>Amen to that. I was under the impression that we all had free>will to tell a developer "no thanks" by not purchasing their>product.>>Personally, when I read a post like the OP - I tend to think>the poster has a hidden agenda. Maybe that's just me.Which part of vote with your wallets did you not get? As for hidden agendas? I have none, I just don't like the way this hobby is going, nothing further.:-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>In the meantime, most of the creations are made and kept in>the freeware spirit, while one item may be offered for sale at>a reasonable price ($11.11 ain't much now, c'mon). >$11.11 Would be a reasonable price for all 4 volumes but not per volume. That's $44.44 for volumes 1-4. Fair price?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$44.44 fair? Sure, why not, since it's all subjective anyway, yeah? I think the busy always-on-the-go starbucks-drinking executive who loves to flight sim for an hour on evenings when not making deals and settling mergers, and doesn't have the time to download and learn a scenery tool, would go for it right quick. Specially if he lives in that neck of he woods. What part of the old maxim "a good deal is just a state of mind" is so difficult to understand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Tabs said...>So let me get this straight - someone tries to market a poor>quality product, which subsequently gets called out for not>being worth the money here on a flight sim consumer forum. >>This is a bad thing how again exactly? This doesn't mean>"flightsim is headed downhill" it means someone tried to>market a poor product and got called out for it...>>Nothing says that all products for FS will be good or else the>sim is "going downhill" sheeesh...Where are all the freeware offerings is what I'm saying. There seems to not be much for those of us that don't have deep pockets in FSX. Last I checked it was okay to voice your opinion about what you thought of a product here at Avsim. It's a crap product that someone is charging for so I called it out as you said. I did it to get the word out to the new people to this hobby (and there are alot) that this type of work is not the standard and there are better places to spend your hard earned coin. Right or wrong, like it or not it's my honest opinion.:-beerchug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Stoopy said...>$44.44 fair? Sure, why not, since it's all subjective>anyway, yeah? I think the busy always-on-the-go>starbucks-drinking executive who loves to flight sim for an>hour on evenings when not making deals and settling mergers,>and doesn't have the time to download and learn a scenery>tool, would go for it right quick. Specially if he lives in>that neck of he woods. >>What part of the old maxim "a good deal is just a state of>mind" is so difficult to understand?>But that's just it, it's not a good deal when compared to other quality addons from companies like Aerosoft, FlyTampa, FSdreamteam and Megascenery. The end price is more than the price of most of these companies addons and they are the definition of quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>It's a crap product that someone is charging for so I called>it out as you said. How do you know it's crap when you don't have it and, as far as I'm aware, you don't know anybody who does?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple solution, don't but it then.I can't see why anyone would buy a 747 (or whatever) for $50-70 either....cause...well...only like prop stuff mostly, and an airplane without a prop seems like a rip off to me....and stoopy...I like your style ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Which part of vote with your wallets did you not get? As for>hidden agendas? I have none, I just don't like the way this>hobby is going, nothing further.:-( So much angst over an addon. Wow. I'd bet most people do vote with their wallets by default so I don't really see the need to remind them to do so myself. I don't see a problem with someone wanting to charge for their work either, it probably took him quite awhile to make. Whether it meets your particular expectations of what payware scenery should be is your call, but others might like it.Airliners don't meet my personal addon standards, payware or otherwise, simply because they're... well, airliners, hehe. I won't buy any of them but that doesn't mean they're rubbish.Not sure what to make of that term "Freeware Quality" either. Fine, most freeware addons may not be able to stand toe to toe with a payware one aesthetically, but in my eyes every single freeware upload in the entire Avsim library represents an act of kindness and generosity, and that's pretty special I think. I certainly never feel 'entitled' to the free time and hard work of others, deep pockets or not. Each one is a gift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>But that's just it, it's not a good deal when compared to>other quality addons from companies like Aerosoft, FlyTampa,>FSdreamteam and Megascenery. The end price is more than the>price of most of these companies addons and they are the>definition of quality.>OK granted, this person isn't going for the volume business and trying to push as many units out the door as possible like Crazy Stoopy's House of El Cheapo Kustom Kolors* but I haven't seen his business plan and neither, I suspect, have you. If you wanted to play the good samaritan you could act as a business consultant for him, maybe, and help him strategize and optimize somewhat. Free country and all. Until then, if the price is too high and the quality is too low, his customers, and/or lack of them, will let him know soon enough. But the thing is, voting with your wallet is just that - your wallet, not anyone else's....and I'd bet some of the FBO's and flight students might also use FS and who also may not be as creatively adept as you or others, would like to have that scenery just because they think it's special and all, and $11 as opposed to sitting down and figuring out how to do it themselves for the first time ever, is a bargain considering what some of their time is worth. It's all like, totally relative, youknow? (and bkeske...ROFL.....I'm with ya on the prop costs, heck we don't even get a refund for the pistons that they don't put in! :) )* A division of Totally Wicked Tax-Write-Off FlightSimmin' Hardware Upgrades, Inc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a very nice free AI package ... hosted right here on AVSIM:http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID...aia&DLID=112838And everyone would like a nice free Piaggo for Christmas!:http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fsxac&DLID=98239Not your style? How bout a nice Airbus:http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fsxac&DLID=99100Not enough weaponry? How bout a nice Eurofighter:http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fsxac&DLID=92331There are, quite frankly, plenty of free addons available. Lots of good payware too.And there should be plenty of room in this "hobby" for both. In fact, the hobby probably couldn't survive if some enthusiasts can't make a buck off their work.I used to develop both freeware - and payware - missions. I put months of effort into some of them.Virtually nobody supported the payware missions, but lots of people downloaded and enjoyed the freeware missions ... thousands of them, in fact.Result: I no longer make ANY missions.Sad ... I know ... but frankly, the effort wasn't supported by the community.So, there needs to be a mix ... and there should be an incentive for someone who puts in hours and hours and hours of work for your enjoyment.By the way ... I can't find the freeware you've developed to give back to the community. Can you point me to what you've developed and given away for free. I'd like to take a look at your work.Cheers,Kevin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deep pockets?Last I checked $11.11 wasn't a great deal of money.Someone puts their time and effort into producing something for the enjoyment of others and decides to charge a minuscule amount for it, and you have a go at that developer and complain that FS is doomed?Take your tightarsed whinging elsewhere - posts like these are the reasons FS is going downhill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 volume with 15 airfields for $11? So, you'd expect 4 volumes x 15 ~ 60 airfields for $45?It is not a good coverage of Florida GA airports.I've done GA airports for FS9, just for the area covered by Now Orleans aeronautical chart including most LA airports + some in MS, AL, FL panhandle, and I had total > 80 airfields (you can find it here http://library.avsim.net/search.php?Search...=root&Go=Search , or on AFCADwarehouse.net). It took me awhile to complete, and I fiddled with AFCAds only (well except for a few airfields where I actually made some scenery). What I'm saying is, Florida has a LOT of GA fields (i.e., have a look at Airnav.com or charts). It is challenging to make a complete Florida GA package, especially if you also do the scenery. But at the end, author decides whether to publish it for free or as payware, and the user decides if it's worth it. From the GA AI point of view, when you care only about AFCADs, AI models and schedules, I'd say $40-50 is a good price for the whole US coverage. However, I'll be happier if the organized freeware efforts like UltimateGA.com and AFCADwarehouse.net will bring some FSX products too.Cheers,=S.V.=eMachines T5026/P4/3.07GHz/1Gb RAM/160Gb S-ATA HDD/Windows XP Home SP2/ATI RADEON 9250 PCI 256Mb/ViewSonic VX910 19' 1280x1024/Microsoft SideWinder Force Feedback 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this looks too bad. Just take a look on simmarket; theres some real special titles for sale way way worst than this.P.s Could someone please post a shot of Vero Beach from this Pack?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True. No need for us to encourage it though. You know better than most what a quality Freeware is. I still can't believe Boston was free. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it is fair to hold out "Boston" as the standard. I don't think too many people could do that even if they wanted too. I would place Holger and Jon's BC stuff in there too -- I think Victoria+ so far is the only "must have" FSX scenery. There is nice scenery called UtahComplete_v1_0 which might be comparable to this Central Fla offering. Now that we have ADE V1 out, hopefully we will have some more "AFCAD" style airport mods. Take a look at Jim Vile's EHAM for example.I think OP is thinking in terms of Scott's (et al) Free Flow Florida package in comparison to the Central Fla product.I like to look at the Hot File downloads for the month in the library to get a feel for the freeware side of the hobby. I'm concerned that there are so few FSX downloads (this could be a function of lack of user base for FSX than lack of files, but...). It's interesting that when you look at FSX aircraft downloads, most all are FS9 models ported to FSX (which PTaylor has told us is non-conformant).This is not "angst". It is just an observation. I'm not sure what it means. It would be interesting if AVSIM could survey everyone who has submitted files to the library and ask if they are still developing, if so which version they are targeting and why, and if not why not.For the "tax accountants": In the US if you don't show a profit after a few years, IRS is probably going to question if your scenery business is really a business or a hobby. If a hobby, expenses can only be counted to the extent of income. Of course, if a business, you get to learn about the joys of "self employment tax".scott s..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I don't think it is fair to hold out "Boston" as the>standard.I wasn't implying that Boston was the standard by any means. I would like to see a survey like the one you mention though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Scott,I pointed out a few of the issues - from a landscape/scenery design perspective - here: http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...2&page=2#428643There's probably fewer consistent users of FSX at this point than there was with FS9 four years ago, which might contribute to the smaller "pool" of freeware developers. However, it's still too early to tell whether output for FSX will remain at lower levels or not.As far as I can tell, with the same amount of effort you won't get the same level of quality in a new version of the sim, and that has been pretty much true for any version transition. Thus, the bar keeps moving up and we need either more contributors or people with more time (ha ha) to keep up with what the sim as a development platform allows us to do.What is not going to help us is proclamations of people who have nurtured some sense of entitlement to a steady stream of high-quality freeware. Freeware is only free to its users, not to its makers! That's primarily why I take offence with some of Fred's statements.Cheers, Holger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hi Scott,>>I pointed out a few of the issues - from a landscape/scenery>design perspective - here:>http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...2&page=2#428643>>There's probably fewer consistent users of FSX at this point>than there was with FS9 four years ago, which might contribute>to the smaller "pool" of freeware developers. However, it's>still too early to tell whether output for FSX will remain at>lower levels or not.>>As far as I can tell, with the same amount of effort you won't>get the same level of quality in a new version of the sim, and>that has been pretty much true for any version transition.>Thus, the bar keeps moving up and we need either more>contributors or people with more time (ha ha) to keep up with>what the sim as a development platform allows us to do.>>What is not going to help us is proclamations of people who>have nurtured some sense of entitlement to a steady stream of>high-quality freeware. Freeware is only free to its users, not>to its makers! That's primarily why I take offence with some>of Fred's statements.>>Cheers, HolgerIf you take offense to what I'm saying then you are reading me wrong. I thought you of all people would see what I was saying since you are one of the consistant developers on both fronts (free and pay.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hi Fred,>>personally, I'd say that hyperventilating posts like yours are>more responsible for reducing fun in our hobby than any>low-cost payware can do.>>You can rest assured that there are FS users, and probably>quite a few, who will get enjoyment out of Joe's package and>that is all that counts, isn't it? After all, the default>airports he worked on are pretty much barren. Also, I'm sure>he spent quite a bit of time on placing these objects and>that's what he would like to be compensated for. Last but not>least, do a search for Joe Watson in the AVSIM library and>you'll find 50 entries of freeware contributions of his dating>back to 2001. >>In any case, we're looking forward to *your* freeware airport>add-ons with full custom GMax models and high-res textures.>Something tells me though, that's not going to happen because>you seem to prefer watching this hobby die while having some>popcorn and yelling at the screen. Or what was the point of>your post?>>Cheers, HolgerOh nonsense Holger. I guess we should close up all consumer rating magazines. We should throw away all tech magazines, car magazines, etc. which regularly rate consumer products on value, worth, etc. on the basis that the ones doing the rating (consumers after all) should make those cars, home appliances, dvd players, etc. that they`re rating otherwise they can't give a viable opinion. It is nothing but elitism which suggests that consumers should buy and/or shut up. Sorry. Doesn't work that way and the FS market is no prima donna. Every consumer has a right and maybe an obligation to contribute to the pool of opinion regarding what THEY buy. The day you pay for the OP`s salary or pay for the purchase of his products then you can castigate his opinion in the fashion you did.:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee,I dunno. It's a free market, let the buyer decide and leave it at that. If the product is a stinker, it is not the frist (nor the last) in the history of payware titles.Read "Zen and the art of motorcylce maintenance" if you want a good treatise on quality. Simply put, quality is subjective, elusive and internal. I don't know much about the title in question, but it is been chided here as lacking in quality and having a price exceeding its worth. That is for the market to decide; the market being a collection of individuals. If you don't like the wares, move on to the next stall. The guy isn't doing anything illegal after all.I wonder why you are vehemently trying to sway the market against this guy? I realize you say "to send a message," but I think the add-on in question is simply providing a product where a gap is perceived. Honestly, there isn't enough talent out there to have a quiver of "home runs" on every add-on outing. In payware there are average, above average and below average offerings and a market for each. Even if this title is a dog (I won't likely find out as the product doesn't interest me), every dog has it's day.The hobby, and the attendant markets, communities and otaku surrounding it, are certainly not going downhill. As John and Paul said: "It's getting better all the time - it can't get much worse.":-)J-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Fred,well, "I of all people" retain the right to make up my own mind about an add-on, the character of its author, and the state of the add-on market and FS community as a whole. If you elect yourself to be spokesperson in all of these matters then you shouldn't be surprised that people talk about *you* rather than what you want them to talk about ;-)Anyway, no need to make this bigger as it is. Next time we'll try to focus on your topic of choice.Cheers, Holger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lennyt,those are good points except I don't think we're responding to the same post.If someone had told us that he had looked at a new payware add-on and found it to be both of poor quality and overprized then my response would indeed have been inappropriate. I fully agree that no one needs to be able to make payware in order to critique it and the same is true for freeware as well.However, the post I was responding to told us that there was a poor add-on, that therefore the developer is a bad person (lack of conscience), that this was further evidence that flightsim is "headed downhill", and hence Dec 21, 2007 was "a sad day for FS". That's not a consumer report it's an attempt at pre-empting discussion.Not sure about others but I prefer to decide for myself about all of these things. And if someone tells me that anyone can make this particular add-on and that it should be freeware then he shouldn't be surprised that I request proof in person.I also would like to think that in a community like ours, in which many developers provide both freeware and commercial add-ons, we can go a bit beyond basic consumer behavior and take the "larger record" of a developer into account. But perhaps that's just me being naive given that the absolute low point in this regard, at least in my mind, was the months-long furor about Pete Dowson making part of his FSUIPC payware. Maybe buying FS add-ons is the same as buying tooth paste...Anyhow, no need to blow this out of proportion either. I've spoken my piece and so have others. With that said I'm logging off for my Christmas break in a festive mood :-rotor Merry Christmas everyone and a happy and healthy New Year!Cheers, Holger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi J,great summary of the "issue", IMO, and much more eloquent and to the point than my posts. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.Cheers, Holger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this