On 11/2/2024 at 6:07 PM, mjrhealth said:

So how long you willing to wait and how much are you willing to pay. So lets upset all the developers so they quit, im sure there are a lot sitting on the fence right now, I guess some dont care if the developers eat.

 

I don't care if the developers eat.

In flight sim, I'm not giving money to charity.

What I care about is whether their product is worth what they're asking for it.

Companies like vskylabs, Thranda, Aerobask, et al. seem to understand this.

GKS does not - at least yet.

And insofar as the systems, etc, I've yet to see any rave reviews by Gulfstream pilots. When this addon starts getting those types of reviews, I will certainly give it further consideration.

On 11/3/2024 at 12:35 AM, Franz007 said:

No that’s not the argument. The argument is that for us systems and flight behaviour are by far the most important in a simulation. 

I would recommand them to simply switch over to MSFS because they will have the eye-goodies they are searching for. 

Why would I pay $45 for a below par Gulfstream when I can get an above par BBJ1 for $35 in the other sim?

Or the excellent Phenom 300 for just a few $ more in this sim?

On 11/3/2024 at 4:10 AM, brinx said:

In 2024, if a developer cannot achieve one or both then the plane needs to be priced appropriately.

I'd agree somewhat if we were talking $70 or more, but come on, with that feature list, $45 is bog standard. And you get good support and continuous updates with it. Carenado would have left you hung out to dry at that price.

 

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

What I care about is whether their product is worth what they're asking for it.

Companies like vskylabs, Thranda, Aerobask, et al. seem to understand this.

GKS does not - at least yet.

I really doubt that AKD will offer future projects at a lower price, unless it's an in-between thing at default system complexity.

18 hours ago, Guido1996 said:

But it is useless to have a nice plane when the plane lacks flight dynamics and complex development in systems.

the successful developers, in this and in the other sim, have proven that both is possible in a single product. both qualities are totally unrelated. there is no reason and no excuse for a great looking plane to fly bad and vice versa.

4 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

What I care about is whether their product is worth what they're asking for it

And they have to consider if the people dont care if the developers have to eat, should they bother to keep on developing, its become a real issue in this time with so many under financial stress.

As for that other sim, id suggest there is so much competition over there the developers have to keep there price down to make a sale, which means a lot more sales to make anything viable.

40 minutes ago, turbomax said:

the successful developers, in this and in the other sim, have proven that both is possible in a single product. both qualities are totally unrelated. there is no reason and no excuse for a great looking plane to fly bad and vice versa.

I understand your point of view but I don't agree totally with it. The CL650 has both and it's not cheap. I mention that plane as an example.

But for the price of the GLF550 I think you can't ask for more than that.

What I do see as very bad and getting worse is the support provided by some developers. Some of them have very bad and arrogant technical support.

3 hours ago, Bjoern said:

I really doubt that AKD will offer future projects at a lower price, unless it's an in-between thing at default system complexity.

I hope they can keep things going at that rate. And to be clear, it's not about the price, it's about what you GET for that price.

Like I said, when I look around at all the other addons available at broadly similar prices, this one quickly falls to the bottom of the list.

If they priced it lower, or if they made it look as good as Aerobask (and AB has good systems), then IMHO its value for money would be good.

The thing is, I only have a limited amount of time for flight simming, and I'm just not willing to compromise when I don't have to.

I guess the bottom line (no pun intended), is that while we shouldn't judge an addon primarily on looks, we also shouldn't make excuses for developers who aren't putting out work that is up to par with similar addons.

1 hour ago, mjrhealth said:

And they have to consider if the people dont care if the developers have to eat, should they bother to keep on developing, its become a real issue in this time with so many under financial stress.

As for that other sim, id suggest there is so much competition over there the developers have to keep there price down to make a sale, which means a lot more sales to make anything viable.

Yes, that's true. And to be clear, I'd like to see AKD succeed and become a wildly successful developer so they could do this full time, or hire a team mate that can complement their talents to produce a plane that looks as good as it runs.

But again, I'm not a charity - and I, too, am under financial stress - so I have to be quite careful with whom I spend that portion of my disposable income. 

As it stands, there are quite a few other devs who will get my money before AKD does. Not because I think AKD is "untalented" or a bad developer, but because what they're asking is too much for what they're offering.

///

I don't agree with your "other sim" point.

What the XP devs need to do is come out of the XP bubble and see where flight simmers of all types are spending money, and what the going rate for various levels of fidelity bring across the board.

Their customers, many (most?) of whom have multiple simulators (because let's face it, at $60 per simulator, it's the cheapest way to get the most variety of Hi Fidelity addons), are voting with their wallets. And when it comes to consumers, most will switch brands to save literally just a dollar or two (this is confirmed over many years by consumer research).

So those that fall for the "we have to price our addons higher because we have fewer customers" are deluding themselves.

The only brands that can get away with that are the ones who are superlative in their value prop (e.g., HotStart, PMDG, Flight Factor, Fenix, et al).

The ones that don't have a superlative product (and AKD is one of them) need to price their addons lower so they can make up in volume what they can't win in unit profit margin.

Edited November 4, 20241 yr by UrgentSiesta

AKD Studio update to Version 1.01

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/297162-glf650-by-akd-studio/&page=7#comment-2797455

Version 1.01(04.11.2024)
• Added SkunkCraft updater config(XP11/XP12)
• Fixed bugs with Simbrief integration(XP11/XP12)
• Fixed LAT/LONG waypoints entering(XP12/XP11)
• Fixed Minor 3D Model and texture bugs(XP12/XP11)
• Fixed Vmo/Mmo indicators on Speed Tape(XP12/XP11)
• Fixed Wing Flex bug with fuel load over 20000KG(XP12/XP11)
• Added hidden clickspots for TOGA and A/T on MCP panel(XP12/XP11)
• Fixed Minor bugs(XP12/XP11)

 

9 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

So those that fall for the "we have to price our addons higher because we have fewer customers" are deluding themselves.

More like, we spent a lot of time money and effort on this we would like some return. But who cares, hey.

Back on topic.

Edited November 5, 20241 yr by mjrhealth

17 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Why would I pay $45 for a below par Gulfstream when I can get an above par BBJ1 for $35 in the other sim?

Or the excellent Phenom 300 for just a few $ more in this sim?

Why would you use XP at all if you were 100% happy with MSFS? That an addon costs a bit more for a sim that has a 10x (or more?) smaller userbase is pretty clear for me.

13 hours ago, turbomax said:

the successful developers, in this and in the other sim, have proven that both is possible in a single product. both qualities are totally unrelated. there is no reason and no excuse for a great looking plane to fly bad and vice versa.

I disagree. Example: the B737. From the real pilots flying it in real and having tested both the PMDG and the Zibo, they all agree that the Zibo had a flight-behaviour closer to real (and am talking only about the flight - not even mentioning the ground-behaviour).

The Fenix comes close but still has some flaws compared to the Toliss when talking about handflying.

And the inibuilds in MSFS doesen‘t even come close because of the bad inertia-simulation.

So which addons exactly are you talking about that are as good as the XP-equivalent when talking about the flightmodel?

Edited November 5, 20241 yr by Franz007

11 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

But again, I'm not a charity - and I, too, am under financial stress - so I have to be quite careful with whom I spend that portion of my disposable income. 

Let‘s just break it down because I am sincerely interested to understand your point:

- I hope you will agree with the fact that a dev has to cover his costs and also be able to make enough to be able to have a decent life? Agree/disagree?

- Let‘s assume the userbase (potential buyers) is 10x higher for sim A than for sim B (perhaps it is even higher, perhaps not but let‘s assume that)

- do you agree that for 2 addons offering the same in sim A and sim B, the amount of work can be assumed as being more or less the same?

Based on these realistic assumptions, can you explain us how it would be possible for a dev selling 10x less products to be able to cover his costs if he sells his products to the exact same price? And have you already realized that even if that same product would costs twice the price it does in the other sim (being sold let‘s assume once again 10x more) that the product in the other sim is the ine we can consider to be overpriced, because the devs make 5x more benefits?

15 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

What the XP devs need to do is come out of the XP bubble and see where flight simmers of all types are spending money, and what the going rate for various levels of fidelity bring across the board.

Developers, mainly XP developers know what they want to do. After all it is the innovation that comes in the form of system that create the real wow factor in an aircraft, not just the texture. If you think that developers should look around at “ and see where flight simmers of all types are spending money”  the problem with that concept is that people generally don’t know what they don’t know and will only want what they can see and not for what they don’t know is coming.

Inibuild is prime example of that, they got their claim to fame in the XP market (if anyone has forgotten). They created the A300-600 (that most younger generation won't look twice at flying) I would say was ok and feature incomplete, but some still took to it, but not many.

Then, came the Beluga, an ugly aircraft but with several feature that made flying it very interesting.  One of the feature concepts to that aircraft is how the weight of the cargo influence the weight of the aircraft and "care" must be done when flying it. (in other words it force pilot to pay more attention to, weight, fuel weight and takeoff calculation that matter and not just an exercise in the procedure or that plane was not going to take off)

The other was the loading of the cargo which remain to appear while after loading was complete and flying with such eminence detail. Then we come to the best of the best was the A310 that sported a feature of CPDLC that only FSLabs was known for in the their A320. But inibuild took a creative step further by utilizes the use of simbrief download feature as a ACARS system to emulate airport operations for flight planning with transfer of data to the fmc and made CPDLC and AOC functional with an actual printer that works. Eventually all this feature was also added to their other aircraft variants, they all didn't come at once if you recall.

Besides that, they also focus in the visual department as well in bringing a luxury livery and military feature like refueling fighter jets.

Since that release, it positions inibuild as the top developer that raise the bar for innovating feature, (this was before the CL650) never seen before enough to attract many users from the other sim and they wanted them to come and make that aircraft for them as well and why? For an aircraft that they wouldn't think twice of flying now wanted that aircraft because it did things their sim didn't have. Because of such interest and inibuild desire to be on all platform eventual left this side of the fence to go over there to give that user what they want.

However, this time, they are not alone in making that offer where there are others doing something that is leaving them in a crossroad of challenges where even the most ardent supporter who was the leading individuals who once cheered inbuilds in coming to their side is now casting doubt of their future success and as far as all the wow factor from inibuild, I have not seen any from them either, more of meeting what the customer want which doesn't leave much room for surprise in a crowded market.

My point in all of this is the XP developers should just keep doing what they are doing by keeping their nose to the grindstone to keep producing fantastic aircraft. People will eventually people come around after they realise that there is sometime better that keeps them coming back.   

 

Edited November 5, 20241 yr by BobFS88

I think we're getting lost in a glass of water.
We understand very well that developers need to eat.
But it's not enough to use the concept of "world hunger" to leverage users' pity in order to convince them to give alms to all the developers out there.
There are so many developers out there, for all platforms, and all these developers have wasted time and resources to create their products, and they all have the sacrosanct right to eat.
Ok but what does this have to do with the buyer?
The buyer doesn't look at these banal clichés, he doesn't start playing the good Samaritan by giving money to everyone and for everyone.
The buyer only buys the things he needs, not the things he doesn't need.
It's the law of commerce, it's always existed.
What the user @UrgentSiesta was pointing out is a very normal concept: "if that product doesn't interest me I don't buy it".
Even the user @mjrhealth (who was the first to emphasize the concept of "everyone must eat") has stated that he will not buy the Toliss A330.
He wrote it: "that plane does not interest me".
So what?
What happened to the concept of helping developers to eat?
After making this "humanitarian propaganda about world hunger" to convince critics to buy that plane we would have expected him to be the first to set an example, to help Toliss to eat by buying that product.
But this was not the case.
He, like all customers, only buys things that interest him.
And he is right.
In business there are no good and bad guys.
There are only customers.
And customers choose what they prefer.
Simple.
I myself am flying with FS9, XP11, XP12, and NOT with MSFS.
Why did I not buy MSFS like many others did?
Because at the moment that product does not interest me, I feel sorry for Asobo, I do not currently give them money to eat.
I feel sorry for them.
This doesn't mean that their product (MSFS) isn't a good product.
It just means that that product doesn't interest me at the moment and I won't buy it.
The same goes for the GLF650, the FF 777v2, and the Toliss A330: these products don't interest me at the moment.