3 hours ago, Franz007 said:

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

His point of view is as simple as sunlight.
If he is interested in a product he buys it.
If he is not interested he does not buy it.
What is so difficult to understand in this banal concept?
We all do it.
You too.
I do not believe that you give money to all the developers in the world to help them eat.
We know very well that developers have spent money and effort to make their products, but it does not mean that we consumers should "reward them all" by buying all those products to help them eat.
If I really have to give alms, there are humanitarian situations in the world that require much more serious economic aid than xplane airplanes!
For example, donating money to the poor people of Valencia who lost everything because of a Hurricane.

4 minutes ago, efis007 said:

His point of view is as simple as sunlight.
If he is interested in a product he buys it.
If he is not interested he does not buy it.
What is so difficult to understand in this banal concept?
We all do it.
You too.
I do not believe that you give money to all the developers in the world to help them eat.
We know very well that developers have spent money and effort to make their products, but it does not mean that we consumers should "reward them all" by buying all those products to help them eat.
If I really have to give alms, there are humanitarian situations in the world that require much more serious economic aid than xplane airplanes!
For example, donating money to the poor people of Valencia who lost everything because of a Hurricane.

That‘s something completely different than complaining about an addon because it doesn‘t have the texture-resolution he would want to have for the cheapest price possible. We all should understand that. You do too.

9 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

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.

Just because time, money, and effort were spent does not entitle anyone to a return on that investment.

If someone wants money I'm return for effort, they have to offer something worth the amount of money asked, or otherwise desired by someone with the amount of money.

E.g., look at all the P3D developers who had to drop everything and start from scratch once MSFS came out.

Are you going to send THEM money - why not, in many cases their work is of superior fidelity?

6 hours ago, Franz007 said:

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.

Do you always go to the same restaurant whenever you dine out...?

I'm not 100% happy with any simulator. I generally fly the highest fidelity addon available regardless of the sim, which explains why I fly in ALL the major sims.

And to be clear, I have more addons in X-Plane than in any other sim, so I clearly enjoy flying there a great deal.

///

Your economic theory is flawed. While it's entirely understandable to pay more for a product that is of higher quality than similar available products, it's nearly incomprehensible to pay more for one that isn't.

That's why I paid for the Airfoil Labs KA 350 and AFL C172 - they're BETTER, in almost every regard, than the alternatives, regardless of simulator.

Similarly, I paid a TON of money for the PMDG 747-8i in P3D - because it was the highest fidelity addon of that type of aircraft available in any sim (and remains so to this day).

And there's practically no point in flying the F-14 in XP or MSFS once you've tasted the exquisitely simulated one in DCS World (and that's aside from the combat aspect).

And so on.

If you're limiting yourself to a particular simulator just because you believe it's the best no matter what, and that you "need to pay more" out of pity for the developers, you're only cheating yourself.

6 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Your economic theory is flawed. While it's entirely understandable to pay more for a product that is of higher quality than similar available products, it's nearly incomprehensible to pay more for one that isn't.

You didn't at all engage in any plausible argument about my questions to you. Stating "it's flawed" won't help anyone and only means that you want those developpers to fail because they cannot offer a price as deep as you will find in another sim. At the same time, do you also complain when those perfect looking addons fail to offer the same flight-fidelity than in XP? The discussion starts to make very little sense and you really didn't brought any strong point to the discussion. Because if I am trying to follow your logic, your expectations would lead to a dev having to close his business, meaning we wouldn't get any fantastic Toliss A330 at all for example (just because they cannot offer it for 45 dollar and with perfect looking textires). I seriously don't know what more to the discussion I can add and also don't get how your complain is supposed to solve that basic reality (economy).

Out of pity for a developper? I think you missed once again my point. I won't pay for an aircraft if I am not interested into that type of aircraft (the GLF650 being one of them btw - I have no interests, doesn't matter how much it costs). But if someone is interested in it, complaining about a 30% higher price as it would potentially cost in a way more popular platform, becomes really tiring and should stop. Again, if you want a dev to keep his work going on for a sim having a significant smaller market, you should basically accept the price to be a bit higher. Because the only other option is to see this dev disappear and I don't get how this is supposed to be of any help. If it's to expensive for you, then fin, it's your decision and just don't buy it. But please stop complaining about that little price difference (we know that most of XP-addons are going to be a bit more expensive) because I don't think that this will help anyone and I also don't see how the dev would be able to achieve these expectations (again read my point about the economy invest vs payback that you haven't really answered). No my theory is not flawed at all. I think it's basic knowledge. When talking about McDonalds, the exact same thing happens: you won't have the same price for a McDonalds Burger than you will have in a smaller chain. Same with WallMart that can have cheaper price than a small family-market. Again: basic knowledge.

6 hours ago, Franz007 said:

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?

Um, no - FlightDeck2Sim said the 737s fly so nearly identically that it doesn't matter. He said there's only some tiny differences that he, who is not only a Captain, but an Instructor Pilot, would notice.

I could point you to several real world ATP A320 pilots who call the Fenix one of the best ever in all regards - including hand flying.

I don't have the iniBuilds Airbus in XP, but I did fly their A310 in MSFS just this weekend, and it performed admirably and entirely in line with what I've come to expect from other similar aircraft across multiple sims.

And closer to point: even if I did have the iniBuilds Airbus for XP, I couldn't trust that the flight model remained accurate due to a combination of all the recent FM improvements/changes in v12, and iB's absolutely minimal effort to make it compatible with v12.

For e.g., did you even read Austin's extensive explanation of all the fundamental improvements he made to XP v12's flight model across the board? Which is awesome, and you can definitely observe the improvements - but only in those addons that have been optimized for the new FM features. There are others which fly notably worse in v12 than they did in v11.

You have fallen for the demonstrably false logic that XP has some Magic Pixie Dust that makes every single addon therein "fly better" than the same addon in any other simulator. 

I'll see you one further: if XP's native flight model were the ne plus ultra of all flight models, why would a company such as SimCoders be able to stay in business - largely by improving the flight model of various other XP addons?

So you see, this isn't at all about which simulator is fundamentally "better", it's about which developer has or continues to maximize the capabilities of their chosen simulator to raise the fidelity of their addon.

 

6 hours ago, Franz007 said:

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?

Y'know, my clients don't care if i'm able to cover my costs and also be able to have a decent life.

They ONLY care about whether I solve their challenges for a relatively reasonable amount of money. 

If not, they go to somebody else who does.

So it's up to ME, the "developer", to ensure that I structure and deliver my services and products to meet the needs of as many clients as possible. Only through VOLUME am I able to cover my costs and have a decent life.

4 hours ago, BobFS88 said:

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.   

 

These are excellent points, but many of these features are available across all sims and many addons now.

The point is, which you've arguably only reinforced on my behalf, is that innovative features and well-balanced High Fidelity addons exist in all the major sims now.

There's simply no reason to blindly stick to one platform out of a sense of charity. We should reward those developers like Flight Factor, PMDG, AirFoil Labs, A2A Sims, Aerobask, et al, who are capable of delivering High Fidelity products that deliver quality in ALL aspects of simulation, and not those that don't (yet - hopefully).

2 hours ago, Franz007 said:

That‘s something completely different than complaining about an addon because it doesn‘t have the texture-resolution he would want to have for the cheapest price possible. We all should understand that. You do too.

It's almost like you're intentionally misquoting, so let me bring the focus WAAAAY in for you:

I will NOT buy the AKD because it's not as well balanced as the Aerobask Phenom 300, and they cost about the same amount of money, IIRC.

AND because I have yet to see ANY Gulfstream pilots praise the AKD addons, whereas the IRL pilot praise for the Phenom was immediate.

So, as I and another have said: I choose what interests me, and I DON'T choose based on price (evidence my $215 PMDG 747-8i), I choose based on VALUE (evidence my $20 SimCoders REP B58 Baron).

5 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

You have fallen for the demonstrably false logic that XP has some Magic Pixie Dust that makes every single addon therein "fly better" than the same addon in any other simulator. 

It becomes tiring. It looks like you've spent too much time in another forum. No, all pilots I have seen comparing both agreed on that point that XP had better flight dyanmics for airliners. Even A330-Driver, a former B737-pilot and part of PMDG's test-pilots stated a few months ago that he agreed that the Zibo had better flight dynamics. Same with FlightDeck2Sim when I watched some of his streams (even if the last version of the PMDG flies better - that doesn't change my point because it didn't before and no one was complaining about its flawed ground behaviour). MSFS has vastly improved many things in their FM and have high goals in that regard for their 2024-version. And it isn't as bad as in the beginning from what i've seen. Still, the vast majority of airliner-pilots won't dispute that point. V1-Pilot only used MSFS since over a year and cannot even compare it to the Toliss anymore. He also made wrong statements once in one of his older streams when he was gettting extremely euphoric for - I don't remember which addon - and started to say it was the best, until someone reminded him that there was another one and he apologised and agreed. He seems to be sometimes a bit to euphoric and jump to conclusion pretty fast.

And about the inertia-issue with the A310: can I ask you how you tested it? It sounds like you just flew form A to B. If you never flew an aircraft in real you may perhaps not even notice that.

31 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

So it's up to ME, the "developer", to ensure that I structure and deliver my services and products to meet the needs of as many clients as possible. Only through VOLUME am I able to cover my costs and have a decent life.

Aehm...not really. Not only through volume, that's the mistake in your reasoning. You get money from volume multiplied by price for each copy. If the volume is low you have to increase the price. No? And there is a breakeven on that curve where the price is being set to an optimum to assure the highest income. The loss of money by seeling a product for a lower price doesn't necessarely weight up with the higher number of sold copies.

So the alternative is what exactly? How would you solve that if you were a developpper (other than having to disappear)? Answer that simple question form a dev point-of-view and not from a client's perspective.

Edited November 5, 20241 yr by Franz007

20 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

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.

Time for a quick market study, "Business Jets" category in the Org store:

1. The "XP11 only, no support, no future" bracket:

- X-Crafts Legacy 650: $50.
- Netavio Citation CJ4: $50.
- Carenado Citation 550 or Falcon 50EX: $40.
- Carenado Phenom 100: $38.
- RW Designs Cessna Mustang: $30.
- DDenn Challenger 300: $20.
- X-Hangar Citation XLS: $20.
 

2. The "officially working in XP12" bracket:

- AirSim3D Citation 650XL: $70.
- Aerobask Phenom 300: $50.
- AKD GLF 550 or 650: $45.
- MSGier PC-24: $27.
- X-Hangar G550 or Learjet 36: $23.

(X-Crafts Legacy 1000 not considered, but likely $80.)

 

I think that's a pretty comfortable market position. The $5 difference to the Phenom 300 is your less polished visuals.

 

P.S: The 550 is 25% off at the moment. Would be a crying shame if that didn't gloss over some..."definciencies" in visuals on an otherwise solidly executed aircraft...

4 hours ago, Franz007 said:

You didn't at all engage in any plausible argument about my questions to you. Stating "it's flawed" won't help anyone and only means that you want those developpers to fail because they cannot offer a price as deep as you will find in another sim. At the same time, do you also complain when those perfect looking addons fail to offer the same flight-fidelity than in XP? The discussion starts to make very little sense and you really didn't brought any strong point to the discussion. Because if I am trying to follow your logic, your expectations would lead to a dev having to close his business, meaning we wouldn't get any fantastic Toliss A330 at all for example (just because they cannot offer it for 45 dollar and with perfect looking textires). I seriously don't know what more to the discussion I can add and also don't get how your complain is supposed to solve that basic reality (economy).

Out of pity for a developper? I think you missed once again my point. I won't pay for an aircraft if I am not interested into that type of aircraft (the GLF650 being one of them btw - I have no interests, doesn't matter how much it costs). But if someone is interested in it, complaining about a 30% higher price as it would potentially cost in a way more popular platform, becomes really tiring and should stop. Again, if you want a dev to keep his work going on for a sim having a significant smaller market, you should basically accept the price to be a bit higher. Because the only other option is to see this dev disappear and I don't get how this is supposed to be of any help. If it's to expensive for you, then fin, it's your decision and just don't buy it. But please stop complaining about that little price difference (we know that most of XP-addons are going to be a bit more expensive) because I don't think that this will help anyone and I also don't see how the dev would be able to achieve these expectations (again read my point about the economy invest vs payback that you haven't really answered). No my theory is not flawed at all. I think it's basic knowledge. When talking about McDonalds, the exact same thing happens: you won't have the same price for a McDonalds Burger than you will have in a smaller chain. Same with WallMart that can have cheaper price than a small family-market. Again: basic knowledge.

I addressed your questions with an alternative viewpoint - one that is reality-based rather than theoretical: a product is only worth what people are willing to pay for it, regardless of how much effort, time, devotion, etc. have gone into it.

Nothing else matters - literally nothing else.

There are plenty of addons in TOS and XP that are more expensive, not less. And they are selling well, from all accounts. So again, it's not a matter of a developer failing because "they cannot offer [as low] a price", developers fail when they will not adjust their prices to meet market realities vis a vis their own products, plain and simple.

Like I said, I'm not going to spend $45 on an AKD addon that gives no advantage over the Colimata Concorde or Aerobask Phenom (just to keep it in the same price range). Heck, I can buy the superb Flight Factor 764 for $50, so again, why spend $45 on AKD?

I don't wish AKD any harm - quite the opposite. But the guy needs to know his price is too high for his own good. Either bring on someone to help get the cockpit graphics into shape, or lower the price and explain why the systems are modeled accurately enough to make it worth it (e.g., the NetAvio CJ4).

So again, I'm not complaining about PRICE in and of itself, because I'm quite willing to spend far more than $45 on an addon, and I do so regularly.

No, instead, I'm (easily) poking holes in your logic and showing that VALUE is the thing that consumers buy (especially the discerning ones), regardless of which simulator in which they happen to fly.

Edited November 5, 20241 yr by UrgentSiesta

3 hours ago, Franz007 said:

And about the inertia-issue with the A310: can I ask you how you tested it? It sounds like you just flew form A to B. If you never flew an aircraft in real you may perhaps not even notice that.

I flew an IFR flight plan from one airport to another. And once I reached the destination, I taxied around to the active and ran a few patterns in it. It's fine, believe me.

And yeah, I do happen to hold an IRL PPL, nothing special, tho, but yes, I'm quite familiar with how aircraft handle.

3 hours ago, Franz007 said:

Aehm...not really. Not only through volume, that's the mistake in your reasoning. You get money from volume multiplied by price for each copy. If the volume is low you have to increase the price. No? And there is a breakeven on that curve where the price is being set to an optimum to assure the highest income. The loss of money by seeling a product for a lower price doesn't necessarely weight up with the higher number of sold copies.

So the alternative is what exactly? How would you solve that if you were a developpper (other than having to disappear)? Answer that simple question form a dev point-of-view and not from a client's perspective.

Sigh...you keep looking at this from the perspective of a frustrated sales person, instead of a prospective buyer.

It matters not one bit what you think your price should be, it only matters what your customers will pay.

///

I did and have answered that, repeatedly: AKD either needs to improve their graphics to match their price point, similar to Aerobask/Colimata/AirFoil Labs/et al, or they need to lower their price. There's any number of ways to go about it, but I personally would find some hungry young 3D artist and offer them a cut of the action to bring the cockpit lighting and textures up to par.