2 hours ago, Farlis said:

No. Say Intentions was this expensive even before it had AI Traffic. If memory serves me correct, BATC actually had traffic before SI.

The only comparism that does make sense: Other ATC programs.

True but SI comes at a higher price for the developer than BATC since its AI based and naturally that cost is forwarded to the end user. Again though, a BMW is more expensive than a Skoda so one has a choice depending on level of want. This said the day BATC VFR feature reaches the level of SI I will switch in a heartbeat with no remorse 😄

Well, this comparison (SI=BMW and BATC=Skoda) is a bit off, to be fair. Both addons have their flaws and issues, they're both "unfinished" in one or the other way. And their level of luxury is more like BMW vs. Audi -  with one being significantly cheaper.
(for me, taking the level of completion into account, it's a bit more like a Skoda vs a Golf, to be honest).

For sure both will grow up with time going by. The only question is: when will they be ready to move out of their parents house.

Edited May 1May 1 by Watsi

21 hours ago, Farlis said:

No. Say Intentions was this expensive even before it had AI Traffic. If memory serves me correct, BATC actually had traffic before SI.

My point is that the comparison being made isn’t entirely valid, since it involves two products built on fundamentally different infrastructures and design choices. Cloud-based solutions, whether for AI or not, can surely scale more easily but that scalability comes with ongoing costs and trade-offs that users end up paying. In contrast, our approach doesn’t allow for the same level of elastic expansion, which means we need to invest significantly more in optimization upfront before delivering a comparable feature, as we need to take into account the performance aspect for different users with different computers.

Just to follow up on my previous query (about upgrading to experimental) ...

I took a chance and did the upgrade - and I'm glad I did. The new features available in the "experimental" version (covered elsewhere) are very promising. I had GA traffic operating with FSLTL models from small (NZ) airports that previously had no GA traffic at all. All this in spite of the latest Flightradar song and dance.

I appreciate ATC vectoring is a highly complex thing, so I'm not surprised that there are always going to be issues ... but for a casual simmer (and not a RL pilot), BATC adds a lot of immersion and, dare I say it, fun!

Also - I'm grateful that so many RL pilots or controllers chime in with their comments/criticisms: it all helps to improve the product.

So .. to recap .. if you're "sitting on the fence" as regards upgrading, I'd say "go for it" 🙂