JaneRachel

21 minutes ago, RobJC said:

To help you guys understand the nuts and bolts of this better, at our company we use Git repositories. These "repos" store each code change that our developers make. Each file change is versioned, so you have a really good record of who is making what changes. You can also revert changes easily, if needed. We then use Jenkins, which is an automation server. This is the tool that polls the repository for changes and then builds and deploys a new version to one or more servers. In practice, when a developer commits code to the repository (i.e. a dev repo) then Jenkins sees those changes and automatically builds a new version of the application. Any developer on our team can commit to the dev repo, and doing so creates a new dev build. This dev build is stored in its own folders (actually its own vm), and it creates a new set of tables in the database, so we have a fresh build to work with. All of our database changes are also scripted and stored in the same repo. This free for all dev repo is the only one that any developer can commit to. One of our team leads is then responsible for merging those changes into a stage repo. They then can manually trigger the Jenkins stage build, which then creates a new stage instance and database. The stage database includes more sample data, that the QA teams use to test. Assuming that looks good to us (and the client) we move that to pre prod. Again, only one guy on that team can do that, and it is after getting the green light from the client. The pre prod instance includes actual data (but SOC-2 required DID of personal data) so the client can do more realistic testing on actual data. Assuming the client and QA give the green light, prod is updated. This involves not only the lead developer, but also support from our Sys Admin. He needs to back up production first, confirm the integrity of those backups, and then run scripts to update the database scheme / tables if necessary. Sometimes an issue gets through the cracks and into production. In those cases, we test a hotfix in pre prod, and then if it passes muster we deploy to prod and then merge those changes back to dev and stage. This is a pain in the @#$ but the other option is impacting the user base by deploying rogue builds. The key is to control who can commit to what repository, which is easily configured within Git and Jenkins. These tools are super flexible, so any team can develop a process that fits their needs, culture, stakeholders, etc. We use this process, and I am not saying it is the best way to do it. But...

These guys are not following best practices. 

 

hey Rob, if I remember rightly and someone feel free to correct me, they use Perforce at Asobo. We do too at work, mainly because Github hits a hard limit when you have enormous amounts of game graphics and falls over. But yes, you are spot on. I was checking our files on the Dovetail games (our publishing partner) perforce only an hour ago for a new TSW5 project. Haven't used Jenkins yet but I know fellow gamedevs who do.

But yes, stuff slips through the cracks... This, though was a mighty big crack. I feel for the devs, I am sure they are mortified. I know many of the Asobo people and they are good people.

all the best

Jane

15 minutes ago, Treetops45 said:

8.7GB update launched then said "Error" at the end & would not reload, so tried to get out via File Manager & now word not allowed S drive where MSFS 2024 is housed is not 'contactable'

What a word not allowed fiasco.

T45

some of us had this earlier, the current solution seems to be to opt out of the beta in the xbox app, then it seems to let you reinstall in the windows store... Had totally the same thing...

1 minute ago, jcomm said:

My guess would be that you'll have to reinstall ALL of your addons that resided in the Community folder 😕

Unless you're using some sort of "Cloud" backup solution in your PC? Do you have OneDrive active for cloud backups of your system and apps, even better if associated with the same MS account you use for the sim?

that is not the problem Hans and I are facing, we simply cannot launch the sim. No title screen, no nothing. Same effect after reinstall. It just ignores the launch icon or start menu start. We cannot even get to the title screen...Even after a complete delete and reinstall. Totally unresponsive in trying to open MS2024

7 minutes ago, jcomm said:

I confess it was never this bad since FS 2020 update quirk times...

Thankfully I had done what I describe at this other thread, so, all of my "stuff" was easily recovered in the time of a sim restart and a couple minutes deleting and checking files like "UserCfg.opt"

I had all my stuff backed up (I am a developer by trade), but the primary issue is not losing settings or even the community folder. Some of us including Hans and myself are completely locked out of even launching FS2024. Totally unresponsive.

17 minutes ago, Lars II Contrail said:

Beware: The update cleared my Community folder and removed the UserCfg.opt

As a result the Contrail App and Orbx Central assume the simulator is "not installed" until you close the sim - at which point the UserCfg.opt is created again. This might also mean that any setting, including a custom PackagesPath might be reset to default.

I'm on the beta branch

It has cleared mine too. The sim also fails to restart after uninstall and reinstall. Just ignores any attempt to start no matter what I do.

exactly the same issue, reinstalling the whole thing now 😞 it just crashed and died after the update and refused all attempts to revive it.

52 minutes ago, Simon_C said:

Hi Jane,

thank you for your insight. I understand the issue with EA. I have actually only seen successful projects with EA, but as I said, this is not my area, so I am just guessing. One of the highest ranking games on Steam, Subnautica, #56 in top sellers with 96% positive reviews, has been EA in the first game, EA in the 2nd, and 3rd part is also preparing an EA, as far as I know.

BATC is EA, still. And yet, due to quality, I would even re-buy it at full release.

And while you say about money flow with EA, well... isn't that just a thing of management? Why sell EA discounted? Why not require buy-out at the end of EA? I believe there are ways.

As you said... all about communication. And that is what miserably failed on the ini side.

You are right Simon on the money flow. In my world of AAA titles, we pretty much sell only through Steam on PC (or console stores). Without breaching disclosures, Steam put strict commercial terms on how early access content is handled, priced etc. A whole load of hoops to go through on titles, which usually involved the lawyers on AAA early access.

A small developer, selling directly, is of course, in a whole different world where they are masters of the commercial terms and retail pricing without a Steam wanting their cut etc.

3 hours ago, Simon_C said:

This is why a long and wide beta testing is needed, and mostly not possible with today's funds and structure. Solution (most likely, I am not an expert): early access. And you can do it step-priced, EA for less, final pay up etc. I see many developments following that scheme, and it seems to be working well. People enter EA even at full priced product. But at least you explicitly accept that it's not a finalized product.

hey Simon,

With my publisher and developer hats on, from 44 years experience... I agree with you on beta testing in relation to costs. I am currently about to ship a title for Train Sim World and I have to say the beta testers at Dovetail and the public beta discord have been fantastic and really helped. That said, going back to my time at Microsoft, EA Games, et al, you hit the nail on the head.

In simulation the cost to return ratio is very low. It is niche. A large paid beta team would likely tip most developer balance sheets in to the red after shipping. Simulation is not top dollar earnings in most case.

Early access was always a big discussion we had at Electronic Arts. Pros and cons really. I like the idea of being upfront with the public by saying there are wrinkles there and we get some great feedback from consumers.  That openness of being clear there are still things to do, things to fix. Small devs benefit from an earlier cashflow (that is half the problem, people need things out quickly for cashflow, sometimes knowing it is far from finished, but are cornered by rising costs - not speaking inibuilds here, I don't know them personally)

The downside is  a successful early access can also hit that bottom line. People buying at discount in early access are not buying full price on release. It can hurt a developer. We have also seen early adopters bad mouth a product as many less enlightened people see early access as somehow feature complete. So we see bad press again damaging sales if there is not bells, whistles and polish in early access. So EA is very much a two edged sword.

No easy answer, but I firmly believe we should be upfront with the consumers about what to expect, what not to expect and what the forward roadmap is, so they can make an informed choice about when to join the product journey. As the CEO of one of the big flightsim publishers, regularly discussed in Avsim very positively with their releases and held in high regard, told me today it "is all about communication"

all the best

Jane

9 hours ago, Seattle Simmer said:

Completing a flight from Seattle to JFK when I notice that my EFIS control panel and baro readout is blank, everything else seemed ok. I forgot to check the other side. FS2020 Inibuilds A350 with latest update.

 

I saw this self same issue yesterday, on a very short 30 minute flight from Manchester to London,

You need to be in managed descent, rather than open descent to follow the profile.

It maybe you inadvertently selected OP DES rather than the managed descent mode? Open descent will ignore any profiles or restrictions on the way down to your chosen altitude.  It is a bit of a simplification, but think of open descent just directly descending to your chosen altitude at the chosen speed with the engines near idle. Altitude restrictions and the VNAV profile are completely ignored in open descent.

2 hours ago, jon b said:

I didn’t join the beta because of the warnings of potentially having to reinstall everything once the update was released.

Has that actually happened to anyone ?

If it’s safe I might join for round 2 

had the same nervousness Jon, but took the plunge with the beta to play nice with the A350... The SU1 just installed over the top this morning and no bother. Was also pleased to see a load of content I had bought previously from the marketplace now flagged as available too.

Jane

On 10/19/2024 at 6:07 AM, sd_flyer said:

IFly EFB was designed by former assembly language programmer lol Everything is “ get”, “set” lol

This post so made me miss my days as an assembler games coder!

did they get the LSAS properly implemented?

8 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

Yes, a lot of companies I’ve worked with use JIRA, can’t stand that web app … never seems to be configured correctly for efficiency and too much guess work in filling out fields.  Can’t tell you how many times I’ve reported issues that went out to the void requiring follow up only to be told oh you didn’t select the correct option … so nobody passes it along to the correct group or gets back to me??

 

this is why as an Old Sod (trademarked 2024) I prefer to get briefings from my exec producer and producers telling me in plain English the upshot of where we are at 🙂

3 hours ago, outermarker said:

From what I've seen on the WorkingTitle Discord, the same seems to be true for bug reports as well. The answer to those is basically “report it on the official forum and hope that it moves up Microsoft's priority list eventually”.

It is not a bad thing to report directly. Most bugs eventually find their way to the one master Jira list, regardless of source. That list is normally managed by the publisher and not the developer, especially in work for hire. So going direct saves intermediaries and gets the issue noticed quicker. Most publishers like to be keeper of the Jira as it is called.

10 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

No. More likely, Microsoft pays for a certain feature set and iniBuilds will try to meet the contracted feature set they were paid for.  And there is probably a support period where 1st party developers like iniBuilds get paid to support their add-on in MSFS.

Where in the teasers did you see any of the iniBuilds planes using their wipers during rain? Even if you saw other planes in the trailers that used windshield wipers, it has to be that specific iniBuilds plane that used windshield wipers for you to have a legitimate case, and not even for the other iniBuilds planes would count, unless Microsoft made a statement saying all iniBuilds planes should have working wipers, or they said all planes that come with MSFS 2024 should have working wipers.

What I get from you is that you kind of expect certain features like windshield wipers to be a part of the iniBuilds planes.  But iniBuilds was not contracted to do this, even if that feature is possible via the SDK. So the formal way to get them to do this is to push Microsoft (or push the MSFS team, probably Jorg) to do it. If the MSFS team/Jorg hear from the community that it's extremely important to have windshield wipers on the iniBuilds planes, then Microsoft may then pay iniBuilds extra money to implement them.

This is how the entire software industry works, not just the flight simulation industry.

Now bugs are probably within the contract that iniBuilds need to fix. Note that fixing bugs is not adding a new feature.  So iniBuilds is probably required to fix the bugs that shipped with their planes. IniBuilds is not required to add new features though, including windshield wipers, even if the SDK allows for that feature to be done.

You should really read what @Lucky38i wrote above and understand what he wrote. e

 With my games developer hat on and my games publisher hat on simultaneously (at least I will be warm!) this is exactly how life is in the industry. There is usually an agreed scope, which is often the longest part of the contract negotiation. Then you deliver to that scope. I have spent weeks both as publisher and dev just sorting this part of the contract with the team, the lawyers et al. You then cost and budget manpower against that scope with an agreed contingency in time and resource. We would often love to throw in the kitchen sink, but strict delivery schedules and cost vs return analysis often means we have to compromise on feature set to fit the project "in the box" of the contract and the required financial margins.

all the best

Jane

On 8/29/2024 at 3:33 AM, jon b said:

Very sad news indeed.

As I’m sure you’ll recall Jane, you introduced me to Derek back in 2005 or 06 when I wrote an article about the 747 for the magazine.

I spoke with Derek on the phone about that ,but at a later flight sim show I spotted him at the PCpilot stall so introduced myself and spoke with him for some time. 
As you say he was clearly very passionate about our hobby but most of all came across as a genuine gentleman, and just a really nice person.

I’m very sorry to hear of his passing.

I remember it very well Jon yep! What I cannot believe it is nearly 20 years! @jon b

5 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I am sad to hear that news, Jane. I have fond memories of writing two articles for PC Pilot magazine, although that was before Derek's time as editor (I worked with Mark Embleton, who was the assistant editor at the time before he moved on to work for JustFlight).

Mark (and Dermot) were my first bosses at PCP when I first joined. It still seems like yesterday that Derek joined us!

1 hour ago, Peter Webber said:

Shame! We were lucky to receive the magazines down here in Capetown. Although a bit delayed. With DVD's attached. Used to buy every edition. RIP. Jane, are you still writing reviews?

Peter.

hey Peter, thank you for your kind words. I had to leave the magazine when my wife became very severely disabled. I miss it very much,

all the best

Jane

It is with deep sadness that I can confirm the passing of my friend Derek Davis. Many of you here in the flight simulation community will know Derek as the Editor of PC Pilot magazine since 2005. I spent over a decade working with Derek as his Deputy Editor on the magazine. Derek worked behind the scenes for years offering support and encouragement to the entire community, from developers to simmers. His passion for aviation and this community had no limits.

He was my friend and we shared many good times together, including some amazing times at air shows and events!

Derek grew up in a small apartment in a single parent family. Just Derek and his mother in a deprived area of London. He always dreamed of aviation. He realised that dream in so many ways, also becoming a leading light in Flight Simulation, helping drive forward Microsoft Flight Simulator and so many other aviation products.

Always a trail blazer, Derek has taken his flight in to heaven and leaves indelible memories of friendship and a true gentleman to all who had the great privilege to call him friend. He joins his wonderful wife Jane (always so kind and generous to me) who passed in 2015, now reunited.

My deepest condolences to his family as we prepare for his funeral, taking place this morning. Derek may have left us, but his legacy in pushing flight simulation forward will endure for many years to come.

Jane Whittaker

Loving the 319, not had a chance to fly the 321 yet.

One small issue, the aircraft still spawns for me floating with the gear up at the gate. Am I missing a fix for that?

all the best

Jane

3 hours ago, Peter Z KCLE_EDDN said:

I didn’t need a GitHub account, try this link, Jane and see if that works: https://docs.flightsim-studio.com/v/boeing-727

Cheers

thank you Peter, really appreciated... That works. (the in-sim link still takes me to a github thing)

Thanks so much

Jane

Am I missing something? looking for the documentation and clicking on the popup in-sim takes me to a github login.. Do I need to set up a github account to read the manuals??

many thanks

Jane

27 minutes ago, masaki said:

Regarding the cabin crew annoncement cutover in the flightdeck, in one of the streams V1 simulations mentioned it's correct, happens when the power switches from APU to engine gen .

thanks for that info Stefan, appreciated!

Has anyone noticed the aircraft wobble (almost like asymmetric thrust) when reducing from FLEX to CLB power on takeoff? Started happening with me after SU15. I installed the new version today and it is still there. I have checked my throttle calibration (TCA Airbus throttle hardware) and reconfigured in the MCDU and checked. The problem persists though in the new build for me.

I am also seeing the cabin crew voiceover cutting out again in this build with the engine starter cutout overriding the safety announcement and losing the safety audio. 

Jane