High Plains Flyer

Members
  • Content Count

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

35 Neutral
  1. High Plains Flyer

    Orbx remarks about X-Plane

    As I indicated, this would seem to be relatively simple to do. First, he has a lot of knowlege about the business aspects. Second, he already knows a lot about making scenery. Converting models from FSX to X-Plane should not be all that difficult. Personally, I convert buildings and other models from both FSX and X-Plane to The Sims 3 all the time. Then you contract with an X-Plane developer to do all of the fiddly bits for X-Plane. You get a firm bid. But it is all contingent upon getting enough pre-orders. Then, you take pre-orders. You demand a certain number of pre-sales, enough to cover your development costs. Maybe it is 500 units, maybe 1000, maybe 2000. When enough people have opened their wallets, you start development. It's a relatively low risk approach. As far as competition with FSX and P3d, these claims make no sense. Microsoft seems to be pretty much done, and I doubt there will be another print run of FSX. Prepar3d is not a mass market product and will always be a niche market within a niche market. I really doubt LM wants to be in the computer game market. I doubt LM sees X-Plane as being "the competition" because it really is angling for different customers. I place the claims that the comments are based about fears of competition in the delusional category. I suspect if Orbyx could be convinced there is a real market for their products with X-Plane, they would make an X-Plane version.
  2. High Plains Flyer

    Orbx remarks about X-Plane

    Of course, his statement won't make the a really excited user happy, but the statement "nor does it have a large enough customer base to make it worth our while" really says it all. Plain and simple, he is telling the X-Plane community that the sales will not justify the development costs. It sounds very much like a business decision to me. There are ways around this, used in other hobbies. One is to take preorders. When enough people have committed to purchasing the product, develpment can start. If they don't get enough pre-orders in a reasonable time, then they know the project is not feasible. They might simply start with one of their existing projects because it should be relatively easy to convert the 3d models from one format to another. But doesn't X-Plane have a conversion program of its own? Maybe it would be more productive if this conversion program could be improved so it could work with Orbyx sceneries? (And if it does work, what's the beef?)
  3. High Plains Flyer

    Most boring Long Haul in FSX?

    While some long haul flights can be boring, it is hard to beat a short flight from, say Cleveland to Indianapolis, for pure boredom. And one misses out on so many interesting areas. For example, Inchon to Kathmandou passes over some territory I was never even aware of. And even though parts of it were tedious, Newark to New Delhi has some real i nteresting parts, even flying over the Kyzl Kum and Kara Kum deserts. I sleep through the boring parts, like transAtlantic crossings, but the iinteresting areas more than make up for it.
  4. High Plains Flyer

    Regretful purchases for FSX

    Actually, I think this is a very important topic. With all of the developer hype and lies being told by the a really excited user, I have wasted plenty of money on substandard or misrepresented products. God save us from the a really excited user! My list includes, but is not limited to (i.e. the one's that really have my blood boiling): Pro ATC: An overglowing initial review on this site caused me to purchase this non-functioning piece of manure. (I use the word "manure," because I am not able to use a more graphic and more accurate word beginning with "sh") Thirty plus pages of comments following this overglowing initial review says it all. Imangine Sims Atlanta and NMG's Johannesburg and Cape Town. A few months after purchasing the products, the developers release newer versions but do not offer an upgrade. What a ripoff! Wilco's CRJ. Overhyped by the community, but after it is released it turns out to be nonflyable. The default CRJ is much better. Taxi2Gate's St. Louis: Even after downloading the fixes, it remains my most unflyable airport. Framerates are still horrible as it crawls to a stop, and the ILS beacons still don't work. I end up doing visual approaches at about 2 FPS! The truth of the matter is that I am really ###### that many a really excited user have the attitude that we will not say anything bad about defective and substandard products. The end result is that developers get away with releasing substandard and unfinished products. The failure to call them out on this leads many unsuspecting consumers to waste money on them. We are not doing anyone any favors by letting this state of affairs to continue. Guys, the least we can do is be honest with our fellow simmers!
  5. High Plains Flyer

    AFS design bad support [Old, outdated thread]

    I came across this because I was considering purchaing the A350 model from this outfit. Thanks for the heads up. It is interesting to note that a demo version was uploaded here a few days ago. It seems that a lot of people could be deceived and cheated. With respect to some of the comments here. Some people think that the doctrine of caveat emptor is the law. It most definietly is not. Vendors are to supply a product which conforms to their descritpion of the product. They are not allowed to lie through their teeth. If a product claims to have a VC, it should have a VC. To claim that the product has a VC when it does not, is fraud. Second, outfits like Simmarket apparently take the position that they are not responsible for the products they sell. This is incorrect. The contract is between the consumer and Sim Market. There is no contractual relationship between the consumer and the developer, in this case AFS. If you are going to get your money back, you are going to get it back from Simmarket. Perhaps a vendor can be excused to some extent if they were not aware of problems with the product when it was first listed. But once they become aware of the problem, they are equally guilty of fraud if they continue to list that product and continue to include the fraudulent claims concerning that product. Once consumers started posting negative feedback, they clearly were on notice that the product was not what was being advertised. Indeed it seems that many developers and vendors live by the Ferengi first rule of acquisition: "Once you get their money, you never give it back." It is an unfornate fact of life that developers and vendors get away with fraud. But it is unfortunate in the same way that consumers often get away with piracy. This is not rocket science, but plain every day honesty. Another factor here is the consumer never gets a chance to really look at the product before putting down his money. Instead, he gives his money and HOPES the product lives up to its claims. And when the consumer discovers that he has been cheated, he is met with stonewalling and threats? If people in this hobby don't want to become the victims of liars and cheats, they need to make it clear that such conduct will not be tolerated. If they don't want to pay money for substandard products, they need to hold the people peddling those products accountable. This means we don't make excuses for fraudsters. We don't try to justify the release of substandard products.