Jump to content

Keirtt

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    355

  • Donations

    $0.00 

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Keirtt

  2. Posted · Edited by Keirtt

    4 minutes ago, iliasr said:

    same  real weather issues 18 months  after release of GOTY...i 'm done ...

    Welcome back - since you've been gone there is an issue that has come up. Between the hours of 1800-1912 (EST), there is a problem with the weather not cycling through. They're aware of it. If you start your flight after 1800, you wont get the weather for 72 minutes. Take a breath, it'll be ok.

    • Like 1

  3. Posted · Edited by Keirtt

    9 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

    IMO, the timing is within reason though because of the Christmas holidays.  I believe that Randazzo said PMDG is talking to multiple people (and therefore, multiple teams) at Asobo.  It's entirely reasonable that one team had several requests from PMDG, and probably worked on several of those requests from PMDG, but didn't get around to fixing one particular request from PMDG.  These teams in Asobo also have other priorities, such as SU7, then the beta patch after SU7, then the hotfix released for SU7 after the new year, and then SU8.

    And then of course, the Christmas holidays came. This article here says that the average French worker has 30 days of paid vacation a year.  As I am a Canadian, I can tell you that in Canada, most Canadian workers don't get anything close to 30 days of paid vacation a year.  Canadians, on average, get 10 paid vacation days a year.

    So if the average French worker gets 30 days of paid vacation a year, and because of the Christmas holidays and New Years, the developer(s) at Asobo that knows how to fix PMDG's problem happened to take the majority of those vacation days during the Christmas holiday and perhaps their holiday extended into the new year, and also had one outstanding request from PMDG that they didn't resolve before going on vacation, it's entirely reasonable that PMDG didn't get a response on this one particular issue until that person came back from holidays.

     

    Not to wrinkle your theory, but Randazzo commented about this 100 days of no response from Asobo on January 17th. That would put the original problem back into October. Plenty of other things have happened over the holidays from both sides. I don't personally feel the holidays are what prevented Asobo from at a minimum, replying to Randazzo. Admittedly, I'm going by his words which clearly stated he was ignored for 100 days and required him to follow up each week. I'm not saying your idea isn't feasible, but not likely imo. I still stand by the fact that the community backlash and CM follow up on their forums is what moved this along. Lets not forget that Matt from WT even chimed in and said he would bring the attention of this matter to the team.

  6. Posted · Edited by Keirtt

    14 minutes ago, ahsmatt7 said:

    I still dont understand how you can jump to the definitive conclusion that asobo only talked to PMDG because of the community. 
     

    could it have been that asobo finally had time to do it and they talked to PMDG under their own volition?
     

     

    To your point then, you're right, I can't "definitively" say it was, but if we are using that logic, than you can't definitively say it wasn't either. I'm trying to use simple reasoning here. The facts are this.... Randazzo stated Asobo had been ignoring him and nothing had been resolved within 100 days. After the community went up in arms, the issue resolved itself within a few days. Coincidence? Possibly, but I doubt it. Again, you have to remember that a CM from the MSFS forums had to go out and publicly reach out on their PMDG forums. I can't definitively say anything, but no one can.... but I'm still going to voice my two cents on the matter and now you have it. You don't have to agree with me on anything, but I think you'd be kidding yourself to not atleast agree that's interesting timing.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1

  7. Posted · Edited by Keirtt

    15 minutes ago, ahsmatt7 said:

    What in the actual hell? How in the world did you come up with this? 
     

     

    I'm a bit confused by your reply, but I'll see if I can clarify this for you. Maybe you weren't in the loop with the past 7 days of drama and the bomb shell that Randazzo dropped about this ongoing 100 day issue and show stopper. Randazzo casually replied to a user on their official forums that his team was frustrated, demoralized and this issue caused a significant impact to their enthusiasm. The community exploded. I won't link every thread and post, but if you do some searching you'll see on AVSIM, PMDG forums, and the MSFS official forums this has been a heated topic. The top voted item for the next Dev Q&A is called, "What is the status of sim functionality for complex airliners". 

    It was because of the immediate responses from the community that a forum CM from the MSFS official forums reached out to Randazzo on his own forums. Randazzo said himself he reached out to Asobo weekly over the past 100 days to have this issue resolved without any luck. The community shook enough trees and raised enough pitch forks that Asobo responded and within a few days this problem is now resolved per Randazzo. After reading the post made by Randazzo this morning, I would've thought the community would receive some appreciation for making some waves and I would argue with anyone that our persistence is the direct result of why this issue was resolved. Whether Randazzo planned to use us against Asobo or not, it worked. 

    I can only assume your comments were related to that part of my post and why I thought we deserved some appreciation. The remaining part of my post is pretty self explanatory. Unless you care to elaborate more, I'm not sure how much better of an explanation I can provide you.

    spacer.png

    • Like 1

  8. Posted

    I'm going to add my two cents to this. First and most importantly, I'm going to correct his post by adding the following statement that he should have included!

    "TO THE COMMUNITY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR ONGOING SUPPORT AND PUSH TO HELP FORWARD OUR AGENDA. WITHOUT YOU, THIS ISSUE MAY HAVE CONTINUED TO PLAGUE THIS AIRCRAFT. WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE HELP GETTING THIS TO THE TOP OF THE PRIORITY LIST"

    While I appreciate everything Randazzo wrote in his post, I'm disappointed that the community wasn't given any credit for helping move this. We were the squeaky wheel here and generated the necessary buzz to get this moving. I'm also cautiously optimistic about the ongoing issues he discusses. When he comments about his "worry list" it makes me think we are almost guaranteed something else to be a "show stopper". I'm excited like everyone else and I completely support PMDG, but lately I feel like the community has been jerked around with these hot/cold posts. So hopefully I can keep my glass half full going forward and maybe we'll all be pleasantly surprised with some more positive information in the upcoming weeks.

  10. Posted · Edited by Keirtt

    46 minutes ago, IcemanFBW said:

    I'm going to preface this with a disclaimer: whatever opinions I have expressed in this thread are those of my own, not necessarily the FBW team.

    The SDK is synonymous with the platform in the context of MSFS - the SDK is the developer-side interface to the platform. If the sim (platform) is lacking functionality or implements functionality incorrectly, then the API's available through the SDK will also lack that correct functionality. IBM defines this relationship as follows: "SDK stands for software development kit. Also known as a devkit, the SDK is a set of software-building tools for a specific platform." [1]. If something isn't available on the platform, then it won't be available in the SDK.

     

    I see no reason to comment on this issue any further - I simply stated the truth, but Randazzo felt the need to resort to straw man [2] and ad hominem [3] fallacies in his frankly unprofessional response.

    I wish the PMDG team the best of luck in their development, and look forward to flying their aircraft.

     

    [1]: https://www.ibm.com/cloud/blog/sdk-vs-api

    [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

    [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

    No reply needed to this.

    I'm not a coder. I'm not a painter. I don't create mods. I'm a simple firefighter who enjoys aviation and doing it in my spare time. I really hope in the next couple years we can all look back and laugh at some of the petty moments that we've seen over the last 48 hours. I don't personally agree with RSRs comments but they make a good product and I'll continue to buy it. With that said, I'm not an Airbus guy, but I have the utmost respect for the team at FBW/WT and all of the other community modders who have volunteered their time to make this hobby as much fun as they can. RSR said it himself... he's got wrinkles, grey hair, and aching joints.... those are the guys you're supposed to be able to lean on for advice, get help from, and are generally wiser. It's a shame in his age he still hasn't been humbled enough.

    With that said, I'm also disappointed in Asobo. I think this is a two way street. I wont beat the dead horse since it's been argued here over and over now, but they have some responsibility here too and I hope they make right in the next dev Q&A and cover some of this. The topic with the most votes is regarding this very thing. I hope they take that seriously and spend some time covering it.

    To finish up, Iceman, FBW, WT, and all of the other mod teams out there, Thank you! You guys rock. You guys are absolute rock stars a long with everyone else who has the talent to make what we do better. I look forward to updates every day (Even if I am partial to Boeing). Hopefully PMDG will start to sing a different tune in the near future and those grey hairs will humble just slightly. Lastly, hopefully Asobo can make right some of the issues that supposedly hold back a great product and more!

    • Like 5

  11. Posted

    Just now, RICHUK said:

    It comes from his personality. Sure Asobo are probably frustrating to work with, but this outpouring of emotion from him is probably coming from the fact he thinks he is bigger than *******.

    I can’t help to think the post today with pictures and discussion of pricing model came out to help deflect from his comments.

    • Like 1

  12. Posted

    18 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

    You have old information.  Randazzo clarified in further posts after this what he meant:

     

    Just to add though… while he clarified some items, it still doesn’t change his words. The fact still remains that this one issue has caused their team to feel, “frustrated, demoralized, and has already had a significant impact on enthusiasm”. I’m not trying to be chicken little, but the reality is regardless of how RSR spins it, his team is at a low with this product currently because of the challenges with Asobo.

  13. Posted · Edited by Keirtt

    6 minutes ago, RICHUK said:

    Yeah, you would think given Randazzo's 'place' in the community he would talk to Jorg once in a while.

    Maybe it's a case of - who's calling me at this hour? Oh word not allowed, it's Randazzo...click...

    Jorg when Rob calls hahaha

    spacer.png

    • Like 2

  14. Posted

    6 minutes ago, Jeff Nielsen said:

    All due respect to SeedyL, I don't think he's really the one to talk to....lol.  He's just trying to help.  It sounds like PMDG is already talking to ASOBO, they're just getting the answer they need.  They may not be understanding what they want and how to implement it.

    I'll agree with that. I find it rather odd to be honest. I'm trying to make a point on the MSFS forums that seems to be over a few folks head about why the CM reached out to begin with. The communication has supposedly been open to the point where Randazzo makes it seem like they have each others numbers. The CM post is what I would expect to receive if they were reaching out to me as a consumer, not a high profile dev. Seedy was probably trying to be helpful, but it just adds to the level of odd.

    • Like 4

  16. Posted

    14 minutes ago, IcemanFBW said:

    They already are using WASM. That's the only way to compile a C++ gauge in MSFS (the alternative being an HTML gauge, which doesn't obscure the source code - not ideal for payware). It replaced the old way of compiling into a .DLL in P3D/FSX, which was also unsafer. However, this doesn't affect how the code is written at all, only how it's built/compiled into an executable format once it's ready to be put in the sim. It's as simple as specifying some different command line options, as you can see in our code:

    https://github.com/flybywiresim/a32nx/blob/master/src/fbw/build.sh#L26

    https://github.com/flybywiresim/a32nx/blob/master/src/fbw/build.sh#L61

    https://github.com/flybywiresim/a32nx/blob/master/src/fbw/build.sh#L114

     

    Thanks for the clarification

  17. Posted

    7 minutes ago, WestAir said:

    Thanks for the clarification Iceman. It'll be interesting to see how things progress for PMDG.

    The fix they need might come tomorrow or it might never come. They may fair better by starting over from scratch in WASM. It would take a few years, but at this point...

    I highly doubt you'll see them abandon the current project to redo it in WASM. I feel confident that RSR will get what he wants... it'll just take a few phone calls/emails to sort things out.

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    1 minute ago, Kilo60 said:

     

    Well, I think you just convinced me to go with Fenix over PMDG at this point...

     

    I'm very leery of any high-fidelity, study level add-on AC, developed to run on the Xbox platform and wedged into the SDK for same...

    In all fairness, I think it's a bit premature to pick one over the other at this point.

    • Like 2
    • Upvote 1

  19. Posted

    2 minutes ago, micstatic said:

    on one hand I want to side with asobo for the reasons stated above.  On the other hand, asobo is still the same developer who can't get the live weather thing right.  Something that we've had in every other sim for a long time.  So I'm not sure who to believe.  But I'd be willing to bet the story is more than just what we are saying in this thread.  

    I would agree completely with this. It is extremely hard to side with either. Not that it should be x vs. x, but it would be better to understand the position of each with more information. I’m really hoping Asobo uses this opportunity to explain their position in the next dev Q&A. Personally, if I was Asobo/PMDG, I’d be working on a way to bring RSR back for another live segment and a chance to truly air out some details without giving away “trade secrets”.

    • Like 2
    • Upvote 1

  20. Posted · Edited by Keirtt

    1 hour ago, micstatic said:

    I'd be curious to hear what asobo's take is.  Though I realize I probably won't.  But it seems bizarre that asobo would simply be ignoring PMDG on a weekly basis.  Developers like PMDG are likely going to be responsible for keeping users on a longterm basis vs the ones who are just stopping by to check things out.  Perhaps it's as simple as PMDG not wanting to totally revamp their methods of development.  The frustration looks massive with PMDG right now

    I agree with this. I’d like to see an answer from both sides of the aisle. PMDG and Asobo both should help enlighten the community. At the end of the day, they’re the ones that promised to look after the core simmers and PMDG is as core as you get for many of us.

    • Like 2
    • Upvote 1

  25. Posted

    23 hours ago, somiller said:

    That's what I get, cruise no problem but sometimes close to the ground or after landing it can be a stutterfest, even sometimes at small airports with little detail or few buildings. Even happens with traffic and multiplayer off.

    Do you notice the white circle spinning in the bottom right corner? I had frequent micro stutters closer to the ground and especially on takeoff and landing. Come to find out after finding others on the official forums, that white circle was causing the microstutters. If you’re having this, you can go into dev mode > console > clear console of errors. That stupid white circle will go away and the microstutters are gone. Hope that helps! 

×
×
  • Create New...