About developers, beta testing and other things.

[CodyValkyrie]

I was going over the Samson SA-2 thread and I felt I had to speak up a bit.

The beta testing process is something that is desperately misunderstood many times over in the FS community. The interaction of the developer and the beta testers is something that cannot be understated. It is a two way street.

I'm willing to bet that I have had access to more beta tests here than most people, with some exceptions like perhaps Nick Churchill and company as well as a few others. Every beta test group functions differently. What I see most often is a group of beta testers who come in enthusiastically which eventually dies as time goes on. When a developer however is more active in the beta testing process however it can keep the beta testers moving forward, plugging away through problems, but this is not always the case.

Some developers choose to pick beta testers who are renown throughout the community, the problem with this is that their time is often more limited. In my case I have been given access to beta testing that I did not have much time to spend spend with. I always try to contribute when and where I can however, time constraints withholding.

The most interesting position I have worked in, in this regard is quality testing, working as the go between for the beta testers and the developer, organizing bug reports, etc. In this role I finally understood the relationship between the developer and testers. As I said above, it is a two way street where BOTH must contribute equally. Finding good beta testers can be a process that is very hard as ideally what a developer wants is someone who has a lot of free time, is committed to the project and has a wealth of knowledge (or willingness to research).

Let's change lanes a bit, I find that the community often is very critical of a hobby business. I, like most here, have made purchases that I have regretted. I have seen numerous times where developers (some in very good standing) are oblivious to very obvious problems with their product. What matters more than anything to me is that the developers are willing to fix said problems WHEN the community interacts with them. I will use Vertigo Studios as an example, and I commend them on their dedication to fix their Bearcat based upon issues that the community has brought up.

This leads me to another problem, is the communities EXPECTATIONS of a product. I believe if we all had a more open mind when purchasing a product, with a willingness to learn and let the developers lead us rather than in-fight with their plan, we will all find products more suitable and we can be more content with what developers produce.

I feel that while the above is true for most of the community, there is a strong, small and loud minority that knee jerks based upon their expectations. I find it interesting that many of the people in this group are willing to part so quickly with their money and be disappointed so quickly. Many in this group could do themselves a favor and WAIT until they hear feedback from the community and/or read reviews of these products. I can also wish to become a millionaire in this hobby doing the work I love.... but it will never happen.

I stand in the corner of Nemeth Designs in this regard, and with them success with the SA-2 and any further products they create. Until such a time that I find they are trying to shovel junk-ware to the community in the name of sales, this stance will not change. It is obvious to me that Nemeth has taken the harder development route by attempting to simulate more complex systems, which shows a passion for their work, even if the aircraft in question is "mythical." Anyone can create a model, a few basic instruments and shovel out a simple .air file.

Perhaps we are all a bit spoiled by some developers, and I think it shows at times.

David Brice of Iris fame is another developer who at times has taken a considerable amount of heat from this, and other communities. He is also someone whose work I will completely defend. David has expressed to me many times in phone conversations that he creates what he loves. In an effort to lead customers to products they will be happier with, he differentiated his aircraft line. Interesting that customers do not take this into consideration when they purchase a product from a different line and expect the same standards.

Then of course we come to the mindset that some want very simple models. This flies in the face of people such as myself who want high fidelity simulations, but in effect nearly doubles the developer's time to bring a product to market should they develop to both standards.

Let's break some numbers down for you all, and I want to ask you if it is worth it to you?

Let's say we create a product that took 5 months of development, release it and it sells for $32.

This product after release sells only 500 copies (yes, a very realistic number depending on the company) in a year.

32x500 = 16,000!

$16,000 sounds like a nice profit doesn't it? AHA! We forgot to add taxes, which in the states equate to more or less 30%.

16,000 x .7 = $11,200

Of course, we forgot to pay anyone else on the team for their efforts, such as the person who crafted the FDE, any marketing, etc. If you released no OTHER product that year, you would have netted < $11,200. Could you put food on your plate? Your kids? Wife?

Ask yourself, from a developer's standpoint, is it worth it? Would YOU double the amount of time of development to offer an adjustable complexity product? To develop that system a "little further?" To release multiple patches?

I will further use a developer of whom I will not name to drive my point home. They spent YEARS developing a product which has won multiple awards and praise from the community. There is a possibility they will leave this community because they are not making enough money from development to pay their mortgage (which is a quite reasonable payment).

Hug a developer folks. It is not all roses. Anyone developing freeware for fun and in their off time who tries to make a LIVING off this work is taking a HUGE RISK. This is why most developers have day jobs and development times drag on.

On the opposite hand, there ARE companies in this community who are profit driven with little regards for the customer. We know who they are, and what junk they shovel on everyone. We do not have to name them. We can defend ourselves by being informed customers. We also should commend them if they break from this mold.

/offsoapbox

[Cag40Navy]

Bravo Cody.

[OleBoy]

In hopes others can see the light, well said Cody

[jeansy]

I agree with you for most that

my flame is the selection process for some and execution , ive seen around the traps the people who kiss @ss or fly with someone online with next to no experience in any form of development getting the role i can think of several names right now i can name within a few companies

which leads me on to the next point, these guys have no experience in any form, and little experience with FS as i made mention in first post which everyone seemed to have missed these guys are pointless and the ones im targeting

for example its like getting a person just got their learner drivers licenses to help final trials of a high performance car

once again my posts have been miss read and everyone has piped up, it was these guys and the people who elect them im pointing the finger at, not the guys who have been doing a good job, And addition to that i was asking developers to take greater care in the selection process

i suggest you re read my posts

[CodyValkyrie]

I had made a post very similar to this over at another major FS forum 6 or more months ago. While not intended directly to you, it reminded me that I wanted to say it here as well.

Regarding your posts, if this is what you wanted to say, why didn't you say it? It sounded much more tactful this time.

Another point, having an average simmer IS valuable at times to developers, because they represent a major majority of simmers. They tend to often find issues that even the best testers miss, simply because they look at things with a different set of goggles.

The extremely good beta tests I could count with two fingers. It is a VERY hard thing for developers and testers to have that perfect mesh. For at least one development team, there is no set in stone process for bringing in testers either. This is not something that can be easily quantified and measured to bring success. The ONLY thing I can recommend is that developers who have a testing team that isn't very helpful is to wash it and start from scratch, keeping those who are. In that regard however, the development team MUST be active with their beta testers as well. As I said, it is a two way street.

[jeansy]

I had made a post very similar to this over at another major FS forum 6 or more months ago. While not intended directly to you, it reminded me that I wanted to say it here as well.

Regarding your posts, if this is what you wanted to say, why didn't you say it? It sounded much more tactful this time.

Another point, having an average simmer IS valuable at times to developers, because they represent a major majority of simmers. They tend to often find issues that even the best testers miss, simply because they look at things with a different set of goggles.

The extremely good beta tests I could count with two fingers. It is a VERY hard thing for developers and testers to have that perfect mesh.

i just bought a product moments before i posted and picked up on some things identical to nemeths last release and it has reminded me of the decline in quality from them

[CodyValkyrie]

Is it really a decline in quality though? Or is it that some companies have set the bar so high that our expectations are no longer met satisfactorily?

I'm not trying to be annoying, I'm just trying to stir everyone to think.

Many of these companies have a very consistent record with regards to releases, and the issues that come with them.

[fliger747]

A good beta testing program may begin really with the Alpha phase. A case in point was the development of FSX. A problem there was that all of the basic decisions and changes had been set in stone before Beta began. Useful improvements flight dynamics and aircraft control functionality had been nixed before things really got very far.

But maybe we are lucky to have at least gotten a graphics upgrade.

Cody is quite correct about time budgeting. A problem sometimes. Annnnd.... because of all of the different systems we have (apple flightsim would have two airplanes, which would be obsolete every six weeks) many things escape even very good beta tests!

T

[CodyValkyrie]

A good beta testing program may begin really with the Alpha phase. A case in point was the development of FSX. A problem there was that all of the basic decisions and changes had been set in stone before Beta began. Useful improvements flight dynamics and aircraft control functionality had been nixed before things really got very far.


Yes, this makes for a often very frustrated development/testing team. I myself have been witness to many releases where there was a freeze on features or bug reports, which can be very frustrating.

The whole view of the developer often can and will override development of a product. They see a sinking profit and if a development drags on, at some point they have to make cuts somewhere. This is also why we see many developers make "safe" aircraft, which are guaranteed to make sales.

[jeansy]

Is it really a decline in quality though? Or is it that some companies have set the bar so high that our expectations are no longer met satisfactorily?

I'm not trying to be annoying, I'm just trying to stir everyone to think.

Many of these companies have a very consistent record with regards to releases, and the issues that come with them.

Not annoying me mate, im prob annoying everyone else

Im not sure what most people here think, but the number of patches from some companies seems to be ever increasing and becoming more frustrating

I sometimes get the impression that the fs development world has now gone quantity over quality compaired to the older days where quality was over quantity

while there are some companies do outstanding jobs the others are avergae and it takes several fixes to get it up to speed.

and this is why i point the finger, i dont want to spend my life chasing up patches over and over again for something, when it could have been picked up in the beta

And i feel sorry for the some developers because they cop some much flak over stuff his beta testers should have found and reported instead of just flying it around and going around saying doesn't it look pretty

[allcott]

If the market moves on, and the developer stands still, does it really matter semantically if it is a decline in quality or a perceived decline in quality ? The perception of a decline in quality is enough, if backed by enough information from sources that one trusts to prove that quality is not good enough. If the market moves on, yet the developer stand still, that IS a decline in quality.

Expectations increase, standards improve and products need to be better or else we'd all be flying wire-frame graphics against a blue and green background.

There might be a line to be drawn between `expectation` and `actually deliverable`, but issuing a product which contains cowl flaps in a model that never had them is a failing in product choice, product development, beta testing or qualitative delivery standards.

In each and every of those cases the fault lies with the developer for not getting it right, not the customer for daring to point out the failing. There are just too many of those inexcusable errors in modern payware to be able to blame the customer.

vilifying the customer when the developer has to bear ALL the responsibility is really not a tenable position.

The customer who HASN'T purchased the product needs to know the mistakes and failings in order to make a perceptive purchase decision, and if that information is not provided by the developer then ONLY the community can provide the evidence, when those financially involved are not prepared to be honest in their appraisal.

Why, for example, do your fine video productions never reveal the failings of the products you have been commissioned to represent? you have closer scrutiny of them for longer than any beta tester, must be aware of those faults, yet hold your counsel.

Don't worry, it's a rhetorical question. We understand your financial imperative.

Ours as customers or would-be customers is quietly different, and in the current economic climate, being cautious with ones' cash is simply the only way to be.

[warchild]

The problrm with Beta testers, is that most people arent.. I was a beta tester in silicon valley back before I got old and became an IT manager, and we worked t=with test matrixes and a dorect line to the engineers.. problem is, mot people average or otherwise, wouldnt know a test matrix from a special effects driven movie, and most people are going to climb in a plane and say that heh, it flies ok, or it flies like crap.. Not many know what to look for, and many times, the developers dont supply a lot of data as to what they are seeing as priorities and show stoppers.. I recently tested a plane wherein i found a bug that for me would have been a show stopper, but for that company, it want.. You see, communications here could have been a help, but it was lacking from both ends ( yes, i, the tester, am just as responsible for saking questions, as they are for giving me milestones and data sets..) i can only hope that hasnt resulted in irreparable damage to the respect in both directions that both I and they deserve from each other..
The last thing is that beta testers arent a dime a dozen. Like everything else in here, beta testers are few and far between, and getting good beta testers is not always easy.. I also know of very few companies that can afford the time to train testers, especially when a great majority of the time, a tester joins a project because of personal interest in that aircraft, and once its on the market, they're gone.. That makes it difficult..
Pam

[CodyValkyrie]

If the market moves on, and the developer stands still, does it really matter semantically if it is a decline in quality or a perceived decline in quality ? The perception of a decline in quality is enough, if backed by enough information from sources that one trusts to prove that quality is not good enough. If the market moves on, yet the developer stand still, that IS a decline in quality.

Expectations increase, standards improve and products need to be better or else we'd all be flying wire-frame graphics against a blue and green background.


Interesting point. For the most part I agree, but in this hobby I think we will see a trend of less developers releasing less content over a given period of time. As the industry standard, or bar, is raised, less are capable of doing the work. A fine example is A2A's ability to create authentic period systems simulations for classic aircraft. If it was easy, more would do it. This is also why A2A takes so long to produce said material.

How far does this go?


There might be a line to be drawn between `expectation` and `actually deliverable`, but issuing a product which contains cowl flaps in a model that never had them is a failing in product choice, product development, beta testing or qualitative delivery standards.

In each and every of those cases the fault lies with the developer for not getting it right, not the customer for daring to point out the failing. There are just too many of those inexcusable errors in modern payware to be able to blame the customer.

vilifying the customer when the developer has to bear ALL the responsibility is really not a tenable position.

The customer who HASN'T purchased the product needs to know the mistakes and failings in order to make a perceptive purchase decision, and if that information is not provided by the developer then ONLY the community can provide the evidence, when those financially involved are not prepared to be honest in their appraisal.

Why, for example, do your fine video productions never reveal the failings of the products you have been commissioned to represent? you have closer scrutiny of them for longer than any beta tester, must be aware of those faults, yet hold your counsel.

Don't worry, it's a rhetorical question. We understand your financial imperative.

Ours as customers or would-be customers is quietly different, and in the current economic climate, being cautious with ones' cash is simply the only way to be.

Again, you raise interesting points.

You also point out rightfully that my job is to omit errors in videos I produce. If I recorded the weak points of aircraft, I wouldn't have much of a job. I HAVE been asked by major developers to omit certain shots because of this... some of these developers many here love. I offset that by trying to be very selective about the companies we actually do commercial work for. We try to avoid any products we ourselves wouldn't use. We are however human. I wouldn't feel comfortable with myself if I was not able to answer your question with honesty, rhetorical or not. We stand by the developers we work with and for.

The list of companies we would NOT work for, and the companies we no longer work for because of these issues is secret. It has to be, professionally, for obvious reasons. This also means that while there are many companies we WOULD like to work for, we either have not been able to agree contractually or the opportunity has not presented itself.

Our company slogan is important, "If we ourselves would not be entertained, neither will you."

I agree with many of your thoughts, as my free market capitalist mentality is always ever present. The depth of which I agree however must be further considered before I could answer with authority.

[warchild]

I sometimes get the impression that the fs development world has now gone quantity over quality compaired to the older days where quality was over quantity



Sorry jeansy, but i'm afraid i must, for the most part ( not totally ) beg to differ. When i started learning dynamics almost five years ago, i did it only because, in my never too humble opinion, there was only one persons planes available worth flying and that was Miltons commanders and his howards. The bottom line is that i have such a hatred and fear of mathematics that i spent the first uear and half in flight modeling, puking my guts out. u did it though because i wanted to fly something that really was real, and not some ridicules wanna be look alike.. Now, here we are, five years down the road, and the sophistication and technical saavy of the aircraft we fly, has exponentially increased to some of the finest flying experiences any one could hope for outside of reality. But as the aircraft have imprived, so have the expectations of the community, and thats only right and just. As Cody said, we all ( for the most part) know who the money grubbers are an many of those are dropping to the wayside.. Whats left, is a smaller group of extremely dedicated individuals who develope outstanding aircraft, and the differences between them are minimal and a matter of personal taste more than anything else.. However, th customers ptience has worn thin over the years, as it should.. And we, the developers, also need to be paying closer attention to the details.. its no longer a matter of including working animations alone, but also all the trappings expected of us by the community at large..

Let me go buy this beast that started it all, and i'll see if i can find any workable solutions or workarounds, even though i am not a chopper person and freely admit it.. its still a pretty darned cool looking aircraft, and like in the old days, if its broke, probably, i can fix it ..

[allcott]

Cody,

Thanks for the honesty. Many of us work in industries or businesses where we sell the positives and eliminate the negatives - usually by ignoring them or those who allude to them. :salute:

I do think we are already seeing the results of increased gestation time. Unfortunately, like we are discussing over the Cardinal thread this delay can also effect the perception of a product that was `current` at the time of its design, but left behind by events by the time of its release.

12 months ago, I think we'd have all been quite impressed by, for example, a GA aircraft that includes tioe-downs, chocks, pitot covers and other conditional animations. Now I find I am less than happy when I purchase something that has none of these things - or has animations that really should include conditional animations, but don't (the AF He210 Uhu is a good example: Deploy the ladder, but you cannot remove the crew. So what's the point of the ladder in the first place? Or a beautiful recreation of a reflective gunsight, but no camera position to enable a pilot to look through it in its offset position?) THAT is just laziness.

So the market has moved on. Yet products in gestation may not.

Perhaps Developers need to start finding ways of shortening the development process. Or being far smarter about when to choose to announce their forthcoming products.

Flight 1 really dropped the ball with the 162 and the 182. Not interested in the reasons why, that's their problem, but if the `appeared from nowhere` 177 Cardinal doesn't have conditional animations then no matter the cheap cost they're suggesting, it won't be on me `must have` list. Ant, Lionheart and others have moved the goalposts with the products that ARE in the marketplace, and expectations move on.

Nobody expects a product to be perfect at release. It just isn't possible. But making basic mistakes and not spotting them when they have all this `extra` gestation time is making it even harder for developers to convince the increasingly demanding and tight-fisted customer to part with money immediately on release. Just Flights back-peddling over the sound of their new DC-3 is an example. Why did they not get it RIGHT, the first time? What possible excuse can they offer those poor pre-sales customers who got their bargain only to find they had to purchase an addon sound suite to get anything resembling a simulcrum? More importantly, what financial compensation will they offer, when later customers will get the soundset at no extra cost?

That's not just poor developiong, that's bad business. And THAT is what neesd to be stamped out in the hobby. If these `companies` want to take money from customers, then they need to raise their game and start acting like proper companies, not barrow-boy market traders.

Perhaps what is needed is a consumer body to represent simmers interests? We've left this up to now to the big websites, but they are so conflicted by commercial imperatives I truly believe they are no longer to be trusted, which is why forums such as this are more important than ever to act as a voice for the consumer, even to the point of adversarial commentary and frankness in discussion.

Discussion that, if seen in the developers own forums sees the posts removed almost immediately, so hiding not so much the truth as the exploration of truth from would-be customers.

[krazycolin]

If I may, as a dev, throw in my two cents?

First off, it's certain that the rising costs of doing business and the decline of sales over the past years has shown me that it's absolutely impossible to do this as a business and survive. Not unless you don't pay your suppliers, buy models off of TS or basically do nothing code/model wise. All of these have happened or are being done, and, I will follow Cody's lead on this one and not mention any names.

However, on the same note, the expectations of you, the clients, have grown, the quality has gone up and the costs have gone up. BUT... the prices for the products have not. And every time I see a new one released that has the same price point as 5 years ago... I wonder... are we doing the right thing by charging the same for an ever increasing quality/cost level? As an example, the Cessna 310R that Milviz released about 3 months ago cost well over, including all costs, 15,000.00USD. Now, total sales so far are in the 400 to 500 range and THAT is a REALLY good sales amount (for three months). We've not had any "reviews" yet but, so far, the product has been compared to Realair's Duke, which for me, is one of the ultimate compliments. (ok ok... enough sales pitch!

What I'm getting at here is that we are selling it at 30.00USD. Now, for many of you, that may seem like a lot. And perhaps it is. But given the cost to bring it to market... we actually have LOST money. (do the math. 500 x 30 = 15,000.... throw in F1's cut and we're out of business)

It's this funny attitude that seems to say... give it to us cheaper, faster but make it better. It's just not possible. Something somewhere must be sacrificed.... What that will be is yet to be defined for us at Milviz, but for other companies, creating different levels of products is one of the things being tried; prepay's, no vc's included to test the waters, being some of the others. etc. All of these marketing schemes have one thing in common: they don't really work because, in the end, quality is the thing being sacrificed. (something I will not do if I can possibly avoid it)

What needs to happen, in my view, is that you, the clientele, must be prepared to pay for what you get. Admittedly, it's hard to know without trying before you buy. This is the main reason why we went with Flight 1. (I do not own stock). Obviously, the fact that they also have a certain amount of piracy protection has a lot to do with our choice. But even that costs us. (A LOT!!!)

On the subject of beta testers, after much trouble, we have finally got a team of testers that consists of a variety of people from ex AF, to ex Army to actual chopper mechs and RW pilots to kids who know basically nothing about beta testing but who are veritable fonts of information about specific planes and their systems... We're lucky. Not every dev is quite so lucky. . )

So, what's going to happen next? I do not know. But I do know that we cannot charge 30.00USD anymore and survive. Cannot do it. Our prices will have to go up. I know that we will lose some of you as clients and for that, I am sorry. But we have to survive and that takes money.

Cody, this was a good idea of a thread and I thank you. You will get my business for our next plane... :salute:

[Martyn]

Just Flights back-peddling over the sound of their new DC-3 is an example. Why did they not get it RIGHT, the first time?

As someone who doesn't appear to own the product, I think you may have misunderstood the situation some-what. The product includes a custom sound-set, which we evaluated and found to be a good match to the real thing. Out of the many hundreds of sales, a selection (equating to less than 2%) of users on this forum found the sound-set to be letting down the rest of the aircraft. It is worth bearing in mind that we have also had feedback from other customers that the sounds are excellent. Sounds are one of those areas which is highly subjective, but after seeing numerous posts from highly respected members of this community expressing disappointment, it is only fair that we offer a comprehensive solution to satisfy our customers and give justice to an excellent product.

There was no back-peddling (did I ever post up a reply dismissing people's feedback, later to back-peddle?) and I think that we have responded in a very timely and positive manner. Unfortunately, as is always the case with forums (and life in general!), you cannot always win over everyone. You are of course free not to purchase the product, but I would urge you to consider your criticisms of a product that you have not actually tried yourself.

The reason that I am typing this forum post at 9am on a Saturday morning, wearing my dressing gown and holding a cup of tea (despite the fact that unlike a lot of FS developers, I am very much a 9-5 employee), is that I have spent the last few months working extremely hard with the development team to produce a DC-3 that will satisfy our customers. I strongly believe that despite some initial (very constructive and fair) criticisms, the vast majority of customers feel this was achieved. I am a big fan of forums as it allows us to have a good dialogue with some of the most demanding (in a good way) customers, but one of its major flaws is its ability to make several fairly minor issues look fairly significant. I suspect that people, understandably, feel that the views portrayed on a particular forum can be interpreted as being representative of the FS community as a whole (very far from the truth).

As regards to this thread in general, I have to agree completely with Cody. In an ideal world I would be able to invite some of the more cynical members of our community to spend a few months working in the 'FS development world' (we have invited a couple of customers to our office for a day-trip!), as I believe it would quickly alleviate their fears and abolish this concept of profiteering, scheming and lazy developers. Quite the opposite is true, I have yet to come across an industry which contains more enthusiastic, eager to please, customer service orientated, hard-working and honest development teams. As Cody has touched upon, where else do you find companies who are willing to work 12 hour days, reply to customer queries in the middle of the night, provide the most deserving members of the community with free copies of their products and all of that on a pretty modest income? We are extremely lucky in the FS world, and I say that not as an employee of JF, but as a customer of most of the developers around.

Just my two cents :wiggle:

[Martyn]

More importantly, what financial compensation will they offer, when later customers will get the soundset at no extra cost?

Although I do not think (based on my above post) that we provided a sub-standard soundset which give people no other choice but to purchase at extra cost another product, I will more than happily provide anyone who purchased the Sonic Solutions package Just Reward points to compensate them. Just contact me directly using the PM feature here.

[michael davies]

Cody,

Nice prose, however, probably a complete waste of your enthusiasm and energy.

I agree with what you say without contradiction, however your target audience that needs to begin to understand these events and issues won't, nor will they read your dialog or more importantly, care.

The people who should be learning this stuff, I have found over the years really don't, they don't want to, they feel they don't need to and ultimately just carry on as normal.

Every one who since posted in the positive already knows how to behave and what makes it all tick, they are not the problem audience.

Many years ago I was given some market research figures from Just Flight, on line sales equated to just 20% of a products sale, feedback from on line sales was nearly 90%, worse, 95% of all complaints came from on line consumers.

In short you could completely ignore all complaints and still sell 80% of your product!.

Now, at that time JF had a lot of shelf space in stores and this parody only works in you have that safety net, if like some vendors who post here, the majority of your sales are virtual, then the above is reversed, all of your complaints are virtual and all complaints effect virtual sales.

Best

Michael

[allcott]

As someone who doesn't appear to own the product, I think you may have misunderstood the situation some-what. The product includes a custom sound-set, which we evaluated and found to be a good match to the real thing. Out of the many hundreds of sales, a selection (equating to less than 2%) of users on this forum found the sound-set to be letting down the rest of the aircraft. It is worth bearing in mind that we have also had feedback from other customers that the sounds are excellent. Sounds are one of those areas which is highly subjective, but after seeing numerous posts from highly respected members of this community expressing disappointment, it is only fair that we offer a comprehensive solution to satisfy our customers and give justice to an excellent product.

There was no back-peddling (did I ever post up a reply dismissing people's feedback, later to back-peddle?) and I think that we have responded in a very timely and positive manner. Unfortunately, as is always the case with forums (and life in general!), you cannot always win over everyone. You are of course free not to purchase the product, but I would urge you to consider your criticisms of a product that you have not actually tried yourself.

The reason that I am typing this forum post at 9am on a Saturday morning, wearing my dressing gown and holding a cup of tea (despite the fact that unlike a lot of FS developers, I am very much a 9-5 employee), is that I have spent the last few months working extremely hard with the development team to produce a DC-3 that will satisfy our customers. I strongly believe that despite some initial (very constructive and fair) criticisms, the vast majority of customers feel this was achieved. I am a big fan of forums as it allows us to have a good dialogue with some of the most demanding (in a good way) customers, but one of its major flaws is its ability to make several fairly minor issues look fairly significant. I suspect that people, understandably, feel that the views portrayed on a particular forum can be interpreted as being representative of the FS community as a whole (very far from the truth).

As regards to this thread in general, I have to agree completely with Cody. In an ideal world I would be able to invite some of the more cynical members of our community to spend a few months working in the 'FS development world' (we have invited a couple of customers to our office for a day-trip!), as I believe it would quickly alleviate their fears and abolish this concept of profiteering, scheming and lazy developers. Quite the opposite is true, I have yet to come across an industry which contains more enthusiastic, eager to please, customer service orientated, hard-working and honest development teams. As Cody has touched upon, where else do you find companies who are willing to work 12 hour days, reply to customer queries in the middle of the night, provide the most deserving members of the community with free copies of their products and all of that on a pretty modest income? We are extremely lucky in the FS world, and I say that not as an employee of JF, but as a customer of most of the developers around.

Just my two cents :wiggle:

And the excuse for the temperature gauge? The cowl flap levers on the Wright version? The poor rendition of the boat-tail? The incorrect gear retraction time? The Sperry that uses the ailerons? The poor cartoon-like graphics of the VC? And if no excuses for those, then explain why that list exists at all?

If the only way to have a criticism of a product is to ignore what critical purchasers are saying and try it oneself, why does Just Flight not offer a 100% moneyback guarantee like Flight 1 or Eaglesoft so that we may?


And are you saying that all these customers who HAVE bought the product and are not satisfied are wrong? Or should we infer, as Michael suggests, that as the criticisms don't affect sales, you just don't care?

Do please show evidence of the 98% satisfaction rating. It is my experience that the 2% who are vocally critical represent a far, far larger proportion, most of whom say nothing, but are disgruntled. Have you, for instance, done what A2A do and telephoned a selection of the other 98% to confirm that they are happy? If not, you have no grounds whatsoever to assumer satisfaction from ANY customer except the ones who have publically stated as such - probably about the same 2% as have expressed displeasure.

We're back to precisely the ground I was talking about earlier. Should we HAVE to complain to have these things right? Why were they not right at release?

If you have that much confidence in your product, or disregard for your customers opinions of it, why then are you dashing to include a replacement soundset? More importantly, why were the sounds shabby at the original point of sale?

Sorry

[SpaceWeevil]

If the only way to have a criticism of a product is to ignore what critical purchasers are saying and try it oneself, why does Just Flight not offer a 100% moneyback guarantee like Flight 1 or Eaglesoft so that we may?

Can't comment on the rest of your post as I don't have the DC3, but it's only fair to mention that Just Flight DO offer a no-quibble money back guarantee.

[allcott]

Can't comment on the rest of your post as I don't have the DC3, but it's only fair to mention that Just Flight DO offer a no-quibble money back guarantee.

It's not stated as such in theTerms and Conditions (http://www.justflight.com/termsconditions.asp) on their website. That is why I was so cautious in the first place!


Naturally, we will provide a replacement or refund in the rare event that an item is faulty, although please bear in mind that under Distance Selling regulations we are not obliged to refund items of software that have been opened unless they are faulty.

That is a long way short of a no-quibble money back guarantee!

As I said earlier, it really is down to the consumer to be extremely careful with their money. This history of sub-standard product seems unlikely to change, whether it's through incompetent beta testing, poor or uncaring developers, or simple economics based on the business model that it doesn't matter how bad it is, most will still buy it. I'm sure we can all name those developers.

At the end of the day, we only get to find out how good a product is after its released to the paying public. And too many obvious faults are coming to light only after it's been bought and paid-for.

That isn't satisfactory from the consumers point of view and in the longer term, extended gestation or not, is likely only to result in the unwelcome attentions (unwelcome from the developers point of view) of legally-empowered consumer protection organisations and the hasty departure from the market of these corporate non-entities that are actually not companies at all (Just Flight being one exception, to be clear) and therefore having no professional indemnity or liability insurance, probably no tax status, and no culpability or recompense procedure for consumers.

In the meantime, I really think that avoiding purchases in the days and weeks after initial release is the soundest judgment. If the developers want the money up front, then all they have to do is make it right first time.

The great thing from the consumer point of view is if there's an ever-increasing list of developers that are going to have to wait for their income, they WILL have to comply with supply and demand.

And if there are no early-adopters, the ONLY policy that will encourage people to take the risk with their own money is a full, no-quibble, money back guarantee.

[PRB]

One thing that would help a beta testing “process” is leadership from the development team. If you simply hand the model off to the beta testers and wait for the bug reports to come in, a lot will be missed. Milton Shupe taught me this. His beta testesr go out to the “flight line” with a very detailed checklist, a couple of pages long. If I don't use a checklist such as this, I find myself simply flying around going “hmm, looks good”. Beta testing can be a tedious and time consuming job. With a good checklist, anyone can do it, except for the flight model that is, but that's another can of worms all together, isn't it...?

I do agree with allcott on this: It's a software development mistake, IMO, to expect all your bugs to be uncovered by the beta testers. Some of this burden must fall upon the developers in the first place. The less bugs you send to beta testers, the less they will have to find...

[Meshman]

It's a software development mistake, IMO, to expect all your bugs to be uncovered by the beta testers. Some of this burden must fall upon the developers in the first place. The less bugs you send to beta testers, the less they will have to find...

What's even better is to have the paying customers be the beta testers! The scenery addons that I have are from being a beta tester or from a past affiliation with a publisher. I have bought two add on packages that cover an area that I am fond of. The latest package contained two airports. Withing five minutes at each airport I saw (IMO) problems that should have never been in a RTM product. Can you say four foot high taxi signs, just to name one example?

Yet this developer is highly praised in the many forums! But you will also see a pattern of issuing a SP not too long after initial release for all their products. These SPs fix things that should be noticed in a beta testing. My conclusion is that their is no prescribed beta testing. Another package will be released for this area and I'm pretty confident there will be a SP issued a couple, three weeks later correcting things that should have been caught before RTM.

And all the praise will still flow across the forums...

Personally, I would LOVE to find a couple of beta testers for my work. But when they got the airport list with 200, 300, 600 airports to double-check, well, we know how well that would probably work out...

[icarus]

500 copies at least? perhaps before torrent, etc...you are too much optimistic cody

[CodyValkyrie]

500 copies at least? perhaps before torrent, etc...you are too much optimistic cody
No sir, not at least. 500 is modest for a large house developer. For a smaller developer, many of whom I work with, I try to reduce my prices if I can afford it myself because I know often that their profit margin is even smaller, including their sales.

I know some developers who are lucky to break even 100 sales. It is a sad reality sometimes.

[Bone]

And the excuse for the temperature gauge? The cowl flap levers on the Wright version? The poor rendition of the boat-tail? The incorrect gear retraction time? The Sperry that uses the ailerons? The poor cartoon-like graphics of the VC? And if no excuses for those, then explain why that list exists at all?

If the only way to have a criticism of a product is to ignore what critical purchasers are saying and try it oneself, why does Just Flight not offer a 100% moneyback guarantee like Flight 1 or Eaglesoft so that we may?


And are you saying that all these customers who HAVE bought the product and are not satisfied are wrong? Or should we infer, as Michael suggests, that as the criticisms don't affect sales, you just don't care?

Do please show evidence of the 98% satisfaction rating. It is my experience that the 2% who are vocally critical represent a far, far larger proportion, most of whom say nothing, but are disgruntled. Have you, for instance, done what A2A do and telephoned a selection of the other 98% to confirm that they are happy? If not, you have no grounds whatsoever to assumer satisfaction from ANY customer except the ones who have publically stated as such - probably about the same 2% as have expressed displeasure.

We're back to precisely the ground I was talking about earlier. Should we HAVE to complain to have these things right? Why were they not right at release?

If you have that much confidence in your product, or disregard for your customers opinions of it, why then are you dashing to include a replacement soundset? More importantly, why were the sounds shabby at the original point of sale?

Sorry

You might be shocked to hear the truth about Level D simulators that cost 15 million US Dollars. I'm smiling in the picture, but it's a fake smile designed to throw off the IP who's about to give me a job check in a simulator that isn't like the real plane.

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj299/theBone11/Sim7.jpg


http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj299/theBone11/Simulator5.jpg

[SkippyBing]

they WILL have to comply with supply and demand.

You know that works both ways right? Be careful what you wish for.

Also +1 for what Bone says about actual real simulators rather than computer games, some of them don't even get the physical interface right and they can literally buy the parts for that if they want to.

[mmann]

When I started getting criticisms on a WOP freeware project I was working on I knew then it just wasn't worth the effort. My hat is tipped to those of you who deal in payware, I can only guess at the amount of quibbling you have to endure!!

Regards, Mike Mann

[Kiwikat]

Is it really a decline in quality though? Or is it that some companies have set the bar so high that our expectations are no longer met satisfactorily?

I'm not trying to be annoying, I'm just trying to stir everyone to think.

Many of these companies have a very consistent record with regards to releases, and the issues that come with them.

I agree with most of what's been said in this thread, but this sticks out.

"Quality" is a relative term. Things progress over time. I would be unhappy with a "quality" product from 2007 if it were released today exactly the same (with VERY few exceptions. Level-D comes to mind). Expectations and "the bar" have risen so fast, some companies are bound to be left behind, for better or worse, whether anyone likes it or not. We customers now have to wait longer for addons and pay a little more, but we are almost always getting the very best.

It has been really neat seeing companies progress since the release of FSX. I've said it in the past- I think overall, IRIS has improved the most. A2A really stepped up their game as well, resetting "the bar" with every release. With the release of their in-house 310, Milviz has shown significant improvement as well and I look forward to their other in-house releases. ORBX swept past most scenery devs and has created the best scenery ever made for FS. There have been some casualties along the way, but there are also many new developers creating even better products.

As a customer, there's not much to complain about these days. There are tons of reviews, videos, and forums to read and watch. It is very easy to make an educated purchase.

Developers that don't meet customer expectations will be called out on it. If you buy a product and enjoy it, let the developer know, spread the word. Feedback is how things improve and progress.

[UKMIL]

When I started getting criticisms on a WOP freeware project I was working on I knew then it just wasn't worth the effort. My hat is tipped to those of you who deal in payware, I can only guess at the amount of quibbling you have to endure!!

Regards, Mike Mann

i agree, i will never go payware as the rewards are simply not enough to warrant the work involved. At least with freeware, I choose what I make, how i make it, and how/when it is released. After release if I wish to fix some bugs, i will, if I dont, no loss. If you download it and like it, happy days. if not delete it. you have lost nothing but a few minutes download time. I think it is a crying shame that our FS community has 'forced' more freeware developers to go payware. There is now a lack of good quality freeware developers. It is a sign of the current times we live in that people are looking to make money everywhere now, where 10 years ago, you purchased fs9, and never had to pay again, as everything you wanted was free somewhere.

It bugs me now, that you spend X amount to buy FSX then you can spend DOUBLE that amount to purchase a single addon! crazy. Now to read forums, where these developers then say they loose money!!! So what is the point? why spend months, and months on something, release it, take money from people and end up out of pocket? it would have been better for EVERYONE to release it for nothing, then noone losses a penny?

[fsafranek]

One thing that would help a beta testing “process” is leadership from the development team. If you simply hand the model off to the beta testers and wait for the bug reports to come in, a lot will be missed. Milton Shupe taught me this. His beta testesr go out to the “flight line” with a very detailed checklist, a couple of pages long. If I don't use a checklist such as this, I find myself simply flying around going “hmm, looks good”. Beta testing can be a tedious and time consuming job. With a good checklist, anyone can do it, except for the flight model that is, but that's another can of worms all together, isn't it...? Absolutely agree. I've seen Milton's checklists and beta test reports and they instill a real sense of confidence. There is no ad hoc testing. (Although from my real world experience testing software/hardware at HP, MusicMatch, and Yahoo some tough corner case issues are only found in ad hoc testing).

The ALS-SIM Flanker project I helped test was a breath of fresh air in that the FDE guy, John Cagle, gave us descriptions of what he wanted tested with background information and expected results. Other companies :-) just give you a new flight model and say here it is. No information about what had changed or what this release was focused on. Modelers on the other hand do like to list what they have done in the new release. So you look at those items first and then look at everything else again to make sure they didn't break anything this go around.


I do agree with allcott on this: It's a software development mistake, IMO, to expect all your bugs to be uncovered by the beta testers. Some of this burden must fall upon the developers in the first place. The less bugs you send to beta testers, the less they will have to find...There also comes a time in every product development where the number of bugs that could still be found in a given time does not justify holding back release. That is a marketing decision. Does it make sense to test for another month when we could release it now and get a month's worth of sales while we still do some testing? Afterall paying customers will be helping us test whether they like it or not. "No, ship it." But that is also when the best PR you can muster better step up to the plate.
:ernae:

[SkippyBing]

So what is the point? why spend months, and months on something, release it, take money from people and end up out of pocket? it would have been better for EVERYONE to release it for nothing, then noone losses a penny?

That's a fail on basic economics, if you spend months developing something you will have incurred costs of one sort or another even if it's just the opportunity cost of not being able to do something else. For most developers I'm assuming there's a large expenditure on research materials, I know I've spent a small fortune on books and cds for things I'm building/thinking about building.
If you then give it away as freeware you make no return on your expenditure, even if it was just your time, so you have lost money. If you charge something, even if you don't make a profit, you will recoup some of that outlay and be better off than if you hadn't.
As a long term business plan it's not great, but with the increasing amount of time and effort required to make a quality FSX release it's a way of easing the pain.

[Martyn]

It's not stated as such in theTerms and Conditions (http://www.justflight.com/termsconditions.asp) on their website. That is why I was so cautious in the first place!

Snave/Simon/Allcott,

I can confirm that we do offer a full refund to any customer not satisfied with their purchase. I apologise if this is not made very clear.

Thanks
Martyn

[warchild]

When I retired from reality in 2002 ( yup, i retired early ) my time alone was worth 80K a year. That means that so far, the development cost on the P-61 has been at least 20K just for my time alone, not taking into account everyone elses time blood sweat and tears.. helll, We got us a hunert thousand dollar project goin here.. Must be nice..
Here's the reality.. Microsoft can sell FSX at 39 bucks a copy because they sell millions of copies. If they had the sales footprint we developers have, you couldnt touch it for anything not approaching a thousand dollars or more. To compare the amount that you pay for a limited distribution addon product, to the price of a massively marketed product just doesnt compute.. And if we were to charge fairly for just time, skills and labor, no one could afford it, even if we divided the cost up over the estimated sales total.
Thirty or fourty dollars for an aircraft is nothing compared to what goes into making it, but its a lot more than a lot of us can pay. truth told, we're experiencing a very unique and golden moment here.. That Warbidsim P-51 os worth well over four times the amount they're asking for, and any A2A product with Accu-Sim is right yup there with it. My own work isnt too shabby either, but i dont model or code.. However, no one could afford it..
Perhaps it can feel to developers that they need to get a model out every six months and they feel the crunch of that, but, it's the developer that controls the development and marketing of the product, and it isnt like anyone is going to lose interest.. I watch PMDG take a year, two years or even longer some times to develop a product, and they still sell at least as many as showed initial interest if not more.. Crying that the customers demand a model doesnt get it in my book..
As for Beta Testing?? yes, the developers need to create the test matrix to test against and it needs to be adhered too, but that said, in the four years i've been doing payware models, i have time and time again with each version of a flight model asked that the testers concentrate on specific conditions i need tested, and time and time again, theres been zero feedback. It's gotten to where i have just one person that i directly work with now. That person has been one of the best ive ever seen, and has given me reason several times over to pull out hair in the pursuit of getting the flight model accurate. The thing is, Beta testers for the most part ( not always ) need to be trained. But frankly, most people dont know how to train people and so the results of almost any testing program irregardless of the quality of the developer or project, is left wanting.

[UKMIL]

That's a fail on basic economics, if you spend months developing something you will have incurred costs of one sort or another even if it's just the opportunity cost of not being able to do something else. For most developers I'm assuming there's a large expenditure on research materials, I know I've spent a small fortune on books and cds for things I'm building/thinking about building.
If you then give it away as freeware you make no return on your expenditure, even if it was just your time, so you have lost money. If you charge something, even if you don't make a profit, you will recoup some of that outlay and be better off than if you hadn't.
As a long term business plan it's not great, but with the increasing amount of time and effort required to make a quality FSX release it's a way of easing the pain.


Well, I have been churning out freeware for around 4 years now, and incur no costs, other than my Internet bill for research. Gmax is free, and so is the SDK with FSX, so my economics are not false. I stick by my original point. You CAN do it for free, it is just people, as shown above are choosing to have it as their 'occuaption' and therefore need a wage. I accept this, but strongly disagree with the above statememt. My freeware is free. It costs me ZERO to produce

[Francois]

Snave/Simon/Allcott,

I can confirm that we do offer a full refund to any customer not satisfied with their purchase. I apologise if this is not made very clear.

Thanks
Martyn

ROFL !!!! One can hide but one cannot escape ;-)

[CodyValkyrie]

It bugs me now, that you spend X amount to buy FSX then you can spend DOUBLE that amount to purchase a single addon! crazy. Now to read forums, where these developers then say they loose money!!! So what is the point? why spend months, and months on something, release it, take money from people and end up out of pocket? it would have been better for EVERYONE to release it for nothing, then noone losses a penny?
Which is still a fraction of the cost of really flying. Furthermore, as new technologies are improved or created, such as bump mapping, etc, development times take longer. At what point do people decide that they are spending more time working on a hobby than their real job? At what point do you eventually want to get paid for your work? This is how I ended up in the business. I went from doing a video that took a few hours to complete, to now often it takes me upwards of 2 weeks.

I am 100% sure that if we did all the work, for no pay, the advancement in technology would not be where it is at in regards to addons for Flight Simulator. Companies like A2A, Orbx, Iris, PMDG, Milviz, etc would not exist because the effort and time (which is money) would be better spent somewhere else.

I have the deepest respect for anyone that produces freeware, and continues to do so. This is no knock on their work whatsoever. Let us be realistic however, that money and human nature drives technology and advancement. So, without getting into a geopolitical and economic debate, I think it is fair to say that without developers making SOME money, the market and the advancements that come with it simply wouldn't exist.

Let's face it, for the little money we do actually get from this work, I think it is fair to say that we wouldn't be doing it unless we loved it. I think that counts for something, doesn't it?

[warchild]

Let's face it, for the little money we do actually get from this work, I think it is fair to say that we wouldn't be doing it unless we loved it. I think that counts for something, doesn't it?

Amen to that..

[Francois]

Let's face it, for the little money we do actually get from this work, I think it is fair to say that we wouldn't be doing it unless we loved it. I think that counts for something, doesn't it?

Yes. Now lets take Microsoft for example....... *cough*..... ;-)

[djscoo]

Flight-sim may be a hobby, but any payware company's overall goal must be to make money. If the response to criticism is to tell the customer they were expecting too much, then that company has a poor understanding of how the market works.

There are a lot of amazing artists involved with many developers, but it seems there is a real shortage of skilled marketers/businessmen. Developers always seem to pass blame to piracy, customers with unrealistic expectations, or exorbitant development costs. When you try to maintain this producer-centric market, rather than a customer-centric one, don't be surprised when there aren't any customers.

[Bone]

Thirty dollars for a model at todays quality really is chump change. Renting a Cessna 152 will cost you about 60 to 70 dollars an hour in the US, and it's going to have a number of flaws (not to mention it's a crapp-@ss 152). Compared to that, these models are a sweet deal, and you can fly them until you go blind. It's amazing how bent out of shape some people get over such a low amount....you'd think they just paid a fortune for something that doesn't work. The majority of these models are awesome peices of work, and I can't believe how cheap they are for the amount of time and effort that goes into them. When the prices start hitting the 80 to 100 dollar amount, then a purchaser really has a foundation to vent their gripes about what they don't like...but at 30 bucks, the crap people pile on devs is ridiculous. Now, I admit, I have had some "what tha heck is this!" moments after buying a model, but that's the way it goes sometimes. Also, there have been some big booboo's in models that were released for sale, but the vendor just about always gets it fixed. I won't buy anymore models that you can't see the external parts of the plane from the VC, but that doesn't mean I can b*tch like a holy terror about it. That's my personal metric, and it may not be valid to anyone else.

I'm not saying that a dev doesn't have a responsibility to try and please the customer base...they absolutely should, but there's a limit, and that limit is a function of price, and price is a function of effort....and from what I can see, the devs haven't priced in their effort yet.

[mmann]

I'm not saying that a dev doesn't have a responsibility to try and please the customer base...they absolutely should, but there's a limit, and that limit is a function of price, and price is a function of effort....and from what I can see, the devs haven't priced in their effort yet.

What amazes me is the effort to please "customers" that some freeware developers go to. At FSDeveloper both Arno Gerretsen and Don Grovestine go to great lengths to work out the bugs in their freeware utilities.

Regards, Mike Mann

[allcott]

ROFL !!!! One can hide but one cannot escape ;-)

Ironic, when I am neither of the former and only the latter. But it seems I am not alone! I was the first to post about this release back in the day. I didn't expect to be let down. Others think I am someone else too. Dont know whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, but looking after number one is the most important thing.

So I wait for the patched product when all the bugs are fixed, and then presumably there will be three more customers - and a revised Terms and Conditions page.

[djscoo]

I just look at the cost of add-ons vs. the cost of base sim, and then what I am getting out of the payware. Simulators are about the only market people are allowed to get away with charging double the price of the base game for an add-on. Probably because the average age/disposable income of flight simmers is greater than most game communities.

[CodyValkyrie]

I just look at the cost of add-ons vs. the cost of base sim, and then what I am getting out of the payware. Simulators are about the only market people are allowed to get away with charging double the price of the base game for an add-on. Probably because the average age/disposable income of flight simmers is greater than most game communities.
While we can compare the price of addons to those of the base simulator, this isn't far from a copy of Windows versus say a copy of 3DS Max or the Adobe Master Collection.

I liken the hobby to that of the small scale model locomotives. It is not impossible for people to pay hundreds for a small engine of high quality.

[bazzar]

The fact of it is that this business has never been regulated. Nobody has ever set an "official" price for anything to do with this hobby. Microsoft sell millions of copies of their product and their price is worked out on that. For the rest of the world, it's just a guess, always has been.
If independents worked on pricing to recover cost and overhead, nobody would ever afford the end product.

This work is to all extents a "donation". $30 just doesn't cover anything other than maybe this month's payments on the graphics and 3D software.

Get one thing crystal clear though, any accountant or banker worth their salt would look at the figures in flightsim development and call for the men in white coats to escort us all off the premises.

My accountant just shakes his head these days having long stopped asking "why?" and gets on with the books on my other business.

I hate to disillusion anybody thinking this is a profitable business or wanting to make a start in it but nobody is making any kind of big dollars out there. Nobody.

And as for freeware, extremely admirable, we have done our fair share too but should it ever be the market's right to demand it?

Certainly not.

[Francois]

The fact of it is that this business has never been regulated. Nobody has ever set an "official" price for anything to do with this hobby. Microsoft sell millions of copies of their product and their price is worked out on that. For the rest of the world, it's just a guess, always has been.
If independents worked on pricing to recover cost and overhead, nobody would ever afford the end product.

This work is to all extents a "donation". $30 just doesn't cover anything other than maybe this month's payments on the graphics and 3D software.

Get one thing crystal clear though, any accountant or banker worth their salt would look at the figures in flightsim development and call for the men in white coats to escort us all off the premises.

My accountant just shakes his head these days having long stopped asking "why?" and gets on with the books on my other business.

I hate to disillusion anybody thinking this is a profitable business or wanting to make a start in it but nobody is making any kind of big dollars out there. Nobody.

And as for freeware, extremely admirable, we have done our fair share too but should it ever be the market's right to demand it?

Certainly not.


Yes, +1.

[SkippyBing]

My freeware is free. It costs me ZERO to produce

Wrong, it's cost you time that could have been spent doing something more productive. It's known as an opportunity cost, you've lost the opportunity to do something else. Unless you're immortal and have unlimited time.

Say you spent 100 hours total to produce a model (all devs I know this is woefully underestimating it but it's just an example), you've forgone 100 hours that could have been spent working in an all night petrol station for £5 an hour (what's the minimum wage these days?!) so that's £500 you've lost by deciding instead to build a model.

[mmann]

Wrong, it's cost you time that could have been spent doing something more productive.

Taking this attitude why would anyone spend any time with a flight simulator unless they were only training for real world flights? I guess I don't mind doing my non productive hobbies because I value the enjoyment they bring.

Regards, Mike Mann

[Francois]

As with everything in life, if something is a hobby then it matters not how much time and money is spent on it...... as long as SWAMBO is in full agreement ! :icon_lol:

But, as has been noted before, since this industry is too small to make a real living in, almost all those that do, or are trying to do, see it still as a partial hobby. And most have another income on the side. The few that don't see this as a hobby, are not really part of the 'community'. Those that DO invariably have 'problems' with marketing and support, just because they all have two hands and one head only. Problems as compared to your regular larger companies employing employees... and lawyers.

Most 'customers' understand these limitations, otherwise there would not be an FS industry ;-)

None of the FS suppliers can compete with the pure hobbyists able to spend limitless time in their creations. Not if they still want to make a living somehow.

[SkippyBing]

I guess I don't mind doing my non productive hobbies because I value the enjoyment they bring.

Which is a perfectly rational choice, you've taken the opportunity to do something you enjoy at the expense of not doing something else. I think Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs comes in here, but that doesn't invalidate the fact that it costs to develop freeware even if you aren't financially out of pocket at the end.

[fliger747]

This eventually turns into a rather philosophical discussion of why we do anything. Respect, imagined or real, good or bad drives much as does the sense of community, at least for freeware developers. I think the payware folks have to be in it for many of the same reasons. However they share some additional aggrivations and stresses. My very ocassional involvement in such programs generally has not ballanced well the time/effort very well with renumeration. Then there is the issue of getting paid....

The long and short is that I like the community, being involved, and working with good collegues.

One or two hours at my day job (I am a 747 Capt) produces far more income than I ever made from any sim project. So if I work for free, I just consider it cheap entertainment.

But if chicken in the pot is on the line here, remember buying a perhaps pricey, but very high quality item you are supporting an important part of our industry!

Thanks to all of the developers who do really serve us!

T

[Sundog]

And the really interesting thing about developing is if there isn't anything being built that you want, there isn't anyone stopping you but yourself from learning to make add ons. It's great software for DIY projects. I mean in the sense it's great that you're allowed to do that, as opposed to other software products that don't allow such mods.

Also, as someone who has been involved in payware projects, many times the cost of the product was really meant to cover the cost of research. There was some profit, but no where near enough to live on.

For me, it really is the hobby aspect, that's why I'm involved in this on the development side. Also, on the flying side as well.

[allcott]

Philosophical debate or not, you take money for a supplied service or product and the recipient is entitled to regard it as a `business` transaction and expect all the necessary niceties and legalities to be supplied. That is the way the Law works. And you don't change that by apportioning the `level` of business as a yardstick, nor the price paid. It actually makes no difference if its 1 or 1,000 Euros, Dollars or Pounds, sold at a profit or a loss, 1 or 21 million units sold, the vendor HAS entered into a business relationship with the customer. QED.

And if it isn't why bother with EULA's and receipts, and more especially payment in advance? If we are all hobbyists and friends together just playing, then supply the product first, and let the hobbyist decide whether its worth paying for, or not.

Yeah, like that's going to happen!

It's not for the developer or reseller to decide whether they are a business or not. It's for the consumer who pays. The impact the vendor has is how much they decide to charge to make it a profitable venture or not, or whether to offer for sale, or not.

Nothing more.

Developers who want to make this a hobby should choose a different business model. Any registered charities among them?

[Stratobat]

Hey SkippyBing,


Wrong, it's cost you time that could have been spent doing something more productive. It's known as an opportunity cost, you've lost the opportunity to do something else. Unless you're immortal and have unlimited time.

That's like saying you should sleep less because sleeping in on your day off is an opportunity cost or if you have a Monday to Friday job you should be ashamed of not working on Saturday and Sunday.

Where does the line get drawn? Should a person neglect the family as well and define spending time with the kids, playing outside in the garden, as an opportunity cost?

People should be able to differentiate between hobbies and jobs.

Regards,
Stratobat

[Helldiver]

"I am typing this forum post at 9am on a Saturday morning, wearing my dressing gown and holding a cup of tea"
Well, I'm typing this at 5 AM, wearing my skivvies and clutching a mug of coffee and it occurs to me it's the same situation, Ham radio was during the early days of 1950. It was a wonderful time when all the Hams were working on rigs they built themselves or reworking surplus Military gear to fit the Ham frequencies. We worked on wondrous things, like single side band, suppressed carrier even before the services thought about it.
Then came the "Money Hams". They bought the best Rohn towers, the best Collins 75A4 reciever, the best linear amplifier, cash could buy. Money was no object.
Gradually, us guys that in it for the fun of the hobby got pushed aside, much like the Milton Shupes and Piglets will be and it's already killed Mke Stone and others. So you money grubbers, go for it. In your greed your doing your best to ruin what was a great hobby

[Francois]

I assume you dive back in bed now for a while longer ?? :icon_lol:

[N2056]

If I may be so bold to suggest...

It looks to me like this thread has probably run it's course as I am seeing a lot of friction starting to develop. I have not entered a personal opinion in this thread because I see no reason to keep repeating it every time this topic comes up, which seems to be every six months or so on one forum or another.

Cody, it was a nice thought, but this topic is a good friend of "FS9 vs. FSX". They always end in a lock.

[Meshman]

...So you money grubbers, go for it. In your greed your doing your best to ruin what was a great hobby

Unfortunate comments. They really are.


I'm readdressing my previous thoughts in a different style, so I would ask Helldiver, are your comments and feelings applicable to Plum Island and the developer who made it? Just wondering...

[robcap]

Any registered charities among them? Yep!

[SkippyBing]

Hey SkippyBing,



That's like saying you should sleep less because sleeping in on your day off is an opportunity cost or if you have a Monday to Friday job you should be ashamed of not working on Saturday and Sunday.

Where does the line get drawn? Should a person neglect the family as well and define spending time with the kids, playing outside in the garden, as an opportunity cost?

People should be able to differentiate between hobbies and jobs.

Regards,
Stratobat

Every decision you make is an opportunity cost, balancing your needs against each other. From the basics, providing yourself with food and shelter, to the advanced giving yourself a feeling of self worth or contentment. Seriously Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, it's a real thing.
I'm not saying you shouldn't have hobbies or lie ins, I'm saying it's false to say developing freeware costs nothing as UK Mil claims. Otherwise if he charged something for his models he'd have 100% profit.

[Bone]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CiXhKijKdk&feature=player_embedded#!

[N2056]

Nice One! :salute:

[bazzar]

Moderators please don't lock this thread. Cody began a perfectly reasonable thread here which has already developed interesting comment. I see no signs of any friction, healthy robust debate but not friction. Both sides of this debate need to air. If we keep shutting threads down, censorship will eventually rule.

I also lament the passing of older times Helldiver but unfortunately demand for more complexity, function and content for prices which have not really moved in years, is what is going to do the damage, not people's ability to purchase equipment. To achieve these new technology levels more expensive and complex programmes are needed to produce model quickly. The cost of such software is beyond a lot of people.

I don't think most prices have actually risen in years and I don't know of many hobbies where that is the case. People are still talking about $30 for an add-ons. They have been doing that for almost 10 years.


The quality and performance of computers has increased out of all proportion to their price so your comparison with ham radio doesn't quite make it. It is not the cost of equipment bought by the fortunate few that impacts this hobby.

What does impact this hobby, like any other, is global recession.

[Stratobat]

Hey SkippyBing,


I'm not saying you shouldn't have hobbies or lie ins, I'm saying it's false to say developing freeware costs nothing as UK Mil claims. Otherwise if he charged something for his models he'd have 100% profit.

I can not fault you on Maslow's but if you peel away the onion skin, so to speak, freeware can actually cost you nothing to develop. Many years ago I was part of a design team and I don't recall any of us ever spending money on research material.

You could always argue that the internet, in itself, costs money (Bandwidth, ISP) but when you're using the internet for other things (Work, corresponding with family, etc), it's kind of a mute point.

The beautiful thing about human nature is that people are diposed to helping one another . One good deed enforces another and there are plenty of people out there on this very forum who share their knowledge and open their reference libraries with no thought of compensation.

Please do not construe what I'm saying here as me having something against payware developers. In the limited correspondence I have had with some payware developers, they have always been pleasant and more than willing to help me out.

I'm just merely highlighting that some people choose to develop as a hobby and do not equate it into pounds and pennies. Maybe their financial situation lends itself to this or it is a calling that they have. Sort of like how some people give their free time to doing charitable works.

Maybe I'm wrong though... Wouldn't be the first time :p:

Regards,
Stratobat

[fsafranek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CiXhKijKdk&feature=player_embedded#!
ROFLMAO. "I have 3000 hours on Flight Simulator. I can do your job." :icon_lol:

OK, back to topic.
:ernae:

[UKMIL]

Wrong, it's cost you time that could have been spent doing something more productive. It's known as an opportunity cost, you've lost the opportunity to do something else. Unless you're immortal and have unlimited time.

Say you spent 100 hours total to produce a model (all devs I know this is woefully underestimating it but it's just an example), you've forgone 100 hours that could have been spent working in an all night petrol station for £5 an hour (what's the minimum wage these days?!) so that's £500 you've lost by deciding instead to build a model.

Yes but I have a full time job, and building models is my 'hobby' So it DOES COST ME NOTHING. How many times do I have to repeat it. MY MODELS COST ME NOTHING, except time, which is my freetime, after work.

So it can cost you nothing. I do not rely on it for a wage, and the time I spend, would just be sat in front of the TV.

It can be done, FREEWARE can be produced from nothing.

[bazzar]

Well yes, your time could be called "free" I suppose but if you are using higher end software and computers then there is a cost there. If you use GMax, Paint or maybe Gimp or something I suppose you'd be getting the overhead down but I doubt if a lot of freeware designers are doing that anymore.

If they are using machines and software that belong to say, their place of work, then that is definitely a cost. To someone....:rolleyes:

[UKMIL]

I agree, but I use GMAX, which effectivly was free with Fs9, and paintshop pro, which was purchased many many years ago, so yes, was a cost, but cetainly not one i look to recoup, as it was bought for a hobby.

But my point is, it STILL is possible to produce good quality models for free. yes, mine are not to the standard of payware, but good enough for free

[Francois]

But my point is, it STILL is possible to produce good quality models for free.

Of course it is.

[mmann]

I get the feeling after reading some posts here that I should be getting paid for playing FSX!!

I had to replace my power supply and video card to allow my computer to run FSX with at least half decent frame rates which cost me money.

I spent countless hours learning to fly a helicopter properly. I spent almost the same amount of time learning carrier operations with the Acceleration Hornet. All this without earning a wage so far.

So if time is money I am woefully short in the pecuniary compensation aspect of this hobby!

Regards, Mike Mann

[allcott]

Yep!

So the DC-2 development team is employed by the Trust? Can you expand on the business relationship as there's no mention of the charity no. on your website?

[brianf51]

There are still opportunities to be made, do not forget who MS sold the product range to. They did not invest that type of money purely to take a potential nuisance product off the market horizon.

[n4gix]

But my point is, it STILL is possible to produce good quality models for free. yes, mine are not to the standard of payware, but good enough for free

Absolutely true! However, the expectations from "Joe Sim" have increased to the point that it is rapidly becoming a zero sum proposition: damned if you do; damned if you don't.

My late granpappy often quipped that "...quality is like buying oats son, if you want nice fresh oats you have to be willing to pay the farmer a fair price. Otherwise you'll have to be satisfied with oats that've already been through the horse..." :ernae:

[Bjoern]

It can be done, FREEWARE can be produced from nothing.

Exactly.

Even if there was some cost involved, like shooting a (cheap) manual from EBay, I still wouldn't roll the cost off on anyone else.

I do add-ons primarily for myself, after all. Throwing 'em out to others is just secondary nature.

[Bone]

Capitalism Capitalism Capitalism. You get what you pay for, and Communism doesn't work (been proven). Freebies are great!! I appreciate all the freebies in flight sim, even the ones I don't like enough to use. But, and this is a big but:

"The best things in life are free, but the really really really good stuff is going to cost you."

Let's put this into the perspectives of cars:

Freebie, Nissan, Jaguar, Ferrari.

If someone gives you their old car because you can't afford one, do you have the right to b*tch if that car develops a bit of a problem after you get it? If all you can afford is a Nissan, do you have the right to b*tch to the Nissan dealer that it's not as nice as a Jaguar, and since you expect value for your money they should throw in some free extras? If you buy a Jaguar because you can afford one, do you have the right to return to the car dealer and get your money back because you got in a race with your friend who has a Ferrari, and you lost? If you buy a Ferrari because you think it's going to have women falling all over you, do you have the right to yell and scream at the Ferrari dealer if women still won't look at you?

You get what you pay for, and there bloody well are different levels of what a customer is entitled to...because it's all dependent upon what you paid.

[OleBoy]

+1

Now if that statement doesn't make sense to the unsensible...nothing will

[Bjoern]

But, and this is a big but:

"The best things in life are free, but the really really really good stuff is going to cost you."

I could counterprove that with an intercourse related example, but for the sake of family friendliness, I'll keep my mouth shut. :icon_lol:

[Bone]

I could counterprove that with an intercourse related example, but for the sake of family friendliness, I'll keep my mouth shut. :icon_lol:

Haaa!

[robcap]

So the DC-2 development team is employed by the Trust? Can you expand on the business relationship as there's no mention of the charity no. on your website?
Well, we are not employed by the trust, the "Uiver" Team members are all volunteers. But all the money we make with the sales of the plane goes directly to the Aviodrome museum, (except the nominal fee we pay to Flight1 obviously, to handle payments and webhosting).
The museum, here in Holland is a charity (although we don't work with a charity number here, like in the UK), and donations are tax deductable (in Holland). When your taxes are due, you just have to state the charity, and when it's on a registered list, you're OK. But I would not know how to let other people then Dutch profit from that fact.
Actually the money goes to a foundation "Friends of the Aviodrome", which set itself the goal to upkeep the collection. So the money is not used to pay the Museum staff.
And, like our voluntary work contributes to the upkeep of the Uiver, other volunteers get greasy hands in the actual work on the real aircraft. Which is another nice way to contribute to aviation history.

best, Rob

[fliger747]

As one of Rob's Jolly Vollys on the DC2 I will confirm it was not a covert get rich quick scheme.

It was great to visit the museum and get a look at the plane in the hangar!

Cheers: T

[Francois]

As one of Rob's Jolly Vollys on the DC2 I will confirm it was not a covert get rich quick scheme.

It was great to visit the museum and get a look at the plane in the hangar!

Cheers: T

Indeed !

The only ones making money off of it are Flight1 actually :-(

[allcott]

Well, we are not employed by the trust, the "Uiver" Team members are all volunteers. But all the money we make with the sales of the plane goes directly to the Aviodrome museum, (except the nominal fee we pay to Flight1 obviously, to handle payments and webhosting).
The museum, here in Holland is a charity (although we don't work with a charity number here, like in the UK), and donations are tax deductable (in Holland). When your taxes are due, you just have to state the charity, and when it's on a registered list, you're OK. But I would not know how to let other people then Dutch profit from that fact.
Actually the money goes to a foundation "Friends of the Aviodrome", which set itself the goal to upkeep the collection. So the money is not used to pay the Museum staff.
And, like our voluntary work contributes to the upkeep of the Uiver, other volunteers get greasy hands in the actual work on the real aircraft. Which is another nice way to contribute to aviation history.

best, Rob

Thanks for the clarification. Much better than the MAAM-Sim "give to a DC-3, see it spent on something else" scenario! Much more transparent. :salute:

[Aussiecop]

Hello finally everyone, my apologies for my tardiness but between a computer going down 2 days before the release of the SA2 and SOH making me reregister and then not letting me post for over a week, this is the first chance I have had to post here. I posted a response on the original thread here: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=46342 explaining both our position and basically where we are aiming into future releases, that said, I want to thank Cody Berglund from Jaggyroad who I had spoken to by email in relation to this post when I was unable to respond here, for his eloquent and thoughtful initial post on behalf of both Nemeth and the developer community as a whole, I think this thread has been extremely beneficial on many different levels, in both the venting side from members and developers alike to the valuable opinions of both, sure every developer has the days of "I don't know why I bother doing this" when they read some forums, but in perspective, a relatively minor amount of complaints means your doing a pretty decent job, I have only seen a couple of gripes about the SA2, some of them are preference, some are because this was a budget priced release and we didnt add as many things as people are used to, either way, we strive to improve with every release and be innovative, hence the totally new designed VC instrument panels and fogging windows effect. The best thing about forums, is getting instant feedback on what to do and not to do in future releases. Some businesses don't get to receive that kind of instant feedback on products, for that I am thankful.

[Javis]

Snave/Simon/Allcott,

I can confirm that we do offer a full refund to any customer not satisfied with their purchase. I apologise if this is not made very clear.
Thanks,Martyn


ROFL !!!! One can hide but one cannot escape ;-)


Ironic, when I am neither of the former and only the latter.

Yeah,right.


Thanks for the clarification. Much better than the MAAM-Sim "give to a DC-3, see it spent on something else" scenario! Much more transparent.

You couldn't be much more transparent yourself, Snave/Simon/Allcott.. :jump:

[bazzar]

As we head toward another Christmas, I would just like people to reflect on this:

A very great number of people rely on development of flightsim and other games assets for a living.

What isn't generally known is that a very great number of those people suffer greatly from debilitating diseases, some that would make life for us more able-bodied untenable.

These are the people that have the time (for obvious reasons) to apply to making things for this hobby. Some commercial developers pay these talented people money to provide an income and some recognition for their efforts. Which in my opinion is the correct thing to do. Interestingly enough, not many people ever come to know about what these people go through or indeed, that they even suffer at all.

To suggest that all add-ons should be free and therefore deny people a fair income for their work is just ridiculous. Flight simulation is no different to any other hobby-oriented commercial proposition, just as plastic models, iPhone apps or anything else that comes to mind. People work for money.

You get very little for nothing these days so why should it not be so in this hobby?

[Milton Shupe]

Well said Bazzar.

Absolutely different markets for different products folks. Some want and appreciate the value of freeware and some want the details, accuracy, and systems of payware. Then there are those in the middle who can appreciate flying both, and those on the fringes that want all that payware offers at a freeware cost, and then demand that freeware be as good as payware. Interesting dynamics in the community for sure. :)

There are poor and great developmental and testing processes used on both sides and that's just a fact. Your job as a consumer is to sort it out. Remember, we only produce likenesses, not actual aircraft.

Remember the bones? There are the wish bones (I wish someone would build this for me), jaw bones (they talk about doing something but seldom deliver), knuckle bones (they knock anything and everything that gets done), and back bones, those who actually get under the load and deliver the aircraft you and I fly, payware or freeware. Frankly, I appreciate it all, but I hate the politics of the knuckle bone contributors. Fortunately, these types are few as the majority here understand and appreciate those who supplement the hobby with add-ons they like and they do not have a personal agenda to lay on the rest of us.

Regarding testing? Every non-trivial system has at least one bug. Most test procedures employed in this hobby would not identify it. To correct this shortcoming, hire a cynical, condescending individual with an ego.

[krazycolin]

Want a job? (not kidding)

[SADT]

Want a job? (not kidding)

What kind? Beta testing?

[Francois]

Good post, Milton !

[Milton Shupe]

What kind? Beta testing?

LOL I was wondering the same. Hopefully I am not cynical and condescending, although re-reading my post, I might have come across that way. Not enough smilies I guess. :wiggle:

[n4gix]

What isn't generally known is that a very great number of those people suffer greatly from debilitating diseases, some that would make life for us more able-bodied untenable.

Well said, sir. Thank you for pointing out what rarely is recognized. Truth to tell, I would be homeless were it not for the extremely modest income from the work I do. I also know that there are a few others in this cottage industry who're even worse off than myself healthwise, and for that I count my blessings.

I'd like to take this opportunity to wish everyone my very best wishes for the holiday season, and that the New Year will bring blessings in abundance! :ernae:

[krazycolin]

As someone who runs a small business doing FSXware, (payware only though I do give away the odd VC) I actually pay several people to do work... as well as divvying up the shares of the products profit so.. it's not just me that's making money... it's others too.

@Milton. It would be in charge of beta testing. Apparently, you're good at that! And right now, the team needs a leader... (it can't be me as I have a real job and a brand new kid)

let me know colin at milviz dot com

And I also would like to take this moment to wish everyone out there a happy New Year and a Merry Xmas!!!!

[fliger747]

Colin:

Good luck and best wishes for the new year and years to come with the new family. Big change! Thanks for all of the creative efforts as well from you and your team

Cheers: Tom

[Francois]

As someone who runs a small business doing FSXware, (payware only though I do give away the odd VC) I actually pay several people to do work... as well as divvying up the shares of the products profit so.. it's not just me that's making money... it's others too.

@Milton. It would be in charge of beta testing. Apparently, you're good at that! And right now, the team needs a leader... (it can't be me as I have a real job and a brand new kid)

let me know colin at milviz dot com

And I also would like to take this moment to wish everyone out there a happy New Year and a Merry Xmas!!!!


Yes, being a father can be a real job.......... *grin*.

Best wishes from me too :-)

[Doering]

Great post Cody to reveal many of the realities within this hobby!

[Lewis-A2A]

Regarding testing? Every non-trivial system has at least one bug. Most test procedures employed in this hobby would not identify it. To correct this shortcoming, hire a cynical, condescending individual with an ego.

Basicly not a single yes man on the team anywere :ernae:

[warchild]

yeahhh, a yes man is absolutely no help whatsoever.. I think most of us realize that we have shortcomings and know our work also has shortcomings and we need to know what they are ( even if sometimes we get a lil cranky). Crow is not a tasty meal, and humble pie isnt much better, but worse yet is finding out that the product that you have released is far below standards because it wasnt dissected enough in testing..

[bazzar]

Testing is vital, of course. However, in commercial terms, it must be done professionally and with speed. And that's the difficult bit. Release deadlines, particularly with published, boxed titles must be met to fulfill retail order requirements otherwise a lot of money is at stake. Many testers are, with all due respect, amateur and therefore may not understand the need for prompt, complete test reports and relevance.

Wishlists are not beta tests. Products need to be tested within the parameters of the intended release. For example, if a model does not contain a particular feature, it is not the duty of a beta tester to request that it be included. Just test and report on what is there.

To be a beta tester, one needs a thorough knowlege of the subject, the simulator and its limitations. It is not easy, especially under pressure with a deadline breathing down your neck.

So anyone thinking about becoming one needs to pause for a while and think of the consequences. It is not just a way of getting a "free" aircraft.

I have nothing but respect for beta testers who know what they are doing. Without them another cog in the machine is missing. Unfortunately, good ones are rare.

[Milton Shupe]

Right on Bazzar. If it weren't for Eric Payne on our team, we would be in deep trouble. As an engineer, he is very methodical and has a format/checklist we developed to put things through their paces. His primary focus and strength is on the panels and gauges, but gives the overall aircraft a good workout. Tom and I work the FM, I work the models, mapping and textures with Damian, and we all look at the sounds with no strong expertise there.

You need fresh eyes with various expertise and backgrounds for the most part and that's why using testers outside the team works best. But, I agree, they must be willing to research data, pictures, read pilot reports, and after becoming fluent with the aircraft performance and nuances, be capable of flying by the numbers, and finding the boundaries. All of this is for nothing without a great test procedure and a formatted reporting structure. Beta testers need to understand what's expected of them, what to test, how to test, and how and when to report back. Without setting expectations, process, and proper reporting structure, things are half-done, reported poorly, and basically a waste of everyone's time.

So I would recommend that a Beta Test Package be assembled to include all the specs, pilot's reports, testing procedures, and the test results checklist for each aspect of the project (Exterior/Interior/panels/gauges/models/textures/sounds/documentation/checklists accuracy and useability/etc), with a rating system that has ratings for day and night, readability, realism, packaging ease of installation/use. etc. Developers have certainly had enough feedback to understand where their issues have been, repeated issues, project after project, typical gripes, etc. to build this on. Most testing should be done on the ground before the plane ever gets off the ground. Once that is done, then we can go flying as the final tests. With this structure, you can parse out the testing in phases and get most issues resolved before the full package beta is released.

[gera]

Well said Bazzar.

Absolutely different markets for different products folks. Some want and appreciate the value of freeware and some want the details, accuracy, and systems of payware. Then there are those in the middle who can appreciate flying both, and those on the fringes that want all that payware offers at a freeware cost, and then demand that freeware be as good as payware. Interesting dynamics in the community for sure. :)

There are poor and great developmental and testing processes used on both sides and that's just a fact. Your job as a consumer is to sort it out. Remember, we only produce likenesses, not actual aircraft.

Remember the bones? There are the wish bones (I wish someone would build this for me), jaw bones (they talk about doing something but seldom deliver), knuckle bones (they knock anything and everything that gets done), and back bones, those who actually get under the load and deliver the aircraft you and I fly, payware or freeware. Frankly, I appreciate it all, but I hate the politics of the knuckle bone contributors. Fortunately, these types are few as the majority here understand and appreciate those who supplement the hobby with add-ons they like and they do not have a personal agenda to lay on the rest of us.

Regarding testing? Every non-trivial system has at least one bug. Most test procedures employed in this hobby would not identify it. To correct this shortcoming, hire a cynical, condescending individual with an ego.

Agree 100% with you and your "bone" selection is quite correct., there is one I know..."the boneless" ( they are critical even of the blue sky!!!):mixedsmi:....on the serious side I think "scenery" payware is going too high for my taste and Freeware is a blessing which not too many hobbies have but even then some "goons" complain about it...

[Aussiecop]

This thread is something I think all developers should read, I as a developer have come away with several points from which to improve our models. I for one appreciate the feedback from fellow developers and users alike, although the premise for this thread was started out of defense for payware developers it has morphed into something better :)