There have been 456 of your fellow community members and guests in the forums and elsewhere on AVSIM within the last 15 minutes!
AVSIM Social Groups - NEW!
AVSIM Team Speak System - NEW!
Simulation's Premier Resource!
AVSIM is a free service to the flight and simulation communities. Please help us keep it that way. Donate what you can today! Thank you for your support!
- Easter sale at PC Aviator
- Q400 for 47.99 at JustFlight
- Just Flight DC-6B Easter bargain
- EASTER WEEKEND SALE AT MV!
- 48 hour deal at Just Flight - Three great add-ons £5/€6/$8 each
- 50% OFF ALL MegaSceneryEarth 2.0 PhotoReal Scenery Titles
- 25% off Taxi2Gate Mexican Airports Till Apr 30
- Like FSDT on Facebook and get a discount next Monday!
- 33% OFF Bill Stack's "Simming on Autopilot" Tutorial
- Easter Sale - 40% OFF PerfectFlight Downloads
- For Sale: TrackIR 5 by NaturalPoint
- Wanted Thrustmaster Warthog Throttle & Flight Stick
- Old Sublogic Flight Sim Charts
- Mcp And Efis For Sale. Usb Plug And Play
- Mcp And Efis For Sale. Usb Plug And Play. Metal
- A good, cheap, VHF Receiver?
- Wanted to BUY or SELL: Used Titan GTX
- Top Quality PC Components For Sale
- Various Add On's for Sale...
- CP Flight RS 232 Items for Sale
. . .
Posted 25 March 2009 - 11:12 AM
Posted 25 March 2009 - 02:52 PM
As anyone who has ever dealt with us as an advertiser can tell you; your assertion is flat wrong. We are not required to "soft pedal" for any of our advertisers. Just ask the likes of Arnie Lee at Abacus, or the boys over at Flight1, ad nauseam. You see, they recognize, unlike you apparently, that our honest reviews are in their best interests. Our credibility means readership, which means continuing exposure of their products via their ads. Our honesty is in their best interest.Don't confuse an inexperienced reviewer, or a reviewer focused strictly on the product (and NOT all the periphreal issues you seem to want included) with "soft pedaling" on behalf of an advertiser. And, not to put too fine a point on it... Our reviewers have total freedom to pan a product anyway they see it, as long as it meets our editorial / content guidelines. Our business side has absolutely nothing to do with, nor do they influence in any way, any of the reviews posted. In fact, our business folks see the reviews when you do; the day they are published. Oh, and just to fill in an unasserted gap in this conversation, unlike some sites, we do not insist on a company being an advertiser before we'll do reviews. Imagine that; having to effectively pay to have a review done. What kind of objectivity do you imagine is enshrined in those reviews? But, finally, here's an offer... as long as you stick to the facts and don't slander anyone, feel free to write a review yourself. You can post your review or reviews anytime, here in the Reader's Review Forum, which was designed for exactly this purpose; a counterpoint to our reviews and others who you feel are tainted by advertising. EDIT: oh, and by the way, you and the other three flight simmers willing to pay for reviews without advertising would certainly entice from some hapless soul to labor the thousands of hours necessary to satisfy all four of you. The model has been tried before, and it didn't last a year.
I saw none of these issues mentioned, with any temerity, in any of your reviews. This is why I will never bother with reviews from an FS site that accepts advertising...you or Flightsim...you are required to soft pedal the problems of any commercial product...or lose their advertising. I understand your problem...you have become too big to keep the interests of the individual simmer as a priority...you need money.The answer, a subscription only website, with no advertising, which does nothing but reviews, like Consumer Reports for FS. I would pay for honest and truthful reviews, with no holds barred and a more in depth report on bugs, fixes and, especially, the developers support.
Posted 25 March 2009 - 09:24 PM
Posted 28 March 2009 - 12:59 AM
Posted 28 March 2009 - 02:21 AM
Posted 29 March 2009 - 09:58 PM
Posted 01 April 2009 - 03:57 PM
Posted 06 April 2009 - 09:35 PM
Posted 08 April 2009 - 10:41 PM
It should also be noted that products that do require workarounds, usually are the more complex ones. When you have more and more stuff on your product, the more stuff there is to break.
FWIW - I'm a reviewer and had some pretty biting comments for Captain Sim's 757 for FSX here on AvSim's forums. The Captain Sim product never worked on my machine after I paid my own cash for it. The FS9 port just did not make the transition to FSX+Accel well. Nobody in AvSim management "shushed" me up. They did do their best to try to find a fix. In the end the 757 got deleted off the hard drive and the dispute through Pay Pal was resolved in my favor.It is a shame there is not a really good FSX 757 out there, because the 757 and 767 are terrific jets which lend themselves well to FSX because they simply do every mission well.Captain Sim's 757 might be a great product on another machine - other than mine. There is no way the 757 would have made it to market if they were having the same problems I experienced. But, my machine runs the products I test just fine. Some products, like the Leonardo MadDog 2008, requires work around procedures to get full functionality on a FSX, Accel, Vista platform. When that is the case, we try to always provide instructions for the procedures that users will need to follow.
Posted 29 May 2009 - 08:03 AM
Posted 29 May 2009 - 12:35 PM
Posted 03 June 2009 - 11:59 AM
Wow. Why don't YOU review the developers? Why don't YOU take the time to actually write a review, only to have people like YOU completely trash it? From what I gather, the reviewers on AVSIM are not paid to review titles - they do so because they want to offer potential buyers an opinion on the product.Seeing as you have so many ideas on how things should be done, why not submit a review yourself?
"(and NOT all the periphreal issues you seem to want included)". Those are exactly the issues which should be included in any review of a product/developer. Do they fix the "bugs"? Do they sell you a product with every intention of correcting the problems...or are they going to take your money and run to the next batch of suckers with something new? Does their support system actually offer support...or is it just a waste of time, with ridiculous responses ("buy our C-130Xperience and everything will be fine"? LOL!)? YES the "peripheral issues" you denigrate are exactly what makes a developer "great"...or trash. CS is trash."EDIT: oh, and by the way, you and the other three flight simmers willing to pay for reviews without advertising would certainly entice from some hapless soul to labor the thousands of hours necessary to satisfy all four of you. The model has been tried before, and it didn't last a year." Tried by who? How much money were we talking about for this service? "As far as CS products go, I've never reviewed one for Avsim, and I've only actually ever bought one (the CS727 in boxed CD format). I'll be honest, I quite like it and have never had any problems with it." Really? You found no problem with the AP being totally inaccurate? The FD playing a part in the AP? Was this the "Legendary 727" or their latest attempt at getting more sucker money? I dumped the CS Legendary 727 the minute I reached acceleration altitude in the Dreamfleet 727...many years ago."Along the lines of a user review, it's worth noting that for several days now there has been a thread urging people to beware of CS products on the forums here at Avsim, and it seems hard to imagine that if some sort of advertising contra-deal were in place with CS, then that would not have been deleted. I'd take that as fairly compelling evidence against your assertion; there seems to be no attempt to subdue such opinions given that thread's existence, but feel free to disagree." OK...you're not Flightsim...THOSE people will ban you for any hint of a "bad" comment on their advertisers. Ask me, I know. You mention that the reviews are usually made just after a release. This is what I would like to see, long term reviews. Sure, the darn thing looked fine at first blush, when do they not??...but what about a follow up on bug fixes? What about a review of the developers efforts to correct them? Do they make a concerted effort to complete the product...or do they just move on to the next, knowing that a new batch of suckers is just drooling over the pretty screenshots and could care less about the problems experienced by those who bought older products? Here's a challenge for you. Do reviews of the developers themselves...not one of their individual products. Forget about getting a product sent to you for review...review their entire operation, from the product quality, through it's support and corrections (patches). Review the developer's customer support and RATE it. Look at, and report on, how a developer deals with issues about their products. Do they work on fixing it, or do they hide behind the "development for XXXX has ended and we no longer support it"? Do they blame the users system (LOFL!), when everything else works fine, or do they actually try and correct their problem. TELL US which developers deal with issues and which cut and run. That, to me, is more important than any single product review. After 3 CS products, I can tell you that CS is a trash developer and they will NEVER see another dime of my money. I kick myself for thinking anything had changed. If anyone here had my experience with CS, and would be allowed to write it as a review of a developer, instead of some "first glance" at a single product, CS would starve...well, probably not...but I'm allowed to dream. And that is exactly my point...they have screwed SO many buyers that any kind of review should include this information. The review should include all those problems and past problems. I'm not exactly happy with some of PMDG's products...but I know that they have fairly good support and my issues are either not correctible or are being woked on. I will buy from them again (as long as it's FS9!). After being a 3 time loser with CS...well, you get the idea. Give me useable reviews, of not only the product but it's developer as well. Follow up on it, give me long term with regard to bugs fixed and problems corrected, or not. The current reviews do nothing for a buyer...they are as "breathless" and excited as the rest of us when a new product is announced. Do the follow up, check on the fixes, the patches or lack of. Tell us about customer support (do you remember...WE ARE THE CUSTOMER!). Give us the entire story! The problems with CS products are well documented (well...they were for the 707, 727 before they "upgraded" the website...how handy)...why don't we have a review of that developer, and others? The review of individual products is fine...but I would be more interested in a review of the developers themselves. Vic
Posted 04 June 2009 - 12:04 PM
Posted 04 June 2009 - 12:44 PM
Any title.... The fact is, that payware is cost prohibitive. I myself am a 19 year old college student, I can't afford to drop a ton of cash on an addon, especially with the economy as bad as it is. It's almost impossible for me to find a job, even at mcdonalds in this economy. Top that off with the fact that things such as ArmA 2 and Rise of Flight are coming out soon for 40 dollars each, and even things such as DCS Black Shark only costs 40 now, and you can see where I have a problem with an addon aircraft being the cost of 2 whole new sims. Younger people are a lot tighter on money than older people, and payware developers only seem to think about people who have decent jobs, not those of us who are young and struggling to get by. The price needs to change on payware, as when you can buy a whole new sim that only just got released, or is for pre-order, for 40 dollars, and the average price of payware seems to be above 50, something is seriously screwed.While I believe the payware devs deserve to make a living, they also need to keep it affordable for the younger simmers.Oh, and for the record, AVSIM reviewers don't get paid (at least I don't...)... When people complain about reviewers... remember this, we don't see a dime of that ad money the developers put toward advertising on the site, we don't get paid at all, our only compensation is that we get to keep any software we review (and rarely if ever the hardware).
What title - what game?
Posted 04 June 2009 - 02:15 PM
Posted 04 June 2009 - 05:53 PM
Posted 04 June 2009 - 08:27 PM
LOL.... true that, however about my supposedly comparing mainstream games to fs addons, no I don't do that, I compare full on simulator prices to sim addons. ArmA 2 is a Infantry Sim, DCS Black Shark is a KA-50 Combat Flight Sim, and Rise of Flight is a WWI Combat Flight Sim. All in all, not necessarily comparing apples to oranges. The biggest issue I take with the pricing though is that it discourages people from being honest. Think of this, would someone who is younger and not able to afford as much rather drop the money they could spend on 2 games on an addon, or would they spend the money on the two games, and pirate the addons. I know a LOT of people are going to balk at what I just said, but it's what normally happens nowadays. I myself believe in paying the developers for good work, I believe in the fairness of compensation for work, however I don't believe that charging as much as they do is nessasairly the answer. Think of this, it's quite possible that if prices were to go down, more younger people would be willing to buy the products. That would in turn actually increase profit because less people would ether pirate or go without. Sometimes you have to balance the price with the volume sold. It's pretty obvious that people will pirate no matter what, however when you lower the price to something which the younger crowd can afford, there will be less piracy in the first place. I personally believe that if I were to pirate, it would just karma me in the end, as I intend on becoming a software programmer myself once I'm out of college (hell right now I have some ideas already for games to make), and I believe that what goes around comes around, the less you pirate, the less chance you have of your stuff getting stolen when you release work. You have to remember however, that the younger crowd doesn't necessarily think with their brains, and as such, we tend to do stupid stuff (I just spent my first year of college perusing a major that turned out not to be for me, when I should have switched from visual communications to computer programming right after i saw my grades drop from my not being neat enough...) The problem becomes, most younger people will see the 80 dollar price tag on a single aircraft and go "hmmm, I could buy 2 of the latest games for that one aircraft, maybe I don't need to buy it...." In the end, I believe that even though the devs should make a profit, they should also try to incorporate the WHOLE community, rather than just the well to do portion. Personally, while I respect all of your opinions on this, I have to say, that I believe that the best way to prevent piracy in general is to not charge so much for a single addon, and that winds up benefiting EVERYONE in the end. Less cease and desists sent out by the ISP, less profit lost by the devs, and more people can enjoy flight simulation the way it was meant to be. I myself am heavy on Combat Simulators in general, and as such, I prefer genuine combat sims compared to a FSX addon. One thing I have learned, is that FSX will NEVER be able to truly simulate combat aircraft correctly, and as such, I try to stick to civilian flight in FSX. If I want to fly a combat aircraft, I fly a CFS. If I want a shooter, I don't go with COD4, I go with ArmA, and if I want to fly civilian aircraft, well that's where X-Plane and FSX come in. I know I'm going to catch a LOT of flak for my statements just now about piracy, however I can't count the number of times where I have seen people say they will just pirate it because it's too expensive. It's the same reason people pirate the various high end development tools like photoshop and 3ds max, they can't afford it. I feel that developers should make a profit, however they have yet to hit that sweet spot for the pricing, especially when something like DCS is 40 dollars when it hits retail shelves. And before anyone says I'm comparing apples to oranges on the DCS comparison, I dare you to download the manuals off the DCS page.... That is when you will read the 500+ pages of how to operate the sim and have your jaw slacked.... I personally do support developers, however they need to actually get the pricing down. I can't validate paying 80 dollars for an MD-11 addon for FSX when I can get an equally in-depth simulation of a KA-50 which is a stand alone combat sim for 40, and then getting in addition to that the most advanced commercially available infantry sim for 40 dollars too.... It's not so much comparing apples to oranges when you actually try the various things I'm talking about. Personally, 95% of the time, I avoid mainstream crap... The few exceptions include things such as Fallout 3, the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series, and things like that. Other than a few select mainstream games, all of my gaming funds goes to simulations and hardware for using my simulations. I also take serious offense to people expecting me to be talking about just mainstream games, as 90% of the time, I'm looking ether for simulations, or the most complex strategy games I can find. (Stuff like Hearts of Iron and Harpoon, not C&C.....)... The world of simulation goes far beyond FSX... There are all kinds of sims out there, and FSX if you ask me is actually overrated.... If you ask me, MS really screwed the pooch in the development of FSX. They should have focused on support of ALL new hardware technologies, rather than just trying to maintain reverse compatibility. That is one of the main reasons why I avoid FSX when I can, because even with my rig, it still is slow as molasses. 90% of my simming can be narrowed down to these sims: ArmA, X-Plane 9, DCS Black Shark, Falcon 4.0, Vehicle Simulator, and rFactor.To sum it all up, my personal belief is that the reason simming has declined compared to what it was is just that people are intimidated, and the world has been dumbed down by consoles. The best way to combat this is to keep it to the point where anyone can get into it, not just the wealthy. That's my personal belief on how to SAVE the flight simulation genre. The genre is just too intimidating for newcomers, they ether get sticker shock, or they expect everything to play like Ace Combat, and then are met with intimidating responses when asking questions. And 90% of the time the responses aren't even meant to be offensive, it's just that the terms used are things that the person doesn't understand at their level of experience.
It isn't just about age Peter - you're looking at things purely from your vantage point - experience says that when you do this, well.... the world never seems to fit your needs. Then again, I was the same at 19.As for not getting paid as Reviewers, well this is not strictly true - we get a free copy of every add-on that we review. So if you want more add-ons for free, get more reviews in! D.
Posted 04 June 2009 - 11:39 PM
Posted 05 June 2009 - 12:11 AM
touche, good points... However I must remind you of this, 90% of the time, these kids who do want it and can't afford it will just pirate it... The best option IMHO is to make it affordable, and then if they decide they don't like it, then they can get a refund.... Pull the licence key, make it useless... As far as my using the MD-11 as an example, it was just that, one example. There are at least dozens if not hundreds more things guilty of the same issue the PMDG aircraft have regarding pricing. It's not just about the MD-11, it's about payware in general. Admittedly, most people won't have the comp for it, however those who are running flight sim in the first place may very well be able to handle it, especially considering how cheap comps are nowadays. Perfect example, I could build a comp that could run FSX easily for less than 1000 bucks if I bought the needed parts online. The main issue is that the various payware addons are priced so high that it encourages people to pirate it. The fact is the best way to prevent piracy if you ask me is to drop the price and institute a fair refund policy. A lot of people pirate things because they can't afford them or they don't want to buy it without trying it first. A good demo and a refund policy, along with cutting prices would go a LONG way to stop piracy.Oh, and regarding calling things like DCS and ArmA 2 one trick ponies, I recommend you try them before you call them that, you might be in for a shock....
One thing you're missing, though, is that younger people who really want to get into flight simulator don't have to buy an $80 add-on. FSX has some really nice airplanes and a lot of challenges, especially with some of the console-type missions. When I remember what FSX has out of the box and try out something like the Acceleration carrier missions, that is some pretty cool stuff even for an jaded old simmer. Heck, even saving the freakin' baby rhino is a challenge and has sort of an interesting plot. So compare your one-trick pony type of games with an open-ended complete and realistic world of flying without add-on one, and I don't think we're seeing entry price as the obstacle. Even among add-ons, there are some very nice ones, especially for beginners, that don't cost an arm and a leg. Most young people are not going to want a complex MD-11, anyway. Let's face it, those are premium products, and some people are going to want them that don't have the disposable income. That's just life.And how are these poor kids who can't afford an $80 MD-11 going to afford the computer good enough to run it right?
Yup, the consoles have dumbed down the nation, and it shows, a lot of people now only want COD4, and not real interesting things.
"The greying of [insert hobby here]" is a frequent topic of discussion all over. It doesn't matter if it is miniatures wargaming, model railroading, or flight simulation, it seems that younger people just aren't interested in dad's hobbies. I have three sons, 19, 19, and 24. I finally got one of them to make a serious effort at learning to do touch and gos with the default Cessna at our local field, but I don't think it will stick. Consoles are part of the reason. I am continually amazed out how much more I know about computers than my kids. It should be the other way around. But to them, computer game memories are of side-scrollers or the First Wing Commander, or Doom. And of dad going nuts trying to get computers to work :-) (Come to think of it, that's not so much a memory as a daily occurence.) Games = consoles, like it or not. I think maybe some of this thinking was behind Microsoft's decision re: FS.
let's just remember that when wow's major community sites get trashed it doesn't make the BBC! Also, remember this, WOW is something where you don't want to be part of that community, I've seen enough of that community to tell you this, it's full of fubar things, including pervs, nutjobs, and addicts....Oh, and WOW isn't instant gratification, it's probably the worst grind you could ever imagine. You literally get quests like "go kill 500 boars" and you keep getting those quests until you reach the level cap, which takes at least a year if you play it non-stop.
But then there is WoW. If you're an average young male, why would want to take the trouble of poring over boring manuals when you can be Ragnorak the 20th Level Weapons Master in a semi-social environment that provides a continuous stream of instant gratification and rewards. But I bet if you had to tweak and sweat and get frustrated to get WoW to run on a computer like we do, WoW would be a flop. I almost added "too." But I don't think we're a flop. Yet. But we can't shoot things, or blow them up, and we're pretty much limited to people who are already interested in aviation for whatever reason.
Very good point, however you have to remember, that things such as just the fact that we are now in an age where flight is just all too common is just killing the wonder of flight for a lot of people. Then there are those who think that flight is just like Ace Combat, and don't want to actually learn how to actually do anything other than instant gratification.All in all, this is what I like about AVSIM, it's a nice place for intelligent debate (it's one of the few places on the internet where things don't always get out of hand when there's a disagreement....). I really do appreciate a good debate every once in a while. And this is a very good intellectual exercise. I can only hope the other participants applicate this kind of debate the same way I do...
I don't know the answer, and I'm glad my livelihood doesn't depend on it. I'm in the criminal justice system. There will always be crime, and every year more things are made illegal. Maybe the idea of flying just isn't as exciting now. People are used to cattle-class with no amenities and taking their shoes off for the TSA folks. I grew up in "The Jet Age." I remember reading about this huge new airplane called the 747 in the Weekly Reader. I saw my big brother off to the Navy in a TWA DC-3 from the local airport. I had the pleasure later of riding many different kinds of military transport, including helos across trackless sea to land on an impossibly small helo pads. In other words, aviation has always had hold of my imagination.It may mean other things in this day and age.Even so, look at all the kids in the VAs. There's still interest there. And I wonder if flight simulation is doing better in countries other than the US, as a percentage of population. My guess would be yes. The non-US developers would seem to indicate that, too.
Posted 05 June 2009 - 01:29 AM
Posted 05 June 2009 - 02:00 AM
I actually do agree with you, the people who do go and bash the payware devs as the OP did do need to at least get a chance to realize that the person they are bashing is human too... No one is perfect, and the guys over at CS, I have a lot of respect for, because they actually put out DEMOS of their aircraft, something which MORE devs should do. And I agree, most of the time, if the person had a drink with the person they were bashing, they would find out they weren't so bad after all. It's all about realizing the other person is a human, just like you.and this part made me laugh:
I have thought about the piracy argument. (Remember, I defend criminals for a living, although never pirates. People do far worse things with computers these days and it is unbelievably common, but that's another story.)I respectfully invite you to consider whether that is a valid argument, and the unintended consequences of it.I doubt many users of pirated add-ons, especially high-end ones, would be buyers, anyway. In other words, the number of pirated copies torrented does not necessarily equal the revenue lost to the company.We can actually turn this discussion back on topic The attitude expressed by the original poster shows a contempt for at least some payware developers. While in no way making any associations to the OP and piracy, it seems clear enough to me that if there is widespread sentiment that payware companies are ripping us off, or gouging us, you then have a ready-made justification for piracy. Charge $80 for this? That's practically stealing. If they're going to be unreasonable, then they deserve what they get, and using a pirated copy isn't a big deal.Pirated copies of movies are pretty common, and don't generate much morale outrage. Why? Because people figure big companies make a lot of money and it isn't really stealing. Would most of the people that watch a pirated movie go into Best Buy and shoplift the same thing? Nope. Moreover, we do not intuitively or morally "get" this whole license concept. I have to go through ridiculous gyrations to make legitimate use of music I paid for from iTunes if I want to transfer "my" music from my iPod to my computer. But I don't own that music, so it isn't really mine, and I'm bound by whatever stupid restrictions Apple builds into their system. Frankly, that frustrates and even angers me. I pay a lot of money for Vista, ("The OS That Hates Software!") but I don't "own" it. I merely have paid for the privilege of using it. If I could get a working copy of Vista for free, illegally, I might think, "Bill Gates doesn't need the money, and $190 for his crap OS isn't worth it."All the dough I've shelled out for add-ons? I don't own a single one. I have merely agreed to pay for the temporary use of a program on my hardware. I can't sell it on Ebay when I'm bored with it because I never owned it to begin with. I can't even give it away to Peter because I feel sorry for him not having a wonderful MD-11 I don't even fly that much because I'm afraid I'll get it dirty :-) (That's how opinions differ. I value Captain Sim because man, those cockpits have been through a lot, and if I get my MCU keys sticky because I'm eating chocolate chip cookies during preflight, who cares?) How many people read those license agreements we solemnly swear we have read, understood and agreed to every time we install a piece of software? Nobody. Because we don't have a choice.We don't think about these things, but people expect to "own" something when they buy it. Anything else is not natural. In fact, a computer+internet creates a moral disconnect that I see every day, and airplane piracy is the least of it, believe me.Ultimately, the license model is a problem. It is not natural and people will never feel anything but resentment toward it. Ever since Thag traded some pretty seashells for a bigger club, humans have believed they own what they pay for.So my point is, piracy is bad and hurts the bottom line of the people who give us so much pleasure with the products they create. But when we complain about the money they charge, we unwittingly create a climate where people are going to feel even more justified "stickin' it to the man." That's one reason I don't like to see company-bashing and will often be seen standing up for companies everybody loves to hate. (I'm not implying that's what you were doing.) Like I've said before, the people making payware are, with some few exceptions I'm not going to name, by and large trying to do something they can be proud of, and that people will like.As an aside, I think Ariane's rolling out "India Knight" was a stroke of brilliance. When they talk about their new customer-friendly policies, it isn't a statement from some faceless company. It's "I'm India Knight, and I want to share with you the changes we're making here at Ariane." Is there really an India Knight, or is she / he like Dos Equis beer's "Most Interesting Man in the World" spokesman. (Great and very effective ads, by the way. I think they should have India Knight saying: "I don't always fly payware, but when I do, I fly Ariane. Three greens, friends.") If you think about companies that are liked, don't they tend to be associated with a named individual? If I say PMDG, what name comes to mind? Or Coolsky? Now how about Captain Sim? Notice the difference? Oooh, Ariane? They want it to be India Kilo, er, Knight, not You Know Who. It may seem contrived, but I like it anyway.This gets back to my point that when you complain about some faceless company, anything is justified. That's why the prosecutor ALWAYS calls my client "the defendant," and I ALWAYS call him "Bob." In death penalty cases we spend upwards of two million dollars (that's right) part of it just to get juries to see the defendant as a human being. So they won't kill him. I bet if the OP sat down and had a few shots of vodka with whoever is behind Captain Sim, he would never, ever come on a forum and say these kinds of things. (Besides if you keep buying products you think are crap, I mean, what the heck? I really laugh out loud about that one.)Finally, before the hack, I would have believed the flight sim community as such would not have harbored pirates. After seeing the truly despicable innuendo that passed for "fair comment" and people actually having the guts to come onto the temp forum and defend under their real names, nothing would surprise me.Wow, what a ramble.
Me, the last thing I ever want is pity, I personally have to deal with being patronized every day of my damn life I have had enough of it... It always annoyed the hell out of me at school when people would treat me different. One thing people don't realize is that, I personally, while I don't think companies should charge as much as they do, and while i rarely if ever agree with the way the EULAs are written, it all comes down to treating the other party the same way you would want to be treated. The golden rule at it's best. I personally when I deal with people sometimes get carried away. I feel that even though people go and moan and complain about these payware devs, the people have to realize their trying to make a living as well. My biggest issue is just that it seems like the way it's priced seems to lock out a lot of the younger folks from really experiencing these greater aircraft. I have no problem with supporting developers, hell I want to write software myself soon, and I'm researching all kinds of things to do it, and I believe that most people don't realize, that even these big payware companies have to have their families supported, however still, I believe that some things just shouldnt be as expensive as they are. My big one I have to say is this though, It's amazing that people have gone and done all this crap even on the temp forum. Some of the things I saw on that forum made me want to reach through the screen and slap the person on the other end for being a smacktard. You don't just go and back up these people who are causing the problems, when people should be trying to find solutions to the whole problem. I find myself as trying to figure out ways that the whole community can prosper. I myself don't just think about the players or the devs, I think about the whole picture. I admit, sometimes, in fact a lot of times, I may be off the mark, however a lot of times, including what I've been saying here, it's my genuine belief that this would lead to the greater good of supporting everyone in the community. The community needs to unite, and it can't do that in this state. The fact is, even though we may disagree on some things, we still all hold a common interest, and that common interest is a bond that holds the whole community together. I had to deal with a lot of smacktards after the attack on AVSIM, including people screwing with my head over IM. If sometimes I act like a smacktard or someone who is out of touch, I apologize, I am honestly trying to state my own opinion on how to make the community better, and sometimes I can be an optimist, and sometimes i'm a pessimist, and sometimes I'm just a flat out smacktard myself.My final word is this, I truly support the developers, however I also support the fairness of supporting all of the community. Not just one sect of it. My firm belief is that people are inherently going to do stupid and evil things. The best option is to keep honest people honest, and don't tempt them to the dark side. We all know what happened with Anikin, and the problem is that can happen with any of us. Imagine the Sith as the criminals and pirates, and the jedis as those of us who try to stay honest, the dark side can be VERY tempting, and it can be hard to resist, however it just winds up hurting us in the end if we do go over to the dark side. I know I just used a Star Wars reference, and really I don't care. I believe that supporting the developers is important, however the bigger focus right now has to be on the big picture. It's best to try to fix the root of the problems rather than just the symptoms. While Payware may cost to much IMHO, it isn't the biggest issue I have. The biggest issue I have is this economy and the global climate towards the economy. The best bet is to find ways to put people to work. I myself have been looking for a while, and I noticed this. When the economy sucks, that's when software piracy seems to be highest, where as when the economy is good, that's when people will actually buy the stuff. I think the ultimate fix for this whole situation is to find a way to put younger people like me to work at decent jobs. With the way the economy is right now, it's a known fact, that when the economy is bad, crime goes up, and when it's good, crime goes down. I feel the best way to fix this whole situation and make everyone happy is to fix the economy, and it all comes down to figuring out ways to put people to work. I myself am glad I work at AVSIM, as it gives me valuable experience, however it still doesn't pay the bills, and the only way to fix that problem is to fix the whole issue, and that starts with issue # 1, the economy.
All the dough I've shelled out for add-ons? I don't own a single one. I have merely agreed to pay for the temporary use of a program on my hardware. I can't sell it on Ebay when I'm bored with it because I never owned it to begin with. I can't even give it away to Peter because I feel sorry for him not having a wonderful MD-11 I don't even fly that much because I'm afraid I'll get it dirty :-) (That's how opinions differ. I value Captain Sim because man, those cockpits have been through a lot, and if I get my MCU keys sticky because I'm eating chocolate chip cookies during preflight, who cares?) How many people read those license agreements we solemnly swear we have read, understood and agreed to every time we install a piece of software? Nobody. Because we don't have a choice.