Rant mode - ON

[chopper_nut]

Ok before I start, I don't want to offend anybody with this and most developers deserve much more credit than they get but there are a few things I need to vent about.

I mostly fly around NZ but with the helicopter flying I do, I thought it would be quite neat to get up into PNG and Indo. I saw that ORBX had just released some scenery for PNG and of course it looks good. I'm running VLC again for NZ simply because of the compatibility issues with third party addons however, I do like a lot of ORBX's work and for somewhere that I'm not likely to be using other developers products, I thought it would be a good addition. I looked at the screenshots and all and I thought "fu** it" I figured that given their history (AU, NZ, North America etc) I would just buy it and be done with it. Imagine my surprise when I found out that I needed to buy base products that cover the ENTIRE WORLD to fly in one comparatively small area. If it wasn't required but recommended then I would have just gone ahead anyway.... but no. So ORBX have been going around the world. They did a really half arsed job in NZ and they seem to have given up doing airports in Australia. It seems like they make a big song and dance about doing a certain area and if they don't make a gazillion dollars then they give up rather than finishing what they started. It's a good thing that there is some other scenery for PNG.

My other big gripe at the moment is aircraft developers. Don't get me wrong, most of these guys do absolutely fantastic work but I'm getting a bit tired of the ones that release half finished products. Milviz is the first one that comes to mind. It's a good thing I'm not buying a lot of addons at the moment because otherwise I would have bought their 530 as soon as it was released. I keep an eye on the Hovercontrol forums and again, imagine my surprise when people start going off about problems. I was incommunicado when the 407 was released but having done some research I see that there were big problems with that when it was initially released also. Service Pack five it's on now. Really? FIVE service packs to get it right. I could understand that over a couple of years but over six or eight months or whatever it's been. Now their 530 (which is my favorite helicopter in the world) is having exactly the same issues. They advertise "realistic startups and shutdowns" except that nothing could be further from the truth. On the forums they start making excuses about it except that Dodosim did realistic startups and shutdowns years ago. The sim is capable of doing it and there is heaps of information about the Allison 250 series operating procedures. There is a reason that I almost exclusively fly Dodo's Bell 206 despite it being years old.
Captain Sim angered me quite a bit with their 737. I bought it as it is one of my favorite airliners and, again, its unfinished. I can't remember when it came out but we're still waiting for it to be fixed. Heaps of information out there on the performance and systems of the aircraft and they just make up their own numbers. BETA TESTING PEOPLE.
Now, there are some really great developers out there who do amazing work even if the products aren't things I'm interested in. So to them... Keep up the good work.

A very interesting article here too about another one of my pet hates. Rise of the Screenshot Queens

Rant mode - OFF

[Ian Warren]

I have a real connection regard to scenery and with this and ORBX, currently doing an elevation fix for Whakatane .. rather remove the elevation or rename it - fix and adjust it to suit the honest VFR-API , people get told this id the most accurate mesh for New Zealand .. I would not care to jump 15ft on to hard ground .
With all the information available how could they get it so wrong ... I look at it this way least in New Zealand First is the base , FSX , Second Party Level developers - Us NZers , Third party ORBX .

[chopper_nut]

Shouldn't be that difficult to get right.

[Ian Warren]

Whakatane is not , just finished that but it put the AFCAD out ... its having to work around the ORBX Mess ... whoops mean Mesh.

Ashburton for example because its further inland all ya get is a bunch of Mathew Ridges , similar to Paraparumu and OMAKA ,

[Kelvinr]

I get your point here.

I never blame the developers, I always blame the people telling the developers what to do.

Steve Jobs said this

Apple is like a ship with a hole in the bottom, leaking water, and my job is to get the ship pointed in the right direction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv1pvRDFFqs

...so it's always the person who makes these decisions that alters direction in any business. At the end of the day they will Always make decisions that will help that company to bring in revenue over decisions to "help the poor" so to speak.

[chopper_nut]

I agree to a point. However, reading the Milviz forums when the 530 was being developed, it was almost like they weren't interested in listening to people who are experts on the machine.

[Charl]

Ya do what sells.
Easily demonstrated by the ORBX approach to NZ and elsewhere, the eye candy has it, over authenticity.
Taken a step further, the Screenshot Queen Syndrome extends to whole flightsims...

I load the ICARO AW139 into my bespoke FS9.5, with the densest airport scenery known, with AI helos, liners, and GA, and have a totally immersive and authentic experience without OOMS and VAS and Other Acronyms getting in my way.

Others prefer just to take a screenshot in slew mode... takes all sorts.

[chopper_nut]

Yep I know. I fly sims for a simulation experience, not so much for eye candy which is why I still fly Dodosim. Takes all kinds. I did say this was a rant, rants don't always have to be rational haha

[Ian Warren]

I 'swear' at the slew mode, ever since I started scenery many moons back , I always flew the scenery , simply to get the honest truth and feel and still do it .... give you a break but also understand features better and see the real cockups ... airport builds were the same the first Wigram dated back to 1998 ... all it was for those year was how to improve on it .

[NZ255]

Have you bought the PNG add-on? I don't know why Global would be required for it to work as it just replaces textures. Sure it might not blend so well but in terms of the FSX scenery engine it shouldn't be a requirement for it to work or not.

Have you tried adding the package to your scenery library and checking it out?

[chopper_nut]

Nah I didn't buy it because it specifically stated that global was required

[cowpatz]

All too true. Also beware of those screenshots that have been rendered and taken in the graphics program and not actually in the simulator. They look a million dollars in the promo material but not nearly as clear and crisp when viewed within the sim.
I guess that there are developers that are very capable and are at the cutting edge of production techniques. Unfortunately those techniques are rarely shared and other developers do not developed that level of expertise. Wilco stuff springs to mind here ....and a certain Sunderland too eh Ian.....(I light the touch paper and stand back).......

[Kelvinr]

of course I didn't mention that there are some devs who are sole charge, meaning they are the boss and developer. This could make things a little more frustrating.

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (cowpatz @ Dec 7 2014,2:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

....and a certain Sunderland too eh Ian.....(I light the touch paper and stand back).......

Don't spose ya have a can of gasoline , that specific product is were the should a specific hanging court ... forget the court , doctored pictures and and load off dribble without support ... I even asking for the source files, after $50 dollars that is the worst and really the only payware due to the fact i wanted the type that deserves the , push them into the blaze .. that model and its selling point and its tactic's really did not do themselves any favour's and especially the many who were duped !

[toprob]

This post includes a bit of a plug for me, and my subscription, no apologies, though, as I really believe what I've stated below

I can kind of see this (the scenery thing, anyway) from both sides, even though I've always been very critical of Orbx, I can understand what they are up against. They are a business, so they need to go where the money is, and in the early stages, they weren't really sure what would sell well. It's easy for me to say that I could've told them that New Zealand would not be a good investment, so they had to learn that on their own. And really, New Zealand was a good test-run for some of the larger areas they moved on to, so it served it's purpose.

Flightsim scenery really comes up against some real diminishing returns -- although it's fairly easy to sell a region to the entire world, only a fraction of that market are going to buy airports within a region they are not too attached to. So in the case of New Zealand, you are really mainly talking about New Zealanders when it comes to paying for further addons. So in a business where you need to sell 2500 units, New Zealand's customer base of about 500 (which includes a good number of Europeans, but almost no-one from the US) isn't going to make anyone any money.

Orbx have actually gone from strength to strength, but only by following the money -- there's a big emphasis on global lc etc at the moment, so even the more popular full-fat regions are losing ground.

So, for New Zealanders, there are very few choices, given that we represent only about 20% of a viable market to Orbx. One answer is to accept that we'll just have to pay a little more, for any ongoing development. In 2015, I suspect that if you want to see any real local development, you'll be paying a little bit more than you'd pay for other, more popular parts of the world. And initially, you'll be better off paying it to me:) I am still in a very risky position, not yet being able to return to a workable development plan after a couple of years off when my heart played up, but at the moment I am still determined to get there. Yes, I do this as a business, but no, it's never going to be a 'successful' business, I do this because someone has to, and it may as well be me, because I love it.

When -- and if -- I ever get to the stage when I can package up some quality scenery into saleable releases, they will probably be more expensive than you have been used to. That's because I know exactly what sort of market I've got, and that isn't going to change much no matter what I do, or what I charge, or how I package it. Flightsim folk are always saying, hey, halve the price and you'll sell three times as much, but that is not even close to reality. If I dropped the price of a 'full' release, even to just a tenth of what I charge now, I might sell 600 rather than 500, the market is that limited.

The Subscription is meant to be a way to be able to keep going full-time, until I can get some finished scenery packages out there. At the moment that still seems an unlikely outcome, but I am not going to give up until I really, really, have to. The sub isn't the way things will be from now on, it is a last-ditch effort to keep New Zealand development going.

So the cold, hard reality is that buying a Subscription at the moment is a good bet, if it leads to a good, steady supply of addon airports, and I would guess that $99 is a small price to pay.

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (Kelvinr @ Dec 7 2014,2:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

of course I didn't mention that there are some devs who are sole charge, meaning they are the boss and developer. This could make things a little more frustrating.

Most don't work like that , for example the that Sunderland .... you have to read the credits , all these well so called known's , was it a THATCHER trick , lie who actually dose the work and puts there name to it, I seriously don't care for convicts and thieves (were was that can off petrol again) ... I have given my work away without any problem for everyone to enjoy for almost twenty years ... or even jump in and help for nothing so for the people who don't do anything and complain yeah and yip ... now is that Stake again !

[chopper_nut]

Good points there Rob. I know it's a business and if you want to make any money then you have to follow the money. My issue with ORBX is that yes it looks pretty but they start something and don't finish it. Whats to say that they go with this global thing for a while and then when a few people have spent their money on it, they change tack and go in a different direction. If they had done their research then they should have known that NZ wouldn't have made them that much money.
I, like most people on here, appreciate your work. I think the subscription is a good idea. This hobby needs people like you who do it for the love and so whatever you need to do to keep the products flowing in will get our support.

[Olderndirt]

Considering that it's just a game, Flight Sim has developed a demanding and diversified fan base. As Hillary (not Sir Edmund) said "It takes all kinds to make a village" and we do have that. Back in my piloting days, nothing I flew remotely resembled a "Screenshot Queen" but now I can make believe - which is what Flight Sim is all about. Scenery and planes are hightlights and constantly improving but flying is still an approximation leaving much to the imagination. Orbx and those other outfits that don't play well together are just guilty of human nature - make as much as you can as soon as you can - just my opinion.

[Ian Warren]

You are very right there Dave and some people may argue that , game, true simulator , ... But there is still a 'code of conduct' - business the old line is "The customer is always right" even if they are not , you then check and double check - some operate like a real family - A2A would the best example but others ... will tell you that is correct because it is ....

I love going through the testing times .. the CAPTAIN SIM , current MILVIZ .. we have the opportunity to put or ask and see what can be done , but then you get the close door types

[Narutokun]

QUOTE (chopper_nut @ Dec 7 2014,2:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree to a point. However, reading the Milviz forums when the 530 was being developed, it was almost like they weren't interested in listening to people who are experts on the machine.

Not a case of not listening but more a case of running into snags in the way FSX handles helos that weren't quite expected. It will take some time to overcome them.