Whats it all about? Alfie?

#1

Not a moan per se, but something I need to release off my chest … because it really does bug me.

IL2 Flying Circus … I read in a recent interview with Jason about total non committal stuff … I honestly learned not one thing from it, it was all maybes ifs and what nots.

I paid full whack for FC Vol 1 … bought everything for ROF out of loyalty too, but so far its just been some (Jason admitted) imported and tweaked ROF Planes into FC vol 1 … Jason has said they can knock out 1 new aircraft a month from that developer … Is this how we want IL2 FC to be?

Honestly … and I read an appropriate map was being worked on … But in recent interview, Jason said he had not even seen it yet … talking Stormbirds here.

FC Vol 1 is one expensive purchase for some of us. $70 is a fair whack to give to a developer for two imported ROF kites and then a few more once every month … what really irks me is … they will not commit to anything :frowning:

Jason in interviews is full of maybes ifs and nothing much else. I’ve never in my life seen someone so non committal and flip flopping over everything.

We all want a WW2 Pacific sim, these were the guys to do it … except they didn’t … Jason was saying, cant be done for now, same with his WW1 Zeppelin excuses … Sorry guys, this does not wash with me.

This is not a troll post guys … I’ve been here a while now, grown to like you all.

I’m a WW1 flight sim enthusiast of the highest order … anyone here do Wing Nut Wings 1/32 scale modelling?

I paid full FC vol price … keep my ear to the ground and it seems this is the last thing on their radar?

Map being developed by third party that Jason has admitted he has not even seen yet.

I’m peeved off, dont want to cause a ruckus or start SimHQ again, but surely there is scope for criticism of Software Flight sim Devs here.

Its OK to be fair n Square and state our opinions on FS hardware, nobody questions that, but when it comes to software FS companys … its like walking on egg shells … it can be almost religious … It should not have to be like this.

2 Likes

#2

I have never seen constructive software criticism trampled here. And yours is very constructive. I’ve made my share and I was met with some agreement and some considerable pushback. The pushback is also constructive. Some people are such big fans of “x” that the problems that strike another user as major, well, to the fan they barely register. And that also is 100% valid too.

RoF and early IL2 was an amazing time for me. I had online friends for the only time in my life. Now, online, I feel that I am wandering in the wilderness. I am not really. Sometimes I actually enjoy myself. But that period 8 years ago was so special that it may have ruined everything that followed, including IL2:New and its variants.

4 Likes

#3

Well, let’s put it this way.
Rise of Flight was a buggy mess, until Jason got involved at took over the reins.
RoF became a classic, IMO.
I trust him to deliver a good product with FC.

I have bought several of their kits. Really great stuff! Haven’t gotten around to build any of them though…

Well, someone must have seen some of it, even if Jason hasn’t…

As for critizising software and developers here, that shouldn’t be a problem.

We do, however, try to keep a balance.
You are in no way or manner, out of line.

My take on this is what I wrote in the replies above, but also that 1C/777 seems to be following the roadmap they laid out in the beginning and they seem to be delivering on the promises that they made.
No, they have not promised to go as far as they did in RoF or match the content. They did reserve the right to call it quits after FC vol. 1 if interest for the product is failing. That’s only prudent.
OTOH, if FC is a success, I don’t see why they shouldn’t continue to expand that branch of the product tree.

Quite frankly, I don’t see anything worth complaining about, yet.

What they have released so far looks good. The rest is on its way.

2 Likes

#4

I bought FC Vol 1 mainly because I wanted to fly RoF in VR. I’m hopeful that eventually it will flesh out to that level. I’m kind of looking at it as a long term investment though, and have put it off to the side to revisit when things have progressed further.

1 Like

#5

I have full faith that 777/1c are capable and willing to deliver on their promises when it comes to flying circus. The quality of the work so far is outstanding and I do not regret all the money I spent on it.

These things take time, a lot of time and since time is money, I think it shows heart that they aren’t rushing things.

2 Likes

#6

I’ve complained fairly vociferously about a certain P3D/XP developer here and never been stifled. However, I attempted to use examples of their statements and marketing compared to their actions and once the point was made, didn’t make it a crusade to ruin the developer. There is a difference IMO.

A converse analogy might be the guy at a cocktail party who argues a valid point, but because of his consumption, so aggressively attempts to get confirmation that everyone whom has his ear and has bought into his position begin wondering off. Never done that :wink:.

Anyway, I’m not going to say that I am happy with the situation, that instead of receiving gratification at the time of purchase, we as consumers are called on to provide development capital. But in the case of ED and 1C/777, they do eventually deliver on their promises.

1 Like

#7

Sort opinion: It doesn’t have to be like this. It isn’t like this. But it also doesn’t have to be negative, ranting and personal, which is where it tends to go after about, on average, 4 responses to a thread. We are in this for the enjoyment of the simulation hobby and we get enough of that on, pretty much, all of the other information channels. Mudspike tries to keep the environment positive.

Long Opinion - Don't read this.

Software development is difficult. It seems like it should be straight forward, but it never is. By it’s nature it is deceptively complex - even when you have access to all of the information needed to make your decisions.

I have seen @777Studios_Jason for many years on many forums and he has always be as straight and forward as he could be about the current release state of a product and, after many years in the consumer flight sim space he adapted to be non-committal and vague on the future - because we, the flight sim consumer, tend to hold developers and producers to the fire for any perceived variation in their statements, no matter how far back in time those comments were made.

I don’t expect him to answer here, same as I don’t expect Mr. Wagner from ED to do the same. Once we burn bridges with representatives of the industry it is difficult to get them back. And Mudspike is (I hope) the good site in this consumer space. We try our best as members of the Mudspike community to be positive and respect each others opinions - and criticism presented in a cooperative and collaborative manner should be part of that.

That goes for the ‘Early Access’ model that is currently being implemented. As consumers, we need to either accept the ‘cost’ of buying in to that model (delays, scope/feature changes, slow progress, etc) and buy in to a nebulous (in the form or a cloud or haze and not the negative associations that term sometimes has) product early or we need to wait until a solid, defined product is released and make our decision then.

Now I am not saying that we shouldn’t voice our opinions and just take what we are given but I believe that there is a certain level of responsibility that we have as intelligent consumers but, as difficult as it is sometimes, the companies that we are putting our trust in need to at least hear those complaints and filter through them as best they can.

For hardware, it is easier to understand the process, the decisions and the end product. It is easier to manage our expectations and our perceptions. It is easier to criticize and even accept that criticism (to some extent). “I don’t like the way this feels”, “I don’t like the way this works” or “I don’t like how this smells” can be more easily addressed or explained: “We had to do it that way to meet the average hand size of the customer base”, “We could not source a better part without having to increase the cost outside what the customer would be willing to pay” or “Oh yeah, that’s the machine oil, we will fix that”.

For software … none of that works … and I don’t want to make this post twice as long as it already is. :slight_smile:. I have seen studies, taken part in some myself, and because software is not a physical product we all treat it differently as we take it in differently - with different experiences, perceptions, and understanding - and we all have different ‘understandings’ of how it is made. It involves trust and once you break that trust, either the trust of consumers or the trust of the developers/designers it gets personal too fast to be controlled.

I can type a ‘humourous’ statement in this text box and you may take it as a humourous statement … or you may take offense, or you may not understand the point of it, or you may not get the joke, or you may keel over laughing or you may want to burn my house down because it involved your mom. Context it hard to read when you only have the words, we have a lot of members here and we all will take something written a different way. It takes about 4 posts for a discussion about flight sim software to ‘go sideways’.

11 Likes

#8

And it did again this time, but in the right, mudspikey way :smiley:

0 Likes

#9

Sorry but you are way off base with your comments about me and what we have promised. I was responding to the questions Colin was asking me. We have not once, violated any previous promises with regards to FC. You are conflating two separate issues. First, what you want to see (which is where Colin was coming from) and two, what we have promised would be included in FC. From the start I have said FC and TC are experiments using 3rd party developments and that we do not have the ability to build everything included in ROF this go around and assuming there are more volumes we will expand the plane-set and the feature set. That goes for any product, not just FC. Simple business.

I’m going to respond to this post in detail when I have time because it seriously annoys me. It’s posts like these that kill products and turns communities against development teams for no good reason. Your argument that we are someone being shady is dead wrong.

Out of all the FS companies that are left. I defy you to show me where we have lied or mislead you or released truly broken product or module. And if it was, we have corrected it asap. I have been completely up front and honest with my customers since day one over 10 years ago. I have explained all decisions we have made about what we build and why. I do this because many of you commit to our products with the hope that we will someday make a product you have been waiting for. But I don’t operate in a vacuum with unlimited budgets, time, personnel, investors, business partners and a demanding community. Again, that’s business. Decisions have to be made and course changes do occur. I’ve always explained such decisions.

The problem with criticizing software companies is because you ascribe all kinds of evil motives to the people involved and often make it personal because we are somewhat accessible. I simply push back when I feel myself or my team are being treated unfairly. Just look at at our track record of what we have built and accomplished with such a small team the past 10 years. How anyone can say we do not deliver on what we set out to do, is absolutely mind boggling to me.

Jason

12 Likes

#10

I read it… My eyes!! :tired_face:

No, seriously, you are right.

We users often fail to see the issues that developers face, so we tend to make ignorant decisions and comments.

Whenever I think a developer is making a wrong move, or decision, regarding their products, I try to look at it from their perspective. If that fails, I look at their track record… They have delivered the goods before, and will probably do so again.

Taking information found here and there, and putting together a reality of its own, is bound to fail.

1 Like

#11

I actually sympathise with Jason for this. Have you seen what happens when a developer makes a release promise and its a day late? What about a complicated feature that’s to be added that doesn’t instantly work straight away and needs a small update released a few days later?

Are people generally understanding or do they get the pitchforks out and start marching? I think we know the answer to this don’t we?

The problem is that most people are happy (in the case of early access) to take a product now even though it is very clearly stated not to be finished. Then throw the toys out the pram when progress is not made swiftly enough. It’s a disgraceful way to act in my opinion.

Can you honestly say that this is the truth? Never? Not a political figure or someone in court?
I’m genuinely not attacking you here, I promise and I hope you don’t take what I’m saying the wrong way mate, But Jason and his team probably comes under intense scrutiny for every single comment they make so being slightly vague is actually very intelligent from a business perspective so they don’t have to deal with the riots that develop when people don’t get their own way

I hate this me me me culture that we have now. Look at the way the ‘other’ forum exploded when the mig 19 and the tomcat were delayed. The vitriol and discusting attitudes of people made me sick.

Not everything is black and white. This isn’t pong or tetris we are dealing with here. It’s hard, expensive and time consuming work developing these wonderful sims and people need to start realising that every single time a developer is hounded and demoralised by the Internet and gives up producing entirely that’s another step in the direction of the end of our hobby.
Be realistic in your expectations. Be patient. Be understanding.
You never know when you get a problem later on and the developers are in a position to help straight away but they remember your screen name as one that upset them before…‘f**k him he can wait till the update comes out’

8 Likes

#12

The bottom line should be “don’t buy something in early access/prerelease/preorder/whatever if you can’t afford it”. Wait for the final product and evaluate it then. If you do buy it, know that you may wait a long time to get it (or even never).

The number of people I’ve seen complain about feeling taken for buying things prerelease that didn’t turn out the way they wanted or (more commonly) when they wanted it is far too large. It’s as if intellectually they understand what early access is, but emotionally they still expect a final product and after some period of time passes which varies from person to person the emotional part overrides the intellectual part.

Some people don’t care at all about delays and are happy to experience the process as it moves along at whatever pace, but I think it is not the majority by far.

4 Likes

#13

Fair play guys … my name is Colin, always been a fair critique of Flight simulation over the years, over the decades even … but my aim has always been to make things better, not to troll as I’m often accused of, but to seek out perfection where possible.

I’ve never really tried to hide who i am or what I think is right or wrong … have shared several Youtube vids here with my real name with full intent … I’m not a troll, honestly I’m not … at least not for this genre.

I’m glad we have sparked some discussion though, and really good to see Jason here to defend himself so well.

Jason, thank you so much for everything so far for FC Vol 1, this is my genre sir. WW1 I have passion for.

My past criticisms still stand for the most part though, but OMG if you can influence more towards FC Vol 1 I would be most grateful.

Sorry if I’ve upset some applecarts here recently, totally respect this site, Troll, Beach … I would love everything to be peachy … but sometimes in life, we need to fall out with each other to get on?

I’m sorry if I’ve upset anyone.

0 Likes

#14

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

0 Likes

#15

Jason … I would just like to say, would love you to elaborate further, you are obviously very passionate about what you do … often consider you as a guiding spirit for some very talented lost souls of Russian developers … you are appreciated for keeping it tight.

I do remember in early days of your WW2 series, bought into it of course, flew around a bit and was not impressed, however … recently I have actually bought all but Tank Crew … its not up to me, but sales must indicate this is where you focus … I guess WW1 aviation is less so … my worry and concern is that we might not get as rich and and fulfilling an experience we had with RoF … I’m sure you have checked it out Jason, but WOFF UE is the absolute single player career mode WW1 sim ever, fantastic AI too … we have to compare FC vol 1 and even RoF to that too … its more or less the benchmark.

I’m banging on a bit again, Jason … but my word, OMG even, the leaps and bounds you guys have made with IL2 Stalingrad and beyond are quite stunning, was caught in searchlights on a bombing run once, tried to dodge them but they hooked up my aircraft, lit up the whole cockpit … I was very impressed to say the least.

All I’m asking for is we get some more WW1 love too, Map as well, its my passion and others too … please don’t forget about us.

You are appreciated Jason, especially for taking time out to come here and talk away from official announcement stuff.

0 Likes

#16

I’ve got some comment stuff deleted there … and it was explained why … I do get a bit hot headed, Scots by nature I suppose … but I do think its good to question stuff, and honestly it really is good to see developers like Jason onboard here and talking with us.

Sorry if I’ve offended anyone, in my debate style, we are better than that, here … sorry especially to Troll and Beach who have been so patient with me.

We have a good community of hardcore simmers here, and I do appreciate it.

5 Likes

#17

This is NOT my site. I have no stake in this at all but I really don’t believe anyone has to defend themselves on this forum.
The staff and members here encourage discussion and friendly debate. We are all very passionate about flight sims and aviation.
the site is very lucky that we also have developers who are members who are willing to join in the discussions and sometimes a bit of light and friendly banter!
The moment someone has to ‘defend’ themselves on here the discussion has rightly or wrongly turned from friendly into an attack. It’s an extremely fine line and it must be very difficult for staff to moderate this.
This is why everyone on here is encouraged to be positive at all times. Disagree with the ideas not the person.
Its fantastic that you are so passionate about this subject and we all feel the same about different points of the hobby (my main issue with sims at the moment is I can’t fly a tanker in dcs or have a euro truck simulator experience with cargo planes!)
you can’t cater to everyone and you have to from a business perspective go to where the money is.
Tankers in dcs are never ever going to sell as well as a sexy tomcat!
be positive dude. If you don’t like something by all means say something and encourage discussion on the topic, just don’t make it personal. That’s what separates mudspike from everywhere else.

7 Likes

#18

Well, I’ll have to plead ignorance here because I’m not very knowledgeable about the ins and outs of IL-2. WW2 stuff just isn’t my area so I have no real big opinions on any of it. What IS obvious is passionate customers, passionate developers, and sometimes that can be an interesting mix. I’d encourage everyone to be careful about using broad blanket statements because rarely is the world ever as neat and easy as that.

I wish I could contribute more, or even take a position, but frankly I just don’t know enough on this topic to do that. Definitely listen to each other and be thoughtful and respectful in your replies to each other. Civil discourse is usually pretty effective.

6 Likes

#19

What Jason said, or implied, about how easily public criticism can damage a product is something worth considering as (or before) one types. The audience for these products is so small that forums like this one have the power to do damage. The damage isn’t done so much in the initial critique. Its done during the back-and-forth between trash talkers and defenders. The longer the pendulum is allowed to swing, the stronger the impression that the product is no better than 50/50.

I am not suggesting “don’t be a critic”. Hell, I have certainly done my share. I am suggesting that we all enjoy the power to do harm to someone’s livelyhood if we are too strident either way. Political ads work in a similar way. They are not intended to promote or destroy a candidate. No, their job is to make voters feel, “They’re all crooks!” and stay home.

If you 80% love something but 20% hate it, your posts on the thing should be at least 80% love.

6 Likes

#20

Yes. And everyone should pull for power in helicopters. Because it makes the world a safer and better place.

10 Likes