PAYWARE aircraft?????

[tristar]

well this could get long, but i will try to shorten it as most as possible..

I have just recently grew an interest for xplane, after 14 years in the flight sim community a few developers here have got my full attention, and have made me realise that xplane is probably more capable than  flightsim  when it comes high quality addons.

The first impression i ever got when i was thinking of switching over from FS to Xplane was horrible!!!

I researched around the xplane community and found out that it is a much titer and better group than that in the FS world\

the only downside though was the aircraft. Except for the default xplane 9 aircraft (C-172-Piaggio) the other payware aircraft were extremely horrible, and I cant believe that these guys would charge money for such crap.

sorry for using these words ,but common there are aircraft for sale that don't have any panels or only 2D panels, the ones that do posses 3d panels most of them look like a grade 3 kid designed them...

Its very simple , don't give up your day job if you lack in quality design and want to make money on your junk, wait until you can produce something that deserves some income, look around at other developers work including flight sim aircraft.

If you cant match the industry standards in quality wait until you can..

As for the xplane developers that ARE producing quality please keep it up , cause your stuff looks like it will surpass

the best of FSX's payware aircraft..

quality xplane

SAAB 340            Leading Edge Simulations ;D ;D ;D - upcoming

MU 2                    2 X-SCENERY : ;D ;D done

DASH 8Q400        www.flyjsim.com ;D ;D upcoming

MALIBU meridian    sorry forgot whos doing it!!!! ;D ;D upcoming

737-300              IXEG - International ;D ;D ;D upcoming

KING AIR  90        Xplane10 default ;D ;D upcoming

CRJ-200              xplane 10 default "JRollon" ;D ;D ;D I think done but not released..

VARIOUS              JGX-Designs  ;D ;D done

remember the smilies are just for the model of aircraft that i preffer not the quality they all seem pretty close in that so far in that department...GOOD JOB GUYS ....

Now I appologize for any other high qualidy addons im forgetting or just dont know about yet...

[Kaphias]

Its very simple , don't give up your day job if you lack in quality design and want to make money on your junk, wait until you can produce something that deserves some income, look around at other developers work including flight sim aircraft.

If you cant match the industry standards in quality wait until you can..

Any author should have the right to attempt to sell his/her work, no matter it's quality, at any price. It's very simple, if you don't like the quality of someone's work, don't buy it. Frankly I'm happy to have a large number of available aircraft that have great flight models (maybe you don't understand this as a MSFS user?) and a panel layout which matches that of the plane. If all the aircraft we had available were those few that are of the quality you outline, I'd be stuck flying a very few number of planes.

[-TheoGregory]

If all the aircraft we had available were those few that are of the quality you outline, I'd be stuck flying a very few number of planes.

How many people on this forum willingly choose to fly the "crap" ones on a day to day basis? My interpretation of the situation is that most people (on this forum at least) are still stuck flying very few numbers of planes.

[tristar]

All im saying is years and years and years , before there was any quality addon worth buying for flight simulater 95/98 , all aircraft that were designed or most were free  cause it was a fun hobby and they knew back then that it would not be worth charging for something with 5 switches on it that looked like a flying cube.

tell me something else, why is there a few free downloads on xplane.org that are better than ALOT of paware ones??

why such there be a charge for a model with out a panel???? who the hell flies from spot view, dude those days are gonne

like 15 years ago..

seems to me that some of you are just trying real hard to take advantage of the situation that exists with xplane not having many QUALITY aircraft available, but i see that the time is near were all that bogus will end as more and more amazing addons start to leave the hangars, and less and less people will be forced to fly junk with wings...

sorry just my 2 cents

[Kesomir]

I'm guilty of buying the decent payware and then not flying them  ;D

I tend to fly fairly infrequently, and when I do, just for the VA, so it has to be a VA aircraft, or close to it.

My main plane at the moment is the MU-2, but to be honest the falco is more modernly built - but the aircraft itself isn't right for my routes.

[Lukasz]

It's very simple, if you don't like the quality of someone's work, don't buy it. [...] If all the aircraft we had available were those few that are of the quality you outline, I'd be stuck flying a very few number of planes.

Sometimes the full truth about the quality or lack of it, comes out only after the purchase... Sometimes you pay $$ for an awesome aircraft and sometimes you pay $$ for a "tip", whose aircraft are to be avoided in the future - because what the others have written about these aircraft, doesn't necessarily reflect my own experience.

I'm sticked to only few, but top class aircraft and I really prefer it that way I can't fly them all at the same time, anyway. And memorising too many super detailed POHs is sometimes troublesome. For me it's a quality over quantity for sure.

seems to me that some of you are just trying real hard to take advantage of the situation that exists with xplane not having many QUALITY aircraft available, but i see that the time is near were all that bogus will end as more and more amazing addons start to leave the hangars, and less and less people will be forced to fly junk with wings...

I believe, that we're at the brink of a change The first signs are already in the view and with time, there will be more of them. Just don't forget about so called "flight model", detailed panel and pretty outer shell are only half of the fun During my MSFS years I flew only freewares, now I fly almost only payware aircraft, with just a few respectable exceptions, like An-2.

Welcome aboard!

[Kaphias]

If all the aircraft we had available were those few that are of the quality you outline, I'd be stuck flying a very few number of planes.

How many people on this forum willingly choose to fly the "crap" ones on a day to day basis? My interpretation of the situation is that most people (on this forum at least) are still stuck flying very few numbers of planes.

Not many obviously, but people come here for the high-quality payware aircraft, not a large collection of free downloads.

tell me something else, why is there a few free downloads on xplane.org that are better than ALOT of paware ones??

why such there be a charge for a model with out a panel???? who the hell flies from spot view, dude those days are gonne

like 15 years ago..

Some people have a life where they can get away with donating hundreds, if not thousands of hours of time to a community. Others need the money to pay rent or support their family, and some do it as a business with the sole purpose of making money, though there are very few, if any, of these in X-Plane. I like to think that all designers enjoy what they do, some just need the money to compensate for their time.

Never seen a payware plane without a panel.

It's very simple, if you don't like the quality of someone's work, don't buy it. [...] If all the aircraft we had available were those few that are of the quality you outline, I'd be stuck flying a very few number of planes.

I'm sticked to only few, but top class aircraft and I really prefer it that way I can't fly them all at the same time, anyway. And memorising too many super detailed POHs is sometimes troublesome. For me it's a quality over quantity for sure.

Personal differences here obviously, I'm quantity over quality (to an extent, of course). I'd rather have the full 737 series in a XPFW-like quality than just the 738 or the 733 to the extent that we have, or will have them.

[kiofka]

"Never buy a pig in a poke."

I don't buy anything without getting good information and reviews first.  I need to see good quality pics of the interior and exterior.  I watch the websites for comments and reviews and see if there is anything significant to be concerned about.  

And then, very carefully... I reach into my wallet.

Good quality freeware is rare. Oh, it's out there, but it's rare.

I find most payware to be an arms length from perfect as well.

There's really only a handful, (if that), that are putting out desirable aircraft.

And of the handful, there isn't a large selection of aircraft to select from.

X-Plane is evolving, and so are a few of the payware vendors.

New versions of X-Plane allow for better framerates with the more technical aircraft,

allowing the vendors to create planes that are more elaborate and sophisticated.  

Flat unbaked textures that were acceptable yesterday

must give way to the richer and higher resolution textures of today.

2D has evolved to 3D.

Some vendors can keep up, others can not.

Do your research, scrutinize the data, and then make your purchase.

Demand your money back if you're not satisfied.

Report abusers, (rip-offs), on all the significant blogs. (Call them by name so that others will know!)

[Lukasz]

So I did Screenshots from the cockpit and outside view were of satisfactory quality and reviews about the flight model were enthusiastic. Since the two aircraft in question are both very high on my favourites list, I've purchased them in one shot. It was an educated purchase.

Too bad, that while visuals looked good on downsized screenshots, they weren't that cool anymore on full screen - and ever less after zooming in to the panel. The flight models have their highlights in some areas, but more or less seriously lack in others. Some time after I've also learned, that there you won't find unenthusiastic "reviews", on certain websites, about certain developers, but that's another story.

[tristar]

Some people have a life where they can get away with donating hundreds, if not thousands of hours of time to a community. Others need the money to pay rent or support their family, and some do it as a business with the sole purpose of making money, though there are very few, if any, of these in X-Plane. I like to think that all designers enjoy what they do, some just need the money to compensate for their time.

Never seen a payware plane without a panel.

1= Pay rent and support?

2= some just need money to compensate for their time?

              well

" GET A JOB! unless you can produce something worth my credit card number.."

thats the bottom line, offcourse we are all free to make our own descisions and have the freedom to try to make money anyway we wan.

but that to me is still a sucker move, developing less than freeware quality at times for $10.00 cause there isnt much option yet in xplane.

I cant  believe that flight simulation has come to this point, where time is so prescios even as a hobby that we have to pay for any junk that is produced...its called being taken advantaged of thats all it is...

in the case of lis saying the pictures on the developers website are tiny , what do you call that then?? that means that the developer knows its crap, and is just trying to to sucker people in to rip them off on a sh*** product  and easy $$$$...

thats called rape..

[Oliver]

thats called rape..

Lets not get carried away there...

[Lukasz]

I didin't say tiny - only downsized, to about 50-60% of the full resolution of my screen. Still, enough to somehow camouflage the real appearance and deceive prospective buyer.

While I understand your disappointment, take note, that every plane was developed by a human and every human wants to make a living, that way or another. Charging "standard payware price" or charging at all for a half-baked plane of at best freeware medium-quality range, combined with exaggerated marketing hype and altered screenshots, doesn't look particularly honest, but that doesn't mean we should shot such developers on sight. These are humans afterall, some may lack skills to do better products, some may have really hard life, some may be sick or have other duties, that take the time that could be used for plane making and else. Also not everything you see is a doing of a developer, don't forget about store owner and his own marketing policy.

Regardless of whether it is an ill will aimed at selling known crap or is it simple unability to perform better, there is only one solution for this: not to buy. It's that simple. Calling names and portraying planes as crap, can and will hurt humans in the end, which is not a good thing - it's even worse than selling crappy digital planes. That's why what I prefer to do, is to promote good planes, while leaving the bad ones in the shadows of oblivion. Easier, better and less stressful thing to do.

I've lost 100$ (4 planes), but now I'm smarter and better know where to look, while deciding whether to buy or not. It's called "frycowe" here, which can be translated as "sucker's tax" or "rookie's tax", to be paid in exchange for knowledge.

[steven winslow]

I think it's called "caveat emptor".......

It's not just X-Plane payware that we buy and later regret.  Every day, everywhere, someone is paying good money for crap.  Some people choose to buy crap and others do it unwittingly.  I've said it before, I don't think I've "lost" anything for buying a piece of crap X-Plane aircraft.  I have learned from the experience and I can only hope my investment helps encourage the crap creator to improve the product.  With that said, I would hesitate to buy from a known crapslinger.  Those who choose to sell crap will not be around in the long run.  The crowd always thins at the top.

And another thought: I think it's sad that most of the developers of X-Plane aircraft and scenery are unpaid hobbyists sharing their time and talent.  Although I am deeply grateful for their work, as a professional photographer who relies on my talent to make a living, it's hard to understand the "free" mentality.  Some of the freeware we've seen lately indeed rivals some of the payware products.  Why is it that only a few can make a buck or two on add-ons?  I'm not suggesting that we all start charging for the personal repaints and personal airports we populate, but it has always struck me as strange.  I even bought (paid real money) a virtual airline a few months ago and it boggles my mind to think there is no plausible, or acceptable, way to make it even pay for itself.  

Steve

[Ben Russell]

tristar: Please do not trivialize a serious issue like Rape ever again. Anywhere.

I suspect you spend too much time on XBox Live where little boys think that word is tough.

[tristar]

Sorry Admin , I wont use that word again on here.. and  i dont play x-box, I fly planes for a living..

cheers

[clavel9]

And another thought: I think it's sad that most of the developers of X-Plane aircraft and scenery are unpaid hobbyists sharing their time and talent.  Although I am deeply grateful for their work, as a professional photographer who relies on my talent to make a living, it's hard to understand the "free" mentality.  Some of the freeware we've seen lately indeed rivals some of the payware products.  Why is it that only a few can make a buck or two on add-ons?  I'm not suggesting that we all start charging for the personal repaints and personal airports we populate, but it has always struck me as strange.

I don't think there's anything especially strange about it. I'm a professional designer and while I keep busy mostly, I do have down time and if someone approaches me to do something for them I'm more than happy to help them out gratis provided it doesn't interfere with my own work. In fact I often use it as an opportunity to brush up on some old skills and learn new ones without compromising my professional work. I have published a couple of repaints over the years and am working on some others and am more than happy to share them for free provided somebody else doesn't attempt to cash in.

Looking at the pay-ware scene in general, the market will decide whether a product is worth paying for and determine the selling price. The pay-ware market isn't very mature yet (at least not in the MSFS sense) and it remains to be seen how it will play out in the coming months. Until recently, there was very little in the way of independent analysis/reviewing of pay-ware (or even freeware) - xplane10blog notwithstanding - while there are numerous magazines, online and print out there reviewing products for FS. I don't define whether something is "freeware quality" or "pay-ware quality": whether or not one has to pay for it is in one sense beside the point. However, by definition you must purchase the pay-ware product before sampling it. It's up to the buyer (or reviewer) to spread the word: good or bad. A pay-ware vendor must be prepared for a higher level of criticism than a freeware developer.

One last point I will make is that most criticism nowadays seem to come down to the skill of the developer in 3D modelling and animation. Screenshots, videos and so forth can give the impression that there's a very polished product there but it might not resemble the real aircraft in terms of performance and handling. Now, in most cases pay-ware developers do pay attention to the technical parts of the aircraft, but I think it's fair to say the several hundred, even several thousand, hours flight testing required to get this right rarely gets mentioned.

[steven winslow]

Very well spoken, Merisi.  In fact, that's pretty much what I wanted to express along with the other things I mentioned.

[-TheoGregory]

Now, in most cases pay-ware developers do pay attention to the technical parts of the aircraft, but I think it's fair to say the several hundred, even several thousand, hours flight testing required to get this right rarely gets mentioned.

Simply because a screenshot or video of the flight model isn't that interesting from a customers viewpoint. I mean it could be possible to say this plane has a flightmodel that's 98% realistic flight model but you can't prove that with pictures like you can with 3d models.

-TheoGregpry

[Lukasz]

But you can portray flight model on a chart or in a table, to show how much it's close to the real thing - or at least the ideal real thing. The problem is, that well done screenshot with a nice plane on it is much more spectacular and exciting, than a couple of curves or columns full of numbers

[Ben Russell]

[Simmo W]

Chart of the year Indi! Accurate too.

[Lukasz]

Looks good to me Although the angled purple part seems to be too small a bit (real PacMan could have opened his mouth a little more), it's close enough for me It's a fair representation of PacMan model, so that anyone can make their own judgement if it is good enough for them or not. Surely better, than usual "highly accurate" claim

[Malchaeus]

Is that the payware or freeware pacman?

[Gjalp]

What systems modelling has been added to it? Manipulators etc??

I was reading the latest PCPilot and they were reviewing the Pits S-1, payware of course, for FSX. I was thinking to myself "I might get FSX just for the planes as they are very nice looking and there are more to chose from..." then I kept reading.

It seems they have released a payware aircraft with "almost all switches and controls working" and I thought to myself again....why would you release a plane with only some parts working? Unless the simulator cannot actually model the functionality of these items (programming coding restraints etc...), then why would you not put them in.

The article said they had access to the pilot (Adrian Mardlin...),and his personal aircraft etc, and he flight tested it and said it had his approval (my words in this part not the magazines...). Dont get me wrong, some payware for FSX / FS9 do actually include as much as they can to give the overall experience, but US$37.55 for an aerobatic aircraft with a simple "pit" (the Pitts dosent really have a complicated pit so shouldnt be too hard to get everything working...even in 3d...), with only "some switches and controls working?" This is more freeware than payware in my opinion. This is what I like about XP and X-Aviation in particlular.....if it is there and can be used in the sim it will be (Im still popping curcuits in the Falco....must be my flying style.....), included.

Anyway, enough of my rant for this morning.....merry christmas and happy new year to all.

Slainte,

Andy

NZCH

[Dozer]

I was reading the latest PCPilot and they were reviewing the Pits S-1, payware of course, for FSX. I was thinking to myself "I might get FSX just for the planes as they are very nice looking and there are more to chose from..." then I kept reading.

It seems they have released a payware aircraft with "almost all switches and controls working" and I thought to myself again....why would you release a plane with only some parts working? Unless the simulator cannot actually model the functionality of these items (programming coding restraints etc...), then why would you not put them in.

I'm completely guessing, but the missing systems are probably the circuit breakers and audio-select panel functions. The Falco is the only simulated aircraft I've come across with working circuit breakers, and even that doesn't have a 100% complete audio select panel (and nor should it given that most of its functions are redundant in a desktop simulator. Would be nice if its power switch could turn it off though.)

Regarding that FS9/FSX Pitts S-1 - the screenshots speak for themselves:

http://www.addictive.it/Pitts/ (that's the developer's own website)

2d gauges stuck to the '3d' cockpit panel, X-Plane 8 style. Post-BK117 I cannot put up with that

edit: for some reason, that Pitts S-1 features an autopilot. And I've just realised it's published by Abacus, whose products I found underwhelming in terms of depth back in my MSFS days, unfortunately