Excellent Op Ed, Dave!

[TheCrazedLog]

Just out of curosity, how much do you make on your products "in your pocket" so to speak (eg after tax, costs yadda yadda yar)

Anthony

[ladamson]

>Just out of curosity, how much
>do you make on your
>products "in your pocket" so
>to speak (eg after tax,
>costs yadda yadda yar)


He wouldn't even tell me that on the phone.....

Our visions of the "Dreamfleet Towers" in the high rent district of New York............... might come tumbling down, if we knew the truth! :)

Ladamson

[daviator]

It really depends on the deal as I go with different publishers.

I did three planes for a company overseas and only got $1200. I got ripped off on that deal and will never work for them again. I really did the package as a favor for a friend who really believed in it. Unfortunately, we all got taken to the cleaners on that one.

After taxes, that comes to $200 per plane. I estimate I put 80 hours plus in each model. That works our to 92 cent per hour. (not counting books I purchased and a couple of 30 mile round trips to a local air museum for the project)

Most of my deals are more lucrative than that but that gives you an idea of what some publishers are paying.

I must admit that Abacus has been fair to me. I like them and they seem to like me. They gave me my first commercial contract around the fall of 2000 and I have been working on and off with them ever since.

Dave
www.daviator.com

[RyanbATC]

Yeah, makes sense, but I think people will just keep having their own opinion. Hopefully, once FS2004 is released, people will just fly that and forget about the whole thing - at least for a while.

http://www.flightsim.com/dcforum/Use...4f4e80de81.jpg
[link:www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=2805|My Jetphotos]

[toddrf]

I will second that. I know almost nothing about what it takes to put a panel of a 737 on my computer. In fact I actually know far more about the actual workings of Miss Pretty Pretty than I know about how computer add-ons are made (as evidenced by my replacing the mixture cable after it broke on me while I was leaning during run-up. Thank goodness for checklists).

But I do know this; whatever it is that devlopers do to create these panels and aircraft has got to take a boatload of work. I read a lot of whining about frame rates and accuracy and the fact is that no two airplanes are the same. My 172 is probably unlike any other in terms of panel etc. Most of you have seen pictures so you know.

All this blather about fidelity and the like, it kind of irks me because I used FS98 extensively for instrument training and it was perfect at the time. Actually still is. I can do great practice with what is now a 'dinosaur' amongst sims, but in relation to actual flying, it is still a super tool.

The last add-ons that I have reviewed, PSS Dash-8 Eaglesoft's Beechjet 400 and the various DF offerings have all amazed me in terms of what they offer for the user. You can use checklists faithfully and really have an enjoyable time with an add-on that save for the feeling of flying, gives you most everything else.

My suspicion is that 2004 will be about the end of the line for FS.

I have long felt that aside from a few niggling little items like pop-up clearances, route changes and random and dynamic weather, FS 2002 was about perfect in terms of what was reasonable for a desktop sim. I suppose greater scenery fidelity and higher terrain mapping fidelity is the next step, but if people think that there is a lot left to be achieved in FS in terms of the quality and accuracy of aircraft...well they are fairly ignorant of real aviation.

As well some of the purported 'real' pilots in the forum who carp about the accuracy of 'feel' in the various FS aircraft.

Here is an observation; I have flown somewhere around 75 different airplanes in my life. Well over 30 different types and if you sit there with a 'backside meter' EVERY one of them flies differently from the other.

That of course is with the exception of airplanes out of rig or wth excessive slop in the controls.

On the gauges you develop certain observations about pitch and roll stability but I stopped judging 'feel' a long time ago and there is no reasonable way to judge this in FS. I think the 172 and the 182 fly just fine in FS. So there is a problem with the argument about air files etc because aside from some gross mistake like enabling a 206 to do mach 2, in most of the cases I have seen the performance is very accurate.

The bottom line is that I have no idea what the gripe is about. I show my regional buddies the ERJ add-ons and they are amazed. About a year ago one of my best friends, a Comair captain, sat with me and we flew approaches into CVG and he felt 'at home'.

My Midwest buddy ran through a checklist and flew the ERJ from PKB to PIT the whole time telling me "This is where this control is and switch that on the MFD..." nearby on my wall is a poster of an actual ERJ-145 panel and I am amazed at the add-on accuracy.

We are very fortunate to have FS. I have 'flown' several full motion sims and stationary trainers that cost several million dollars a piece and do not offer the graphics detail of FS. I just loaded 2002 on this little Celeron 1.33 GHz machine I am using at work and with default scenery display settings it flew smoothly and well. I thought I was 'doomed' to 98 at work and now I have 2002 for a screensaver between patients.

Griping about FS and quality or the developers or anything else is really a sign of the complacency and the 'obesity' of our time. We really have no idea how good we have it.

I will close with this. I spend a lot of time in MPP flying places. I love my 172 and she gets me there. I have a friend that is about to take delivery on a 2003, get this, turbine DHC-2, Beaver. He has a stable of other airplanes, most of which I have flown, but he is always very sensitive about what goes into his airplane. So much so that he once suggested that we use my airplane because "it doesn't matter if it gets dinged up...".

I found that telling. I don't think he much enjoys flying because he tends to be consumed by details. I on ther other hand look at the incredible marvel of a personal airplane and regardless of dings and hangar rash couldn't be happier with my old 172. I think the same thing is true about simming. I have qa plain jane Dell computer. Off the shelf MS joystick and I rarely add scenery or other upgrades to 2002. I am still blown away by what it will do. The people who gripe about developers I think are in their own misery for they lack the ability to find a sense of wonder in what they have before them.

What's the 737 selling for right now Lou? $30...I don't know exactly, but even at $50, for a 737 fan, that is peeing in the ocean for what you get in the add-on. Even if you only use it for a screensaver between patients...

AS with most of the whiners, I say to the devlopers, drive on an know that the vast majority of us out here are really happy with what we have.

Todd :-wave

[panzerschiffe]

>My suspicion is that 2004 will
>be about the end of
>the line for FS.

I have the same feeling. The level of detail that people are going to expect from freeware is only going to increase. The addition of clickable VC's is going to make that feature a requirement. If you're not already entrenched into the FS developer scene, I think it will be more difficult to break in in the next couple of years.

Albaro Villegas SPC [link:www.army.mil|US Army] | FDX1243 [link:www.vfedex.com|Virtual Fedex]
http://thescorned.homestead.com/big.jpg
www.md11.net www.vfedex.com | [link:www.ifdg.net|iFDG] - MD-11 Designer
No more Disco Chicken because he's 24 pixels too tall.
The mods are watching me!

[TheCrazedLog]

Do you get the money from the sales or what? Just not really sure on all of this...

Anthony

[CookieMonster]

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Jun-30-03 AT 10:25AM (EDT)[/font][p]Two things:


1) I have no problem with Mr. Betti's point of view, but I DO have a problem with him calling those who disagree with his point of view - "whiners."

Which leads me to the question - if the moderators have allowed debate over a particular topic - then I don't think one of the moderators (i.e. Mr. Betti) should put down those who a take one point of view on that debate which they disagree with.

Otherwise, please...don't allow the topic.

2) Mr. Betti, anybody who deals with customers knows there will be complainers. I don't care if you're selling add-on aircraft or underwear. For you to be so shocked, so surprised, so upset about it; I really don't understand that. It's all a part of being in business, and it will not change as long as you are in business. People can write all the op-eds in the world, but it won't change consumers in this regard. Learn to accept it, or ignore it, and move forward with your work, because it won't go away.

Cookie Monster
http://www.flightsim.com/dcforum/Use...5051c3067d.jpg

[joea]

For goodness sake, there is room for both in my opnion. I agree we are getting ##### spoiled with FS and the growing complexity. Todd said something which has been in the back of my mind for awhile that we are approaching a plateau with the sim. Still we have come a long way and with the next hardware revolution FS will take a big leap forward.
Joe Apostolidis
"The Only Good System is a Sound System"
Geneva 2003

[daviator]

On this particular deal, no. On other yes. However I only get a small percentage. Some goes to the sound guy, some to the flight dynamics guy, some to the panel or gauge guy and of course, some to the publisher.