Reality XP GTN

[lowflyr]

I have a question for the A2A devs. Reality XP is supposedly working on bringing their GTN over to P3D. Given that Reality XP already shows up in the aircraft configurator, is it safe to assume that if/when this product is released, it will be implemented at some point? I know Flight1 already makes one for 32-bit versions (which I own) and are likely working on a v4 upgrade but after witnessing the complete lack of appreciation they have for their customers, I am contemplating taking my business elsewhere. However, my main purpose for the GTN is for use in the A2A planes. So I am just trying to plan for the future.
Thanks for any info you can provide.

[Lewis - A2A]

Hello,

as I understand it Flight1/RXP are currently one of the same with RXP concentrating on the 5/430 and Flight1 on the 6/750. Our Aircraft moving onto v4 from v3 will be supporting the new updates as they are released from Flight1.

thanks,
Lewis

[Tim-HH]

...but after witnessing the complete lack of appreciation they have for their customers, I am contemplating taking my business elsewhere.

What led you to this conclusion? Flight1 has released countless updates for the GTN in the past years. Many of them contained new features at no additional costs. They also offer a great support in their forum. Therefore I really can't understand your statement that Flight1 does not value their customers.

And don't forget that RealityXP suddenly disappeared for years and ceased all support activities. If that happens again your RealityXP software works exactly until the next P3D v4 update.

Greetings
Tim

[Warbirds]

Flight 1 are greedy and only out for a buck. I have bought their 750 twice now (FSX and P3D) and now find they will again want to charge me for a P3Dv4 upgrade.

So I hope another developers does come out with a GTN 750 because I will not buy the Flight 1 a third time.

[lowflyr]

...but after witnessing the complete lack of appreciation they have for their customers, I am contemplating taking my business elsewhere.

What led you to this conclusion? Flight1 has released countless updates for the GTN in the past years. Many of them contained new features at no additional costs. They also offer a great support in their forum. Therefore I really can't understand your statement that Flight1 does not value their customers.

And don't forget that RealityXP suddenly disappeared for years and ceased all support activities. If that happens again your RealityXP software works exactly until the next P3D v4 update.

Greetings
Tim

A couple responses from their "support"

I will say this again, so its clear.

We will update the GTN to V4 once we believe the smoke has cleared and there are no further issues with V4. I will not provide a date for when this will happen. If that does not work, stick with V3.

It will also incur a small update fee. Its not a small change by any stretch of the imagination.
We have provided countless updates for free for V2 and V3. We don't work for free, and I suspect you don't either. Nowhere have we ever said the GTN is updatable for free for life.
That doesn't even make sense. Lockheed didnt provide V2, V3 or V4 for free either.

I really don't care what other developers are doing or not doing. It has no bearing on what we do. Once again, if I see this thread or any thread moving in a negative direction, it will be locked at minimum.

This in response to a question of when to expect the release. The question of cost was not even brought up. Then later in the same thread, this:

If anyone else would like to sign up under a false username and complain, let me help you with something

We know who you are, where you are regardless of VPN, and this nonsense of my ISP hides me through VPN's deal is kind of funny which is why tech costs money.

It is not just the re-development which I can personally tell you the LM forums are lit up like a xmas tree right now with developers asking WT... HOW do I ...,

It is the kiddies who pull stunts like I referenced above and the time it takes to deal with them too.

If you are a REAL pilot or someone who wishes to be,.. and knows/understands the real world, and want the technology in your aircraft, in the real world for those who a dead from the neck up behind a keyboard.. , you pay, over and over again for every update

Don't like that attitude? I shucked out for a recent Garmin USB stick update

You came to the wrong party!

You were given updates for free for years.. this time is different

Now, go buy/rent the aircraft with the tech in it, and then do the same thing in email and tell the manufacture how you should get updates for free and do not like the person telling you why that isn't possible.



This isn't a game. You want a 'as close to' professional real world simulation as best as it can be repro'd? but pull stupid ... moves to make a internet forum statement?


Please, report my post too.


This is a shot across the bow, don't scratch my anchor! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGD-tUsySPs

<My dingy is bigger than yer whole boat>


next time it wont be so pretty <see line 2 above>

And in another thread, this:

I am not here to make buddies. If you think my statement which is factual is being interpreted as "attitude" than you have sadly mistaken attitude for proper business decisions.

Now with that said, I guess I will irritate you some more by telling you that I am under no obligation to explain in detail what we have to do to get V4 compliance in said add-on. Nobody forced you to buy V4, and I doubt you would understand the complexities involved in re-porting the GTN over to V4. Its not a simple gauge. You will have two choices. 1. either stick with V3, 2. Purchase the upgrade for V4 the same way you willingly paid for V4.

I will not discuss this further.

Locked.

If you go to the forums where I pulled these from you will notice that these responses were unprovoked. They want to point out how many updates they have offered for free, although the majority of them were for bug fixes and compatibility (things which we would expect from any other developer).

I had no expectation of an upgrade to V4 being free. Honestly, I am surprised at the number of add-ons which are free. FSUIPC is the only one I have had to fork out a fee for thus far. That's awesome.

What I don't like is the manner in which they jump right into telling you that it's not going to be free, but never giving any indication of when it might be available. Are they obligated to do so? No, I don't think so. Is it good practice to keep your customers informed? Of course it is. A2A, PMDG, and many others issued announcements as soon as the announcement was made.

[CAPFlyer]

Actually, those responses weren't unprovoked. They all were in response to posts later deleted because the inciting post was from a repeat offender of "sh**-starting" on Flight1's boards. Because Flight1's forum software doesn't leave a "post deleted" stub, it looks wierd and they really need to fix that, but it's not the poster's fault that he responded to a post and then that post later disappeared.

Sadly, this hobby has people who will be the end of P3D. People who buy the Academic license but know they don't qualify for it. People who complain to developers for not "giving" them everything. Those people will be the ones that cause Lockheed to have to enforce its "Not For Entertainment Use" clause and make all license holders prove they're qualified to own the license they have and suddenly they'll either have to pay another $100+ for the Professional license, or they'll have all those useless addons they complained to the developers so much about having to pay for legitimate updates to.

[lowflyr]

Actually, those responses weren't unprovoked. They all were in response to posts later deleted because the inciting post was from a repeat offender of "sh**-starting" on Flight1's boards. Because Flight1's forum software doesn't leave a "post deleted" stub, it looks wierd and they really need to fix that, but it's not the poster's fault that he responded to a post and then that post later disappeared.

Sadly, this hobby has people who will be the end of P3D. People who buy the Academic license but know they don't qualify for it. People who complain to developers for not "giving" them everything. Those people will be the ones that cause Lockheed to have to enforce its "Not For Entertainment Use" clause and make all license holders prove they're qualified to own the license they have and suddenly they'll either have to pay another $100+ for the Professional license, or they'll have all those useless addons they complained to the developers so much about having to pay for legitimate updates to.

I don't have a problem paying a reasonable update fee. I understand the time and effort spent to develop these products is worth something.

And perhaps those responses were provoked. The responses still don't seem very tempered coming from representatives of Flight1.

Again, my problem is not the cost involved (provided it is not outrageous). My problem is that they are not acting very appreciative of those of us who have paid for the product, are willing to pay again to upgrade the product, and are only looking for some indication of when this product might be available. I made it clear in my own post over there that I was just interested in a ballpark idea of a release timeframe (days/weeks/months/whatever), and the response was that they were not going to provide a hard timeline and if we weren't happy with it, stick with P3D.

Once again, I understand that they are under no obligation to release that information. But if they are going to continue to get defensive about the monetary implications, it seems that they could give us some information in return. Just my 2 cents.

[AKar]

Sadly, this hobby has people who will be the end of P3D. People who buy the Academic license but know they don't qualify for it. People who complain to developers for not "giving" them everything. Those people will be the ones that cause Lockheed to have to enforce its "Not For Entertainment Use" clause and make all license holders prove they're qualified to own the license they have and suddenly they'll either have to pay another $100+ for the Professional license, or they'll have all those useless addons they complained to the developers so much about having to pay for legitimate updates to.

I agree, albeit what I find curious is LM's apparently intentional blind spot over what you mentioned about Academic license. They know they could enforce it, but the have chosen not to, for now at least. I am a bit worried about the situation, as it could potentially get messy, but I don't see P3D going anywhere, even if someone released the hounds, as they start to have a rather large market share. But I'd think if we only counted de jure academic and professional licenses, the scales might tip from where they currently balance according to some who are supposed to have some information of it.

In principle, I find the convergence of the real aviation and the sim community a good thing, though.

I've always been pro update fee, where justified. I do not like the way of not having any update path at all, such as was the P3Dv2 to v3 move, where the upgrade was relatively small. I don't yet have the v4 to have any opinion on this change.

-Esa

[CAPFlyer]

It hasn't been an issue because there's 2 factors - 1) until recently, P3D's sales haven't been that big. There's a small, but very vocal user group that's on a lot of these same forums, but beyond that, it's not been a widely sold product. 2) there's been no real competition. Microsoft and even DTG have been more than happy to let those few (under 10,000 last I saw any realistic number) users who want to use P3D do so. The problem is that with P3Dv4 coming out and being the start of a real new sim level (although most of its changes are still "window dressing" and not actual changes to the flight dynamics or base simulator code) and now FSW, it's probably going to come to a head because Lockheed and/or Microsoft have made sure that DTG declares that FSW is "not for training or professional use" in their EULA to comply with their part, so DTG may be in a position where they almost have to force the issue or risk loosing a substantial market share. What scares me is that too many in the community will see it as a "dick move" (kinda like Flight1 here) and further alienate developers and end up killing development for the vast majority of users who want to see the MSFS line continue forward but also won't break the law just to get their sim.

[Warbirds]

Well Cap, I do have a right to my opinion and my wallet does talk and make a small point at times. Flight1 is greedy and sitting with a big smile on their faces knowing they, once again, can sell the same product over and over and over to the same customers.

Here is a point to ponder. PMDG just updated their 747 to V4 at great development expense and time and did not charge the user of the V3 version one dime for this. Any developer that charges for an update to V4 for their current models is off my list permanently.

[lowflyr]

Well Cap, I do have a right to my opinion and my wallet does talk and make a small point at times. Flight1 is greedy and sitting with a big smile on their faces knowing they, once again, can sell the same product over and over and over to the same customers.

Here is a point to ponder. PMDG just updated their 747 to V4 at great development expense and time and did not charge the user of the V3 version one dime for this. Any developer that charges for an update to V4 for their current models is off my list permanently.

So I don't necessarily disagree with you (and you certainly have your right to that opinion) but for me, it's not all about the money. The way I understand it, some developers foresaw the move to 64-bit as something which was going to happen soon enough that they incorporated the expense of that transition into their previous pricing models. Others may have made the decision not to charge because their product was easily integrated, or perhaps due to pressure from the community. Regardless, I think we have been quite fortunate with the amount of developers who have not taken advantage of an opportunity to grab some cash.

I mentioned earlier that I got FSUIPC5, which was not a free upgrade. I read what Pete had to say as far as development, and he gave a reasonable explanation as to why he was charging for it. He also worked to get it out rather quickly. I don't really know what all was involved. Maybe in reality all he had to do was rename the program from 4 to 5. Doesn't matter. He wasn't a jerk about it, so I paid.

I guess my point is I wouldn't be so quick to write off a developer for the simple fact of charging for an upgrade. I would, however, agree that touting all of the free upgrades (i.e. bug fixes) that they have released as evidence of their supposed generosity and justification for an upgrade fee is rather annoying, and the fact that they steadfastly refuse to provide any timeline whatsoever are very good reasons for keeping your money or supporting other developers instead.

I just don't want this thread, or my opinion, to be taken as a dig on anyone who charges for an upgrade. Rather, it is just to point out that maybe we have become spoiled by devs like A2A who do appear to value their customers, and keep us informed without treating us as inferiors.
/rant

[Ssnake51]

Flight 1 are greedy and only out for a buck.

What an absurd view.
If the good people at Flight 1 were really greedy and only out for a buck they would not be wasting their time on flight sim products. Much more lucrative areas in gaming to really make big bucks.

You are of course free to express your opinion. But I think it quite foolish.

Am looking forward to their updated GTN and will gladly reimburse them for their efforts.

[lowflyr]

Hello,

as I understand it Flight1/RXP are currently one of the same with RXP concentrating on the 5/430 and Flight1 on the 6/750. Our Aircraft moving onto v4 from v3 will be supporting the new updates as they are released from Flight1.

thanks,
Lewis

So it appears that this is indeed the case. That's unfortunate. They make a great product, and unfortunately I have become spoiled by using it. Thanks for the info Lewis.

[shortspecialbus]

Why do we have a thread on the A2A forum bashing other developers?

-stefan

[lowflyr]

Why do we have a thread on the A2A forum bashing other developers?

-stefan

The thread was started with the intention of seeing if a particular product would be supported along with an explanation of why I was asking the question. And while the opinion does appear to be split, the basis for my complaint with those developers seems to be shared by at least a few others in the community. You call it bashing, and that's fine. But the negative remarks towards them are not unfounded.