Is lack of communications delaying dev. of some classics?

[ColoKent]

All,

There have been a number of cases of both FSX and P3D aircraft development efforts (seemingly) going dormant for years, with no word from the developer on the status of the project (...not looking for anything specific other than "Yeah...it's still in development", or "No. We binned that idea, thanks for asking").

In most cases, this lack of communication effectively freezes development on a specific type (especially if it is one of the very well regarded, "study-level" developers who previously announced they have a type in development, but haven't commented on progress in literally-- years). Let me say that I certainly understand the critical need for developers in general, and payware developers in particular, to carefully assess the potential interest and market for a product before they sink months, years, and dollars into development. In addition, I recognize that developers need to control the rate and type of information they release on active projects due to competitive considerations. Finally, I also understand the reluctance of developers to commit to specific release dates in advance-- there are too many unknowns.

That said, what I find frustrating is that I can think of at least 4 examples of WONDERFUL "study level" projects that have seemingly gone dormant without a peep on progress for 2-4 years...and these are not "offbeat", "one-off" or "arcane" types favored by some developers, but rather mainsteam, high demand classic types with huge potential for repaints, etc.

The end result of this is that lack of communication to the community (especially when a developer terminates an effort) delays/dissuades the production of popular (and many times long overdue) types that likely would otherwise be going on. Not trying to slam developers, but rather help them understand that it would be helpful to the hobby if they could be more forthcoming when they cancel a project.

Thoughts?

Kent

 

[crashaz]

I can certainly see this happen... especially with the study-level projects. Working with virtual teams online, everybody has a role, someone always gets caught up in real life. Really surprised it does not happen more often. Even here we had a P-61 Black Widow aircraft that never made the light of day.

 

[Mach3DS]

What usually happens, is that coders leave. and don't leave the code behind. FSX/P3D coders are in HIGH....did I mention HIGH...I mean REALLY HIGH demand. without them, the models are useless. Same goes with FDE development. And in most cases for "Study Level" sims, they are hand in hand with the coders and 3D modelers. So, the fact that something goes by the wayside, even if it's a no-brainer popular "high-sales" potential aircraft, is actually not uncommon. There's only a handful of developers who actually have the active skill set to produce a "study level" sim. No joke...many times these same developers are using the same coders. So projects are delayed because resources are scarce. Become an FSX/P3D SDK guru and coder of C++ and XML, and you've found yourself a job, almost instantly!

I'm finding the same thing with the XF-92A...I want to implement certain things. However, some ideas will have to go to the wayside, because I simply don't possess the coding skills, and there's not enough coders with free time and the will to work for free! So it makes decisions easy! But, you can imagine that for a payware dev, without the coders there's not much to show off.

 

[b52bob]

Interesting. My coding experience consists of coding a basic program that says “hello”, so I am not a guru.

i agree that updates on a project should be given so we know if it’s still alive. There may be others who were comptemplating doing the same aircraft but held off because someone else was doing one. If one dies, the we should know about it.

on the other hand, if you give progress reports on what’s happening, you get many requests like “when is it finished”! Etc.

no matter what, we owe a great deal of thanks to those who have persevered and brought us and continue to bring us the many excellent aircraft, both freeware and payware.

just my 2 cents worth.

 

[falcon409]

Real world situations probably play into this as well. Developers who worked diligently on a pet project, supplying updates from time to time and then suddenly. . .nothing. Later it's discovered that they suffered a major medical emergency and are either incapacitated or have passed away. In some cases the family knows of his affiliation with the Sim Community and is able to pass that info on. . .but it's also feasible to think that no one realized what his hobbies were and they simply shut off the computer, box it up and pack it away. Also consider that even in the "outhouse", developers have simply walked away. . .here one day and gone the next. Certainly they have every right to do so, it's their life and their decision.

So there are any number of ways that communication between developers and customers can fail and we, as prospective customers can be the root of those lapses in communication when well meaning but quite annoying individuals, who won't read a thread that gives the info they seek, but instead insist on posting the ever popular. . ."is it done yet?". . .or "Is there a release date?" and so on. In those instances I wouldn't blame the developer for killing the engines and running silent for awhile, lol.

 

[roger-wilco-66]

I've been working on the VC of the Caribou for a year now. For me, as a working individual with family, this is a hard thing to do with so little time.

The complexity of a cockpit is staggering. You have to research, understand the functions, and after doing the 3d model and the animations as well as the texturing, you have to later work on the coding (in my case I'm geared to do it myself). This is another whole different chapter. After being half way through it I have the highest respect for anyone who commits himself to such an endeavor. To me it is important to take a step away from it from time to time to engage myself in something else. I think one can burn out if one puts too much pressure on oneself, or lets outside pressure get too close.

But I'm sure this is not the sole reason for "mission creep". I also concur that the coding issue might be a big show stopper. You can make the best 3d model, if there is no coding, there won't be a finished sim aircraft. Another staggering road block can be new versions (and opportunities as well as the expectations of users that go with it) when new versions of sims emerge. Imagine that your development gets overrun by the frequency of new versions of the sim you are developing or. You end up endlessly re-iterating what you are doing. That feels like being the apprentice in Goethe's Faust

Cheers to all devs,
Mark

 

[deimos256]

I've been working on the VC of the Caribou for a year now. For me, as a working individual with family, this is a hard thing to do with so little time.

The complexity of a cockpit is staggering. You have to research, understand the functions, and after doing the 3d model and the animations as well as the texturing, you have to later work on the coding (in my case I'm geared to do it myself). This is another whole different chapter. After being half way through it I have the highest respect for anyone who commits himself to such an endeavor. To me it is important to take a step away from it from time to time to engage myself in something else. I think one can burn out if one puts too much pressure on oneself, or lets outside pressure get too close.

But I'm sure this is not the sole reason for "mission creep". I also concur that the coding issue might be a big show stopper. You can make the best 3d model, if there is no coding, there won't be a finished sim aircraft. Another staggering road block can be new versions (and opportunities as well as the expectations of users that go with it) when new versions of sims emerge. Imagine that your development gets overrun by the frequency of new versions of the sim you are developing or. You end up endlessly re-iterating what you are doing. That feels like being the apprentice in Goethe's Faust

Cheers to all devs,
Mark

I know this isn’t the place to discuss such things, but your last point about the sim platform itself changing is a big problem right now with X-Plane 11. The developer keeps changing the core flight model and these changes end up breaking the addons. Some developers embrace it and are constantly gathering feedback and making changes while others go silent, which I can only assume is due to frustration with constantly having to tweak their product.

 

[ColoKent]

Tons of good input and explanations concerning the myriad of reasons why multi-year delays **might** occur. I recognize that there are many legitimate reasons why these delays happen, and it was interesting hearing some of them-- thank you. And just to make clear: NONE of my post was referring to freeware projects, as they are completely at the behest of the individual or team developing it.

Looking at the responses, I probably didn't do the best job of explaining that my real focus in the original post was not on the reasons for the delays. Rather, I have to believe that years of silence by the developers on some of these dormant or dead projects (and we rarely know which is the case-- due to little or more often, NO communication), have had the potential of dissuading further development of those subjects by **other** developers. So I was trying to suggest that at the point at which developers go dormant on a project, that they simply consider letting the community know that it is still being worked...but progress is going slow-- and provide updates if that status changes (i.e. they cancel it). Conversely, if they have decided to terminate a project, do us all a favor and let us (and more importantly, other developers) know that as soon as practical, so that other developers can then chose to take up a project without feeling they are duplicating another developers efforts.

Here is an actual example from within the community (using Company X, Y and Z to avoid naming these mainstream, well-known companies...but the timeframes are real): To Company Z: "Hey...why don't you consider doing an "ABC?". And the response I get is: "Nope. Company X and Company Y both have an ABC in development..." Which is technically true...But unfortunately, Company X hasn't mentioned the project once in nearly 3 years (and it's been WIP for about 4 years before that), and Company Y has remained silent for over 4 years-- since first mentioning the project and showing an initial external render.

That's the issue I've got with "going silent" for years...

Thanks,

Kent

 

[falcon409]

. . . . . . . .
Here is an actual example from within the community (using Company X, Y and Z to avoid naming these mainstream, well-known companies...but the time frames are real): To Company Z: "Hey...why don't you consider doing an "ABC?". And the response I get is: "Nope. Company X and Company Y both have an ABC in development..." Which is technically true...But unfortunately, Company X hasn't mentioned the project once in nearly 3 years (and it's been WIP for about 4 years before that), and Company Y has remained silent for over 4 years--since first mentioning the project and showing an initial external render.

That's the issue I've got with "going silent" for years...

Thanks,
Kent

Totally agree on that point!

 

[docjohnson]

On the other hand, as a software developer who wrote code for a living in the commercial world, now retired; writing the code for any aircraft system is a major effort, even part-time. I've been working on the cockpit of a fairly simple aircraft, a trainer and I started last April (I think, memory isn't as good as it was and I'm too lazy to go look in my code to see) and am still cranking away at it. It might be done by April of this year. Maybe. Consider another aircraft an extremely complex by any standard took 4 years to develop. And that was a collaboration between two well-known companies on at least one system.

While I appreciate all the sentiment about inter and extra team communications being a problem, I just don't see it. Developing modern business software using the latest streamlined process, we used virtual meetings, phone calls, chat, and the like without ever having a face to face during the entire project. What I will say that is totally different is that programming a cockpit instrument or aircraft system for FSX or P3D is one of the most complex things I have ever done. And the one I'm working on now is just a simple aircraft by any standard, and still, even with another developer to assist when a design problem or coding problem comes up, it takes a lot of time. So I don't think communication is the problem as the team I'm on uses all those.

What is wonderful to me is that there are no deadlines, so I can take my time and do it right, versus hacking together a solution like sometimes happens in the business world. In fact, as a retired guy (twice) I don't do deadlines. I have learned that the development and integration of code to the model is also a very complex team sport. And to push to a deadline (especially on a freeware project) is asking for trouble (i.e. hours if not days of debugging code).

When I first started learning how to develop instruments and systems, I read a lot and thought I knew how to put the pieces together. Wrong! My team sat me down and told me to avoid relying on the SDK documents other than the references to variables and event ids. In other words, there is a much easier way than programming things according to the SDK. I was dumbfounded, I had to unlearn what I had learned on my own.

And I do have a pet peeve, this (not just this one) community should start releasing common cockpit code to the public as open source. I've seen this happen a little bit, mostly in XML. I've seen entire aircraft code from the old days, in C, and I'm sure it worked. But a bunch of it contain things that as a new developer fresh out of college we were taught never to do. We had mentors who helped get you up to speed so you could be productive. This happens all the time in the world I came from. We also used open source projects to shorten development time and time to market. And it would have helped to see how others have found answers to the problems that seem to have no solution. I was lucky, I had another developer on another project who had suffered what I was going through learning the monstrosity of the API to P3D and FSX. Without his help and the code examples, I would have quit and gone back to the beach and enjoyed retirement.

Finally, there is the programming interface which still has a lot of legacy code on the FSX and P3D side...some variables in the SDK don't work as portrayed in the documentation (what little there is) as an example. In another case, a variable doesn't return anything even close to what is expected. Then you have to stumble your way through like a blind man in a dark alley trying to find a solution usually you just ignore the A var and roll your own L variable. These all slow down the development. The fact that we have people that do it for free is a miracle, much less the people who work and do it in their spare time, well I don't know how they do it, have a family, and a job and produce aircraft for the sim. So those are my thoughts on the matter.

P.S. I see LM expanding the PDK which if I understand it correctly can be used instead of the current clunky SDK methods to build out a cockpit and/or systems. Someday, it will be the base of a project on a future aircraft, but not yet. I have an aircraft with 4 variants each more complex than the base it was built from to finish.

 

[ColoKent]

While I appreciate all the sentiment about inter and extra team communications being a problem...

Thanks for added insight into intra-team software coding challenges, software project management, and the joys of not having to work to a deadline.

Your response is another that did not address the original observation I had. Nonetheless, you DO win “the prize” for hinting closest to what I believe is the REAL issue here, and one which I have avoided addressing directly before now....but here goes: Payware developers in this hobby often appear to not behave as if they are engaged in a business....this is typified by not keeping their customers informed over the long haul or when they terminate a project. Period. As a business consultant who deals with these types of issues daily, I find this lack of insight puzzling, to say the least.

I love this hobby...and there are developers that do a great job running their business like a business...but in my experience, I’ve seen comparatively few that operate that way. The conclusion that I draw from this is that while developers might make the move from producing freeware as a hobbiest to payware as a “professional”...the realization that this transition requires changed behavior (in this example, communications) seems to be a hard transition for some.

Perhaps a business model like Apple uses is best— NO info until the project is released. That would solve the original problem— developers not picking subjects because they are under the impression they are under development by other developers...when oftentimes they are delayed or terminated. I dunno...

At any rate, thank you for all the replies...

Regards,

Kent

 

[jmig]

ColoKent: "hinting closest to what I believe is the REAL issue here, and one which I have avoided addressing directly before now....but here goes: Payware developers in this hobby often appear to not behave as if they are engaged in a business....this is typified by not keeping their customers informed over the long haul or when they terminate a project. Period. As a business consultant who deals with these types of issues daily, I find this lack of insight puzzling, to say the least."

I could not agree more. I have had several contentious conversations with developers over lack of communication and customer convenience. As a retired businessman, who was successful enough to retire and live comfortably, I believe I learned a thing or two about treating people, read customers. Communications is the biggest. Even if you screw up royally, being upfront and timely with an apology can make a big difference. After blowing up and reaming you a new air passage, most people realize, after they cool down, that we all make mistakes. Clam up, circle the wagons and you have created someone who will remember long. You will lose them immediately as a customer, if there is another supplier, or they will stay until there is another supplier, then it is "don't let the door hit you on your way out."

The other big thing is customer convenience. Most people don't understand that there are only five psychological reasons for buying something. Everything we buy is based on one of these five reasons. Convenience is one of them. People will pay more for convenience. Make it easy to buy and they will. Make them jump through hoops and they will buy only reluctantly, if at all.

I will give you a personal example to illustrate my point. I am a scenery addict. Put a scenery in front of me and I start to salivate. There is a company who makes a lot of photorealistic scenery. I own their product for every state in the entire USA. Recently they came out with a new version. I tried it and like it. However, this time they required a serial number to be entered for every state purchase, (after a 10 GB download) in some cases large states require multiple purchases and serial numbers. It is one thing to enter a serial number for an airplane. It is another to enter 50-60 serial numbers. That, frankly is very inconvenient. I informed them of this fact. They never answered me. (See ColoKent's point). So, I have not purchased anymore of their scenery.

Now, take ORBX. Some people don't like them because they feel ORBX is arrogant. However, ORBX makes it very convenient to purchase and receive their products. No looking for lost serial numbers. All you need to do is run Central 3 and it automatically finds and offers downloading of your purchases and updates. Convenient and easy to use. They are one, if not the largest FSX/PD3 add-on companies in the world. I also happen to own 80-90% of their offerings.

 

[ColoKent]

Everything we buy is based on one of these five reasons.

Okay...now you got me-- what are the other 4 reasons? This is interesting.

As for ORBX, I'm in the same boat as JMIG....I own a BUNCH of ORBX stuff on two computers (one running P3D 3.4, and the other P3D 4.0). And I agree that despite what some would call "personality quirks" on the staff, these boys CLEARLY understand how to run a business. You may disagree with their policies...but at least they have some.

Truth in advertising: I have a soft spot in my heart for ORBX, because I like their products, but also because I read with interest about a year and a half ago of John V's new "lappie", and how well it ran P3D. And being a "Road Warrior" who had to leave my hobby behind for months at a time, I went out and bought the identical model...and indeed it DOES handle P3D nicely on the road....And my shoulder is a LOT stronger from schlepping an 18-inch, 9.5 pound laptop around the country!

EDIT: Okay John...I got impatient and went to "Dr. Google" to find an answer to the 5 reasons people buy:
1. Necessity
2. Convenience
3. Identity
4. Obligation
5. Hope

Were those the 5 you were thinking of?

Kent

 

[jmig]

Okay...now you got me-- what are the other 4 reasons? This is interesting.

As for ORBX, I'm in the same boat as JMIG....I own a BUNCH of ORBX stuff on two computers (one running P3D 3.4, and the other P3D 4.0). And I agree that despite what some would call "personality quirks" on the staff, these boys CLEARLY understand how to run a business. You may disagree with their policies...but at least they have some.

Truth in advertising: I have a soft spot in my heart for ORBX, because I like their products, but also because I read with interest about a year and a half ago of John V's new "lappie", and how well it ran P3D. And being a "Road Warrior" who had to leave my hobby behind for months at a time, I went out and bought the identical model...and indeed it DOES handle P3D nicely on the road....And my shoulder is a LOT stronger from schlepping an 18-inch, 9.5 pound laptop around the country!

EDIT: Okay John...I got impatient and went to "Dr. Google" to find an answer to the 5 reasons people buy:
1. Necessity
2. Convenience
3. Identity
4. Obligation
5. Hope

Were those the 5 you were thinking of?

Kent

The five reasons I am talking about are deep seated psychological drives that we are often unaware of, but which drive us to decisions. They are as follows:

1. Profit (Greed) Self-explanatory
2. Fear Often of loss. The insurance industry has made untold billions using this motivation.
3. Convenience (Laziness) Think of buying milk or beer at your local "convenience" store for a $1.00 or more than what you can get it elsewhere.
4. Pride A Rolex or BMW anyone
5. Sex Think of how many fancy shinny new sports cars with that pretty young woman sitting in them have been sold after watching the ad on TV. The unspoken message is, By this car and the pretty girls will come.

Even so called low bid government contracts or engineered spec bids will come down to one of those reasons. A human makes the final decision. That human will operate with the above motivations. Good salesmen know these motivations and can use them to their advantage.

 

[ColoKent]

John...I like your list BETTER...especially that last item...although that's usually NOT a motivator for my flight sim purchases-- and NO, Heidi in the back seat of A2A's Piper Cub doesn't fall under reason #5, either (...plus my wife thinks I'm geeky enough as it is...)

 

[Bjoern]

I've turned down multiple offers to code for payware projects. Too little money to warrant the effort and, more importantly, too little enthusiasm for the subject aircraft and deadlines. Plus being the butt monkey when a user has yet again failed to read the manual and complains about alleged bugs or weird behavior. And of course the annoying (potential) customers that are constantly complaining about what's taking so long and why there aren't any updates. No, thanks. I'll rather slave away in the real world and do what I want in my spare time.

 

[wombat666]

The generic FS consumers (present company excepted of course) remind so much of my time in the model industry.
FYI it was a 'boutique' operation that we started after retiring from the Real World and did rather well.
However (there's always at least one however) working with suppliers in the UK, Italy, Switzerland and France and operating out of Australia meant that delays were often inevitable.
Our UK based resin caster was a perfectionist, so much so that he often rejected 50% of his production run...........admirable QC but frustrating when all the other components are complete.
That aside we did very well, but the most irritating part of the process was the 'Client'.
Typical comment after contacting a client (especially one who would hassle us on a weekly basis with the 'Is the Tipo 61 done yet' (for example) to let him know that yes indeed we have our first supply of whatever it was 'that he just had to have' would run along the lines of 'Is the 250TR done yet!' ............. eventually I took an executive decision and refused to announce new projects until they were 95% finished.
There lies a possible answer to the FS problem for Developers, simply do not say anything until the new project is well and truly on final approach.
I'd add that communication between Developers should be taken seriously, the plethora of duplicate subjects is just plain bloody stupid.
Must be time for my medication, as it is now 04:27 ADST.

 

[ColoKent]

There lies a possible answer to the FS problem for Developers, simply do not say anything until the new project is well and truly on final approach

That would certainly be the Apple approach...And it would keep the decks open for other developers to set out on their own without regard to unannounced delays and terminations. Unfortunately, it can half seem like a "punishment" from the developer to the customer base for raising the question of progress. I guess my view differs slightly from part of the quote above in that I don't see this as an "FS problem", but rather as a "business acumen problem (or, more accurately in this case, a "lack of business acumen" problem). The bottom line is that keeping your customers up to date and excited about what you are doing for them is a core business principle.

Just my .02 cents.

Kent

 

[jmig]

...

Just my .02 cents.

Kent

Is it still two cents? I thought inflation had raised it to two bits or $0.25 years ago.

 

[docjohnson]

Wow what do you know, I win a prize, thanks for that! And I'm so enlightened by the insight into what all of us payware developers do or don't do and our motivations as opposed to who develop freeware. I have always respected those who develop aircraft without charge. As I said I think its a miracle that people do. However, to besmirch folks who spend their free time and in a lot of cases, their own money developing payware products is a sad thing to see. To date, I have made zip, nada nothing, on months of work. Why? I love aviation, I enjoy working on a team, and then, of course, there is the finished product.

Until you go from the consumer to the producer those opinions on this thread are just that, opinion. Better yet, I suggest you show me instead of telling me; spend the effort to produce an aircraft. Until you have been in the shoes of a developer's and spent months of painstaking work just to be belittled by someone who thinks they know better how someone should behave, how they should produce their work, or run like their hobby like their business was run...As I said, it's sad. But you have the freedom of choice - that if you don't like the product or how a payware company is run - don't buy it! It's really that simple.