A guide to constructive critisism.

There’s no such thing as being qualified or un-qualified to “pick apart” an FS model. It doesn’t work that way. Either the “picker-aparter” is correct, or isn’t correct. The very idea that this or that person is “unqualified” (based on what?) to make a comment about WIP is part of the problem around here. We seem to have trouble here isolating the commenter from the comment. If the commenter is “in” then it’s ok. I’ve seen a payware model released a few years ago that was shaped very wrong in a very vital part of the airplane. Somebody pointed it out, and he was raked over the coals for it here. He was correct, but what did that matter? He wasn’t even rude about it. He just wasn’t “qualified”, I suppose. He was even told he was wrong. Yes, the model was fixed.
 
Simulation is at its heart approximation. The degree of fidelity depends on many, many factors and as much as sims are built on science and engineering principles, I believe FS has a good bit of of art in it. And where there's art there is room for interpretation and all that goes along with that. Two different artists painting or sculpting a subject will bring out different aspects of that subject and will end up with different works of art.

When offering critique it's good to consider the designer's intentions, which may or may not be evident in a few screen shots. Most may assume a designer is going for exactness and accuracy with respect to the subject being modeled, where the designer may actually be deliberately taking artisitc license for whatever reason. Sort of like comparing a Norman Rockwell with a Monet or Picasso.

just my two yen

- dcc




- dcc
 
dcc said:
Simulation is at its heart approximation. The degree of fidelity depends on many, many factors and as much as sims are built on science and engineering principles.....
Click to expand...
Very well said.


dcc said:
...........where the designer may actually be deliberately taking artisitc license for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

Sir, please show me a payware developer that advertises their works as produced with artistic license. You were right about a simulation being an approximation, but by definition a simulation seeks to make things as real as possible.
 
tigisfat said:
Very well said.




Sir, please show me a payware developer that advertises their works as produced with artistic license. You were right about a simulation being an approximation, but by definition a simulation seeks to make things as real as possible.
Click to expand...



didn't realize this discussion was limited to payware companies...

- dcc
 
dcc said:
didn't realize this discussion was limited to payware companies...

- dcc
Click to expand...

Touche. Now I must cover my tracks:
Youwillforget.gif
 
I don't get it if I was working towards a goal I would wan't you to help me make my project better by telling me so! Plus you spell criticism with a C not an S lol!
Another thing is when we buy aircraft or download them its up 2 us what we do with them I don't mean sharing them or anything like that, but if we need to modify an aircraft because it doesn't work, meet our expectations or just needs an fsx revamp then why shouldn't we be able to change it?
 
peter12213 said:
but if we need to modify an aircraft because it doesn't work, meet our expectations or just needs an fsx revamp then why shouldn't we be able to change it?
Click to expand...


Come again?

I don't think anybody said that, did they? Most big-time EULAs would prevent you from modifications, but I don't think any MSFS dev cares about your modifications. Most would be interested to find out that someone enjoyed their product more by applying 'X' homemade mod. You just can't distribute.
 
Thats what I meant what you said, I didn't mean changing anybodies work for distribution just for personal use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top