Gents,
Wow. First, well done to MILVIZ for having the fortitude and dedication to bring this to our community; you certainly had some challenges. I'm a 24 year active duty Navy Captain, and I've served with three of the four DoD services (missing the Army) on exchange tours and what not. Before someone nails me on the Coast Guard, they're DoT. Not much deployed time (just two 8 month deployments), so I won't make Flag. I've met, worked for, and served with pilots of both DoN and USAF flavor. Just met a Marine LtCol the other day who flies F-18s and had an exchange tour in F-15Cs awhile back. We had a really interesting conversation about flying both aircraft types. I've served in a direct Presidential support billet across two Administrations, so I know that there is a time when we need to take the mission very seriously (but not necessarily ourselves). I am not a pilot. I did want to offer some thoughts for whatever they're worth.
As a potential customer, I'm awaiting news of the patch and resolution of the installer issues - thanks for extending the price break. I'm not particularly worried about getting to 100% realism, but I have watched with first interest, and then dismay, as this thread (which should be about a triumph) has gotten wrapped up in the details of this F-15E simulator. I'm trying not to sound pedantic, but I ask my esteemed forum colleagues to consider a few questions (and I say this having always encourged payware constructive criticism - heck, we're paying for it, right?). Are we applying a reasonable metric for even payware. Is 100% accuracy and realism achievable? Is 100% accuracy and realism desired by most of our paying target audience? Is 100% accuracy supported by the business case analysis when you decide about the potential market? I would submit that the answer to all of these questions is "no".
Instead, if the expectation for most everyone was to design and operate these sims at the far end of the bell curve, where exponential increases in time and resources are required to get ever decreasing incremental product improvements, we would not have payware developers that could stay in business, let alone freeware developers. They'd all be bankrupt, or the start-up costs would be prohibitive. Is 90% or even 95% realism reasonable? Perhaps, if we could even measure it.
What would your average F-15E Eagle pilot say (if any of them can be considered "average") if we asked him about this simulator. My guess is that it would be something like (he say it with a slight smile); "Not bad guys. You got a few things wrong, but I'm pretty impressed." My thoughts exactly.
Tonight, I'm going to go kill some alien baddies in Crysis 2. Heck, that's certainly not realistic, but it is fun. Maybe there's something to be said for that as well...cheers, MILVIZ and congratulations on your product.
Regards,
LT1
Wow. First, well done to MILVIZ for having the fortitude and dedication to bring this to our community; you certainly had some challenges. I'm a 24 year active duty Navy Captain, and I've served with three of the four DoD services (missing the Army) on exchange tours and what not. Before someone nails me on the Coast Guard, they're DoT. Not much deployed time (just two 8 month deployments), so I won't make Flag. I've met, worked for, and served with pilots of both DoN and USAF flavor. Just met a Marine LtCol the other day who flies F-18s and had an exchange tour in F-15Cs awhile back. We had a really interesting conversation about flying both aircraft types. I've served in a direct Presidential support billet across two Administrations, so I know that there is a time when we need to take the mission very seriously (but not necessarily ourselves). I am not a pilot. I did want to offer some thoughts for whatever they're worth.
As a potential customer, I'm awaiting news of the patch and resolution of the installer issues - thanks for extending the price break. I'm not particularly worried about getting to 100% realism, but I have watched with first interest, and then dismay, as this thread (which should be about a triumph) has gotten wrapped up in the details of this F-15E simulator. I'm trying not to sound pedantic, but I ask my esteemed forum colleagues to consider a few questions (and I say this having always encourged payware constructive criticism - heck, we're paying for it, right?). Are we applying a reasonable metric for even payware. Is 100% accuracy and realism achievable? Is 100% accuracy and realism desired by most of our paying target audience? Is 100% accuracy supported by the business case analysis when you decide about the potential market? I would submit that the answer to all of these questions is "no".
Instead, if the expectation for most everyone was to design and operate these sims at the far end of the bell curve, where exponential increases in time and resources are required to get ever decreasing incremental product improvements, we would not have payware developers that could stay in business, let alone freeware developers. They'd all be bankrupt, or the start-up costs would be prohibitive. Is 90% or even 95% realism reasonable? Perhaps, if we could even measure it.
What would your average F-15E Eagle pilot say (if any of them can be considered "average") if we asked him about this simulator. My guess is that it would be something like (he say it with a slight smile); "Not bad guys. You got a few things wrong, but I'm pretty impressed." My thoughts exactly.
Tonight, I'm going to go kill some alien baddies in Crysis 2. Heck, that's certainly not realistic, but it is fun. Maybe there's something to be said for that as well...cheers, MILVIZ and congratulations on your product.
Regards,
LT1
