Press Orders (don't be an idiot)

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Gents this Chrismas we had a new record in incorrect press orders.

As you might know you we have a special payment option for press (and other people who should not need to pay, beta testers etc). In fact this option circumvents the whole payment section and puts the order in a pending state. We check it and release it when all is okay.

Unfortunately there are a lot of people who see the option and decide to take a shot and use that payment option. Now I can assume that some people made a mistake but if you try to buy something and you don't see any payment option I would think you would ask the seller what's happened, right? But this Christmas 29 people used the Press payment option, none of them were on our press list, none of them offered any explanation in the comments section and none asked for an explanation why the order was not processed normally. So I deleted all these orders, send all of them a nice email explaining why we believe it is a honest mistake and ask them to do a new correct order. Yet in my mind I can't help to think "loser" with any of these orders. Do they really think we release them without checking? We do keep these name on record cause often we find other irregularities linked to those email addresses.

But please, don't be one of the losers who thinks that they might as well try to get a free copy this way. It's just not going to happen.

[mvalotta 2]

I was one of those "idiots" Mathjis, and I did it twice, but to be honest I didn´t realize that there was a press review option.

I just did the wrong click trying to do everything quickly having the many new items and the AES birthday/christmas discount plus the offer to previous FS9 orders (I am renewing all the stuff right now)

I simply didn´t care cause all the regular payment options can be possible to me (CC, Debit, Paypal, etc.)

After the second mistake I realized that and warned inmediatly your customer service to cancel it, repeating the purchase.

Cant believe that many people trrid to use this option on purpose as you think...at least the regular customers, but who knows...

With regards

Mario the idiot.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I was one of those "idiots" Mathjis, and I did it twice, but to be honest I didn´t realize that there was a press review option.

I just did the wrong click trying to do everything quickly having the many new items and the AES birthday/christmas discount plus the offer to previous FS9 orders (I am renewing all the stuff right now)

I simply didn´t care cause all the regular payment options can be possible to me (CC, Debit, Paypal, etc.)

After the second mistake I realized that and warned inmediatly your customer service to cancel it, repeating the purchase.

Cant believe that many people trrid to use this option on purpose as you think...at least the regular customers, but who knows...

With regards

Mario the idiot.

Don't worry YOU are not on my idiot list.

[Rafal Haczek 1612]

my idiot list.

I just love it!

Best regards,

Rafal

[Guest Dag]

I just love it!

Best regards,

Rafal

I think I'm on it though!! Hopefully...... :shock: Or was it the press-review list...... :?: :roll:

Thanks for the previous year, may DX10 and NVIDIA drivers get better...

[Snave 466]

It never ceases to amaze me that people these days consider themselves to be `journalists` because they have a website. Personally, I like the definition supplied by my old tutor, who derided three years of study and a professional qualification to describe true journalism thusly:

You should make the time to research

You must have the words to describe

You need to have the means to distribute

and, most importantly

You ought to have something to say that others want to hear:

...even if only to disagree!

Sees to me too many `journalists` fail on at least half those criterion... I see these `wannabes` at events often. Strangley, they never seem to be in conversation with the recognised `names` of the profession or the industry. Only each other.

Perhaps this suggests they are falling short on all counts..?

[virtuali 37]

It never ceases to amaze me that people these days consider themselves to be `journalists` because they have a website.

I guess that, especially in flight sim world, we probably have now more "journalists" than users...

[Snave 466]

Or `losers`, as is the current expression for them...

So given the choice, which would you rather be?

A user... or a loser? :wink:

Any `journalist` who doesn't make a living out of their writing, or at least a financial return is also a loser, and not a journalist. So I guess that makes all the pathetic product scroungers `losers` by implication?

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Or `losers`, as is the current expression for them...

So given the choice, which would you rather be?

A user... or a loser? :wink:

Any `journalist` who doesn't make a living out of their writing, or at least a financial return is also a loser, and not a journalist. So I guess that makes all the pathetic product scroungers `losers` by implication?

Well that would mean there would be hardly any online reviews as almost all of them are written by people who get a free copy from me, but are not professional writers. For us Press orders (or rather products for free) are send out to whom we feel deserves it for some reason or to whom we feel it is commercially interesting for us to send one.

But the 20 odd people who done press orders in the last 48 hours who we don't know, well a good deal of them are indeed losers.

[signmanbob 18]

The real shame of it is that without financially supporting the great add-on developers like Aerosoft, they will go on to other ventures and sim enthusiast will loose the add-on software that really make the simulation experience so exciting and addictive.

I know that there is freeware out there that may be worth while, but I have found that nothing compares to the detail and functionality that goes into pay-ware add-ons. They work and they have good support.

Anyone that pirates sim software or tries to sneak it out the back door is hurting everyone who loves flight simulation because they discourage developers and drive up the price of add-ons.

[Rafal Haczek 1612]

nothing compares to the detail and functionality that goes into pay-ware add-ons.

Well, I disagree a bit.

I pay a lot of money for payware addons every year, including lots of credit packs for AES. And I use mostly paid aircraft and fly to paid airports.

But there are addons, especially airports that are free in spite of being on payware quality levels. I use some of these in my FS world.

What's more, I know (but will not name) cases where developers want payment for total rubbish.

But true that best paid aerodromes and planes deserve their prices.

Knowing what you mean, hewever, I generally agree with the rest of your words. :wink:

Best regards,

Rafal

[Snave 466]

Well, I disagree a bit.

I pay a lot of money for payware addons every year, including lots of credit packs for AES. And I use mostly paid aircraft and fly to paid airports.

But there are addons, especially airports that are free in spite of being on payware quality levels. I use some of these in my FS world.

What's more, I know (but will not name) cases where developers want payment for total rubbish.

But true that best paid aerodromes and planes deserve their prices.

Knowing what you mean, hewever, I generally agree with the rest of your words. :wink:

Best regards,

Rafal

And that's the difference between you and a journalist: A journalist would have no qualms about naming those shoddy developers, so that others might be warned, or at least debate begun...

Captain Sim have an abysmal record on delivering what they promise, yet people still throw money at them, based on what they say is coming even though it rarely, if ever, does. They have even shown that it is possible to sell (at an excessive price!) a substandard beta that will most likely NEVER be finished.

Block x..? B.ll.ckx, more like... :wink:

Truly the journalists role should be to help consumers wise-up, but as long as their are those who think that they are journalists because they claim they are, yet they have nothing to inform or impart, then it really is an indictment of the level of intelligence of such people.

Meanwhile, on the other side the fact that the rest of us take at face value the words of some who have `interesting` links with certain developers without question or disagreement, suggests that the rest of us could do with wising-up as well! :roll:

Some of these `journalists` are NOT your friends. :wink:

[signmanbob 18]

The main thing that I am saying is that there is plenty of acceptable free products available for those looking for that, but everyone who loves the enhanced experience that great add-ons gives needs to encourage future development by discouraging pirating at any level. Trying to get a product free without the developers permission is just another form of pirating and if done intentionally, not any different than shoplifting. This discourages future development and increases costs for everyone.

I think Cpt Sim takes a different approach to releasing products from most. They more or less release what they have available with the promise that more will come. They seem to have the eventual goal of having a very complex airline simulation that you will be able "build" yourself by purchasing blocks.

Although this may work for some, I'm sure that this method of releasing their product is not favorable to everyone because until you purchase the product, it is difficult to know what is going to be inoperative. That can get disappointing if you were expecting something to work, but it is coming in another "block".

I have there products, but I have not had the time to really look at them closely, although what I have seen doesn't look bad, most of what is functional falls under the classification of eye candy. If they can complete the project with this next block, they may have a pretty good product.

Other developers don't release anything until it is all complete, like the new Airbus 320s that are in the works. It may be another year before they are released, but I'm sure that they will be stunning models.

[ANORAKX159 0]

Come on Mathjis "Yet in my mind I can't help to think "loser" with any of these orders." is a bit harsh ........I like Mario was one of those who clicked on the wrong box in haste trying to make a purchase before being distracted by the festivities. I too immediately followed with an e mail to support to cancel it. The Press option does blend in with the other payment options so you should highlight it a bit better to prevent it happening in the future. I have spent quite a bit on Aerosoft products over the past 12 months, and maybe so has Mario so to be classed as losers when we are part of your customer base who are prepared to pay for the products (which I must say are excellent, especially with AES functionality) is a bit near the mark. Hopefully you will agree that it was a comment maybe lost in translation and you should reword it???

[signmanbob 18]

I believe he is talking about some folks who are doing it intentionally to try to get the product for free.

He said he didn't mean those who have mistakenly selected the wrong button when purchasing.

Unfortunately what you did by accident is also commonly being done intentionally.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Come on Mathjis "Yet in my mind I can't help to think "loser" with any of these orders." is a bit harsh ........I like Mario was one of those who clicked on the wrong box in haste trying to make a purchase before being distracted by the festivities. I too immediately followed with an e mail to support to cancel it. The Press option does blend in with the other payment options so you should highlight it a bit better to prevent it happening in the future. I have spent quite a bit on Aerosoft products over the past 12 months, and maybe so has Mario so to be classed as losers when we are part of your customer base who are prepared to pay for the products (which I must say are excellent, especially with AES functionality) is a bit near the mark. Hopefully you will agree that it was a comment maybe lost in translation and you should reword it???

Okay, the "any of these orders" was incorrectly stated. But fact is press orders are going down with any comment that's posted here, lol. And I no get nice folks in email who told me they made the mistake. So all in all, success!

[Mithrin 0]

I guess this whole matter just shows that humans are opportunists! *chuckles*

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Come on Mathjis "Yet in my mind I can't help to think "loser" with any of these orders." is a bit harsh ........I like Mario was one of those who clicked on the wrong box in haste trying to make a purchase before being distracted by the festivities.

Now that could be put down to, to much Christmas cheer and blurred vision

[Kevin Glover 7]

woops... I should have read this earlier Mathijs

Kevin G.

[Flexman 0]

I realise this topic is around 6 months old but I feel I should counter some of the commentary on journalism made here.

I've had the pleasure to work in the game industry early on when it was less self-obsessed and an enjoyable occupation, working for Microprose UK in the early nineties, freelance 'journalism' (paid and published) and outsource development / writing for other game studios.

Now more than at any other time, the gaming press is under pressure, especially among specialist publications where personal relations are important. Advertising revenues and access play prominent factors in coverage. Other journalists I've known have varying experiences but I know from personal (and painful) experience the pressures that content publishers place upon editors. Doors have been closing on the independent press for a decade, a situation which has served to strengthen the position of publishers. Understandable after a combined explosion of web content, blogging and citizen journalism, it's assumed that unfavorable reviews can damage sale revenues (and there's a lot been written by analysts on this). As a 'punter' this doesn't serve me.

But it does go on, and I cite a recent example although I will not mention names, it relates to a very popular figure in the UK simulator community who's own light aircraft was part of a package published by a leading FS add-on company (NOT aerosoft). He was denied a review copy, in his view because of his unfavorable opinion. Even though the issues were resolved after the fact via product updates are we really served by this kind of thing?

At least with the independent, you know that what you read is what you get. Even if the quality leaves a lot to be desired. Heck a lot of noise is just that, noise.

Editors I've known will do the right thing, but they have to walk a line, they don't want to give their competitors "exclusives" (often pre-arranged with AAA titles) so will try to keep the relationship sweet. Keep that in mind when you're reading "professional" journalism. It's hard to look the other way when you're next pay-cheque depends on it. That's human nature too.

Richard "Flexman" Hawley

/You have control

[newmanix 61]

I've bought hundreds worth of stuff from Aerosoft and I never so much as once made that mistake. Paying attention is the most important (fun) aspect of flying in FS. Shouldn't paying attention it be important when you are spending your money? And for those who did it on purpose, those people ARE loosers. Just pay up! Oh, this topic is old.... Oops... Didn't pay attention... LOL

$00.02

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I realise this topic is around 6 months old but I feel I should counter some of the commentary on journalism made here.

I've had the pleasure to work in the game industry early on when it was less self-obsessed and an enjoyable occupation, working for Microprose UK in the early nineties, freelance 'journalism' (paid and published) and outsource development / writing for other game studios.

Now more than at any other time, the gaming press is under pressure, especially among specialist publications where personal relations are important. Advertising revenues and access play prominent factors in coverage. Other journalists I've known have varying experiences but I know from personal (and painful) experience the pressures that content publishers place upon editors. Doors have been closing on the independent press for a decade, a situation which has served to strengthen the position of publishers. Understandable after a combined explosion of web content, blogging and citizen journalism, it's assumed that unfavorable reviews can damage sale revenues (and there's a lot been written by analysts on this). As a 'punter' this doesn't serve me.

But it does go on, and I cite a recent example although I will not mention names, it relates to a very popular figure in the UK simulator community who's own light aircraft was part of a package published by a leading FS add-on company (NOT aerosoft). He was denied a review copy, in his view because of his unfavorable opinion. Even though the issues were resolved after the fact via product updates are we really served by this kind of thing?

At least with the independent, you know that what you read is what you get. Even if the quality leaves a lot to be desired. Heck a lot of noise is just that, noise.

Editors I've known will do the right thing, but they have to walk a line, they don't want to give their competitors "exclusives" (often pre-arranged with AAA titles) so will try to keep the relationship sweet. Keep that in mind when you're reading "professional" journalism. It's hard to look the other way when you're next pay-cheque depends on it. That's human nature too.

Richard "Flexman" Hawley

/You have control

mmmpfff... that's one good post, Richard.

I am one of the people who control who gets a free copy and who not. Now I think I can honestly say we are very open and honest about reviews. That's not hard as almost all the reviews we get are positive, it's a lot harder if your company is not aiming for being the best. I think we do okay BECAUSE we are open and honest. You'll never see a text from me claiming something is totally realistic or the best there is (unless I at least put some evidence on the table).

But if I read a review that is negative and has images included that show the product with almost the opposite settings as we advice (for the love of god, I could not make images of that product look worse on my netbook) and having comments that show the writer got personal issue with the developer, I draw the line. The same product is one of our best selling. lowest support products. It got good to great reviews on every other site or magazine. That reviewer (and the editor that did not see the issue) can got to hell. That review costs us a lot of money. Write a negative review and show me what's wrong and I'll work hard to get it corrected. I can proof we done that many times. We copy reviews to our review forum and to the product pages. See if you find a review that's not there and see why it is not there. Then see if we are wrong not to post it.

In the end, there is not one single magazine or site I trust 101% in reviews, except one. http://mutleyshangar.com/index.htm. I never seen any review there I could not agree with. I seen many I did like 100%, but I seen not one that I could not agree with. But 80% of reviews written are solid and it is does not require rocket science to find the ones that are not.

[darem 106]

I once ran a website for computer roleplaying games. It started out as a tiny geocities homepage and ended as the largest independent site for the genre worldwide. In the final years of the site, we didn't ask for review copies, we were asked if we would like to review the games. We have been invited to press conferences across the atlantic and flew there for just 12 hours. Our reviews have been printed on the boxes of megasellers like Morrowind (Elder scroll series) and cited in advertisements in the major gaming magazines around the globe.

What I always found (with one single exception): if you treat publishers fair, they respect you, and your audience respects you for your fairness. They accept negative reviews if they are based on facts and not on taste. And that even holds true for those responsible for the advertising budgets. They love sites where they find quality instead of feetlicking in reviews - because they know they will find an audience there that is an opinion leader in their target market. The only exception from that rule was one european company that withdrew all advertising on our site after we did a review of a badly flawed product that was released before it even reached beta status. We didn't miss them.

The funny thing is: when you look at reviews in the flightsim genre, I personally find the tendency that the larger the site is, the less substantial the review gets. I am not talking about length of the review, but about quality. Worst example is AVSIM - the harshest critizism they allow themselves is "might not be for everyone" - if you read this there, you can be sure the addon is utter rubbish. Flightsim.com reviews aren't any better, alas. Mutley's hangar is - there I agree with Mathjis - the best by far. The news sites associated with Simmarket have quality reviews for the most part, the only exception is when you can feel there is some personal tension between the reviewer and the developer (and one CAN feel that *g*).

What I generally trust before buying an addon is user comments in online stores and infobits on forums. Reviews have lost their importance over the last few years, and this is a tendency I am happy with. Top down communication is coming to an end, and if you know where to search, you will be informed pretty well or even better as with reviews...

[mutley 7]

Hi there,

First off, I would like to thank Mathijs for that vote of confidence in our reviews, it really means a lot to me and our team of reviewers.

I have to say, my first request for a review copy from Aerosoft was politely turned down and understandable really if you were to look at my site in 2005!

At Mutley's, we have no commercial allegiances or pressures to sing from the same hymn book as the developer or publishers. We are an ad-free, membership free community, funded by, well, me! and any donations we receive via the site.

As for quality and content of reviews,I have read reviews on some sites (f*i*h*s*m.c*m) where the reviewer has copied and pasted paragraphs from previous reviews into his latest article, how can he expect you to respect that review? It must be out of laziness, deadline or reward? The big review sites and magazines are swimming in software titles sent in by some publishers ready to reviewed by the first taker as soon as possible but must be before the next publication deadline! That makes me think, write what the developer wants to hear and publish?! On the flip side, a small site like us allocate reviews to reviewers by reviewer request or by asking a certain reviewer subject to their main area of interest to run the product through its paces. Once a title is established, we humbly request the product with this specific review in mind. I think this is where we are out-gunning the commercial sites.

As I have built up more contacts and insight into the review business, I know there are deals being done (Present site excluded) so don't always believe what you read in the magazines as the review could be, well, tolerant of a few reportable glitches, I have witnessed the "old boy network" in action.

We aim to be fair in our criticism as well as our praises. We always give the developer the opportunity to preview our reviews and respond to any unfounded, unfair or lack of experience criticism from our reviewers. That's not not to say that we we will change our review if the evidence proved otherwise and we have, in the case of one publisher, removed a review on their request. (pdf copy available! )

My guidelines to my reviewers are, go away, read the manual and enjoy the product. No deadlines, no guidance, if you are intelligent and capable of stringing together a sentence in English you are capable to produce a subjective review!

The results you see are on our site, good and honest flight sim user reviews.

Final advert if thats ok? http://mutleyshangar.com/reviews.htm

Thanks

Joe (Mutley) Lawford

Prop. Mutleyshangar.com