I honestly will say I don’t believe there is any good idea in itself for this, but there is a minimum common sense applicable both sides, otherwise it won’t be long until the next DLC aircraft panel will be offering only one button to play a flatulence sound when pressed (one of the most successful iOS App Store app…)
Common sense tells me an aircraft DLC should be offering what you’d expect for an aircraft, which at a minimum is:
Realistic values displayed in the gauges.
Flight characteristic fairly representing the aircraft behavior in flight.
3D model and textures closely resembling the model.
Both of these cases in July are about DLC which are either not flying at all, or not having any proper instrumentation.
There must be many different and all equally good reasons aircraft DLC, which are not even fulfilling the basic premise of what an aircraft and its instrumentation are supposed to be representing and simulating, are found appealing enough nonetheless to be approved on the Market Place, but we’re not at a liberty to discuss these on this forum. One of these reasons at least though, is to generate DLC sales revenue for both sides: the vendor and the market place.
Yeah. What I meant by the Forza Horizon comment was that most Xbox will be wholly unprepared for 15$ digital items sold in an official store being complete rip offs. Just stating it’s ‘third party’ just doesn’t convey the concept that the product you buy just won’t work.
Hm I still think a customer needs to get some basic informations about a product before buying something
But still great that you got a refund! Next time always and only buy PMDG, Just Flight, Carenado and A2A Accusim. (And the older Captain Sim Planes which are not using 747 stock vanilla gauges.)
The Fenix Simulations Airbus is from a new development team but I am sure it will be absolute high end and study level.
From what a read a while ago, Asobo has strict rules on the quality of the aircraft that can be added to the game, so that seems to be a load of bollocks.
I wonder if the Xbox controllers on the Xbox are going to lose all the settings every time the Box is switched off?
I guess there is (gonna) be a market for garbage? There probably are a lot of people who are gonna fly on their Xbox from outside view below bridges and dodging buildings, not being bothered by the Frankensteined together cockpit, broken instruments etc.? This has to be reflected in the price of course as not to pay study-level price for an empty shell of an external model…
There is some sad irony behind all this: some company with a fruit in their logo actually does that, and there was a loud outcry: „Outrageous, big brother, golden cage, suppressing competition…!“
Now MS/Asobo does the complete opposite (they even allow 3rd party marketplaces!), and now there is a furious outcry: „No quality gate, no control, garbage products, betrayal… !“
Personally I am fine with the later (I also don‘t mind the former approach on mobile devices/consoles).
(Clarification: „the later“ is referring to „an open market“ - not the „outcry“ ;))
So now I am going to play the devil‘s advocate: the price tag of the A-10 alone told me that this is basically just a „movable 3D model“ where hopefully at least the basic instruments (speed, altitude, attitude) display reasonable values (having to accelerate to 300 knots in order to be able to take-off is a bummer, of course).
And - that‘s fine! We can still argue about the price tag, but there is probably a market of players that „mostly fly in 3rd person view“ anyway. And that needs to be respected (and served), too.
The only chance not to be touched by that Marketplace tragedy is not to bother and not to buy from the Marketplace at all. After that recent Warthog mishap I decided to totally ignore the Marketplace.
I feel this is different because this isn’t a third party website but an official store within a game, a game developed by Microsoft. That is going to come with some basic expectation.
The Marketplace is how Microsoft is surely planning to drive continued revenue for the game. However if a consumer buys a product, finds it doesn’t have a basic level of functionality and that there isn’t a comprehensive way to address their problem or even a clear warning on what they are getting, I personally don’t think they will do so again.
Of course they don’t have do anything but at least some people feel they should and they will lose at least some revenue because of this. You could say it’s meaninglessly small however as time goes on and the number of people playing inevitably reduces, if you’re in game store has an a bad reputation, it’s a much more serious problem.
For me, it’s not a case of they have to do this, it’s a case that they should want to do it.
I can’t see the marketplace properly until tomorrow, but on a video I saw, it was the first item in the marketplace, presumably due to alphabetical order. Am I right?
I can understand if a buyer would surmise that the first listed product was fit for purpose.
Yeah aye evilozzy66 gotta love our Australian consumer Law - at the end of the day we even got Fair trading if we need to put wind up companies butts it’s awesome had to go through the claim process a few times with eb games the idiots
I’m glad it worked out for you. Quality really varies with Flight Sim add ons. I personally have a three-review rule: I have to either watch or read three reviews from three sources before I’ll purchase an add-on.
