I for one would be interested to see a question asked at then next Q&A with regard to community mods, and whether Asobo really do embrace the modding community, and the method currently used as is currently laid out i.e. a self contained package with modified files, and not two pages of instructions on how to build the mod yourself, plugging in the various changes required to do the 3PD’s job for them, putting it unkindly.
1 Like
I think it’s obvious to everyone who isn’t Aerosoft that community modding is openly embraced and sharing a modified text file for non-commercial use is fine. It happens with Asobo’s own planes on this very forum! In fact, anyone considering the Twotter should check out the C208 mod thread.
A better question for Jorg and the team: how do you feel about a developer asserting copyright over a text file that is itself modified from Asobo’s work?
6 Likes
One thing that gave me a 
was Aerosoft’s own programmer, Hans Hartmann, stating that he had no issue with someone sharing a modified panel.cfg for the CRJ. This is the same in principle as modified .cfg files for flight dynamics or repaints, which always include an aircraft.cfg entry that is based on an Aerosoft original.
The only thing that comes to mind which gives AS any defense is my own speculation that perhaps their flight dynamics guy was unhappy and raised a big fuss about this internally. Even if true, it would not justify their external behavior as a publisher. For example, one of the mods over on their forum has been assailing Moach for days in an extremely unprofessional manner, while refusing to remove posts from a toxic user who is defending AS by snarking on all the detractors.
2 Likes
I noticed the same post and I would bet dollars to donuts that’s exactly what happened. No lawyer told them they had to enforce their copyright by threatening modders for editing a configuration file. The deflection from Mathjis is just classic negative flight sim boomer energy.
6 Likes
AS antics aside, I think I’ll hold off on the Twin Otter. I don’t use the default G1/3/5000 or Nxi: I use the GNS750. Had it since release and can’t go back at this point. That with Navigraph, Pilot2ATC, AIG and GA traffic mod, DOZENS of payware airports and about 200+ freeware airports…plus a bunch of payware and freeware planes (all higher fidelity except the EMB110)…I think I am good. I am not bragging but trying to justify not buying a low-fidelity aircraft. The Seneca…from Carenado…surprisingly…is good! It has been my go-to test aircraft for new scenery and landings. Even the engine out is simulated fairly well.
I still like AS and their products despite a few antics. Their CRJ is my favorite jet…
AS should just give in: they’re wrong and too slow to update this plane. The NextGen EMB was around 40 and its not remotely worth that price…
The Kodiak, with GNS, Navigraph etc…is the perfect STOL vehicle. No need for a twin at this point.
Thank you everyone for your wisdom!
1 Like
I have to say, this entire fiasco on AS’s behalf is a joke rife with astounding ignorance on their part. Tell you what, I’d be willing to write a Powershell script that would look at their original file, capture string entries, change them to what they need to be, delete their original file completely from hard disk (hash and all) and then output a brand new file, subsequently containing its own unique hash far and away from AS’s file. Want to take me to court on that AS? I’ll hammer you all day long on it and you’d be paying me for damages.
I’m an Infosec guy and the world of digital forensics where I live and play says if the hash don’t match, you’ll have to prove it is your work. When I demo the PS script doing its thing, it’ll be clear to the court it ain’t your work because the file was created from scratch after deleting your original. Dollars to donuts that’s how the courts and defense attorneys would see it. Just like if I buy a car and change the paint. Does the manufacturer have a right to seek damages for that if i share my leftover paint with friends, or sell the paint for that matter? AS’s assertion is absurd on its face IMO. I’m sick of corporations bullying people. The better half of me says I’d be willing to take the legal brunt to hammer these clowns. Just saying!
IMO, this product was released partially broken and unfinished, period! And they have the audacity to punish the community for it? Right on! Count me as another former AS customer. No more from me. There are much better devs out there that are willing to support the community.
EDIT: Just an idea. Suppose a modded CFG file is not uploaded and instead a PS script that people can download and run on their PC to write a new config file is? I would expect they have no resemblance of a claim at that point. Zero!
6 Likes
In fact, that’s what Aerosoft is suggesting as a permissible workaround in this really dumb thread.
1 Like
I tried to find which mod you mean but couldn’t find anything. Would you like to share what mod exactly that is, since it sounds very interesting!
I have AIG and used this mod here: How to get GA traffic when using AIG - Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020) - The AVSIM Community
And followed the directions very very closely and got it!
I am at KADS and watching GA traffic take off from this small airport while jets are flying around us over head.
Its a game changer.
No pun intended
1 Like
Always pretend you intend your puns. People might mistake you for being extra clever.
2 Likes
Well, if CCM wants to provide me with a copy of the modded strings, I can get to work on that…skippy flat. I’d even be willing to do one for Mugz’s CRJ mod that was denied. Just hit me up.
1 Like
That would be impossible for I am slightly stupid.
3 Likes
What is the GA traffic mod? Have you got a link please?
EDIT: ignore me. Should have read rest of thread first. I thought it was a stand alone mod, not something on top of AIG (I don’t use AIG)
It is not a dumb thread at all. I think AS is getting way too much negative attention here. MK even takes time to explain the issue. Not all developers are so open. They are not against the community AT ALL, and are very open to improvements suggested by simmers.
5 Likes
He doesn’t explain the issue. He tries to exert copyright over a text file that uses default Asobo code. And then he runs off and doesn’t answer any questions like: how come every other developer, including Asobo, encourages modders to tweak .cfg files?
5 Likes
He also doesn’t answer why liveries that include panel.cfg, model.cfg, and/or texture.cfg files have not been removed from .to under the same AS assertion. The optics in this regard tend to make the assertion appear as one of selective maliciousness and not true concern about copyright violations.
2 Likes
You are clever, you know how to use the diff command.
Yes, but forcing the user to edit all the changed lines in multiple files is not something that everyone can do, although the end result, if done correctly, is exactly the same.
1 Like
Go over to AvSim. Not only are developers arrogant so are forum members. At the end of the day this product is a game and many on sim forums seem to know all when in fact the vast majority haven’t flown real aircraft particularly commercial aircraft. Many on these forums show to have knowledge like they are aerospace engineers. I see so many “know it alls” I rarely post on any of these forums unless I’m troubleshooting something.
For the price point, this Aircraft is fine. If you want to hate on the developers do it with your wallet. There is plenty of worse stuff on the marketplace!
7 Likes
Any fool can copy and paste. I’ve only posted one mod on flightsim.to, the rest I post here as “search for this line, replace it with the one below” instructions. Aerosoft have said that this type of modding is entirely acceptable to them because there’s no need to share actual files. That’s their decision and they’re fully entitled to enforce it whether anyone else likes it or not.
1 Like
Then they can accept the repercussions as well.