I would point out that one of those is minor, and one is a function of differences between PAL and NTSC (it runs at 60Hz rather than 50Hz). However you could basically fly the things. It’s also written in 6502 assembler which is way harder work than C or whatever this is in (and yes I do both, I’ve got some idea what I’m talking about).
I take the point on constructive criticism. So here it is.
Okay, here’s how I see it. You are at Point A. You can’t change that, you have to start from here. So how do you make this potentially awesome piece of software fly, because it isn’t, and pretending it’s just teething problems or trying to PR it away with “look at the superb graphics” won’t work.
Well, as far as is possible I would throw everything out except for CTD - I don’t care about problems in the graphics rendering that are minor - there isn’t a block of flats at EGSV (I live within walking distance) but I can live with that as long as its not in the middle of a runway. (And if it was, at a tiny backwater airport like EGSV it should be very low priority). Also, the Graphics are way better than the other flight sims standard graphics, and most of the add ons anyway.
The #1 problem is that there is not a single reliable IFR jet (IMO, I’m a VFR man myself which is much easier). So pick one. The A320 would be sensible as it seems to be the best. Focus all efforts on making that flyable. Get some help from the 32NX team who clearly have some idea if necessary. If you can get one plane working well enough so that people can fly from EHAM to EGKK with a pretty good chance of success then people will live with it. Even simplify it a bit. iNop is better than RandomOp.
Yes, they won’t be 100% happy about only being able to fly one airliner, especially if they’ve paid for others, but they’ll live with it, they can fly from A to B on VATSIM or whatever.
Likewise make sure on of the turboprob types - it doesn’t really matter which - works as well. Make it clear which one. I think the Cessna 152 is reasonably stable as it has almost no electronics. The VOR can go on the backburner for a while.
Only do things like the UK update if the people cannot contribute to the central problems. ; developing, testing. I live in the UK, and I can manage. They can write some proper instructions ; borrow from FSX if necessary. Or just buy SoFly’s out which should have been there in the first place.
#2 is the “bug fixing”. Have a proper larger beta testing group. This shouldn’t be hard ; simply skip one update and put a checkbox in the setup “are you on the beta ?” and have two sets of module lists. People on the beta take the risk, they can’t complain if something breaks. That’s what betas do. They do so knowing they get the latest and greatest,and can contribute but also that it may bring problems.
The scariest thing on my screen now is “Reduced yaw oscillation by further reducing yaw gain”. Why ? Because it sounds like you are addressing the symptoms not figuring out why it’s oscillating. Flattening a yaw multiplier isn’t a fix.