If I remember correctly, the 787 was marketed to be more-functional than it proved to be. Lots of INOP buttons, lots of bugs that took months to resolve. Not what I expect from a premium aircraft. ESPECIALLY when it’s locked so we can only make minimal, superficial improvements. Whatever developer got the contract to make that bird should be grounded, permanently.
Hypothetical: Money was tight, so I bought the standard package, but I’d sure love to have that Zlin Shock Ultra.
Real (to me): I spent the extra to get the Deluxe so that I could have the steam 172, but that hand-crafted KSFO sure would be nice!
With a price difference of US $30.00 per upgrade point, that’s only $3.00 each for the individual upgrade planes and airports per bundle. Individual components could be added to the Marketplace for around US $7.50 each, which would be entirely reasonable.
Its mental pricing! ill stick with what I have then hah! I only wanted the 787 don’t care about the rest! Wish they had replay and allowed you to change the view inside of the cabin.
Cheers,
Chris
I won’t buy this game again, however, I’d love to be able to upgrade and have the 787.
@Tistopher , @BScout9956 , I moved your post to a Wishlist topic that is probably what you’re looking for: Buying individual planes instead of doing a full upgrade. (That other topic that you were in is going to be merged into another larger topic, too, so your posts would have moved one way or the other.) You may want to vote for this topic.
1 Like
The 787 trust me is a mess and still is. Its the only aircraft in the PM Deluxe I do not fly.
I have the deluxe addition ,but would like just to buy, separately the aircraft in the premium as I do not want to pay the same price I paid for the deluxe version, for a upgrade. Thanks in Advance.
Not part of their business model as designed. If they were even to do it, I would expect them to increase the individual plane price. For instance, just an example of course, if an 8 plane bundle was $80 (basically $10 per plane) I would offer individual planes at $15 or $20. It’s bundling, and it’s the same business concept as cable TV.
2 Likes
Just wait for a third party developer to make a payware version of it. It will most likely be less than 80.-
1 Like
Because, unfortunately for you, that is not their business model. I very much doubt that they will unbundle individual aircraft. So if you want one particular aircraft you either have to buy the Deluxe bundle OR wait for a third party developer (freeware or payware) to develop that aircraft.
Selling individual items outside of a bundle is very much a normal practice. You see commercials all the time for things like “Get phone, internet, and television for (some cheap price) when bundled!” But if you only need one or two services, they’ll still take your money, but charge a bit more for the individual services. It actually introduces the potential to make more money than selling only the bundles. If you sell a bundle, you might put a dollar in the bank. But if you sell five individual pieces at only 25¢, then you get to put $1.25 in the bank and come out ahead.
1 Like
As title; make the Boeing 787-10 for separate purchase?
My advice is don’t buy the 787. It’s not even an alpha, nothing works in it…
Don’t forget that “default aircraft” are by definition, “default”. These aircraft have NEVER been better or more complete than payware aircraft. NEVER.
The funniest thing I see in the whole business concept is the pricing model that segregates the “normal” Skyhawk into a premium category. Like many GA lovers, I learned on a Skyhawk, and the A2A version of the 182RG was my payware go to in former versions. With this version, you just knew that after a while the payware community would provide.
And the payware aircraft become the only aircraft for me, because they most remind me of my real flying.
The flaws in the multiple tiered pricing model that segregates the normal Skyhawk into a premium category are:
- They must assume that GA pilots enjoy lingering in the premium airports. Hardly real, as we GA folks don’t need long runways, and don’t want to pay the fees associated with the big airports. So, I never use big airports.
- They must assume that GA pilots don’t care about loss of realism involved in flying default aircraft. Not true for anyone I know that loves GA flying.
In the first case, its the folks that simulate big iron that want the classy big airports with procedures, gates, etc. But if tha’s the market, why include the normal skyhawk? Big iron guys won’t want that one. The second concern seems borne out of lack of in depth knowledge of the history of simming and the skills of third party designers.
Truth is, I spent years as a scenery designer for 2 reasons. First, the default scenery was plain and generic (no longer true in this version). Second, since I was able to make some really nice scenery, but designing the world was too daunting, I made airports so that the vfr reporting points were visible, and something in the experience looked real. Also, no longer needed.
What I’ve learned in the last 6 months, having purchased the least expensive version of msfs, and being relegated to the C152, was that the scenery now allows for pilotage as a valid navigation method, and the scenery and weather engine are strikingly beautiful. The airports aren’t anymore the only beautiful thing. I don’t spend a great deal of time at any airport in real life, and I don’t feel a need to do so in the sim. So, I have less interest in the whole fancy airport thing.
Which leaves me wishing ONLY for the normal skyhawk, but I knew…I really knew, that spending less and being patient would pay off, and it did. Now, with the PA128 Arrow III from Just Flight, I have all I could ever want (at least to date). I got the parts of the sim that really matter to a GA pilot for the lowest cost, and the expensive payware aircraft is the one I would fly no matter what else I’d put money toward.
So for about the same money as GA folks spent to fly the normal skyhawk, I’m flying the most amazing payware aircraft available to date for this sim.
There is science behind establishing a good multiple tiered pricing model, and the wise marketing group assures the tiers make sense for both the business and the customers, and there MUST be a way to avoid customers making an end run, through a secondary market for the missing items, as in this case. The inclusion of the most common and prolific GA aircraft in the world configured as most GA pilots expect has no place in the high price tier. It can’t be a huge motivator for anyone who has flown payware aircraft before, and found their default planes gathering dust. Its just too certain that a “better than” will come along.
1 Like
I probably would have bought the base package if the only upgrade that interested me was the 172 steamer. But there were more items that I wanted, namely the Baron and O’Hare. The Baron was initially a disappointment, but now that the automix issue is straightened, I’ll be trying to get in some hours there. Same goes for Chicago now that Asobo says they’ve optimized frames at large airports. I haven’t checked back there yet, but I have high hopes. I also considered getting the Premium pack, but the only thing that interested me there was KSFO. So I paid $10 each for the three parts of the first upgrade level that I wanted, but wasn’t willing to pay $30 for just one airport. If MS/Asobo were to offer the individual components, I’d gladly pay around $8-10 for that one field.
I agree. Please Microsoft sell individual planes. I would buy the cirrus 22 for $15 usd if it was available.
(Taking advantage of the “BUMP” )
The Biggest “Thank You” to flight simmers from Microsoft, would be to finally UPDATE the Default & Premium/Deluxe aircraft, from their initial lacking & buggy release.
Then maybe by the end of 2022, update the simplistic Reno Planes.
Another option might be to take on another Sub-Contractor (like WT), to fix the current Asobo Planes, just as WT is fixing the current GPS systems, leaving Asobo to continue working on the Base Sim.
1 Like
i will also buy - but for now, any third party developer has created a decent steam gauge 172 ?