• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Anyone seen this? Bf-109E-4

I'd wish I had the time. Pretty busy at work and I'm on standby this week.

I'd love to hear your opinion though!!

Priller
 
Looks a bit low-poly (could be wrong - just going by the screenshots) and is listed as WIP, but I think this one is still worth a sticky due to special interest.
 
This is going to be controversial, but judging off screens and comments (downloading the plane now) from the author on flightsim.to, this is another product of what I would call an importer-developer. To quote the author:

I don't build these models. I purchase these models at the lowest price I can get. Then make it fly.

Seeing a lot more of this lately in the MSFS world. While I'm aware that some of our biggest payware names buy 3d models from other third-parties as a starting point, I'm seeing a trend where we have new individuals doing the above - buying the model, doing a basic convert to make it appear in game, and then moving on (or providing minimal support), all without research or expertise on the subject matter, without a significant concern for accuracy, and without the skills to accommodate any needed (per perceived to be needed) updates.

While I applaud the author for perhaps introducing more people to these warbirds, it appears from the comments on this and their other uploads that they can convert existing models, resize model elements, and experiment with configuration files, but they can't actually model themselves. I'm hoping this venture is a gateway to learning and doing so, or joining a team to leverage other's expertise, but I also note that someone asked if the author is introducing more variants of the 109 and the author indicated that they were unfamiliar with other variants, and seemingly too busy with multiple other projects "on the go". They are also somewhat dismissive of bug reports on other uploads (a mix of acknowledgement and semi-commitment to learn and work on it in some comments, or dismissal entirely. I can't figure out how its trending).

On one hand it feels awkward to sit in the peanut gallery and fault them for skills that many of us lack, but on the other, I think there is something to be said for mass importing another author's 3D assets and moving on perhaps to just get your name out there. As someone who is often first to ask "who's the intended audience for this addon?", I question the point of devoting as little time and attention as some of these authors may be doing to say they contributed.

We'll see if this plane is substantively improved upon....or.... if flightsim.to is flooded with TurboSquid model imports. I'm hoping for the former.
 
SeanTK said:
This is going to be controversial, but judging off screens and comments (downloading the plane now) from the author on flightsim.to, this is another product of what I would call an importer-developer. To quote the author:

I don't build these models. I purchase these models at the lowest price I can get. Then make it fly.

Seeing a lot more of this lately in the MSFS world. While I'm aware that some of our biggest payware names buy 3d models from other third-parties as a starting point, I'm seeing a trend where we have new individuals doing the above - buying the model, doing a basic convert to make it appear in game, and then moving on (or providing minimal support), all without research or expertise on the subject matter, without a significant concern for accuracy, and without the skills to accommodate any needed (per perceived to be needed) updates.

While I applaud the author for perhaps introducing more people to these warbirds, it appears from the comments on this and their other uploads that they can convert existing models, resize model elements, and experiment with configuration files, but they can't actually model themselves. I'm hoping this venture is a gateway to learning and doing so, or joining a team to leverage other's expertise, but I also note that someone asked if the author is introducing more variants of the 109 and the author indicated that they were unfamiliar with other variants, and seemingly too busy with multiple other projects "on the go". They are also somewhat dismissive of bug reports on other uploads (a mix of acknowledgement and semi-commitment to learn and work on it in some comments, or dismissal entirely. I can't figure out how its trending).

On one hand it feels awkward to sit in the peanut gallery and fault them for skills that many of us lack, but on the other, I think there is something to be said for mass importing another author's 3D assets and moving on perhaps to just get your name out there. As someone who is often first to ask "who's the intended audience for this addon?", I question the point of devoting as little time and attention as some of these authors may be doing to say they contributed.

We'll see if this plane is substantively improved upon....or.... if flightsim.to is flooded with TurboSquid model imports. I'm hoping for the former.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you might be disappointed there. The variety, quality and availability of models on the web market has made it possible for anyone with a moderate knowledge of preparing packages for MSFS and builds for other sims, to push these out. The issues begin to arise if the "developer"has not paid or acquired the appropriate license.

Buying models is not foreign to all major developers. The latest announcements re FW190 and Me109 and existing products from other well-known, well respected houses are good examples. But that is where the similarity stops.

A professional license for a third party built model for use in flight simulators is a much more expensive exercise, plastered with legalities and usually composed by litigious attorneys. IMHO (only) I doubt seriously whether these offerings from flightsim.to are subjects of the latter type of license. This is their risk but it is far from professional. Not to mention not supporting the original author of the 3D who will have spent 100's if not 1000's of hours building it.

Properly configured, professionally built models can cost many thousands of dollars to buy, even without an exclusive license.

We live in interesting times.:engel016:
 
1.0.2 is up...quite a nice model though in VR (which looks good) the cockpit contents are half size, a problem which afflicts most freeware authors :(

Flies OK, bit more like a biplane than a 109 and sounds need work but for free no complaints :)
 
I find it interesting to read this thread at the same time as the simultaneous "Aerosoft dumbing down for Xbox" thread.

The fact that some folks are criticizing Aerosoft for not going beyond the maximum sophistication and fidelity permitted by the MSFS engine, while others find a product like this 109 acceptable, tells me that there is room in the MSFS marketplace (meaning the actual marketplace, not the stupid website) for planes at a broad range of quality levels. Not so different from the way it was with past sims.

August
 
There's a difference between freeware standards and payware. Regardless of the quality of any freeware release, unless you pay for your internet data by the GB, all you've lost is a few minutes of download and testing time. With payware, people rightly expect to get what they pay for.
 
Even with freeware Tom, if they haven't obeyed by the terms of the licence, it is still at best, an insult to the modeler and at worst, unlawful. I know of cases where lawyers have gone after end-users as well as the perpetrators.:engel016:
 
Tom Clayton said:
There's a difference between freeware standards and payware. Regardless of the quality of any freeware release, unless you pay for your internet data by the GB, all you've lost is a few minutes of download and testing time. With payware, people rightly expect to get what they pay for.
Click to expand...

Do we *want* a library of what's advertised as cool flyable aircraft that are simple imports of a 3d model from another party, with little if any adjustments to bring MSFS features to the addon? There's already a website out there that does seemingly rapid-fire imports of 3d models just for people to fly around. No (or very very few) animations at all. Just a 3D object that "flies" in the virtual sky. As someone simming since the FS2000 days (really in CFS2), and who picked up more of the civilian side since FS2002, it feels like we're going a bit backwards when it comes to aircraft, but oddly enough, leaps and bounds ahead with scenery. The addon airport scenery situation for MSFS is generally amazing - both pay and freeware.

To this BF-109 author's credit, he seems to be working on some limited fixes, but it sounds like there's still a major skill gap that only lets him do minimal adjustments. A recent comment indicates he won't do textures at all, and I think most of the recent updates have been config parameters and a resizing of some assets. All for supporting new devs, but I don't think most who have been in the community for a while want a flood of they "hey look this turbosquid model works in game, done".

There are differing standards between payware and freeware (usually), but that doesn't mean accepting minimal effort to get a name out there too.
 
I'm impressed by freeware that is of payware quality...someone(s) with skills who could charge for what they've built (or they generally do) but have decided to share a project with the community instead.

That isn't what this Me109 is and I'm not looking to just fill up my hard drive with...stuff
 
Flying Iron have a 109G but still early days.

I probably won't fly this one again, but I will keep it in case I bump into one in multiplayer - will make a nice change from aerobatting over Duxford with just Spitfires and Mustangs :)
 
bazzar said:
Even with freeware Tom, if they haven't obeyed by the terms of the licence, it is still at best, an insult to the modeler and at worst, unlawful. I know of cases where lawyers have gone after end-users as well as the perpetrators.:engel016:
Click to expand...
I completely agree, but not knowing the license terms agreed to by the author, I'd rather not speculate on whether what he's doing is legal, not legal, or even gray. If a problem does come to light, then I'm sure the developer of the original 3D model with handle it.
 
Unfortunately Tom, it's the same with piracy. That will never be stamped out so long as there are people who want something for nothing. At AH we never worry about piracy because frankly the people who indulge were never going to buy anyway.

But for some of the modeling guys, they are really doing it tough and need to be supported correctly. The sheer amounts of talent that can be had for peanuts is actually quite depressing. This hobby/industry has been built on the backs of talented amateurs and hobbyists and has never been properly regulated. IMO it it time it was.:engel016:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top