vitos wrote in Sun Apr 19, 2015 7:39 pm:Plus, these things You made are not a things You could fly. It's about flight.
[...]But is that momentum about flight really?
To be honest (and without meaning to offend you), this is where your notion of "collaboration" is probably mistaken and this is why you (and a few others) are getting stuck so often.
You need to realize that people have different requirements, priorities and backgrounds. So collaboration is more about temporary collaboration and about making concessions and finding compromises. You are entirely correct that the aforementioned Canvas related efforts have probably little -if any- bearing for people interested in 1960s space flight or in WW2 aircraft - however, there are others around here, interested in those aspects of flight - think modern airliners (777, A380, 744 etc), modern space craft (SpaceShip2), who cannot proceed without these features.
You have managed to pull off something that maybe only 5-12 other active contributors would be able to do - and apparently entirely on your own, so you're hitting the ceiling of your own skills/expertise and spare time obviously, as well as probably arriving at the conclusion that there is only so much you're willing/able to learn, which is where the whole EarthView debate was coming from.
Then again, others may be interested in stuff that seems irrelevant to you, but they may still have complementary skills, i.e. they may be able to do stuff that you are not interested in - for instance, Thorsten is regularly doing stuff that most others seem not interested in - and equally, when I am getting a PM from Thorsten, he's usually pretty blunt by stating that he's doesn't have the interest/inclination or time to do a certain thing, but that he'd be willing to incorporate stuff that I may come up with.
Stating that scenery development or doing liveries is not as important as FDM development is short-sighted - obviously, a FDM / 3D model seems more relevant than a livery or scenery development - but ultimately it depends on the concrete use-case - e.g. the space shuttle FDM existed long before there was a plausible 3D model, and long before FG even supported the corresponding atmosphere dynamics. Sometimes these efforts are spanning several years, so it is only natural for things to fall into place over time - it's like a huge puzzle - with each piece requiring different skills and backgrounds.
Had you not spent so much time doing the Vostok, we almost certainly would not be having EarthView and the new Space Shuttle FDM Thorsten is working on - but these things take time obviously.
vitos wrote:By the way, are You flying something for time at FG multiplayer? Since, You know, there at MP some crazy guy somewhere at Germany, who does not fly a thing, but sits at some airport, demands others to follow his commands, and to "neglect" ones who do not follow it immediately.
So what, he's doing ATC, and apparently not interested in other things/aspects of FG - which I find just as valid a use-case as everything else. Just think about it: how many people do we have interested in doing ATC, while ATC still is a crucial thing for many folks doing airliner stuff (think VAs).
These are all just "features", and some may seem irrelevant to you - while some of your own interests may not align well with people doing other stuff (think ATC). However, even a space craft like the space shuttle will at some point require ATC services, so it makes sense to collaborate - and simply accept that people have different backgrounds, priorities and skills.