I've told this many times for over a year... I was ignored.
Please don't confuse consolidation and weighting of opinions and experiences with being "ignored". I guarantee you the "current" main developers of the c172p listen to all input and like I said, I personally give much weight to RL experience.
Also, there are many different prop, engine and gear configurations that could give one pilot a completely different feel over that of another. The aircraft has been tested by other RL pilots that seem to be OK with the current feel of the aircraft.
The slight push of a rudder pedal in RL probably can't ever be reconciled with the mouse or keyboard equivalent of that of a sim.
I think the best case scenario would be to get all of those who have contributed RL experienced opinions to this development to get together, hash out what is correct and what needs to be changed and come to a consensus.
I keep bringing this up on the development site because there are control responses that I really don't believe are as realistic as they could be. One of those is the turning radius with and without water rudders on the water. I've seen videos where it looks like they can spin the aircraft on a dime. On the land as well. Maybe it is technique, maybe it is limitations of the simulators FDM.
Kansas and Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA, 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout
Intel i7/GeForce RTX 2070/Max-Q