Board index Other Hangar talk

Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Talk about (almost) anything, as long as it is no serious FlightGear talk and does not fit in the other subforums.
Forum rules
Please refrain from discussing politics.

Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby CaptB » Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:28 pm

CaptB
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:36 pm
Callsign: EKCH_AP
IRC name: CAPTB
Version: 2018.1
OS: Xubuntu, Win7 64

Spoiler alert: Fire in the hole !

Postby Hooray » Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:59 pm

Okay, just spent 10 minutes going through the whole thing.

If anything, it merely proves that there is next to nothing to be gained by the FG community by attracting the typical MS-Windows based multiplayer-flight sim enthusiast (what a surprise !).

That is, except for targeting high school/college students specifically.

</fire-in-the-hole>
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11317
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby stuart » Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:13 pm

Thanks for posting this. I wasn't aware that a survey had taken place. I wonder if that's a reflection of where it was advertised, and if that means it under-represents the FG community.

I agree with Hooray that we're going to struggle to attract the typical flightsimmer - it's particularly interesting that they are more likely to be using payware than previously, and are spending significant amounts on an ongoing basis both on software and hardware (a lot of 10XX graphics cards :)).

However, I think there are some interesting nuggets there:
- 2.2.2. The gender gap is just depressing (98%+ male)
- 2.3.3. Surprisingly high proportion of RL pilots (> 25%)
- 2.5.5. Looks like people are saying they are increasingly using payware. I wonder if that's partly a reflection of the ultra-high fidelity payware that's available - OrbX, PMDG
- 2.6.2 Given the relatively low proportion of mainland Europeans in the FS communtity, interesting that FSWeekend is so popular. I guess it is attracting a larger proportion of the community than (say) the Flightsim Show at Cosford.
- 2.6.5 Higher proportion than I would expect are writing software or are 3d modellers ( 13%), so my view of them as purely consumers is perhaps unrealistic.
- 2.6.8 Not quite sure what to make of this data. Discord, Facebook, Reddit are being used constantly, but unclear if this is just for flightsim purposes.

-Stuart
G-MWLX
User avatar
stuart
Moderator
 
Posts: 1469
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:56 am
Location: Edinburgh
Callsign: G-MWLX

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby StuartC » Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:34 pm

Eye candy.
The Typical casual Fs user is more interested in eye candy than actual flight dynamics.
After spending over a year with FG in the line of fire against the other sims ( Helicopter users ), we can and do win hands down on flight dynamics but yet users will not stick with FG due to the lack of the eye candy scenery and that its too much effort apparently to make it run well. Also in addition to that, the other gripes fired back at me are - lack of head tracking, lack of VR support.
Users of commercial sims don't adapt well to having to modify xml files to make the sim work for them.
StuartC
 
Posts: 2704
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Arse end of the Universe
Callsign: WF01
Version: 2018.3.2
OS: W10 64 bit

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby curt » Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:55 pm

One quick comment. Based on web site stats, our main user base is the USA with Germany being about half of that, and the UK following in 3rd. (Then Italy, France, Brazil, Canada ...) Usa represents about 21% of the visitors, so the rest of the world is pretty well represented. If you look around at the code/core developers, my subjective sense is that the larger percent come from Europe.

I agree that if the survey wasn't advertised in common flightgear channels, then there would be a pretty good chance we were under represented ... if it matters. My sense was that this survey was created to serve commercial developers and help them tune their efforts.
Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics
University of Minnesota
curt
Administrator
 
Posts: 1173
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby Isaak » Thu Dec 20, 2018 5:16 pm

Sad, I did fill in the form, but didn't think of posting it on the mailing list/forums. Will do next year!
Isaak
 
Posts: 405
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 2:52 pm
Location: Leuven, Belgium
Callsign: OO-ISA
Version: 2019.1.1
OS: Windows 10

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby Hooray » Thu Dec 20, 2018 7:33 pm

It would actually be very interesting if the parties/communities involved here could also be involved in suggestion topics/questions to be covered, depending on their main focus - I could imagine 10-20 additional questions that would be highly relevant from an OSS standpoint.

Next time, we should probably promote such polls via the newsletter/forum and devel list, just like we are doing for sourceforge'ns project of the month...
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11317
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Spoiler alert: Fire in the hole !

Postby msalama » Sat Jun 29, 2019 4:22 pm

typical MS-Windows based multiplayer-flight sim enthusiast


Not so sure about that. Some DCS realism buffs, including myself, do want a civvie sim alternative that's inclined towards maximum realism. And isn't FG just that?
msalama
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:44 am

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby Hooray » Sat Jul 06, 2019 11:11 am

I wouldn't necessarily say that FlightGear development is by and large driven by striving for maximum realism, there are too many different goals/priorities involved, and people with different backgrounds.

FlightGear development is primarily shaped by contributors who are able, and willing, to accept some very real constraints (think resources like time, manpower, funding), and who nevertheless still want to be part of this effort/community for a variety reasons. While "realism" clearly is a declared "goal", it's not necessarily being worked on in any kind of orchestrated capacity, it merely "happens", i.e. in an organic fashion - as in, a piece of software that is evolving over time, with functionality/features sometimes collapsing over time, and being re-invented/adjusted in an incremental fashion.

I'd say, none of the long-term contributors are consciously working towards competing with commercial counterparts, it's just "en vogue" to occasionally highlight that /some/ aspects of FlightGear seem superior to what these products have to offer, "under some circumstances" - but that seems more like a way among contributors to mutually motivate themselves ;-)

While this development model may seem rather fragile and even inferior to commercial products, it's a rather self-sustaining model actually, because those people who do put up with those previously mentioned constraints, get to shape FlightGear without being faced by constraints that commercial products face regularly.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11317
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby legoboyvdlp » Sat Jul 06, 2019 4:39 pm

I mean I would hope that nobody is striving for maximum unrealism... :P
User avatar
legoboyvdlp
 
Posts: 6699
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 1:28 am
Callsign: YV-LEGO
Version: 2018.3.1
OS: Windows 10 HP

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby xDraconian » Sat Jul 06, 2019 5:01 pm

legoboyvdlp wrote in Sat Jul 06, 2019 4:39 pm:... striving for maximum unrealism... :P

LOL
xDraconian
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:53 am
Version: Git
OS: Linux Mint

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby frtps » Sun Jul 07, 2019 11:42 am

Some interesting tidbits from an Australian point of view: Australia is at number 5 in terms of responses (5%), and YSSY (Sydney International) is in the top 10 departure airports. And there is an Australian flight sim expo! Who knew? Except they only accept certain commercial sims as exhibitors according to their webpage.
frtps
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 9:58 am

Re: Navigraph's Flight simulator Survey Results.

Postby msalama » Tue Jul 09, 2019 10:30 am

Well the development process doesn't seem to strive for maximum arcadishness either :mrgreen: No, I get it that goals, priorities and personal preferences differ, but by and large it at least seems that maintaining a high overall level of realism is important for the core devs. And that's one of the things I like about FG.
msalama
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:44 am


Return to Hangar talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest