Flamin_Squirrel

Where did I pass judgement on whether anyone's post was constructive or not?

This forum is the best place customers have to provide feedback. Whether it is constructive is not for you to judge.

Nonsense. This is the primary way of dissatisfied people to make their feelings known.

Well if s/he doesn't express their view, those with a similar view aren't going to be able to form a consensus are they. These types of threads are becoming more common, so ED should take it onboard, even if they do decide to take no particular action. Only a fraction of customers will frequent this form, an even small fraction of which will have read this thread. ED explaining in this thread is not addressing the issue.

Easier to implement for the Viper? Not sure, but there must be a good reason for it.

What I'm hoping is that this is the 'getting worse before it gets better' phase. I think instead of developing individual modules, they're spending more time working on core functionality that can be transferred from one to the other (TWS between Viper and Hornet for example). That's going to require some patience now, but should allow faster development in the future. Fingers crossed anyways.

Same. The reason I voice concern on here though, is because ED needs to keep the more casual player happy. They can't only rely on the fanatics like us!

I didn't say he was wrong, I said he's not considering other people's point of view, and neither are you.

You may well not notice even if it was modelled. The reason it's there is to reduce idle to mil time.

That's because you're not considering anyone else's point of view.

I think it's bugged in MP. Give it a try in single player and see how you get on. Let us know, I'd be interested to hear.

Bruno: are you trying on mutiplayer?

Not so. I read your earlier post "That's your opinion that not everybody has to share." as I shouldn't have shared my opinion. If you meant that as not everyone has to agree with my opinion, that's fine and no offence meant or taken.

This is the mistake that I think ED is making. Everyone understands that EA means bugs and missing features; the problem it the length of time being taken to resolve them. While I'm not so bothered (I've been around here for many years and am confident ED is in this for the long haul) I also fear that for every one person complaining on this forum, there are several who will consider not buying any more modules; a problem that will only get worse if changes aren't made to the way new modules are released (or indeed, existing ones updated).

So you consider your opinion worthy but no-one else's?

Possibly a culture thing, but if a company's response to a legitimate criticism about the length of their EA period was 'you shouldn't have bought EA', I'd consider that insulting.

Great idea. Insult your customers and ignore the fact that frequent posts about EA and peoples' disappointment in it are evidence of an underlying issue that needs to be addressed. :doh:

Assuming you don't have a control setup issue: trim is to remove the need to apply constant force (much stronger than your desktop stick) to the controls; isn't there so the pilot can let go of the controls and have the plane maintain straight and level. You always have to fly the plane.

Board number 2? Cover postage and it's yours.

Walleye currently broken in MP?

Uncage button on your throttle (it's not an MFD button).

Yes. Sorry, just the way my brain read the sentence was that they tried it and determined you shouldn't use it in routine flight.

It removes all flight envelope protections.

You're pretty aggressive for someone who's missing the point (and not willing to listen).

Where did they say they considered that weird? They only pointed out that ED aren't meeting the same standards they demand from 3rd parties.