The current version of the 777 Captain (v1.8), is only compatible with P3Dv3.

The upgrade to P3Dv4, for the 777 Captain, has not started yet (well it hasn't for beta testing).

The good news. You might be entitled to a free upgrade to the 777 Captain for P3Dv4 when it arrives, otherwise, you could ask for a refund from FSPilot Shop.

jalbino59 wrote on Jan 17^th, 2019 at 9:50pm:


The reason the 757 was so much and no upgrade was because it was an entirely new aircraft. So it should be treated as such. The 737 got a free upgrade if you owned the P3D v3 version. The 737 was just a port afaik. I'm sure the 777 will be the same. It's very possible for the 777 to get a free upgrade or  at least a discount.

Also the reason its taking so long is that its not easy. 32bit programs use different code than 64bit. So much of the code has to be altered. They're also busy supporting the new 757. Give them time. I'd rather wait and have a well designed addon than have a rushed badly designed one.

Quote:


I don't want to be nosy or anything, but this is the first time that I heard that it'll be a paid update. Is this a temporary decision or a permanent one? Has a decision been made on whether existing 777 users can expect a discount?

Again, I'm only curious. I'd like to thank you for your help in advance!

Captain Sim wrote on Feb 18^th, 2019 at 8:54pm:


@CaptainSim, please clarify fully since you currently have 2 current 32 bit offerings, one for P3D and another for FSX.  Is it your intention to charge full price for the P3D v4 version of the 777 for current users of the P3D v3 32 bit version of the 777?  I ask for clarification purposes only.  Not to oppose your pricing decisions on your platform.

Thank you, and to be clear on my part and in my opinion you are 100% entitled to charge whatever you feel your work is worth.

I just get a little annoyed with claims from some who say you will offer something you have not said you would.

Regards

Markoz wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2019 at 2:37am:


Now that we have full clarity from the developer themselves, how is this or further discussion about this, even relevant? Rhetorical question.

Markoz wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2019 at 3:36am:


If any assumption which I am about to make is incorrect, my apologies in advance.

Mr. Fletcher, it that was your statement, then my comments apply to you as well,  here's the deal.

You are a product tester, you receive the product at no charge as modest "compensation" to test the product and report back to the developer if you find any problems or enhancements that can be addressed and applied prior to a general launch to the public.

The user to whom you harmlessly suggested a free update MIGHT be offered, is a customer who paid full retail price for a product he cannot use and apparently has an option to return it.

That harmless statement you (not CS) made MIGHT have swayed the CUSTOMER to keep a product that has now been shown he has no use for.  If he later calls YOU (not CS) to account, and request YOU (not CS) to refund his purchase because he relied on a suggestion the YOU (not CS) made would, YOU (not CS) make him whole for his financial loss, can you tell me who should? again rhetorical question (def. A question where no response is expected and is to be treated as a statement to make emphasis)

I have admiration for beta testers.  They spend many hours trying to make sure developers are aware of any issues they can address in order for them to have a successful product. It's tedious work that I myself would not find enjoyable.   

Where I take exception, is when a beta tester decides on his own to take on the role of Promoter, Sales Representative, Marketing, or PR Exec. Here comes another assumption, I assume that just isn't the role you signed up for.

I hope sincerely you do not take offense at my response. I really meant none. I have no problem with beta testers testing product, developers creating products, and publishers promoting and selling products. It's when the roles get twisted that confusion ensues.

Regards,
Jose Albino