PMDG JS41

[Gavin 99]

And with that Rafal, I could not agree more. If I were the all powerful king of the FS world, I would pin up that post everywhere, ask everyone to read it, and end all this petty FS9 v FSX nonsense once and for all. But then again I guess it's just not in our human nature is it? I mean, for how many years have humans been killing each other over different pointless superstitious beliefs? Madness.

[Dillon 2,197]

My only reason for going back and fourth is you never know who could be reading all this. New FSX users hearing biased opinions unchallenged about FS9 is never how it should be. We have options in this community and there's those among us that want to bury all effort for one sim in favor of another. Developers read this and if the perception is pro FSX without challenge then the going wisdom is there's no longer a need to produce FS9 add-ons. Discussion like this bring very valid points on either side that can't be denied but to let one side shout down the other side especially in a forum that belongs to the apposing side is wrong.All in all this is about clearing up untruths and explaining to those indifferent readers the pros and cons of each sim. Every simmer has the option to decide based on the discussion and what they are seeing on their own rig. Many FSX users have switched back to FS9 because of various reasons. I don't want FS9 prematurely buried so it's up to people like myself that fly more than visit these forums both in the real world and virtually to let the community know FS9 is still alive and well (and why it's still alive and well).

[Wolfko 0]

This thread doesn't concern freeware... we're debating payware add-ons here... But if you want to bring in statistics, go to Simmarket or FlightSim Store and see how many releases there are for FSX vs FS9. On Simmarket, 10 of the last 12 releases are FSX only... 1 is for both FSX and FS9 version and only 1 is for FS9.Looks like an overwhelming trend amongst payware developers to lean towards FSX :( Naturally, freeware developers are going to gravitate towards FS9 because it isn't as complex or time-consuming to develop for FS9 as it is for FSX... but if you're counting things like WOAI releases and AI aircraft repaints in general (which are, by far the most uploaded items) you'll notice that they are not FS9 exclusive, rather they are for both FS9 and FSX.The fact is that amongst add-on aircraft developers, very few are developing exclusively for FS9. Those who do still create add-ons for FS9 are also developing for FSX... scenery developers tend to develop for both platforms, but more and more NEW aircraft releases are FSX exclusive.PMDG is one of those developers who favors the FSX platform. releasing the JS41 for FSX only is evidence of that. Also, their upcoming Dash 8 product will be for FSX only. Beyond that, though... if they DO release the 737NGX for FS9, there is really very little doubt that it will be their final FS9 release. But you must remember that no one has said that it is wrong to favor FS9 over FSX... all that is being said is that there is an overwhelming trend amongst payware developers to migrate towards FSX.

Off course do payware developers have to go with the newest title i. e. FSX! Most of the developers made the decision before MS stopped the development. Now they have realized FSX is not a milestone of the path into the future but a dead end street. Some developers already have revised their decision, e. g. Cerenaddo.On the other hand there are loads of and loads of high end payware products already released for FS9, so there is not so much need/demand for new titles (FS9 Is already nearly perfect). So the smaller FSX community will currently buy more payware than bigger FS9 community. That's the other reason why payware producers have to focus on FSX (something a freeware developer does not have to take into consideration.)And last but not least the number of FSX copies sold does not proof how many people are actually using this sim. I own both FS9 and FSX and do not use FSX any more but only FS9 like many others I know.

[WarpD 824]

Something that hasn't even been considered:The level of sales dictates purpose for development on a commercial standpoint. If FS9 products simply aren't being purchased at a level to merit development, then no FS9 development will happen.So, if you want developers to make stuff for FS9... you have to show them, through purchase, that you want FS9 products. Otherwise...

[mgh 89]

Off course do payware developers have to go with the newest title i. e. FSX!

Payware developers will go with the title that they believe will bring them the greatest financial reward. Remember, they are investing their own money and resources so they'd be foolish not to.

[atc_scott 22]

I don't know why you people insist FS9 products have good sales at all. If you want more FS9 products from PMDG why not go out and buy the MD11.. I buy plenty of FS9 products. I didn't buy the MD-11 because I could care less about that aircraft. I wouldn't buy the JS-41 if it was available for FS-9 either. No airline that I fly with operates that aircraft. It's not the version of the sim that makes my choice with PMDG lately. It's my personal choice, no slam of PMDG's fine products. If the new 737 doesn't work with FS9...oh well, guess I will keep flying with the old PMDG outstanding version for FS9. :( Scott

[N400QW 205]

To add to what has already been noted about FS9 commercial development.It is now abundantly clear to commercial devs that the FS9 product sales numbers no longer justify the investment in time and effort to build complex products for that platform.FS9 folks can wish or hope that the situation changes but it will not.The facts are that FS9 fans do not support FS9 commercial development in sufficient numbers.If FS9 users decide to support commercial development by increasing purchases the situation will change to their liking.Otherwise, the current trend will continue and even accelerate. :(

[scoob 18]

It is now abundantly clear to commercial devs that the FS9 product sales numbers no longer justify the investment in time and effort to build complex products for that platform.

feelThere is seeing a strong interest in FS9 from users. of those using the support forum for the ERJ v2 FS9 v. FSX support is 40/60.--

[protzler 0]

To add to what has already been noted about FS9 commercial development.It is now abundantly clear to commercial devs that the FS9 product sales numbers no longer justify the investment in time and effort to build complex products for that platform.FS9 folks can wish or hope that the situation changes but it will not.The facts are that FS9 fans do not support FS9 commercial development in sufficient numbers.If FS9 users decide to support commercial development by increasing purchases the situation will change to their liking.Otherwise, the current trend will continue and even accelerate. :(

Ron,That's only half of it, however. If developers want that to happen, then they should produce products that people actually want.A perfect example would be this thread, which has mentioned the MD-11 and Jetstream. Not many operators utilize the MD-11. And the Jetstream...I haven't seen one in real life in years.

[Glynn 405]

feelThere is seeing a strong interest in FS9 from users. of those using the support forum for the ERJ v2 FS9 v. FSX support is 40/60.--

Feelthere deserve all the support they get. Releasing the ERJ v2 with dual installers for FS9 and FSX plus including the Call addon was a very good move.And lets not forget the support for Goflight hardware, one of the very few Devs that offer that level of hardware support.

[scoob 18]

...produce products that people actually want.

the number of aircraft request is greater then the number of developers. over time i've read a request for what seems every type of aircraft ever to fly (or almost fly).the issue is always finding a balance between: demand for the type (comes down to a guess really) and detailed knowledge of the development team for the aicraft being developed.--

[mackintosh 0]

the issue is always finding a balance between: demand for the type (comes down to a guess really) and detailed knowledge of the development team for the aicraft being developed.--

That's obviously very true, but, hypothetically speaking, if you develop a niche aircraft for a saturated market, you shouldn't act all surprised that people aren't buying it. A lot of "heavy iron" virtual pilots prefer to fly realistic schedules on aircraft that do service the routes, given how many Airbus, Boeing, Embraer and Bombardier planes are in the air at any given time - that kind of suggests what the market might want.

[protzler 0]

the number of aircraft request is greater then the number of developers. over time i've read a request for what seems every type of aircraft ever to fly (or almost fly).the issue is always finding a balance between: demand for the type (comes down to a guess really) and detailed knowledge of the development team for the aicraft being developed.--

Absolutely. It seems to me that any aircraft that is made that is in widespread service would sell fairly well. Especially if you can find one that hasn't been done before. It seems that Feelthere excels in that regard, with your A320 and Embraers. If you were to redo the CRJ I'm sure that would sell well also.As far as designing what the users want, while I believe it pays to listen to them, butI also don't think it's a good indicator of the demand. For example, I've seen tons and tons of posts begging for a BAe-146. However, I really don't think it would sell once developed. I could be wrong, but I just don't see it. All in all, I don't think "It's all your fault that I am not going to develop for FS9." is a valid argument. In my opinion, if the developer made something that the simmer wanted, then it would sell. It's a two way street.

[Arklight1 140]

All you FSX guys just check out how many FS9 files are added to the Avsim library daily (lots and lots) and how many FSX files (just a few). Generally there is not so much freeware around for FSX!I wonder why this is? :( Wolfgang

Because FS9 has been around a lot longer and also runs on more mid-range hardware would be my guess.PMDG, CaptainSim, and others all seem to be slowly moving away from FS9. Enjoy FS9 ( Is till do, along with FSX), it is a great product, but I would not expect continued support for a whole lot longer from many payware groups. I would wager that the time investment for development in FS9 is slowly becoming "not worth it" to many of these developers. Flightsimming is a hobby, but to a payware developer it is also a business. As nice as it would be to sit around all day, sipping hot cocoa, and playing the banjo while the money tree provides endless Flightsim fruits, it is not going to happen. If payware developers need to move away from FS9 in order to stay in business and continue to support this hobby, I am all for it. On a side note, I don't even understand why people ever even began the FS9 vs FSX debate. People need to just play what they want and not worry about what everybody else is doing. Life is too short for trivial BS.

[Dillon 2,197]

That's obviously very true, but, hypothetically speaking, if you develop a niche aircraft for a saturated market, you shouldn't act all surprised that people aren't buying it. A lot of "heavy iron" virtual pilots prefer to fly realistic schedules on aircraft that do service the routes, given how many Airbus, Boeing, Embraer and Bombardier planes are in the air at any given time - that kind of suggests what the market might want.

Working for the developers I have in the past you hit the nail on the head. Feelthere is one of the developers I work for and that's the very reason I'm asking them to do the 717. I'd also like to see the CRJ and 737 redone (especially the 737's VC). Legacy aircraft don't sell because many of us want what's actually flying in the real world today. You can't blame this on FS9 and then (because of your choice) take the stance FS9 products aren't selling.Examples of this:Imaginesim's VHHH -- there's a perfectly good freeware version on the market as well as FlyTampa's VHHX.PMDG's MD11 -- All this work with only FedEx as a major operator. FSX users bought it because it was the only game in town on this level.PMDG's JS41 -- What airline flies this aircraft these days??? Again FSX add-ons are limited these days so these guys will buy anything especially if it's half good.Here's a list of aircraft many simmers on both sides of the tracks actually want (make these choices and they will sell across the board):Airbus -- All versions especially the A300 at this point737NG -- All versions, there are those that will pay Ariane prices for something done right737 Classic (200/300/500/etc) -- If Feelthere updates theirs they'll have a guaranteed seller. Many have asked for the -200 although that bird doesn't fly as much anymore but it has been asked for by many.717 CRJ777 -- Why PMDG keeps beating around the bush on this I'll never understand...Any Business Jet that hasn't been done -- I'm surprised by Eaglesoft's response here as anything they make will sell for both versions of FS. ES just hasn't released anything new for awhile (I'm talking totally new bird like the DA42, Perspective, Citation XLS) to even make the claim of what won't sell in FS9. Release some of these choices and then come talk to us... Now is there anyone here that won't buy the new birds in development at ES? We're hoping to see a professional Hawker 1000 and Gulfstream IV done someday by someone. We'll see how well the FSD FS9 Cirrus Jet is going to sell for FS9 (in which they took a back step and supported FS9 once again).If developers stop making what they feel like making and listen to customers sales would go better. PMDG needs to listen to customers and make the 777, Blueprint is another one who should take a stab at locations other scenery designers haven't done like Long Beach. Blueprint was on that path ans still is at some point but I see another KORD and KDFW on their future product's list. Blaming lack of sales on FS9 in favor of FSX is Bogus when again better choices can be made based on user feedback that would insure sales all around. Some developers like Feelthere get it and make a killing across the board and others have their heads in the sand...

On a side note, I don't even understand why people ever even began the FS9 vs FSX debate. People need to just play what they want and not worry about what everybody else is doing. Life is too short for trivial BS.

Because if we want continued development for FS9 a valid case has to be made for it. Read my post above...