Finally, we remember well a certain development house you've tested for who did not make the jump to FSX but instead relied on FS9 sales to stay afloat.The question for you to answer is what condition that development house is in today? We maintain that reliance on a declining FS9 market borders on business suicide. :(

Dreamfleet started developing for FSX (with the release of their FSX native Piper Dakota). The reason Lou has been out of the game has nothing to do with FS9 versus FSX but rather personal issues. I'll leave it at that....

As far as I know, 'Dreamfleet' are still solvent. Paul Golding is working on an FSX upgrade for their excellent 727 and developing a DC-8 too.

Dreamfleet started developing for FSX (with the release of their FSX native Piper Dakota). The reason Lou has been out of the game has nothing to do with FS9 versus FSX but rather personal issues. I'll leave it at that....

We know about the one DF FSX project but the point is that even that developer could not make it on one FSX project while their FS9 sales numbers declined.I know the exact details about the "personal issues" and that does not mitigate the point that DF could not remain viable on FS9 sales numbers nor can any other dev for that matter. :(

As far as I know, 'Dreamfleet' are still solvent. Paul Golding is working on an FSX upgrade for their excellent 727 and developing a DC-8 too.

And our best to Paul with his efforts. It is notable that the FSX Version is likely required due to lack of FS9 support/patronization. :(

We know about the one DF FSX project but the point is that even that developer could not make it on one FSX project while their FS9 sales numbers declined.I know the exact details about the "personal issues" and that does not mitigate the point that DF could not remain viable on FS9 sales numbers nor can any other dev for that matter. :(And our best to Paul with his efforts. It is notable that the FSX Version is likely required due to lack of FS9 support/patronization. :(

Ron I've talked to Lou personally and FS9 had nothing to do with Dreamfleet's slow down. In fact the only add-on you've released since Dreamfleet's FSX Dakota was the Citation X V2.0. Eaglesoft hasn't been blazing any trails as of late either to even talk about another developer. Just the same Dreamfleet was a big proponent of FSX and moving in that direction. They by far wasn't trying to stay with FS9. Like what was mentioned above Dreamfleet has not closed up shop. There's still a website up selling product. I wouldn't use Dreamfleet as an example furthermore it's kind of out of line commenting on another developer in this way. I'll leave it at that...Switching gears to you, when are those products that's been previewed in your forums 'for years' going to see the light of day? The Citation X v2 has been out well over a year and everything else promised has been on the cooker for over 2-3 years. Let's talk about what's causing your slowdown...

Ron I've talked to Lou personally and FS9 had nothing to do with Dreamfleet's slow down. In fact the only add-on you've released since Dreamfleet's FSX Dakota was the Citation X V2.0. Eaglesoft hasn't been blazing any trails as of late either to even talk about another developer. Just the same Dreamfleet was a big proponent of FSX and moving in that direction. They by far wasn't trying to stay with FS9. Like what was mentioned above Dreamfleet has not closed up shop. There's still a website up selling product. I wouldn't use Dreamfleet as an example furthermore it's kind of out of line commenting on another developer in this way. I'll leave it at that...Switching gears to you, when are those products that's been previewed in your forums 'for years' going to see the light of day? The Citation X v2 has been out well over a year and everything else promised has been on the cooker for over 2-3 years. Let's talk about what's causing your slowdown...

Dillon, I did not mention DF until you actually did so yourself.Why would you think that you are the only one who has talked with Lou?I'm afraid you've missed the entire point of my most recent post here so I'll repeat for your benefit then let's drop this. The point we've made is quite simple: That point is that FS9 development is no longer viable for a majority of developers and so you shall see less and less new FS9 development.In fact, you and Dave have proven the point yourselves. :(

Dillon, I did not mention DF until you actually did so yourself. :(

O.k. we're playing games here...Who exactly were you referencing here? Everyone else I've worked with is still in the game...

Finally, we remember well a certain development house you've tested for who did not make the jump to FSX but instead relied on FS9 sales to stay afloat.The question for you to answer is what condition that development house is in today? We maintain that reliance on a declining FS9 market borders on business suicide. :(

The point we've made is quite simple: That point is that FS9 development is no longer viable for a majority of developers and so you shall see less and less new FS9 development.In fact, you and Dave have proven the point yourselves. :(

I just don't understand how you developers do your market research. Developers design a product that doesn't sell well. Since it didn't sell well, it is a sign that the entire market has declined, and that nobody is buying for that platform anymore. Yet the product that was designed was either unpopular or already oversaturated. 2 examples for you:QualityWings developed a lite/medium 757. While one might consider the 757 market as oversaturated, they certainly didn't...and their bank account backs that up their thinking. They alone have proved that the fs9 market is far from dead. They pulled it off because they approached their development from several angles. They did something for everybody. It has eye candy, perfect sounds, a realistic FDE, and detailed systems. It also can be started with ctrl + E and has a switch to use the default GPS. They went after the entire market instead of a small niche of the market. You get the 752/300, the freighter version, and the military variant for $45.00.PMDG developed their absolutely amazing MD-11. Nothing short of a study sim that takes 45 minutes to get everything set up. Unfortunately, the MD-11 is somewhat of an unpopular aircraft. Mainly due to that fact that only a couple of airlines world wide still use it. The pricetag of $90 was pretty steep (well worth it to me.) When PMDG released the FSX version, the economy was fine. People were buying things left and right. The world economy tanked right before the release of the fs9 version. All of the sudden, people were more worried about forclosure than the latest and greatest addon for flightsim. Especially one that was developed for a very small minority of the market, and was rather unpopular to begin with. So PMDG comes out with this statement about how fs9 is dead and that , IF they develop the NGX for fs9, it will be the last project they do for it. OK, but their reasoning is silly. They say that the FSX version outsold the FS9 version 3-1 so that's the end of it. They do no take into account the recession, the actual popularity of the MD-11, or the price of said product.What they are doing and others have done is the equivelent of Toyota saying "Well...the 2007 Camry didn't sell well in America, so we are going to halt production of all cars being built for America, and we will never build a car for them again." Even though the 2006 model sold well.Like I have said before in other threads. You guys are the developers. Do what you think is best for your company, but using silly reasoning is...well...silly. Let's spin it the developers way for a second. The fs9 market is dead. FS9 has been out for 6 years. FSX has been out for 4 years. With that reasoning, I reckon you all got about 2 years left before the FSX market is dead. Then what are you going to do?? I have also heard developers say that the majority of fs9 users are just pirates anyways. Hmmmm...if the fs9 market is dead, fs9 is no longer for sale in retail, and FSX is the sim for the younger generation...it would seem to me that more pirates would be FSX users. In closing, it doesn't matter what anybody on here says anyways. You all have made your decision. Hopefully, it will be the right decision.

I just don't understand how you developers do your market research. Developers design a product that doesn't sell well. Since it didn't sell well, it is a sign that the entire market has declined, and that nobody is buying for that platform anymore. Yet the product that was designed was either unpopular or already oversaturated. 2 examples for you:QualityWings developed a lite/medium 757. While one might consider the 757 market as oversaturated, they certainly didn't...and their bank account backs that up their thinking. They alone have proved that the fs9 market is far from dead. They pulled it off because they approached their development from several angles. They did something for everybody. It has eye candy, perfect sounds, a realistic FDE, and detailed systems. It also can be started with ctrl + E and has a switch to use the default GPS. They went after the entire market instead of a small niche of the market. You get the 752/300, the freighter version, and the military variant for $45.00.PMDG developed their absolutely amazing MD-11. Nothing short of a study sim that takes 45 minutes to get everything set up. Unfortunately, the MD-11 is somewhat of an unpopular aircraft. Mainly due to that fact that only a couple of airlines world wide still use it. The pricetag of $90 was pretty steep (well worth it to me.) When PMDG released the FSX version, the economy was fine. People were buying things left and right. The world economy tanked right before the release of the fs9 version. All of the sudden, people were more worried about forclosure than the latest and greatest addon for flightsim. Especially one that was developed for a very small minority of the market, and was rather unpopular to begin with. So PMDG comes out with this statement about how fs9 is dead and that , IF they develop the NGX for fs9, it will be the last project they do for it. OK, but their reasoning is silly. They say that the FSX version outsold the FS9 version 3-1 so that's the end of it. They do no take into account the recession, the actual popularity of the MD-11, or the price of said product.What they are doing and others have done is the equivelent of Toyota saying "Well...the 2007 Camry didn't sell well in America, so we are going to halt production of all cars being built for America, and we will never build a car for them again." Even though the 2006 model sold well.Like I have said before in other threads. You guys are the developers. Do what you think is best for your company, but using silly reasoning is...well...silly. Let's spin it the developers way for a second. The fs9 market is dead. FS9 has been out for 6 years. FSX has been out for 4 years. With that reasoning, I reckon you all got about 2 years left before the FSX market is dead. Then what are you going to do?? I have also heard developers say that the majority of fs9 users are just pirates anyways. Hmmmm...if the fs9 market is dead, fs9 is no longer for sale in retail, and FSX is the sim for the younger generation...it would seem to me that more pirates would be FSX users. In closing, it doesn't matter what anybody on here says anyways. You all have made your decision. Hopefully, it will be the right decision.

Summed up brilliantly. I could not have put it better myself. You can't argue with facts and the future will prove it.The saying 'Head in the clouds' says it all. Great and accurate post. :)

No amount of argument or discussion from FS9 users will change the future direction of developers.In short, the only thing FS9 users can do to insure future FS9 development is to heavily support/patronize their favorite devs FS9 products.The equation is not difficult. Real monetary reward for FS9 work accomplished equals more FS9 development...Ask any honest dev house and they will answer in a similar fashion. :(

The equation is not difficult. Real monetary reward for FS9 work accomplished equals more FS9 development...

To me that reads as "Buy what we make, not what you want or give up any vague hopes of seeing what you want "Just saying :(

No amount of argument or discussion from FS9 users will change the future direction of developers.In short, the only thing FS9 users can do to insure future FS9 development is to heavily support/patronize their favorite devs FS9 products.The equation is not difficult. Real monetary reward for FS9 work accomplished equals more FS9 development...Ask any honest dev house and they will answer in a similar fashion. :(

Unfortunately, I am not going to buy a product that I have no interest in. If I was interested in business jets, you would have most definitely seen me at your store. The same applies to PMDG or level-D or CaptainSim. People weren't interested in an MD-11. If they were, they would have bought it.People in PMDG's forum asked if PMDG would do a prepay system for the fs9 NGX. Many many people were on board with this idea. PMDG said no. That show's me (a small business owner mind you) 2 things: The reasoning behind their development plan was either made up, inaccurate, or both. The second reason being that they really don't care to do fs9 aircraft anymore, and they just want to focus on FSX. Regardless, that is just one of several examples where fs9 customers have tried to work with developers.Anyways, I have more than paid my dues to FS9 developers. I will also continue to do so IF a developer makes an aircraft that I want to buy. End of story...

To me that reads as "Buy what we make, not what you want or give up any vague hopes of seeing what you want "Just saying :(

This emphasis should be included as well: "In short, the only thing FS9 users can do to insure future FS9 development is to heavily support/patronize their favorite devs FS9 products.

Unfortunately, I am not going to buy a product that I have no interest in. If I was interested in business jets, you would have most definitely seen me at your store. The same applies to PMDG or level-D or CaptainSim. People weren't interested in an MD-11. If they were, they would have bought it.People in PMDG's forum asked if PMDG would do a prepay system for the fs9 NGX. Many many people were on board with this idea. PMDG said no. That show's me (a small business owner mind you) 2 things: The reasoning behind their development plan was either made up, inaccurate, or both. The second reason being that they really don't care to do fs9 aircraft anymore, and they just want to focus on FSX. Regardless, that is just one of several examples where fs9 customers have tried to work with developers.Anyways, I have more than paid my dues to FS9 developers. I will also continue to do so IF a developer makes an aircraft that I want to buy. End of story...

Please understand that my statement is directed to FS9 users Favorite Devs and and includes their Favorite Devs FS9 Products.For our part, we've already suffered the decline in FS9 sales so this is not about us or our FS9 line but rather whether FS9 users will support/patronize their Favorite Devs FS9 line or if FS9 users will simply reduce their support/patronage even further. :(

No amount of argument or discussion from FS9 users will change the future direction of developers.In short, the only thing FS9 users can do to insure future FS9 development is to heavily support/patronize their favorite devs FS9 products.The equation is not difficult. Real monetary reward for FS9 work accomplished equals more FS9 development...Ask any honest dev house and they will answer in a similar fashion. :(

As I love beating dead horses,here I go again!Rant on:As long as the dev house is honest enough to admit that f.e they would've been smarterdeveloping a 777 for FS9 rather then an MD11.What boggles my mind is that a particular developer halts developing a 737 because the MD11 sold poorly.Did said developer also take a minute to think why possibly a 737 would sell more copies as an MD11 would?See the Qualitywings example : folks have wanted a 757 for years,and QW decided they could pull it off,and DID pull it off.I'd imagine a new 737 without eyebrow windows would sell well,as I also imagine a 737-300/500 model according to the latest standards would sell.They're the most numerous planes outthere,and it is nothing short of amazingsome developers,like chefs, just don't seem to get the fact that you gotta (somewhat) give the public what they want,or they w