True enough, but I think that statement goes double for Microsoft. It seemed that AFS2013 was full steam ahead, and they only started hiding their cards after Microsoft started hiring Software Design Engineers in Test(SDET) folk. Now given those are supporting roles at MS and they were hiring 6 of them, one for each existing developer (6) , the size of , group could actually be 12-15 people including program managers. I just don't think anyone would invest that much money in a first game from any relatively unknown studio. Especially given that the champion has unlimited resources. I don't know about you guys but for 3 months straight I saw 2-3 televesion ads every hour, everyday on several channels just for FSX, and that was just for Canada. :)

Aerosoft didn't blunder their way into being one of the biggest sim companies there is.

But Rolls-Royce blundered being one of the leading aircraft engine companies and then into bankruptcy!

Here it goes again... someone releases a comment about the next Flight Simulator, and the Rumor/ Speculation mill starts spinning. I think folks should just wait until whatever company is making a new Flight Simulator actually RELEASES the product to a major flight simulation magazine for review before making comments about it. There is so much worry about what features/ capabilities there are going to be with the "new" Flight Simulator that some of you are going to wind up in the hospital with ulcers, anxiety disorder or some other form of distress before the damned thing is even on the market! Just let the respective companies get it out on the market first, then start commenting on it.In the meantime, just use what you have for the time being and FLY! I mean, that's the reason you're here, right?Signed,A Nobody in the Flight Sim Community. :(

Here it goes again... someone releases a comment about the next Flight Simulator, and the Rumor/ Speculation mill starts spinning. I think folks should just wait until whatever company is making a new Flight Simulator actually RELEASES the product to a major flight simulation magazine for review before making comments about it. There is so much worry about what features/ capabilities there are going to be with the "new" Flight Simulator that some of you are going to wind up in the hospital with ulcers, anxiety disorder or some other form of distress before the damned thing is even on the market! Just let the respective companies get it out on the market first, then start commenting on it.In the meantime, just use what you have for the time being and FLY! I mean, that's the reason you're here, right?Signed,A Nobody in the Flight Sim Community. :(

Actually, no, the reason I'm here is to discuss stuff, which is what this bit of Avsim is for and why this forum section is actually called Hangar Chat. There's a big difference between starting rumours discussing something you are interested in.Al

But Rolls-Royce blundered being one of the leading aircraft engine companies and then into bankruptcy!

I don't think there is a single aircraft manufacturer who hasn't blundered there way to bankruptcy at least twice! See companies like Rolls Royce or even boeing can mess up all they want, but at the end of the day "continuity" is required for various reasons, such as defence. So governments always bail them out. I think the same could be said about Aces... and the continuity of FS. It serves too much as a testbed to just throw in the towel.

Here it goes again... someone releases a comment about the next Flight Simulator, and the Rumor/ Speculation mill starts spinning. I think folks should just wait until whatever company is making a new Flight Simulator actually RELEASES the product to a major flight simulation magazine for review before making comments about it. There is so much worry about what features/ capabilities there are going to be with the "new" Flight Simulator that some of you are going to wind up in the hospital with ulcers, anxiety disorder or some other form of distress before the damned thing is even on the market! Just let the respective companies get it out on the market first, then start commenting on it.In the meantime, just use what you have for the time being and FLY! I mean, that's the reason you're here, right?Signed,A Nobody in the Flight Sim Community. :(

As long as developers continue to publish statements about their intentions, the rest of us will continue to discuss therm .

Actually, no, the reason I'm here is to discuss stuff, which is what this bit of Avsim is for and why this forum section is actually called Hangar Chat. There's a big difference between starting rumours discussing something you are interested in.Al

Word.

Hi there, just read something on Outerra's forum, would anyone else say this statement describes Aerosoft:Could Aerosoft be considering a partnership with Outerra?

Unfortunately it isn't Aerosoft, Outerra made that clear today. That's a real shame, their graphics engine is really shaping up. I'm surprised that we haven't had someone like Oleg Maddox (creator of IL2) being interested in filling the gap. Surely his game engine could be adapted for a civilian simualtor.I always thought companies would be queueing up to make a new flight simulator with Microsoft out of the franchise. I undertand that we are a niche market but there is money to be made, surely. Rhydian

Hi all !Now they are in "stage of going from paper to coding" but they already know they want Mama Microsoft's DirectX 11:

But when we ask these companies to show something on a round earth, with sight lines of 100 miles, using DX11 and not using more then 30% of resources (we also got to do flight modeling, weather, user interface, online stuff etc etc) you will get a lot less enthusiastic responses.

I guess Outerra wasn't an option for Aerosoft. Outerra uses OpenGL, like X-Plane. They will have to build their own engine, but they will always depend on Microsoft.

I always thought companies would be queueing up to make a new flight simulator with Microsoft out of the franchise. I undertand that we are a niche market but there is money to be made, surely.

But Microsoft doesn't appear to be out of the market. It is hiring staff to work on some new flight simulator http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=284383 That may be why Aerosoft seems to have stalled.

Hi all !Now they are in "stage of going from paper to coding" but they already know they want Mama Microsoft's DirectX 11:I guess Outerra wasn't an option for Aerosoft. Outerra uses OpenGL, like X-Plane. They will have to build their own engine, but they will always depend on Microsoft.

The real shame is that they want to use DX11 instead of OpenGL4 and OpenCL. Especially when you consider that GL4 + OpenCL covers all the bases that MS added in DX11. There are other things that would need to be implemented using other libraries, however you could just use something like Delta3D and just use that instead which would cover most of your problems right there, and remaining with standards like that would allow you to release it on Windows, Mac, and Linux.

Does anyone find this part of the statement as interesting as I do?"But when we ask these companies to show something on a round earth, with sight lines of 100 miles, using DX11 and not using more then 30% of resources (we also got to do flight modeling, weather, user interface, online stuff etc etc) you will get a lot less enthusiastic responses. If at all."

This is EXACTLY the line I wanted to comment on.For years and years, we've been hearing from the peanut galleries about how MSFS is unoptomized, and how if they re-wrote it using these newfangled modern rendering systems and innovations, we could have uber-fluid FPS with all the weather and water effects we could handle.It didn't matter if subject matter experts said, "Umm, no - you still need to account for flying the plane and such"... It didn't matter if MSFS developers said, "This IS optomized - we can't do much better."It didn't matter that computer engineers said, "Guys - it's as good as we can do right now."The only thing that mattered were the various opinions that it could be better, and that MSFS was somehow behind the curve when it came to technology. Without cause or basis in fact, the peanut gallery rained down criticism of the engine. Well, lookie here at this comment from Mathijs. Here's a 3rd party company jumpstarting a brand new, from the ground up, scratch-built flight simulator saying without reservation that all these new rendering technologies and options that we've seen for years just will not cut it when placed in the realm of a consumer flight simulator. So now you've had Microsoft (*and their former ACES team members) say that "We've done the best we could provided today and tomorrow's hardware".... and now you've got the company aiming to be their competition ALSO saying that "Gee folks - we've seen all those tech demos and they really won't work in a true flight sim system." If ever there was vindication of the idea that Microsoft wasn't in fact a generation or two behind the times when it came to their graphics and rendering engines, I believe this independant comment is just that. Since day one, I (and other like minded individuals) have stood up for Microsoft and ACES, sometimes passively and sometimes aggressively, in the face of being called shills and apologists, knowing that Microsoft did the best they could with what they were given. I'm not going to say it has been all roses and they certainly may have misjudged the multi-core revolution which hardware systems found themselves in. "Hearing" that line come from Mathijs, who is in the process of developing a competing product, reaffirms the fact that you cannot slap in any old graphics rendering engine (a la: Crysis and other games) and expect it to function well in an open world flight sim. It. just. doesn't. work. that. way. It speaks to the complexity in the systems that has seemingly gone misunderstood in the months and years after nearly each release of MSFS, Fly!, Flight Unlimited, and practically every other simulation out there over the past 10-20 years. -Greg

But Microsoft doesn't appear to be out of the market. It is hiring staff to work on some new flight simulator http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=284383 That may be why Aerosoft seems to have stalled.

Thanks for the heads up, I never realised they were hiring staff like that. Certainly sounds interesting. I agree with your statement in that thread where it says:If Microsoft intended to continue development of FSX why did it close ACES and dismiss its staff?I suspect that whatever emerges it won't be FSX+ as some seem to hope.I do wonder what they will come up with. Seems a waste to get rid of such a talented bunch at ACES. CheersRhydian

It. just. doesn't. work. that. way. It speaks to the complexity in the systems that has seemingly gone misunderstood in the months and years after nearly each release of MSFS, Fly!, Flight Unlimited, and practically every other simulation out there over the past 10-20 years. -Greg

Thank you for the excellent exegesis, Greg. I it is precisely what I would have written, had I still the energy to do so......having beat my head against the wall for years, I finally gave up and let the "peanut gallery" have the floor. :(

Thank you for the excellent exegesis, Greg. I it is precisely what I would have written, had I still the energy to do so......having beat my head against the wall for years, I finally gave up and let the "peanut gallery" have the floor. :(

Greg-Same for me...couldn't have said it any better...and the other thing about that comment is it is 4 years later now.