Fortunately some of the developers working with Microsoft on Flight under NDA's will probably find the concept of better texture management a very important issue. With any luck Microsoft will listen to them and improve this issue to the the enjoyment of all (which will translate into better sales for both Microsoft and the developers).Regards, Mike Mann

Fortunately some of the developers working with Microsoft on Flight under NDA's will probably find the concept of better texture management a very important issue. With any luck Microsoft will listen to them and improve this issue to the the enjoyment of all (which will translate into better sales for both Microsoft and the developers).Regards, Mike Mann

Why will it result in better sales for Microsoft given that the target market won't even know about it and so can't be influenced by it? How many hardcore enthusiasts will refuse to buy it if it doesn't have it? Very few I suggest.

the target market won't even know about it and so can't be influenced by it

Given the very likely Addon Market integrated within Flight, all addons will have a much better visibility.And shall we let Microsoft decide on their targets and priorities, OK ? We should not refrain us, casual developpers and hardcore users, from suggesting improvements that will make our FS life easier. Remember that flight sim beginners are potential hardcore users (and addicted customers) in progress...

Given the very likely Addon Market integrated within Flight, all addons will have a much better visibility.And shall we let Microsoft decide on their targets and priorities, OK ? We should not refrain us, casual developpers and hardcore users, from suggesting improvements that will make our FS life easier. Remember that flight sim beginners are potential hardcore users (and addicted customers) in progress...

But I doubt if "easy management of add-on scenery" will be featured up-front on the site. Beginners who turn into hardcore users won't buy a second copy of Flight - Microsoft will earn no more. from them. In the end, Microsoft will decide, and I suspect many people will be disappointed. I can image this dialog:Why are we spending money on this feature?Because it will help 3rd party developer 's sales.How much are they paying us for it?Er.....

Some of us have known for a long time who the targets are, and they are not anyone who visits a FS forum.

How much are they paying us for it?

You are wrong with the end of the dialog here. It would be something along :7.5% of their sales for the market service.or150K€ to licence the SDK for payware with developper support for one year.In other words, MS will definitely be interested somehow in the addon sales. In my opinion, the addons business should share a (small) part of its income with MS to maintain a better sim. This is probably highly controversial, but to me, it is fair. How do you explain that FSX is less than 50$ and represents a global scenery with multiple aircrafts, ATC, weather (etc...) and you pay more for a single airport/aircraft ? You will probably answer that they don't have the same user base and that is correct. But the cost of both developpments are not on the same order of magnitude neither.

Some of us have known for a long time who the targets are

Would you mind to share with us then ? I restate that we should not refrain us, casual developpers and hardcore simmers, from suggesting improvements that will make our FS life easier and let MS decide on their priorities. Or is this forum the wrong place to discuss this ?

Why are we spending money on this feature?Because it will help 3rd party developer 's sales.How much are they paying us for it?Er.....

This kind of begs the question; why did they include the SDK in previous versions if the mentality has only been for profit? has the add-on market only really matured with FSX enough to make it a viable target for Microsoft?I can see where you are coming from, I just wonder why was it any different for FSX.

This kind of begs the question; why did they include the SDK in previous versions if the mentality has only been for profit? has the add-on market only really matured with FSX enough to make it a viable target for Microsoft?I can see where you are coming from, I just wonder why was it any different for FSX.

Times they are a-changing. FSX was developed by ACES. ACES was closed and the development of Flight transferred to MGS in order to better align with our goals and long-term development plans. Flight will offer a whole new look and feel, a wide range of new game play and challenges, persistent experiences and social connectivity. Words in italics are Microsoft's own.

SamSam,The target market for EVERY version of FS known to man has been the casual GAMER. That is where the MAJORITY of the programming, features, the GUI features, and marketing is focused. Do they care about the rest of us? A little bit, and this has increased a little bit starting with FSX, but MS is not sitting there asking what hardcore simmers whats or needs. That's why all the "wishlist posts" are so funny and a waste of time, because they are pretty much meaningless. MS isn't sitting there, reading those, saying "wow, let's get most of that stuff into the next version of FS".It's hard to let your ego go and come to the realization that you are not the target market for anything that you enjoy.

Jim, call me naive, but I really believe that people at MS could be reading our posts if the forum was less about bashing a few screenshots and full of constructive/realizable suggestions. Moreover, even for the casual gamers, texture products are often the first product to be considered since they improve the whole sim dramatically.As a commercial dev, if it is not under NDA, could you tell us about the way the ACES team used to share ideas with the 3rd party devs ? Were you (or other company) involved in the FSX SDK specifications ? This is slightly off topic and yet very interesting.

Jim, call me naive, but I really believe that people at MS could be reading our posts if the forum was less about bashing a few screenshots and full of constructive/realizable suggestions. Moreover, even for the casual gamers, texture products are often the first product to be considered since they improve the whole sim dramatically.As a commercial dev, if it is not under NDA, could you tell us about the way the ACES team used to share ideas with the 3rd party devs ? Were you (or other company) involved in the FSX SDK specifications ? This is slightly off topic and yet very interesting.

Microsoft is not going to commit to a new application of any sort without being very sure what it's going to contain. How else could it prepare a development budget? It's certainly not going to opeerate on the basos of "let's start a flight simulator and once we've started we'll ask AVSIM what to include" In reality, it will begin with its own "wish-list" of features some of which are likely to fall by the wayside during development for one reason or another.

Why are we spending money on this feature?Because it will help 3rd party developer 's sales.How much are they paying us for it?Er.....

Of course MS earns money from 3PD’s :( No one believes MS wrote the SDK and hosted dev conferences for the fun of it ;)The SDK is a feature (an expensive one) that earns MS money - that’s why they invest in it.3PD’s secure FS’s market share – and the strategy allows them to dominate the FS genre.In fact they’ve pretty much obliterated the competition with it.Without P3D’s MSFS would have far fewer sales…and they would get far less attention from casual simmers.Take away the SDK/3PD's and imagine what future MSFS would have.It’s called externalizing development costs. MS is not a charity :biggrin:Also this particular issue is a small change (if it’s in fact not already working - it could be that it's not documneted)Most (if not all?) textures (and other assets) are not loaded from a single discreet path.They’re sourced with a search according to rules designers can take advantage of (and often specify).Global environment textures should be no different…if this is broken.BTW this would not require a UI…it’s all done with folders and config files.

Of course MS earns money from 3PD’s :(

How many first time buyers are aware that there even are SDKs? I suggest very few if any, the SDK's aren't earning anything from those buyers.Microsoft may earn from second-time buyers who buy the new release and wouldn't have done so without add-ons. Whether that's worthwhile only Microsoft can judge. The expenditure on SDKs etc is real and quantifable: the earnings from them isn't. I've known companies in other fields who've decided to stop spending on "marketing" activities because they could seethe costs but not the profits. Think of Formula 1 racing; Jaguar/ Ford, Honda, BMW, Toyota all thought it was worthwhile but then decided otherwise.

SamSam,The target market for EVERY version of FS known to man has been the casual GAMER. That is where the MAJORITY of the programming, features, the GUI features, and marketing is focused. Do they care about the rest of us? A little bit, and this has increased a little bit starting with FSX, but MS is not sitting there asking what hardcore simmers whats or needs. That's why all the "wishlist posts" are so funny and a waste of time, because they are pretty much meaningless. MS isn't sitting there, reading those, saying "wow, let's get most of that stuff into the next version of FS".It's hard to let your ego go and come to the realization that you are not the target market for anything that you enjoy.

I don't think this is 100% true either. Sure Microsoft are targeting the wider audiance, and they will have a development path, strategy, vision - call it what you like for Flight which has been written in stone for months if not years but they would want to be seen to listening to these forums and taking on some of the lesser points which could well make there way into the development schedule. Of course we'll not know exactly how much influance we can exert, but there is definately some scope to influance and wish lists are definately not a waste of time... Cheers,Dave.

Times they are a-changing. FSX was developed by ACES. ACES was closed and the development of Flight transferred to MGS in order to better align with our goals and long-term development plans. Flight will offer a whole new look and feel, a wide range of new game play and challenges, persistent experiences and social connectivity. Words in italics are Microsoft's own.

This doesn't give any theoretical reasoning to why M$ would decide to restrict the third party market with this release. Sounds like paranoia to me.