The way it comes across, if you really look at it, is not in a very positive way. Maybe he could have worded it better so as to avoid any misunderstanding. When people start saying "If PMDG go to X Plane, I'm getting X Plane for sure!", that is NOT for extra content. That is for particular content.Sure, to increase content, more than welcome. But if read in the context of "X Plane developers need to be replaced by better developers" which, let's face it, is the mindset of a vast majority of people not familiar with x plane, you can see why it would come across as insulting.I certainly don't mean anything bad by it. I'm very blunt and very honest. I just want to set the record straight and fill in the gaps.Tierborn, I'm not attacking you. Why is it when someone disagrees, they're considered "attacking"?

@Jason,My post regarding XPX-4d, was actually a joke.P3d is asking $10 a month, 12 = 120, XPX is $Orbx is getting I believe $8 per scenery if you already own it, PLUS you have to have FSX installed as a side-by-side.Now, some people may pay the full fee instead of the monthly service, if not you throwing away more money.So, why would you pay anything more for what you already own to use it under those conditions?

Very interesting discussion , do we need PMDG and others from "there" over here to improve quality? My answer is a simple "YES" In the XP scene we have a lot of developers making low quality models and we have a group of excellent developers making high quality. Lets say this gives us an "average level of quality" When they "come over" this "average level of quality " will certainly improve. Leen

Very interesting discussion , do we need PMDG and others from "there" over here to improve quality?My answer is a simple "YES"

Not only for the added numbers of people to work on the product, but also for the reputation that such companies can bring to the table! I'd wager that Aerosoft's involvement in this iteration of X-Plane is going to have a far more positive impact than if it was the never-before-seen Acme Sim Company partnering with Laminar instead.That being said, I have hesitation in saying that any of the major players would be rushing to the X-Plane side anytime soon, considering the eternal state of flux the product seems to find itself in during its infancy.-Greg

Very interesting discussion , do we need PMDG and others from "there" over here to improve quality?My answer is a simple "YES"In the XP scene we have a lot of developers making low quality models and we have a group of excellent developers making high quality. Lets say this gives us an "average level of quality"When they "come over" this "average level of quality " will certainly improve.Leen

+1

Do we "need" them to pump out more products? Sure. Why not. For the sake of the consumer. Do we need them to REPLACE us? Possibly SOME of us. But there are very competent X Plane developers that would give any FSX dev team a run for their money.But consider this. X Plane has been doing just fine and growing steadily for nearly 20 years on a shoestring budget when compared to Microsoft. The payware market in X Plane is very young. Detailed 3D object models only started coming out in XP8. About 5 or 6 years ago. It took 4 years for PMDG, a very experienced TEAM of developers, to make the 747-400 and 8 years to make the MD-11. We need some perspective. Do we "want" them? I can't speak for other X Plane developers, and personally, it doesn't bother me either way. It sure as hell will lift the standard, and that only makes our work better and the user happier! I can appreciate the nervousness of SOME x plane developers if a high level FSX developer/s make the move. Do X Plane simmers want/need them? Most probably. Like Greg said, for the reputation. But this is where it gets funky. An FSX developers reputation is based around FSX. Not X Plane. X Plane is completely different. They will have to learn to make aircraft ALL OVER AGAIN. And it is NOT easy. So Greg, in saying that, I think THAT is the reason the big developers are hesitant about coming over to X Plane. Not because of the updates. The updates don't "break" an addon. If they do, the developer files a report and the Laminar team fix it.Knowing what I know about what is possible in X Plane, what is being done in X Plane, and what has been done in X Plane, (on the 3rd party development side) but is not yet released, FSX developers have a LOT of catching up to do.But by all means, come on over. Aerosoft have done it and they have been welcomed with open arms. Activesky are doing it, and they are also welcomed with open arms. Carenado as well. That reminds me, Carenado contracted an x plane developer to convert their GA's. GA's are EASY. The heavy stuff, that's a different story altogether! The GA's are like making a $2 hamburger. The heavy stuff is like making a 4 michelin star restaurant 4 course meal!

I think the point is right now I have 62 payware aircraft in my fs folder of which I would say 50 are extremely high quality and the rest are pretty close. In xplane I have about 20 of which I would rank only 1-4 as high quality. I also have probably 100 payware scenerys in fs-of which I would say the majority are extremely high quality, and some like sim savy photo real cover the entire Untied states. In xplane I have 3-and honestly would not rank them the same extreme high quality.I don't think anyone is talking about "replacing". I think we are talking access to quantity and quality. Yes xplane is young. Now is the time to especially with the Flight fiasco to strike! As a consumer I don't really care who does it, I just want access to it!

Goran said: Do we "want" them? I can't speak for other X Plane developers, and personally, it doesn't bother me either way.

IF it really doesn`t bother you , why are you spending so much time on this subject.Being a developer selling his own products on the X-Plane market you really should be bothered.Speaking for myself , I am runnig a bycicle-store and when another huge bycicle store would open its doors in our street and my reaction would be "It doesn`t bother me".................please be realistic that would be totally abnormal.When I would start a monologue every moment someone said only a few words obout that "other store"..........................And yes developping for X-Plane is complicated BUT not more complcated than developing for MSFS.That could mean , that if or when a big (real BIG) player like PMDG enters the X-Plane market , they are also going to "learn extremely fast" having lots of manpower and capital to do so.Please get bothered asap Goran , spend more time on developing and less on discuss.Leen

Leen, I swear to you, it doesn't bother me. I'm very competitive, and I always try to look on the brighter side of things. It would be a kind of hurdle, but it would force me to up my game to try and stay as up there as I can. I'm not going on about FSX developers coming over. You said you run a bicycle shop. What would happen if someone who has never ridden a bicycle said they will start only if X Bikes (pun intended) moved to your street? Regardless of how good or bad you were, you would feel somewhat insulted. You work hard to do what you do. Same thing. We work hard. The quality is there. Many x plane developers started making freeware and they did that for years before going onto payware. I started with payware 3 years ago. I would HATE it if people felt intimidated by me. How hypocritical would I be if I felt intimidated by other developers coming in to X Plane who have a reputation in FSX when I didn't have any reputation AT ALL. I'm not PMDG quality, but I do my best and the feedback has been positive.I seriously look at it as an opportunity to find areas that have been untouched in aircraft development. I look at it as friendly competition. There is a developer who I consider one of the best modellers in X plane. And we are constantly having little friendly screenshot battles on how detailed we can model something. He's a competitor but we help each other constantly.It's really not as "ruthless" (for want of a better word) as some people make it out to be. Anyway, I'm rambling. My original point was, it doesn't feel good to be thrown to the bottom of the barrel, when we have worked very hard to get to where we are, by people who think a dev team can do a better job in a sim they have never touched. That's my whole point.If it was a misunderstanding on my part, then I humbly apologize.

Aerosoft have done it and they have been welcomed with open arms. GA's are EASY. The GA's are like making a $2 hamburger.

Welcomed with open arms? By whom?If GA's are sooo easy, why don't we have a single perfect $2 hamburger in x-plane yet?It's still a flight simulator and not a systems simulator.As Morten already mentioned, making real prop planes fly correctly in x-plane is more difficult than jets.

Aerosoft, from what I know, have not had any backlash from the x plane community. If anything, they'll bring over more people to try x plane. Something the market needs.Making jet's fly is one thing. Making SYSTEMS is another animal altogether. When I said GA's are easy, I meant they are easier, as a whole, compared to jets with complex systems.(Still haven't tried my Duchess, have you?)

Yes welcomed with open arms , thats correct Mr Stolle.Maybe not your arms , certainly my arms and many many others.And spoken about perfect planes , they do not exist in X-Plane nor MSFS.I have to be honest ,didn`t try the Duchess either.

Why should there have been a 'backlash' for Aerosoft? There's a quite lot between a backlash and being welcomed with open arms.Is I mentioned before, this is a flight simulator in the first place.It's imperative to get the planes to fly correct in the first place before doing systems programming.Doesn't make sense to test the Duchess as haven't flown the real one, nor have I read any pireps about it.It's one of the weakest and uninspiring twins ever produced, so to buy it just for a few test circuits isn't really an option for me as I wouldn't fly it after testing.

Yes welcomed with open arms , thats correct Mr Stolle.Maybe not your arms , certainly my arms and many many others.

In which way did Aerosoft notice the 'open arms' and do you think that if Aerosoft wouldn't have been welcomed by a few guys, they wouldn't have started developing for x-plane?

Why should there have been a 'backlash' for Aerosoft? There's a quite lot between a backlash and being welcomed with open arms.

Ok, well, they are more than welcome to help the add on market grow.

Is I mentioned before, this is a flight simulator in the first place.

Sure it is. And if ANY developer say their aircraft flies no less than 100% accurately when compared to the real thing, they are lying.

It's imperative to get the planes to fly correct in the first place before doing systems programming.

Which is why I said I try to up my game as much as possible. Particularly if a new, top level developer comes over. But you cannot deny that you need BOTH for a complete flying experience.

Doesn't make sense to test the Duchess as haven't flown the real one, nor have I read any pireps about it.It's one of the weakest and uninspiring twins ever produced, so to buy it just for a few test circuits isn't really an option for me as I wouldn't fly it after testing.

Wow! Ok, If that's your opinion, then sure, you're entitled to it. I won't say what I think about some of the aircraft listed in your signature. I respect what you have worked on enough to not comment. Sorry to see you don't feel the same way.