I don't agree with you Greg.In the end, the payment would be on us, users.If ngx now costs 70€, then it would cost say 100€ with microsoft wanting to earn the part.You can't expect addon companies pay for what ms wants to charge them.And its not pmdg, orbx etc who don't want... Its ms who said that there are gonna be no addons.And will you be ready to pay for each bit of land my gives you?In the end, you would end up paying way more than 70€ what p3d is gonna cost you in a year.But neither you nor I can say what is exactly going to come.

I am an aircraft developer for X-Plane. I would warmly and wholeheartedly welcome PMDG if it chose to make products for X-Plane — and be first in the queue in their shop.X-Plane is different to Microsoft Flight Simulator in many ways. Laminar Research's founder and owner, Austin Meyer, is a wonderfully enthusiastic inventor, and the strength of his conviction shines through. Even now, if you write to him, you will get an answer, and that creates a unique and loyal bond between Laminar Research and its customers.There can be a problem with this, too, and early versions of X-Plane were inspired, but erratic. As it grew in popularity and complexity, LR expanded into a small but strong team of developers that widened X-Plane's scope, introduced a more organised development path, with better support and documentation. I find a lot of people judge X-Plane on those early versions and fail to appreciate where it's come from, and therefore where it might be going.X-Plane comes with "Plane Maker". It is altogether more accessible than the Flight Simulator SDK. In fact, it is so easy to create your own plane that some people got it down to a fine art, pumping out a plane a week without writing a single line of code. Freeware proliferated, some were beautifully researched and painstakingly produced, others showing, frankly, more enthusiasm than talent. I it unkind of me to say so, because these true petrol-heads are the backbone of X-Plane, but again I think X-Plane was judged — continues to be judged — on the extremely variable quality of these creations.The big change came with X-Plane 9. The company was, by then, better organised, the direction the product was being developed was clearer, and this made developers take it more seriously. Most importantly, there were huge changes in the way aircraft were constructed. In one leap, we moved from Plane Maker geometry, with its very restrictive geometry of a maximum of 20 cross-sections, each with 16 sides, to the virtually limitless possibilities of 3D object models. Suddenly, the only cap on detail was the performance of your graphics card.This proved to be something of a culture shock. X-Plane developers were traditionally one-man week-end or evening warriors, but now the possibilities were so enormous that the length of time required leaped from man weeks to man years. It took more than a year before the first truly XP9-spec aircraft began to appear, and some of the even more complex models are only just reaching maturity now - 4 years after XP9 was introduced.I've just used geometric detail as an example, but that's only the tip of the iceberg. Skilful programmers found (are still finding) that they can develop richly detailed systems, via plugins. Again, these are only really appearing on the market now because it took time for developers to acquire the skills and put them to good use.This is the nub of the argument: X-Plane is like a force that has yet to reach critical mass. Already, since the closure of the ACES studio, sales of X-Plane have soared, membership of forums have doubled, and the demands of FS9/FSX users, used to a more "polished" virtual world, is having a hugely beneficial effect. We need developers like PMDG to show how it can be done, to encourage more developers to form effective teams and finish new projects in good time. We need FSX users to bring a new point of view, or a new sense of priorities, to make XP10, XP11, XP12 even better than they could be without them.

Edited January 16, 201214 yr by guymp

I must correct a mistake on an earlier page on this topic that scenery, for example buildings or whole airports, can be converted from FS to X-Plane without having to re-map textures. There are tools for Blender that will do this. Of course it must be done with the original developer's permission, but it can be done successfully. Animations have to be re-done.

Robert: I think that you have very sensibly outlined the realities of the situation. You are a business and must make the decisions that you see as best.Depending on the decisions that LM take we could have FSX on steroids with version 2 - but they too will abide by their best interests, And though not party to their purchase from MS we can accept that the terms would be quite explicit and detailed. Why develop Flight (in my view a restricted decision to enter the kid's throwaway game market) - and let a purchaser have free reign to compete in the $ bracket. However I think that LM does know that it has a highly developable code in its hands. And like the dog that caught the car, it is in two minds as to what to do with it. They really do have the potential to take the majority of the FSX market with them once they are into DX11, tessalation and the like.I would trust that you consider making and selling the equivalent of a SBSL or marketed installers for some of your recent products.Meanwhile it is my intention to increase the variety of aircraft and scenery in P3D at the pace of the market. As the made for P3D addons, utilities and licences are brought onto the market I will buy them alongside my continued investment in FSX until I need to make a decision one way or the other, or just die!!.

I am a Senior Command Air Transport Pilot with close to 5000 hours and have been a member of the longest, still functioning, Virtual Airline out there. I won't bother to name it other than to say I have been with them for over ten years.One of our Directors was selected by MS to be a Beta tester for FLIGHT. When he entered into an agreement with MS to do the testing, one of the prerequisites, was that he wouldn't divulge any information. This is not only fair, but a credible approach. He has not discussed the matterHowever, from time to time without disclosing any information or details I get the feeling when talking to him that he is of the same opinion, (almost to the letter), as Robert ,here. All of us at our VA support and purchase not only PMDG products but the others that are also mentioned ie; Aerosoft.We fully intend to continue with our VA and to grow our members. We will continue to support our 3rd party developers by purchasing their product(s).My personal opinion is, "Damn the torpedos, (Microsoft),.......... full steam ahead PMDG.In closing, thank you PMDG, and registered members of this forum for your invaluable service and support to our community. The advice we read regarding setup etc is greatly apprechiated.We look forward to the PMDG 777.Thank you all and may God Bless, no matter your God.Steve ChapmanNBL4059

I'm not against moving to a new platform, but I am against moving to a platform that will not provide an in-depth hardcore flight simming experience whilst applying abusive, imposing policies to users and secondary market developers.

Well said. I think you sum up what most of us feel here.

I can see X-Plane evolving to the overall quality of FSX. My dream is to no longer have to rely on PCs. Maybe one day I can be flying PMDG's unbeatable products on X-Plane on a powerful Apple product.Luis Linares

MacOs runs on pcs these days.

I can see X-Plane evolving to the overall quality of FSX. My dream is to no longer have to rely on PCs. Maybe one day I can be flying PMDG's unbeatable products on X-Plane on a powerful Apple product.Luis Linares

Old age will have crept up on you by then !Fred.

Right now, lack of Track IR support for Linux is the only reason why I don't use X-Plane 9, that, and the lack of hat-support.

Edited January 19, 201214 yr by Jude Bradley

If they want it to be a 'point scoring' game, why didn't they develop it for XBox?

good point!

Well I don"t agree... after all Flight, if you remove the top arcade like information banner, looks really nice with nice tree autogen and a much better default ground texture than FSX.... Now, I feel that PMDG or ORBX, by refusing the new Microsoft business model is taking us hostages and preventing us from getting access to a new Flightsim....Oh we could always use it some may say, but would we, hardcore simmers, would like to Fly FSX without REX, PMDG, Aerosoft etc. ?Now, I can understand Microsoft wanting to charge developers for the use of their platform.... after all, without FS, there wouldn't be aircrafts or scenery deleoppment companies....In conclusion, I feel that you developers could have accepted to come at the table of negotiation, at least, and see where you could have find an agree point... Instead of that you preferred to stand proudly in front of the bad huge Microsoft company.... and us, we are left down with a 5 year old FSX..... or a future Prepar3d that will cost us 70 USD a year to use at least.... Thank you.Greg

You don't negotiate with Microsoft - they own all the toys and they dicatate how you will play with them. I work for a large Global Bank with turnover in tens of billions of dollars. We are one of M$ s biggest corporate customers and we can't get them to the negotiating table, How do you thing PMDG are going to manage it? M$ argue that if you want their products you play by their rules - end of story. These developers are being told to morgtage the companies have painfully built up over many years on the basis of a busines model where M$ holds all the card with vague unsubstantiated promise of 'jam tomorrow' - if it were you and it were your business would you agree to it? Remember If it doesn't work out M$ will walk away without a scratch but the small developers will be out of business. If you really want to preserve the future of simming and not see it turned into another XBOX shoot-em-up you should be encouraging all quality developers to walk away from this debacle as fast as possible.

You don't negotiate with Microsoft - they own all the toys and they dicatate how you will play with them. I work for a large Global Bank with turnover in tens of billions of dollars. We are one of M$ s biggest corporate customers and we can't get them to the negotiating table, How do you thing PMDG are going to manage it? M$ argue that if you want their products you play by their rules - end of story. These developers are being told to morgtage the companies have painfully built up over many years on the basis of a busines model where M$ holds all the card with vague unsubstantiated promise of 'jam tomorrow' - if it were you and it were your business would you agree to it? Remember If it doesn't work out M$ will walk away without a scratch but the small developers will be out of business. If you really want to preserve the future of simming and not see it turned into another XBOX shoot-em-up you should be encouraging all quality developers to walk away from this debacle as fast as possible.

... Of course I would do it ! Do you think PMDG can play around and make some money selling aircrafts to dying FSX or un-matured X-plane 10 ? I would put down my pant, turn around and say... come on, thank you microsoft. Millions of potential customer are better than hundreds. And at the end, who developed the game ? So Microsoft should be the big winner of the game... Oh yes come on....

Edited January 20, 201214 yr by cassis

I hope that a truly free clone to MS Flight Simulator will come about. I use OpenOffice3 in place of MS Office. Open Source software which to me is better than the MS product. I know this is a whole different ball game... just a lame thought and hope on my part.Dave "Stall" Ambrose

I hope that a truly free clone to MS Flight Simulator will come about. I use OpenOffice3 in place of MS Office. Open Source software which to me is better than the MS product. I know this is a whole different ball game... just a lame thought and hope on my part.Dave "Stall" Ambrose

Oh ye of little faith... ask and you shall recieve: http://www.flightgear.org/. Doesn't look as good as FSX, but it is a free and open source flight simulator.