Some thoughts on Flight...

[Richard99_Photography 2]

Robert, great post!To back that up... watch the following:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVgUuDY1UjM&feature=player_embedded

I am truly disappointed!

This video has been removed... Any bet about that?@ Robert: thanks a lot for your valuable comment on Flight, it was a very contructive reading.So, FLIGHT won't be for us, PMDG lovers, and this is a first, heavy, certainty.But, now, which will be the future of the flight simulation world?FSX is an obsolete and old one and needs a very performing hardware(*), X-Plane 10 is an immature product yet and no idea in how many years it could be at the same level of FSX in terms of addons (quality and quantity). Prepar3d has a license price not sustainable for many of us.I cannot think that in 2015 we continue to use FSX yet, so, what do you think about the future of our passion?After first briefly news about FLIGHT, we have some confirms, but also a bunch of uncertainties.Bye. (*) = plus, new addons (sceneries, aircrafts or so...) just launched on the market or which will be developed are more and more demanding in terms of system & hardware resources.

[G7USL 117]

Good post Robert,In terms of platforms to eventually move to, have you seen, or even better what are your thoughts on Aerofly FS.This just looks incredible..

Fantatstic quality, best I have seen.

[phoenixphire 50]

Thank you Robert for you assessment. You are one of the few voices that offers an educated, experiential and informed opinion that I can take into account. You responses are always carefully measured. Your response in this case leaves me with a great deal concern for our tiny sector of the simulation market and leaves me with a great deal of trepidation for the future of MS versions of our beloved simulation. It seems that Microsoft is not concerned enough with our market segment to include our needs in the simulation but was concerned enough about the potential profits that they could make from us. Their strategy of funneling all of the potential add-ons under their control seems very "Jobsonian". Its too bad only time will tell the future of MS involvement. This may well be an opportunity for competitors to have a simulation that offers more breadth. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

[ZKOKQ 984]

My only concern is...If PMDG et al aren't going to develop anything for Flight!.......then who is?...I'm curious to see if anyone has found any positive statements from developers...

Not at present. From what I have read, M$ have given most major Devs like PMDG & Orbx the spanish archer. So without the main players on board, it is hardley likley that any other would, it would be fiscal suicide.

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

I was really disappointed with this news... ACES team, along with Ensemble Studios (they made Age of Empires... The funnest game I've ever played!) were the highest quality developer teams I've ever seen. So sad to see them go.

Edited January 7, 2012 by linux731

[JasonD210 0]

Regarding Prepar3D - as far as we know (and I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise) - P3D isn't a consumer product. The ESP license they're using allows for use in the professional/training markets. Unless they find a way to convert that license into a consumer one and produce a low cost version (relative to the professional one) I'm not sure I see how this is a viable platform for a developer like us just yet.

Here is a quote from Prepar3D forum by L-M employee John Nichol, from the forum over at Prepar3d:

"Prepar3D is a simulation framework, which means that it should be able to be used to develop any type of virtual interactive simulation environment, and used by anyone to train within that environment. Off-the-shelf of course, it is a system ready to go for training. Obviously it is best for flight training applications right now, but we will hope to see it being employed in other domains."

Just Flight have already added their Comet to it, (which incidently was not very realistic). There didn't seem to be any problem with that. Both ORBX and REX also are also adapting their products for it. Again, quotes from Prepar3D:

"Orbx does offer content for Prepar3D, and I believe they offer a free demo area as well. All purchasing and licensing of Orbx content would go through Orbx." - Bhiolis (

http://www.prepar3d....viewtopic&t=571

)

Again from John Nichol of Lockheed-Martin on the same website:

"I can tell you that REX are working on a Prepar3D version of their excellent add-on! FSUIPC should work as Pete Dowson has built in support for P3D."

Edited January 7, 2012 by JasonD210

[jtsjc1 3]

Disappointing but not surprising coming from MS. They have failed to fully develop any game in the FS series. I've been buying them since they came out and they've yet to correct problems with the sim that have been there since day one. Now a slap in the face to the flight sim community by giving us the finger so to speak. This attitude is why the product will never reach its full potential and will be just another "game" to MS. Links was a great golf sim and the last version came out in 2003. Another potentially great product that was never given adequate support from MS. I'm glad PMDG and Capt. Randazzo are committed to producing quality a/c we can still use on FSX. Hopefully Level D and others will follow because I will certainly not buy another half-assed product from MS. Sorry for the rant! Joe Colao

[RYR738 9]

Thanks for the very interesting read Robert !Microsoft have nobody to blame except themselves.It's a scary thought to even think that PMDG would have "sold out" to MS.Fred.

[Blaze 102]

Here is a quote from Prepar3D forum by L-M employee John Nichol, from the forum over at Prepar3d:

"Prepar3D is a simulation framework, which means that it should be able to be used to develop any type of virtual interactive simulation environment, and used by anyone to train within that environment. Off-the-shelf of course, it is a system ready to go for training. Obviously it is best for flight training applications right now, but we will hope to see it being employed in other domains."

Just Flight have already added their Comet to it, (which incidently was not very realistic). There didn't seem to be any problem with that. Both ORBX and REX also are also adapting their products for it. Again, quotes from Prepar3D:

"Orbx does offer content for Prepar3D, and I believe they offer a free demo area as well. All purchasing and licensing of Orbx content would go through Orbx." - Bhiolis (

http://www.prepar3d....viewtopic&t=571

)

Again from John Nichol of Lockheed-Martin on the same website:

"I can tell you that REX are working on a Prepar3D version of their excellent add-on! FSUIPC should work as Pete Dowson has built in support for P3D."

John Nichol is very polite and informative but no matter what he posts in the P3D forum I can assure you LM did not purchase the source code from MS with the home flight simulator enthusiast in mind as their target market. They are a commercial base defense contractor mega company that will tailor that code in ways to showcase their products and or adapt it to provide training applications as needed or required buy their customers. We our no more their target market than we our to Microsoft.Be careful what you wish for...LM has the financial means to offer incentives for the developers of the now uncertain consumer market, to come over and develop commercial grade applications for their simulation system. If you think some of our favorite developers wouldn't be interested in what they have to offer your nuts. John V. took a shot or two over us "ungrateful" customers during his last X-Mas sale. You think he wouldn't ditch us small fish to provide the scenery solution for a major defense contractor? How would you feel about P3D if LM made an offer for PMDG to assist in the development of a Boeing KC-767 tanker system but would have to pull several technicians off the B777 project to do it? Or worse... Edited January 7, 2012 by Blaze

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Gents-First- thank you for not letting this thread get "emotional." I was worried that this thread might become one of those events where everyone starts bashing everyone else for their opinions. I'm glad to see the mature discussion prevail.In my lead-off post above, I intentionally made very little mention of "where do we go from here?" This is a topic that has been the subject of internal planning and discussion at PMDG ever since we began to worry about the information we were getting regarding the FLIGHT platform. It is a topic that requires very careful consideration, and business oriented decision making.The simple existence of a platform does not mean that it can/should be supported. When selecting platforms upon which to put our products, we have to very carefully consider what you, our customers are likely to do with the platform once it reaches your hands.A platform that has all of the features we want as developers, but looks like FS98 won't make for a successful marriage. Nor would a platform that has everything we all want, except that it cannot be supported by other developers in our community... (I'm making these examples up... )What happens with the developers in our community will become apparent over time. Some will begin to move their products to new platforms- and some will meet with success and others with failure. Over time all of us that make up the consumer market for flight simulation will eventually congregate around one or two stronger platforms- and that is where the developers will need to be.The key for a company like PMDG that can arguably sway some of the consumer decision making- is to make a careful, considered decision about how we move forward in the years that are still over the horizon.In the near term we are still actively supporting FSX- but we have been engaged for more than a year in a longer term planning process that will (I hope!) see us supporting multiple platforms with our products in order to give you the best range of options for your simming hobby.I would like to see PMDG becoming a bit more deep in terms of the platforms that we support. The work that we do on the code-side is to a very large degree, platform independent and can be ported between platforms with some work. How much work will depend on the tools available for that platform... I do not want to give the impression that any of this is EASY, but it has been part of our planning process during the development of the NGX and 777.Now- on the model side things get a bit more loose... This is an area that will make or break our participation on various platforms, and each platform/project marriage must be evaluated carefully.With all of that said, we have been very well supported by Laminar Research. They have been gracious in providing us with copies of the release version of XPlane10 to work with- and as previously mentioned I am adding someone to the team who will be spearheading the process of porting one of our existing aircraft into Xplane10.What we learn and how well that process goes will, to a large degree, dictate whether we choose to support that platform in the long run.The folks at Lockheed Martin have been the polar opposite. Our Commercial Division has been reaching out to them for a year without any reply back. (Well- actually we gave up on them in September...so make that nine months) Perhaps I'm just getting cranky in my old age- but if we are going to sell a bunch of commercial licenses for them I'm really not inclined to start shelling out money to buy their over-priced, dressed up FSX for every member of the development team without knowing for certain where they plan on taking the platform.And it is also worth noting that that we haven't closed the door on developing for FLIGHT. I have been given the distinct impression that MS is not interested in having external partners- and it has been my experience that this lack of interest on their part is because they couldn't convince all of us in the development community to "shut up and get in line." But that isn't to say that if/when they decide to bring the platform to the point where they want external support we won't consider the platform. It just depends...After all- at the end of the day, PMDG and our customers have a shared interest in finding the best platform for 2015 and beyond.We'll find it... All of us... It is a team effort.

[markadeane 272]

Honestly I regard this all as good news.You see, I spend a tonne of money - WAY more than I'd like to admit - on this hobby, and changing my base platform is a draining experience, financially and in terms of patience. I absolutely bloody hate it.Lately I've been flogging the NGX around my home country of New Zealand. I'm using some excellent scenery for down here, as well as real-world weather and excellent environmental augmentations like REX. I have caught myself looking out the front windows, marveling at what a fantastic thing it is that our hobby has reached such high levels of fidelity.Sure, FSX is not a particularly well optimised example of hardware use, but for my money I have got a stable, fluid simulation that handles all the heavy add-ons nicely.From my perspective, there is more that can be done in FSX, and I'm looking forward to seeing how PMDG will implement some of the more advanced technology on board the 777.Cheers!

Edited January 7, 2012 by markadeane

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

Guys, look at FS9. It's still ongoing, and they're still making payware addons for it. I feel FSX is going to be the same. This reminds me of Windows XP, which some here have. Windows XP is the best selling Windows yet, but hey, it's 3 versions back now. That makes it old. BUT, it's still sold and selling millions. M$ is going to support it until 2014...

[mikea76 184]

 

.With all of that said, we have been very well supported by Laminar Research. They have been gracious in providing us with copies of the release version of XPlane10 to work with- and as previously mentioned I am adding someone to the team who will be spearheading the process of porting one of our existing aircraft into Xplane10.What we learn and how well that process goes will, to a large degree, dictate whether we choose to support that platform in the long run.The folks at Lockheed Martin have been the polar opposite. Our Commercial Division has been reaching out to them for a year without any reply back. (Well- actually we gave up on them in September...so make that nine months) Perhaps I'm just getting cranky in my old age- but if we are going to sell a bunch of commercial licenses for them I'm really not inclined to start shelling out money to buy their over-priced, dressed up FSX for every member of the development team without knowing for certain where they plan on taking the platform.

Wow that is very interesting. Robert, your company is one of a handful that could sway where the hardcore simmers go after FSX.. If PMDG builds for X-plane that could make a big difference. The part about L-M is very disappointing to hear, but honestly with how they are forced to market P3D I am not sure it could ever really takeoff

[Blaze 102]

Nice to hear the relationship with XP is warming up.LM is just to much of a commercial giant to ever have made me feel comfortable providing support to what only amounts to a handful of consumer enthusiasts to them. However, if they can continue to evolve P3D while allowing us to use it then it certainly can't be a bad thing for any of us.

Edited January 7, 2012 by Blaze

[fsxnate 0]

thank you Robert, you will always have my loyalty, keep FSX alive.