third party developers to be blamed for the way Flight has ended up?

[garsands 0]

Are the 3rd third party developers to be blamed for the way Flight has ended up?At the moment do third party developers pay MS flight any fees from the profit they make on addons for FSX?I ask as I have paid MS £20 for FSX & that's all, but I have paid third party developers over £150 some of you have paid £500+So why should MS only get £20 but third party developers get £150 from me?If it was not for FSX the third party developers would not get any money they are only able to make money off the back of MS.If I started a new business & my business model showed that I am going to be making less money then the third party developers using MY software I would be called crazy is this how FSX works at the moment?Here are a few quotesFrom John Venema Orbx CEO

'since we cannot generate income from such a proprietary arrangement'

'If they can convince third party developers to create content for it, I wish them luck. I doubt if any company will agree to their terms.'

From from PMDG

'Since that time, I have watched (at times in dismay) the project transitioned from "modest proposal" to "green-lit console-style game" to "resurgent FSX replacement" and back to the console-ish game that the product seems to have become in it's final format.'

So MS Flight started as a 'modest proposal' & even went to a 'resurgent FSX replacement'So what happened? did MS then tell the third party developers we now want a cut of all the sales of addons from the money you make off the back of OUR software? & they said no thanksHere is a quote from this site http://www.theregist...light_sim_free/

'come to a deal with the existing developer base for a level of compatibility - in exchange for a 30 per cent cut of the take.'

So at the moment do the third party developers give any money they make off the back of FSX back to MS?Are the third party developers the ones that have made MS flight take the path it's taken?MS can't model the whole world to a high standard on there own so what was left for them to do?Model the Hawaiian Islands & make it into a airborne Grand Theft Auto.But just think under that there is a new 60+ FPS FSX just waiting to be unleashed to us but not with out the 3rd third party developers.Do the 3rd third party developers want MS Flight to fail why the need for the post from Orbx & PMDG?Do they want us to carry on buying addons for FSX where they keep all the money? and not have to hand over 30% to MS.Is it right that MS only get my £20 but the 3rd third party developers get my £150? when if it was not for FSX they would get nothing.Just my thought's

[JasonHarris 96]

Why would MS get money from 3rd parties? MS had an open platform with no arrangement to take royalties with FSX. It takes time and effort to make these addons and they cost money and most do not sell al lot. Microsoft got it's money back by selling millions of copies in the flight sim franchise. Third party developers could only dream of that many sales, their prices are higher because they need to be to make up for the small amount of sales. Thats just straight maths and economics. Edit. Also it's not entirely fair to compare to something like the apple store where you keep 70% etc. For a lot of developers on apples stores, they never had the infrastructure to process payments, run the website etc. Current 3rd parties have all of that, they have a sales channel so the benefit it not as high. Also, apple open up a much bigger audience to developers than flight will ever do to flight addon makers. ps. I dont know where 30% you quatoed came from. I think it's a figure pulled out of the air and we have no idea what it could/woud be in relation to flight.

Edited January 8, 2012 by JasonHarris

[Guest HowardHughes]

Are the 3rd third party developers to be blamed for the way Flight has ended up?No.At the moment do third party developers pay MS flight any fees from the profit they make on addons for FSX?No.I ask as I have paid MS £20 for FSX & that's all, but I have paid third party developers over £150 some of you have paid £500+So why should MS only get £20 but third party developers get £150 from me?Because 3rd party developers massively extend the user base and life cycle of the product. Third party additions to FS2004 have made it a valid and popular flight sim 7 years down the line.If it was not for FSX the third party developers would not get any money they are only able to make money off the back of MS.If it wasn't for 3rd party developers FSX would be a dead/dying.If I started a new business & my business model showed that I am going to be making less money then the third party developers using MY software I would be called crazy is this how FSX works at the moment?Here are a few quotesFrom John Venema Orbx CEOFrom from PMDGSo MS Flight started as a 'modest proposal' & even went to a 'resurgent FSX replacement'So what happened? did MS then tell the third party developers we now want a cut of all the sales of addons from the money you make off the back of OUR software? & they said no thanksHere is a quote from this site http://www.theregist...light_sim_free/They said 'no thanks' due to the fact that MS Flight is not a platform on which you can build. It is an arcade game with extremely limited capability.So at the moment do the third party developers give any money they make off the back of FSX back to MS?Yes, through additional sales of the software via a massively increased user base.Are the third party developers the ones that have made MS flight take the path it's taken?No.MS can't model the whole world to a high standard on there own so what was left for them to do?They didn't need to. They didn't with FS2004, or with FSX.Model the Hawaiian Islands & make it into a airborne Grand Theft Auto.But just think under that there is a new 60+ FPS FSX just waiting to be unleashed to us but not with out the 3rd third party developers.Do the 3rd third party developers want MS Flight to fail why the need for the post from Orbx & PMDG?Why would they want it to fail? They want it to succeed beyond their wildest dreams. They'd all be hugely rich.Do they want us to carry on buying addons for FSX where they keep all the money? and not have to hand over 30% to MS.They hand over a percentage to the publishers anyway. They pay huge amounts of money for website building and maintenance, as well as a publisher for their material. It probably equates to 30% of the value of the product anyway. Is it right that MS only get my £20 but the 3rd third party developers get my £150? when if it was not for FSX they would get nothing.And if it weren't for 3rd party developers then MSFS wouldn't have sold half the copies it did of FSX/FS2004.Just my thought's

...

[Arwen 289]

One of the main reasons that FSX has sold so well is because of the amount (and quality) of 3rd party addons/enhancements.Most of us would not still be playing FSX if it wasn't for the 3rd party addons.

[Zangoose 1,631]

Flight Simulator would of been pretty much dead years ago if it wasn't due to the many addons you can get for it whether that is payware and freeware. They have helped the community to grow into what it is today.

[Swifta 0]

I kinda see the point the OP is trying to get at...and in a way sort of make sense but it's a double edged sword. I'm pretty sure if devs had to pay MS some type of royalties for FSX, it prbly wouldn't be around today.... At the same time if devs had been paying royalties to MS then we'd prbly have a new full fledged flight sim by now but with less addons... Idk which side to take because I can understand both of them...There's + and - to both sides but now that I think about it I would rather have the latter and at this time be exeriencing the beta of a new full fledged flight sim. I personally would rather have a new flight sim every 4-5 years and new addons to boot with it! I think the problem lies with the community (as i've stated in a prev thread) and it's unwillingness to move on to new things. When fsx came out there was a huge uproar against fsx as in it's too early for a new sim and other BS that people that are part of this community post. I am not at all surprised MS is trying to break itself off from this community, can't seem to please you guys either way. If they bring a new game out it's why why why too soon I'm sticking with current fs, if they dont bring one out its waa waaa waa QQ MS is stupid for not continuing fs. It's a LOSE LOSE for MS either way with this community. What you guys need to realize is if you don't partner with MS in order to share profits then forget MSFS all together because it will become completey extinct!

Edited January 8, 2012 by Swifta

[Mike T 208]

That's absolutely not how business works. At Cisco Systems, how much money do we get from HP when they write software to monitor our switches and routers. Nothing. How much did Infiniti get when I bought a new set of after market rims for my car? Nothing. How much did my home builder get when we added a new patio? Nothing. How much does Boeing get if Continental decided to retrofit their flight decks with new equipment from a 3rd party? Nothing. How much will Apple get if I buy a new leather case for my iPad from a 3rd party? Nothing. How much should Microsoft get because PMDG is selling the NGX for FSX?The way it works is 3rd party suppliers hitch their wagon to the main manufacturer's star. They depend on sales of the main product to drive sales of the 3rd party product. It also works both ways. If a 3rd party product is popular then it drives sales of the main product. If the PMDG NGX is a demanded product then it will drive sales of FSX which is needed to run it. PMDG makes money, Microsoft makes money. The price point for the main product or the 3rd party is irrelevant in this model.This is the whole reason for the concept of the App store. NOW, if the main developer closes off sales EXCEPT through their store they get to take a cut as the distributor and make the terms. This is the way to get around what I described above. If I could only get rims from the Infiniti store or Cisco made everyone sell their products through the Cisco Store then that is a different story.HOWEVER, my mother always said that "a story has two sides" and in this case I am sure that we have only heard one side of the story.

Edited January 8, 2012 by Mike T

[RicardoNY1 2]

Are the 3rd third party developers to be blamed for the way Flight has ended up?At the moment do third party developers pay MS flight any fees from the profit they make on addons for FSX?I ask as I have paid MS £20 for FSX & that's all, but I have paid third party developers over £150 some of you have paid £500+So why should MS only get £20 but third party developers get £150 from me?If it was not for FSX the third party developers would not get any money they are only able to make money off the back of MS.

Are you serious? Do you have any sense of reality or understand how third party devleopment, free or payware, has shaped the future and success of the MSFS franchise? Placing blame on the 3rd party developes is like farting in an elevator and looking at the guy standing next to you.Ask yourself this.......why does MS need the cooperation of 3rd party developers anyway? Do they not have the talent or resources to pump out their own add-ons? Probably not. Now tell me..........who is riding whose back? Or is it one hand washing the other at this point?

[ohsirus 241]

Well hate to say it, but FSX must not have been the cash cow it was supposed to have been, thus the shift in direction. If third pary developers were not onboard for MS licensing as it is a niche market, they should have done as they have done in offering a free game with microtransactions and offer a full version at a true-sim price to offset the loss of 3rd party fees. Honestly I think the price should be close to that of their O/S's.

[JonP01 104]

One of the main reasons that FSX has sold so well is because of the amount (and quality) of 3rd party addons/enhancements.Most of us would not still be playing FSX if it wasn't for the 3rd party addons.

Well I have never seen any definitive figures showing the total stock FSX units sold versus the total stock FSX units sold for which third party add-ons were purchased. Whilst what you say is certainly true for the hard core enthusiast and thus virtually everyone here (including myself), I would still like to know the definitive answer.My feeling is that Microsoft's original plan was to farm out all Flight development post core Hawaii game to third parties. Therefore the "third party add-on" market would have been fundamentally huge compared to FSX, since the free game is (almost literally) a drop in the ocean compared to even the stock FSX.

[JasonHarris 96]

Placing blame on the 3rd party developes is like farting in an elevator and looking at the guy standing next to you.

This tactic is perfectly valid if there are at least three of you in the elevator.

[fly_a_mig17 0]

That's absolutely not how business works. At Cisco Systems, how much money do we get from HP when they write software to monitor our switches and routers. Nothing. How much did Infiniti get when I bought a new set of after market rims for my car? Nothing. How much did my home builder get when we added a new patio? Nothing. How much does Boeing get if Continental decided to retrofit their flight decks with new equipment from a 3rd party? Nothing. How much will Apple get if I buy a new leather case for my iPad from a 3rd party? Nothing. How much should Microsoft get because PMDG is selling the NGX for FSX?The way it works is 3rd party suppliers hitch their wagon to the main manufacturer's star. They depend on sales of the main product to drive sales of the 3rd party product. It also works both ways. If a 3rd party product is popular then it drives sales of the main product. If the PMDG NGX is a demanded product then it will drive sales of FSX which is needed to run it. PMDG makes money, Microsoft makes money. The price point for the main product or the 3rd party is irrelevant in this model.

I totally agree Mike...All FSX was, was a platform, basement, foundation. From there, the third party developers finish the rest. Microsoft realized that they lost alot more profit when they didnt have a market of their own. Unfortunately, FSX was such a big success that enthusiast have put alot of their own money into amazing addons to create a whole better picture. You snooze, you lose.I probably still wouldn't have ordered any add-ons from Microsoft because the quality blows.

[b1m2d3 0]

Looking at how well FS9 and FSX have done over the years simply b/c of 3rd party developers, MS could have made a KILLING off of MS Flight. And I do mean a killing!!!Had they focused on what FSX/FS9 offers, but improved upon it with new coding and still allowed 3rd party developers to create addon's for it they could literally sell the software for probably $100 per copy.If they were smart enough about it, they could have worked out some sort of deal with 3rd party developers to help make the new sim the greatest thing since sliced bread and still profit for years to come.As already stated, 3rd party developers are the ones that have kept FS9 and FSX alive all these years and have expanded the flight simming user base.MS really screwed the pooch with Flight. They must have some real idiots in their finance/development dept.I guess just b/c you're greedy doesn't mean your smart to boot!

[Swifta 0]

I totally agree Mike...All FSX was, was a platform, basement, foundation. From there, the third party developers finish the rest. Microsoft realized that they lost alot more profit when they didnt have a market of their own. Unfortunately, FSX was such a big success that enthusiast have put alot of their own money into amazing addons to create a whole better picture. You snooze, you lose.I probably still wouldn't have ordered any add-ons from Microsoft because the quality blows.

This kind of thinking is what will hinder any future success in this genre!Guys that might be how construction and other types of business works but you have to realize MS is also in the console business where they get royalties from EVERYTHING that comes and goes through the xbox. Sony is the same with ps3, Nintendo, etc... even STEAM gets royalties obviously for products sold but also on DLC for products offered. Welcome to the age of software entertainment... it's not the same as your basement! Edited January 8, 2012 by Swifta

[simmerhead 885]

No, and if MS wanted they could have just made their own addons and probably sold a lot more of them than all independent developers combined.