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

[maxter 0]

...only to find out that in 18 months they could only pull off 2 planes and one island

I wonder how this assumption can be made with any degree of honesty or veracity given the amount of information that is available for the product?

[xplanery 250]

I wonder how this assumption can be made with any degree of honesty or veracity given the amount of information that is available for the product?

Its already in beta testing.

[Guest]

Its already in beta testing.

But that doesn't mean gtrbarbarian was right. Everyone knows MS developed more than 2 planes and an island, even those who don't have the beta. And even the ones who hate MS Flight will have to confirm that. How MUCH more we don't know yet, but certainly more,

[garsands 0]

First I will start off by repeating myself.I am not Blaming third party developers for the way MS Flight has turn out If I was the thread title would read.third party developers ARE to be blamed for the way Flight has ended up.I am NOT looking for someone to blame.I am asking questions.Going to recap.I asked the question below in my opening post.

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?I was told no that's not how business works & if someone makes money off someone elses software they should not have to pay the makerof that software any money in return. So no money should be given back to MS

I then post this quote for John Venema Orbx CEOSource is herehttp://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/36939-prepar3d/page__view__findpost__p__321787He is talking about his plans with Orbx software & Prepar3D

'They will be priced at commercial levels from AU$4000 for NA regions and AU$7000 for all of Australia. Airports will be AU$2500 each.Clearly, this pricing is prohibitive for personal developer use, but very cost effective and affordable for companies who will use FTX to make profit from it.'

for companies who will use FTX to make profit from it (it being Orbx software)I then ask the same question again and I get null reply.I was also then told that third party developers make very little from the software they make for FSX.The above quote shows the true amount that FSX software is being sold for, that seems a bit more then very little money.John has also said in this thread that he has already sold software at the above prices.The point of they don't have to as that's not how business works has been removed due to Orbx charging there commercial customers extra as they willbe making a profit from orbx software.You can't have it both ways.

we still see posts like the one above quoting our commercial pricing without really having any understanding of how our business works or comprehending the difference between the enthusiast/hobby market and the commercial markets.

Questions.Have you turned MS FSX software addons into a commercial business?Or are you a small group of FSX fans making some addons for free or for bit of beer money?Are you now a MS FSX commercial customer using there software to make a profit from it & not some beer money?You are now selling this software to your commercial customers at a commercial price as they are then going to charge there customers a fee to use it & in turn make money from it.Questions.What does MS get out of this deal?Is this how MS FSX intended there SDK to be used?As a commercial customer you only paid MS the retail price of FSX for the SDK same as the enthusiast/hobby market.But as a commercial customer should you not be paying MS alot more for it a commercial price for the SDK? as you are making money from it & not just beer money.Same deal as you do with your commercial customers?You have said it yourself

MS provided an SDK for FSX, which spawned a sub-industry.

I am confused am I missing something here?I have only read up to post 171 so far as I am short of time but will read rest later.I am learning all the time.As the thread title readsthird party developers to be blamed for the way Flight has ended up? Have some turned the use of the SDK into a commercial business?Just asking.I will cover your points about the third party developers making FSX what is today & have kept people playing it, later I have not forgoten.I only post what I have learnedI only ask questions.I am not blaming anyoneAny answers to questions that I post I support with quotes or the Source of the answer.I am not accusing anyone of anything just asking questions.

[N400QW 205]

First mistake: John Venema is not now and never has been a spokesman for 3rd Party Developers.Second mistake: Relying on the numbers as presented by John Venema who publically admits to violating an NDA which is a legal agreement between two parties and violates the rules here in this forum.BUSTING NDA's NOTICE: FLIGHT is in BETA testing. All BETA testers are subject to an NDA. Any material posted here or elsewhere in the forums that come from BETA testing in violation of the NDA, will be removed. Copying links to violating material will also result in topic removal. Repeat offenders will have their posting privileges removed.

[frankla 44]

First mistake: John Venema is not now and never has been a spokesman for 3rd Party Developers.Second mistake: Relying on the numbers as presented by John Venema who publically admits to violating an NDA which is a legal agreement between two parties and violates the rules here in this forum.BUSTING NDA's NOTICE: FLIGHT is in BETA testing. All BETA testers are subject to an NDA. Any material posted here or elsewhere in the forums that come from BETA testing in violation of the NDA, will be removed. Copying links to violating material will also result in topic removal. Repeat offenders will have their posting privileges removed.

When couple of month ago, I suggested that IF john was under NDA he was breaking it and IF he wasn't he was spreading rumors and that either way it was a wrong thing to do (specially since he would never say he was not under NDA), he threatened to sue me. Somehow I was expecting John to be slapped on the wrist. To my dismay and great disgust AVSIM got ME banned for 30 days instead. Edited January 10, 2012 by frankla

[EarthSimulations 8]

If Flight1 feels otherwise then that is your prerogative but please don't make it personal.

John V N400QWI've no idea if it's really the case..But you are really making it all sound like it's personal with these and your other ever so slightly effervescent reactions to anything John V has said in recent days. The impact of any valid points you might be making N400QW seem to me at least a little eroded when your comments towards John appear to be initiated out of spite... even if they are not, to me at least you are certainly making it look that way.

[alainneedle1 97]

When earlier I suggested that if john was under NDA he was breaking it and if he wasn't he was spreading rumors and that either way it was a wrong thing to do, he threatened to sue me. Somehow I was expecting John to be slapped on the wrist. To my dismay and great disgust AVSIM got ME banned for 30 days instead.

Exactly, David gave you 30 days vacation for saying IF, and you are right John broke his NDA period.Now since he is a commercial member and some mod. here do like PreparD3 what will happen???Now that we all know you were right since John admitted to be in with Flight did you get an apology from Avsim? Edited January 10, 2012 by alainneedle1

[frankla 44]

Exactly, David gave you 30 days vacation for saying IF, and you are right John broke his NDA period.Now since he is a commercial member and some mod. here do like PreparD3 what will happen???Now that we all know you were right since John admitted to be in with Flight did you get an apology from Avsim?

Thank you Allain,I am not holding my breath for an AVSIM apology. Edited January 10, 2012 by frankla

[N400QW 205]

N400QWI've no idea if it's really the case..But you are really making it all sound like it's personal with these and your other ever so slightly effervescent reactions to anything John V has said in recent days.The impact of any valid points you might be making N400QW seem to me at least a little eroded when your comments towards John appear to be initiated out of spite... even if they are not, to me at least you are certainly making it look that way.

BUSTING NDA's NOTICE: FLIGHT is in BETA testing. All BETA testers are subject to an NDA. Any material posted here or elsewhere in the forums that come from BETA testing in violation of the NDA, will be removed. Copying links to violating material will also result in topic removal. Repeat offenders will have their posting privileges removed.

Again, John Venema is certainly not in a leadership/spokesperson position among 3PDs and is clearly in violation of the Avsim forum rules as quoted.The question of whether he violated an NDA with Microsoft is quite obviously answered from John Venemas own public posts.

[jbinner 15]

and on that note, I think this thread has gone far enough. Locking it.