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

[drumsonly2002 3]

Sorry to sound nosey, does that mean Orbx sells approx 30,000 units on average per release? They have high overhead, but it is sustained by a somewhat small but focused community. A community under 50,000 is small verses the shoot em up communities and games like Warcraft. must be hard for 3rd party devolopers to keep supper on the table year in, year out. Sorry off topic.

[SpiritFlyer 987]

No way, Dan. It is just a small fraction of that per release on the average, probably even in the small single digit percentage wise. That would be my take on it, not that I know for certain or anything, but the total FSX "community" is a whole lot smaller than most think, and likely shrinking over time.

Edited January 8, 2012 by SpiritFlyer

[Clipper Ocean Spray 189]

Yes, but think of this for a moment, just how much that add on sales would INCREASE if the main welcome screen for Flight is the "gateway" to add-ons?

Not very much IMO. The presumption underlying this reasoning is that users that became truly interested in the FSX hobby using default FSX were not able to search the internet and find the user communities, freeware addons, and payware. Seems unlikely to me. More likely IMO is these users would easily have the desire and technical capability to find the freeware and payware market. The inclusion of a gateway in Flight will thus have little effect. Serious users interested in getting more from Flight will find the addons, just as it was before in FSX. The big difference this time around is these users will find the FSX and related add-on markets, then get lured away just at the time they would have become Flight paying customers (unless MS changes course).

[Guest]

Yah, uuhmmm - just because "we" the Flight Sim community "know how" to dig in and download add ons, install them, etc. I think the add on devs missed the boat by not thinking outside the box enough --- I mean "we" the FS community are "smart" and get it with add ons and how to do them, but MOST (98%?) of the people out there aren't going to be bothered by looking things up on the net or going to AVSIM... they want it ALL right in front of them with a SIMPLE BUY NOW button within the game itself. It's just how the world is today. Hey even I like the simplicity of it all at times ;)

Er... in case you didn't notice, I completely agree with you. :(

From what I have read in various places it's more like they were forbidden to board, and I think that was planned all along.

Well, yeah, that's what the devs say, of course. :( They don't want to be blamed for missing the boat. But MS still says they would like to work with other developers, but the addons have to be sold through the MS Flight store. Amongst others. Robert from PMDG told a clear story about it. And though I understand their decision, I still doubt if they made the right decision. Remarks from Orbx like 'Later in 2010 we were told to go away, no SDK will be shipped.' have to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Not very much IMO. The presumption underlying this reasoning is that users that became truly interested in the FSX hobby using default FSX were not able to search the internet and find the user communities, freeware addons, and payware. Seems unlikely to me. More likely IMO is these users would easily have the desire and technical capability to find the freeware and payware market. The inclusion of a gateway in Flight will thus have little effect. Serious users interested in getting more from Flight will find the addons, just as it was before in FSX.The big difference this time around is these users will find the FSX and related add-on markets, then get lured away just at the time they would have become Flight paying customers (unless MS changes course).

The thing simply is that the majority of FSX buyers don't even KNOW about addons. When they download MS Flight they WILL. But after playing MS Flight those customers won't be able to appreciate FSX anymore because FSX looks very outdated out of the box and needs a lot of work to get it running right. I don't believe MS Flight will convert many people to FSX.

[BIGSKY 316]

FSX4Life stated, "It couldn't be all that difficult to take the FSX 737-800 and turn it into the full 737NG family" Really now? Let's ask PMDG,how easy it was to develop their NGX line?M$ did not then,or now, have the expertise to develop complex ad-dons,or they would have done it.This is why Flight will fail.

[KERNEL32 510]

 

Er... in case you didn't notice, I completely agree with you. :(

Yip - I know, just making some basic observations in agreement to what you said, but whether we all agree or not, the basic point being that we are where we are, and either we will see the new model succeed or fail - time will tell!

[3-2-1-Now 126]

Let me put it this way: Windows only cost me £70 OEM, yet I paid £4500 for LabVIEW FPGA development software. Is that fair to Microsoft?It is a BS comparison. Flight Sim is the OS. Add-ons are the programs we run on top of it, and cost many times more.If I buy a Mercedes, should I compensate BMW? Of course not!!!Best regards,Robin.

[alainneedle1 97]

True. Maybe we should compare the beta and the upcoming free version of MS Flight to the FSX demo... That one also only had a few islands...! Who knows what MS has created without telling us! To be honest I can hardly imagine they have been working all this time on such a small island. But that's just speculation, of course.

:( :( ......

[garsands 0]

First off in my opening post I am not trying to blame anyone for the root that MS Flight has taken.If I was the thread title would have been 'third party developers ARE to be blamed for the way Flight has ended up'As some one posted at the start

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.

mine told me the same.She also told me

if you don't ask questions you will never know

This is why I started this Thread to ask this question.

Are the 3rd third party developers to be blamed for the way Flight has ended up?

I don't know much about this if I did I would not have made this thread.I don't know how much 3rd third party developers make for addons, I would not expect them to tell me it's none of my business.I don't know how many copy's of FSX have been sold.I don't Know the % of users that buy addons.Nor have I claimed to.But what I do know is that something has gone wrong with the path that MS Flight has taken & it saddens me.We are here posting on this forum because we are passionate & have strong feelings about FSX.I also know that FSX with 3rd third party addons REX, Orbx, PMDG, ATC looks beautiful, stunning, amazing many of a time I have thought to myself WOW.But then I look at the FPS & it takes alot of the joy away.Then I look at the MS Flight screen shot's and it's WOW again that battle ship in the port! the shadows! the FPS what I have read 60FPS.Yes we can have all that but on one island, but we also know eye candy is only half of what FSX.Then I think this could be done anywhere in the whole world & it's there locked away in MS Flight ready to be used but NO.That battle ship in the port! that's better then any addon I have seen made for FSX not the fault of the third party developers as they can only use what FSX can give them.I then think put MS Flight in the hands of Orbx & what they could come up with. WOW again but that's not going to happen.This quote

It is surprising and almost shocking to find such basic lack of understanding on how business works whether brick and mortor wholesale and retail or software wholesale and retail.This appears to be most evident in the FS "community" which bashes the very providers of the platform and content they wish to enjoy.

I am no expert & don't claim to be but I am learning.I find this comment about my post strange

and now the blame game is in the forefront of your mind

but all I see over the forums, youtube comments, ect is 100's of simmers blaming MS for the root flight has taken. blame game you say?I am not looking to blame anyone I am on no one's side I just want MS Flight to work don't we all? Reading 100's of negative comments about MS Flight I am not so sure.So much so simmers feel the need to use this M$ why so negative, they gave you FSX.I also know that FSX is not going to get any better anytime soon when it come's to FPS 10GHz CPU anyone? 10 years time? what are we at now 5.2GHz it's taken 2+ years to go up 1GHz.Last note what no flamming of my OP? I was expecting the worse!I took a risk starting this thread as I was not sure how well it would be taken, also not the best thread to start when it was my 1st post here.I thank you. I have learnt a bit more.

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Welcome Garsands, :( You are a great addition to AVSIM and I hope you stay around and get involved from now on. I like your style! :good:Kind regards,

Edited January 8, 2012 by SpiritFlyer

[dmaher 0]

For the 90% (or more) that don’t use add-ons their sim choice is about what they perceive as a good value. A small active group of hardcore users contributes a lot to reputation. The less folks know about something the more they defer to a products reputation. Those sorts of signals about reputation are everywhere and they stick with us. I’m not saying the actions of the 10% rule the choices of the 90%...just that reputation is a factor. And it’s just as much of a factor in the casual market. The success of Zynga, which MS is possibly trying to copy, is mostly about the power of this peer to peer endorsement. T think it’s getting more important not less.For what it’s worth, I figure this new revenue model for Flight didn’t come from the Flight team but wasimposed on them as part of a wider MS strategy. And it may even be 'right' for many products. The problem is that folks generally overestimate the profitability of FS add-ons (because costs aren’t discussed). While a tiny minority may generate income, my feeling is the sum total for the entire ‘industry’ is closer to break-even; many struggling to recover their true out-of-pocket investment…but very happy just to be involved. And that makes it not so different than the free-ware days. That’s all fine, and if MS needs to recover all their costs in the add-on market it’ll mean a lot of change. It’s very hard to imagine how all that will play out…it's experimental ;)

[n4gix 4,955]

LOL That's what I've been saying all the time! And that's why 3rd party devs should have jumped on the MS Flight train! But they didn't...

You have no idea whatever what the "terms" MS was demanding, so there's no basis whatever to make such a conclusion. In other threads and replies some have intimated that developers were "greedy" etc., and writing as though developers are some multi-national corporations with thousands on staff...The reality is that vast majority of developers are very, very small groups who've banded together to make an extremely small profit from what remains to them primarily a second job, but is still mostly a hobby. Some of us are retired old farts who are trying to supplement our retirement income. For that matter some -such as FSGenesis- are one-man-bands!The further reality is that the "payware market" is incredibly tiny and horribly fragmented. It is far, far smaller than anyone other than a developer can possibly imagine.

[Paavo 2]

So, who of you has a receipt proving that you've paid royalties to Microsoft for using their Windows platform to share your thoughts with us here, on Avsim?

[gkvarga 0]

Both sides are to be blamed for this whole scenario. In the end they did not come to a business solution that was able to work for both the OEM or the aftermarket supplier.Although I did have apprehensions of the MS Live marketplace, I also beleive that the marketplace could have been a very good filter to ensure only high quality add-ons were available for Flight. Let's face it, there are only very few reputable third party developers in the FS world. Most create substandard work at outrageous prices (i.e. some camera utility for $30?? really?), or create hype on soon to be released products that never do come to fruition and blatantly mislead customers and treat them like garbage, (i.e Airsimmer), or charge $30 for airport scenery?? $30 really? There are no specific controls on quality and cost in this hobby. The marketplace had the opportunity to do this, in the end the customer may have very well benefitted the most.Many FS developers have no right in leeching off this hobby, yet they do because they can, there are no controls to their misleading marketing and agendas. But with close integration with MS Live, those unreputables could not do business as M$ would not want them tarnishing their reputation. In addition, those available add-ons would have been much better integrated into the FS operating system as both the OEM and 3rd party would work in conjunction with each other. The potential was here to create a beautiful simulation experience, but both messed it up. In fact the more I think about it, I put more of the blame on the 3rd party developers for wasting this opportunity.This whole hobby has become disfunctional in many ways, and crooked to say the least.

[mgh 89]

The further reality is that the "payware market" is incredibly tiny and horribly fragmented. It is far, far smaller than anyone other than a developer can possibly imagine.

Which may be one of the reasons Microsoft chose to ignore it?