If you would ask people in 1995 if they would pay for MP3 in a internet-market store (like Itunes) the answer would probably be "I don't know....i don't think so, i'll stick with CD's.If you would ask people in 2003 if the would pay for applications on your mobile phone (like a game) then people would probably say: I don't know....i play games or apps on my computer.All changes are difficult, only time will tell but I think we have to hope that FLIGHT will become a succes and that people are interested in learning more about flying. After all, we simmers all started on Meigs Field in a cesna....

All changes are difficult, only time will tell but I think we have to hope that FLIGHT will become a succes and that people are interested in learning more about flying. After all, we simmers all started on Meigs Field in a cesna....

I couldn't land that Cessna if my life depended on it! In FS98 I could load up the 747 with 5% fuel at Meigs and rotate with full flaps right at the end of the strip and stagger into the air and fly north until on base for O'hare, turn left and fly the boxes all the way down to the runway. Thrilling! I must have done that 500 times.Kind regards,

Edited January 11, 201214 yr by SpiritFlyer

I realize this is from way back in July, and MS could have definitely made a major shift in the direction they were heading, but check out the job description that they posted:http://forum.avsim.net/topic/339201-job-description-test-engineer-for-flight/

I have spent almost, not quite, but almost $4,000 on flight simulation software for FS9 and FSX alone including almost every good payware and freeware scenery and aircraft offered by almost everyone,

And of that $4,000 you probably spent no more than $100 on FS9 and FSX. Do you wonder Microsoft has changed its approach?

I realize this is from way back in July, and MS could have definitely made a major shift in the direction they were heading, but check out the job description that they posted:http://forum.avsim.n...eer-for-flight/

Flight will have SDK but it will be available only for those who agree to pay big part of their products bought from MS store to MS. And of course no third party freeware either...

Edited January 11, 201214 yr by pvjinflight

Flight will have SDK but it will be available only for those who agree to pay big part of their products bought from MS store to MS.

It already costs up to 30% expense to market a payware addon now. What possible difference could it make to whom the 30% is paid?Until and unless MS make clear what terms are required, I reserve my decision as to whether or not I'm interested...

And of that $4,000 you probably spent no more than $100 on FS9 and FSX. Do you wonder Microsoft has changed its approach?

Exactly. In this case, how fair is it when Microsoft allows a whole industry of 3PDs to market addons and rake in 97.5% for themselves while they themselves only have something like 2.5% of the pie. Even if only a few hundred dollars are spent, that will still amount to something like 90% or more going elsewhere. You don't have to be a CPA or a Philadelphia lawyer to know that such an arrangement won't go on forever without checks and balances being checked and balanced. We all know that MSFS helped make all the payware addon business possible and profitable by not charging royalties while providing the base, (at huge costs), for everything, without which the third party developers would have nothing, no market, no business, and couldn't even exist.That's OK for me. I have enjoyed the use of each and every addon and piece of equipment I have invested in this hobby. Obviously, like most of us, I wish I could make some of those decisions over again, but overall, it has been worth it. However few people have been able (or have been wise enough not to) spend a lot of money for non essential entertainment like many of us have. It always seemed odd to me that I would pay as much, or more, for an airplane, or a weather program, or a patch of scenery, or whatever, than I paid for the whole FS9 or FSX flight simulation program. It always seemed to me that there should be someway to put all these things and costs in a more proper balance, by making expansion of this hobby economically just, and more viable for many, at reduced costs by utilizing economies of scale. Maybe that is what Microsoft is trying to do with Flight, bringing cost/price/benefit rationalization to flight simulation. Nothing sinister, just sensible.That is why it seems so incredibly arrogant, and insanely stupid for anyone of us who rely upon MSFS for profit or pleasure to hurl insults and shake their fist defiantly in the face of the people who work for and own one of the most powerful corporations in the world. They have all the cards in the deck and are not without power and influence, and not afraid to discretely use it when sufficiently provoked. All of this, or none of this, might be instrumental in understanding why Microsoft has decided to work in house or only with select chosen third party developers they can get along with and together reach a mutually beneficial business and market sharing arrangement. Such an idea might help explain why they are holding their cards very close to their chests right now. Don't know.Someone wise once said, "Hold your friends closely, but hold your enemies even closer." These are interesting times.Kind regards,

Edited January 11, 201214 yr by SpiritFlyer

Again. Microsoft could have made their own addons if they wanted to. In fact they did with Acceleration. Always puzzeled my why they didn't think of creating addons sooner?

Exactly. In this case, how fair is it when Microsoft allows a whole industry of 3PDs to market addons and rake in 97.5% for themselves while they themselves only have something like 2.5% of the pie. Even if only a few hundred dollars are spent, that will still amount to something like 90% or more going elsewhere.

This is a little misleading, as not everyone who purchased FSX bought $4000 worth of addons, so MS isn't getting just 2.5% of the pie, as you say. You would have to compare the total sales of FSX compared to the total sales of FSX addons, and we don't have those numbers. We don't even have good estimates of those numbers.Your point is still valid though - why would Microsoft ignore the sales of addon products when it has the ability to sell them exclusively through its own online store. Compared to the current situation (collecting nothing), controlling the marketplace and collecting royalties seems like a win-win situation for them. I'm surprised they didn't do this earlier. Apple did the same thing with its app store (albeit, not exclusive), and it has been very successful and popular with customers.Anyway, your positive "wait and see" attitude might be something that more people should adopt. There's no use getting worked up over something you can't change anyway. Flight is the future at Microsoft.

Again. Microsoft could have made their own addons if they wanted to. In fact they did with Acceleration. Always puzzeled my why they didn't think of creating addons sooner?

Microsoft did no such thing! The new scenery was contracted out to third-party developers, as were the new aircraft and helicopter...

This is a little misleading, as not everyone who purchased FSX bought $4000 worth of addons, so MS isn't getting just 2.5% of the pie, as you say. You would have to compare the total sales of FSX compared to the total sales of FSX addons, and we don't have those numbers. We don't even have good estimates of those numbers.

And...as you know..it's not the $4000...it's the net profit that counts...that's the only money generated.If the costs amount to $3500 (this user's share of the dev costs) then this user generated $500 for profit. Yay!$4000 is a lot of add-ons btw. That would amount to every add-on I've ever wanted and then some :(

Microsoft did no such thing! The new scenery was contracted out to third-party developers, as were the new aircraft and helicopter...

Which is precicely what they may be doing right now... :)

And...as you know..it's not the $4000...it's the net profit that counts...that's the only money generated.If the costs amount to $3500 (this user's share of the dev costs) then this user generated $500 for profit. Yay!$4000 is a lot of add-ons btw. That would amount to every add-on I've ever wanted and then some :(

Yeah, it seems like a lot, but that was spread over about 8 years with both FS9 and FSX, so really, it's under $500.00 a year, or about $40.00 a month or so average, which sounds a lot better. It's a lot safer to say it that way whenever I have to explain "the cost of Stephen's play airplane stuff" around here! :( Shhhh! Just don't mention anything about all the new hardware...Kind regards,

Edited January 12, 201214 yr by SpiritFlyer

And of that $4,000 you probably spent no more than $100 on FS9 and FSX. Do you wonder Microsoft has changed its approach?

Out of all the arguments and points made in the last few weeks, MGH summed it up in one sentence. Unfortuntately, numbers don't lie. Not to say some of this blame doesn't lie with Microsoft because this business model was and is under their control. Flight is a radical wakeup call of their own making and it ends up being like a bear waking up from hibernation and going on a feeding frenzy and there is nothing but carnage all over the landscape. I figure that the pendulum will eventually swing the other direction eventually and all will settle somewhere in the middle.The truth is that Microsoft cannot develop even a portion of what we have for FSX by themselves and the 3rd party developers can't develop FSX forever so the two will either meet in the middle or destroy either other.

Edited January 12, 201214 yr by Mike T

Out of all the arguments and points made in the last few weeks, MGH summed it up in one sentence. Unfortuntately, numbers don't lie. Not to say some of this blame doesn't lie with Microsoft because this business model was and is under their control. Flight is a radical wakeup call of their own making and it ends up being like a bear waking up from hibernation and going on a feeding frenzy and there is nothing but carnage all over the landscape. I figure that the pendulum will eventually swing the other direction eventually and all will settle somewhere in the middle.The truth is that Microsoft cannot develop even a portion of what we have for FSX by themselves and the 3rd party developers can't develop FSX forever so the two will either meet in the middle or destroy either other.

You are right Mike. They could perhaps destroy each other! I hope that does not happen, for all our sakes. Maybe when the decks are cleared cooler heads will prevail.Kind regards,

Edited January 12, 201214 yr by SpiritFlyer