Will Flight Hurt FSX Addon Vendors?

[nudata 10]

Most would possibly agree that the quality and longevity of FSX is, in large measure, due to the array of addons (free and pay) that have emerged over the years. It took Microsoft management awhile to allow an SDK. They seemed focused on the success of the closed Apple model. Once the SDKs appeared wonderful addons showed up and it was like getting a new product.Now we are faced with an allegedly closed product as a follow-on to FSX. This presents some problems for those loyal addon producers. If a sizable number of FSX users move to Flight the customer base remaining for FSX will shrink. The authors will see no opportunity to move their wares to the closed Flight and may shutter their virtual shops. This will dry-up the addon products and FSX will simply die on the vine as the remaining base seeks a richer flight simulator environment. In-other-words Flight may become responsible for ruining FSX.

[Bray 1]

From what I have seen of Flight I will be looking at more 3rd party addons for FSX.

[drumsonly2002 3]

Flight would not have hurt these guys http://cerasimaircraft.com/ Cerasim's business was stolen by those too cowardly to pay for the hard work of others. Leaches. What is hurting the industry is thieves. Great companies are not immune to this. Lots of "free" payware. Payware is being downloaded at a rate that cannot be measured. Flight's download model would have helped Cerasim who made very nice products. So nice they went broke from people stealing it. What sales are lost from stealing? The free ride should stop so developers can make money and produce more product. If Flight pays the vendors the proper amount, they will help. At least the vendor's product does not end up as Little Johnny's or Job Slob's "freeware".

Edited January 16, 2012 by drumsonly2002

[japascoe 98]

Did I miss the announcement that Flight will contain a virus that will permanently destroy all copies of FSX? FSX and all the add-ons available for it currently will work just fine. Now it may be that in the fullness of time enough people will migrate away from FSX (though probably not to Flight) that it becomes no longer economically attractive to develop new add-ons for FSX, but everything there is will remain in working condition. If that ruins FSX for you, then perhaps you should ask yourself why you can only be content with a program if it gives you a shiny new add-on to play with every month.Mozart will never write another note of music, but that doesn't ruin what he did compose.But if it gives you any piece of mind, both Orbx and PMDG have announced they will be developing for FSX for the forseeable future.

[simmerhead 885]

Piracy has been an annoyance for as long as I have used computers (1985). Still the gaming industry has never been more succesful than it is today.

[xplanery 250]

Probably not. With current information about Flight I could see it to have future as simulator/game focused more on general aviation flying than really airliners. And also big amount of people who fly GA like to do it much in areas they know in real life, which would probably make amount of people who move completely from FSX to Flight even smaller.I believe that FSX community will stay very alive for several years.

[drumsonly2002 3]

If a man is cut and bleeding, trying to control the injury is better than watching him bleed to death like Cerasim has been bled to death by thieft. At least they would of had a fighting chance. Leaving your candy bowl uncovered at a party insures it will be emptied verses putting it somewhere it is harder to get at. Cerasim did not have the funds to provide protective infrastructure for their product. Big pockets Flight can provide such for the small guy. Orbx as their own system not needing Flight's on line store. Regardless, in the case of Cerasim, Flight would have been of help in that situation. So my reply to the topic, in some cases Flight will help. I do not know what Flight collects for commission for selling products, so I do not know if their business model will hurt developers.

Edited January 16, 2012 by drumsonly2002

[Guest jahman]

It took Microsoft management awhile to allow an SDK. They seemed focused on the success of the closed Apple model.

Remember Microsoft today is what it is thanks to an open business miodel: You don't have to pay MS for the apps you run under windows, or the documents you create under Word, or Excel, etc.If MS did extremely well on an open model, why switch to a closed model now with Flight?Cheers,- jahman.

[gtrbarbarian 1]

Who says that its all good?

It's only good if you don't want to stifle creativity in software development. Startups can barely afford to keep the lights on in many cases...if they are looking at a closed computer model where MS skims profits through a forced participation in the Windows store, where MS wants to own your IP and therefore your product and brand.... well then, if you understand markets and barriers to entry, many will think the cost of entry is too high. We do not want monopolies here... where the main consumer platform being Windows, you are forced to essentially merge with Microsoft in order to develop for the major consumer operating system.This doesn't just apply to startups either...can you imagine MS forcing Google to only allow for instance, Google Earth through the windows store, giving them the rights to their IP? Yeah RIGHT!If that model comes into play full force, you can expect that to trigger all sorts of anti-trust litigation, and rightly so...

[alainneedle1 97]

It's only good if you don't want to stifle creativity in software development. Startups can barely afford to keep the lights on in many cases...if they are looking at a closed computer model where MS skims profits through a forced participation in the Windows store, where MS wants to own your IP and therefore your product and brand.... well then, if you understand markets and barriers to entry, many will think the cost of entry is too high. We do not want monopolies here... where the main consumer platform being Windows, you are forced to essentially merge with Microsoft in order to develop for the major consumer operating system.This doesn't just apply to startups either...can you imagine MS forcing Google to only allow for instance, Google Earth through the windows store, giving them the rights to their IP? Yeah RIGHT!If that model comes into play full force, you can expect that to trigger all sorts of anti-trust litigation, and rightly so...

Agree wth you to a point, big time dev. making addons for FSX like PMG or Orbx may not agree with MS's rules, can't blame them for running their business the way they want to, BUT if these devs. don't make addons for Flight (if the demand is there) for what ever their reasons are you can bet that smaller guys (good artist) struggling to make ends meet will take their place and become very good, no one was born as an addon developer, they had to learn to do it.

[Ben Cap 89]

Agree wth you to a point, big time dev. making addons for FSX like PMG or Orbx may not agree with MS's rules, can't blame them for running their business the way they want to, BUT if these devs. don't make addons for Flight (if the demand is there) for what ever their reasons are you can bet that smaller guys (good artist) struggling to make ends meet will take their place and become very good, no one was born as an addon developer, they had to learn to do it.

Very true.... Flight will succeed if we can have a "re-birth" of Flight Simulation addon developers. Who knows? Maybe the next great addon artist has yet to come.... :(

[torium 207]

BUT if these devs. don't make addons for Flight (if the demand is there) for what ever their reasons are you can bet that smaller guys (good artist) struggling to make ends meet will take their place and become very good, no one was born as an addon developer, they had to learn to do it.

You're right. Anyway the development will continue!

[gtrbarbarian 1]

Agree wth you to a point, big time dev. making addons for FSX like PMG or Orbx may not agree with MS's rules, can't blame them for running their business the way they want to, BUT if these devs. don't make addons for Flight (if the demand is there) for what ever their reasons are you can bet that smaller guys (good artist) struggling to make ends meet will take their place and become very good, no one was born as an addon developer, they had to learn to do it.

I hear what you are saying, and I agree that somebody will end up developing add-ons. If they are to the same level that we have remains to be seen.However, I wasn't referring to just the flight sim genre, but to Microsoft Windows as a development platform for all genres of software. Meaning....for instance, if you could no longer go to cnet's download.com and download and install your own freeware, trial-ware etc.. Or as a small time developer (which I would guess many 3pd for FSX fall into this category, i.e. they are not Adobe etc) you had to give up your source code and 30% of your profits in order to code for the Windows OS...that would essentially block many developers from getting out of the starting gate,Another couple of examples....NetBeans or Eclipse (amazing freeware alternatives to MS Visual Studio development environmen)t, or Open and LibreOffice (open source alternatives to MS Office)... open source will largely go away if all software is forced to be distributed via a closed Windows Store model if they are forced to release under a non-open source license. I really hope it doesn't come to this...but the fact that all "metro" style applications that are distributed for Windows 8 will have to be distributed via the Windows Store does not bode well, And before someone asks, no I've never worked for Microsoft, but I have developed for Windows since Win 3.0, using all apis from C/C++ win32 to .NET to web. This IMHO represents a stifling change to future windows development. Changes that have much larger consequences to the software industry than just for flight simulator.http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/windows-8-app-store-will-be-the-only-source-of-metro-apps/14873

[alainneedle1 97]

I hear what you are saying, and I agree that somebody will end up developing add-ons. If they are to the same level that we have remains to be seen.However, I wasn't referring to just the flight sim genre, but to Microsoft Windows as a development platform for all genres of software. Meaning....for instance, if you could no longer go to cnet's download.com and download and install your own freeware, trial-ware etc.. Or as a small time developer (which I would guess many 3pd for FSX fall into this category, i.e. they are not Adobe etc) you had to give up your source code and 30% of your profits in order to code for the Windows OS...that would essentially block many developers from getting out of the starting gate,Another couple of examples....NetBeans or Eclipse (amazing freeware alternatives to MS Visual Studio development environmen)t, or Open and LibreOffice (open source alternatives to MS Office)... open source will largely go away if all software is forced to be distributed via a closed Windows Store model if they are forced to release under a non-open source license. I really hope it doesn't come to this...but the fact that all "metro" style applications that are distributed for Windows 8 will have to be distributed via the Windows Store does not bode well, And before someone asks, no I've never worked for Microsoft, but I have developed for Windows since Win 3.0, using all apis from C/C++ win32 to .NET to web. This IMHO represents a stifling change to future windows development. Changes that have much larger consequences to the software industry than just for flight simulator.http://www.zdnet.com...etro-apps/14873

Point taken but again, what's stopping one dev. to open another addon business on the side and make addons for Flight.....what ever they will make under what ever rules MS as in place is money they did not have before....like I said if the big fish are not ready to do it somebody else who's barely making money as an addon developer will gladly take their place if the deal is good enough for them.

[drumsonly2002 3]

They have "in house" developers ready to go now. Without them Flight's landscape would not exist. I would guess the size of the team may take a bit of time to do the globe. I do not think it is a question of who will do the work, alainneedle 1 wisely stated Quote: "like I said if the big fish are not ready to do it somebody else who's barely making money as an addon developer will gladly take their place if the deal is good enough for them." end Quote. I think it will be a question of how long to create large landmasses. The tubeliner / Vatsim / on line global fliers are the ones to please the most. How expensive, how fast, how plentiful. Maybe this will span an entirely new generation of developers sub financed by Microsoft. Microsoft is so tight lipped in how this all works we are bashing our heads against the wall speculating what is :( what :( I just realized I went off topic sorry.

Edited January 17, 2012 by drumsonly2002