Now that many of us have had a chance to experience Flight I thought this would make an interesting subject.Some add-on developers have said that they would no longer be able to make a profit if they had to give up some income to Microsoft. Let's say that in a year MS allowed third party development, but requested a 30% cut from the sale of the content, similar to how the App Store works.As a result, your favorite add-on developers increased their prices to counter that. That means a $70 add on for FSX/FS9 would now cost $100 for Flight. That way MS get's 30% ($30) and the developer get's the same income from the sale ($70) as they would have on FSX/FS9.Would you pay the extra?Personally, my answer would likely be yes - especially as more areas are added to Flight and assuming they continue to add things that I would like to have, such as real-world weather, TrackIR etc.

Hogwash on not being able to make a profit giving up 30% of the sale price. As it is now, 3PDs surely spend at least that in marketing, distribution, piracy, and support. They will also benefit from their product being 'showcased' within Flight where everyone can see it on day one, sales will be much greater than they are now. . .I voted 'no'.

Its a complicated question for me.Yes, it appears that MS is asking for 30% but if the market is 60 tames as large or more.........How much are the 3rd parties actually losing? Enough to really need to pass those costs on?I don't know.Another thing, is that if MS really can open a relatively huge market for add-ons, suddenly a lot more people are going to take interest and want to be in there.Price wars?Again I just don't know.Maybe its better if MS sets a base price, ensures a minimum quality standard and retains some overall control of the possible madness. (and cuts piracy) In which case 30% might not be horrible.But what else have they asked for?I don't know.(Did I mention I just don't know?)Insufficient data to answer poll question. (beep)

Hogwash on not being able to make a profit giving up 30% of the sale price. As it is now, 3PDs surely spend at least that in marketing, distribution, piracy, and support. They will also benefit from their product being 'showcased' within Flight where everyone can see it on day one, sales will be much greater than they are now. . .I voted 'no'.

+1

Hogwash on not being able to make a profit giving up 30% of the sale price. As it is now, 3PDs surely spend at least that in marketing, distribution, piracy, and support. They will also benefit from their product being 'showcased' within Flight where everyone can see it on day one, sales will be much greater than they are now. . .I voted 'no'.

I actually agree with that fully. I still vote yes, because I want to see those quality add-ons in Flight but you're right about there being huge advantages to the DLC style distribution.

HelloOnly if toe brakes and TrackIR are supported in Flight! otherwise I would never use it.

Don't online stores such as Simmarket and the others take a big cut already? What would be different then.The issue I see here is with previous FS titles, you paid for the whole world, whereas with flight you pay for a part of the world WITH included addons, including the aircraft. If nothing else, I'd like to see MS hiring some of our 3rd party devs to work on the addons for future DLCs, at least this way they can stay busy and have a foot in the door.IMNSHO I didn't vote as I find the poll pointless since we can't develop for the game/sim yet. Ask again when it is viable.

Microsoft could buy planes from third parties, then charge whatever they want for it.They could have a panel where 3rd parties submit planes that microsoft could possibly pick, then pay them upfront for it, or a percentage of each plane they sell.

If it facilitates better quality addons in Flight, i have no objection. You will always have the choice to not buy it. This way you may have a lot more to choose from.

You can bet if Flight really takes off and is a big success with DLC, those same 3PD's will stand up and take notice and maybe be more apt to participate if they can...I am not so sure, some are not already in the beginning stages of just such a thing.

Just an FYI. Most 3rd party's get charged between 25-35% on most online stores. So MS charging 30% is inline with that, but going with MS will expose you to VASTLY more people, making it more attractive.

You all forget one thing here !with fsx - you buy the actual sim for 50 / 60 $ - and you have the whole world already covered - now flight will cost much more than that ! and than you have to start again to add third parties addons ???will not work - too many will run out of disposable income !

You all forget one thing here !with fsx - you buy the actual sim for 50 / 60 $ - and you have the whole world already covered - now flight will cost much more than that ! and than you have to start again to add third parties addons ???will not work - too many will run out of disposable income !

Hey we have to do our part to help " stimulate" this economy!!

Hogwash on not being able to make a profit giving up 30% of the sale price. As it is now, 3PDs surely spend at least that in marketing, distribution, piracy, and support. They will also benefit from their product being 'showcased' within Flight where everyone can see it on day one, sales will be much greater than they are now. . .I voted 'no'.

+1

will not work - too many will run out of disposable income !

Nah - just like it is now with 3rd party FSX products - we buy as our budget allows - maybe $50 a month for some and $50 per year for others. . .no difference at all. . .