Compared with Train Simmers you lot have had shed loads of developments, several versions of the base sim and have a much bigger 3rd party add-on back up. MSTS survived because the community has developed it into an almost completely new sim with freeware add-ons and a MAJOR freeware patch by an individual that revolutionised what the sim could do. However there are only a few (by comparison) 3rd party add-on publishers

 

Revolutionary patch? Freeware add-ons? This is exactly what Flight needs but can`t get because MS won`t release the SDK. THAT`s the problem.

Revolutionary patch? Freeware add-ons? This is exactly what Flight needs but can`t get because MS won`t release the SDK. THAT`s the problem.

Well you can't reinvent history (...what am I saying the media is full of "revisionists" :mad: ) but whilst you're right about the SDK I'd say that in hindsight the FLIGHT team should have opened a dialogue with the community BEFORE and DURING the titles development. This is what the ACE's guys working on MSTS2 (v2) did. I'd like to see the spreadsheets and forecasts that made ditching it so close to release the best option :huh: , but I think you're right about "The Suits" and "The beancounters". Knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing is not a good starting place for visionaries. I think they looked at the RW use of Steam as a DLC and thought "That's how we get to keep ALL the money!". Blinded by greed they were too slow to appreciate how and why simulators have become the longest surviving, most developed and probably most successful type of computer game. The balance between freeware and payware is IMO essential for a succesful Sim. It attracts to the hobby those who want to do more than just use the software and expands interest in the title which encourages purchases of payware. Like any major project various aspects are supported or developed by third paties. Try and keep all the profit and you sink or swim by your own efforts?

 

I think those crying out for something new need to analyse what we've got. There are dozens of Flight Simulation titles if you include all the combat ones. Those with smaller areas of coverage may well use newer and better graphics engines (?) and of course the hardware technology will improve but IMO the work done by LM will extend the life of FSX for a good few years yet. 3rd party add-ons given this stability will push the envelope and advances in hardware will make it run smoother. As I said earlier few NEW things work as well as later tweaked and patched versions.

 

Bottom line is that M$ could hardly have sent a clearer signal about future involvement in games. Wittering on about "should they" is about as useful as leaving notes up the chimney for Santa Claus B)

 

Geoff

Flight simming isn't going to die, that's for sure. For example X plane is mainly work of one guy so I can't see why also other small companies couldn't go and make new whole world including flight simulators. And I don't see it entirely impossible for X plane to be made more user friendly and easier for new people in future.

 

Even train simulation community which is much smaller market has gotten couple of new simulators recently. Of course making train simulator surely requires less work, but still as long as there is void within FS market someone will eventually fill it.

I say CAE should take this opportunity to expand into the consumer market. I mean they lead the market in "Real" flight simulators, so they have all the resources necessary to make a decent flight sim that could be available to us. Just sayin...

Is there no hope for simming? I wont say that. There is a void, and as we all know, all voids are filled. There IS a market, someone just needs to be willing to fill that market. Who will?

 

I have a question for you, but I understand that in all honesty, you likely wont have a good answer.

 

How much would it cost to build a NEW sim that is comparable to FSX (Feature Set, World-Wide, etc.) but updated to new standards? I ask this because I am the type of person that given the right scenario (read: come into massive amounts of money [yeah, right]) that I would look to either hire a company, or develop a brand-new company to develop such a product. I understand that lots of folks will likely think/comment "Oh yeah, that would be a big waste" or something along those lines, but I've already got a hardware business off the ground. If I were to come into massive amounts of discretionary capital, I believe that I would strongly consider putting together a team to create such a product. I just wonder how many millions of dollars it takes to bring a sim with world-wide capability to market. Please understand, I do not mean to give the impression that I will ever have this kind of money (because after all, I do not normally play the lottery and we all know how often that works out) but seriously, some folks spend so much money on all kinds of things when they come into money and I've often imagined assembling a team to create a standalone simulator.

Plus, there already is a large market for this item. There probably are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of potential purchases. The cost of updating FSX should be considerably less than starting from scratch. Plus a company like Microsoft has the strength to get their program in the distribution chain (i.e. Walmart). In fact, it would seem impossible not to make money at it, unless some Einstein comes along and decides that it should be designed for 12 year olds and remove things like the cockpit...

 

In the computer world hundreds of thousands is not a large market, at all.

To sell in the consumer market your retail price can't go much above $50. Of that Microsoft will receive about $25 (standard retail mark-up), from which you still need to subtract the cost of distribution (making DVDs, boxes, shipping, etc).

That means that to earn back the $ 30 million quoted earlier you need to sell well over a million copies, just to not make a loss.

 

 

In the computer world hundreds of thousands is not a large market, at all.

To sell in the consumer market your retail price can't go much above $50. Of that Microsoft will receive about $25 (standard retail mark-up), from which you still need to subtract the cost of distribution (making DVDs, boxes, shipping, etc).

That means that to earn back the $ 30 million quoted earlier you need to sell well over a million copies, just to not make a loss.

 

Of course, much of what you just said monetarily becomes nearly moot in the world of online distribution and social network/YouTube advertising.

You asked:

 

"How much would it cost to build a NEW sim that is comparable to FSX (Feature Set, World-Wide, etc.) but updated to new standards?"

 

That's fairly an easy "guesstimate". It cost several million $US and takes about 3-4 years of development time. Why do I say this? Basically what you are asking is what LM did. P3D has the same approximate feature-set (actually more), plus-world-wide coverage and the version 2.0 will be out in 2013. It will have many of the latest standards such as DX11. Now if I am correct, will be 3-4 for years since they got the code.

 

In my eyes, MS Next IS Prepar3d. So why wish and hope elsewhere?

Because some still have qualms about Prepar3d's terms of use. I see two camps saying conflicting things, and the whole subject was/is surrounded by warning signs.

 

For me, that's made it something to avoid until all the adamant people have hashed things out. I did just join the forums, though.

In my eyes, MS Next IS Prepar3d. So why wish and hope elsewhere?

 

Prepar3D is aimed at the training market. So it's not the next FS.

You asked:

 

"How much would it cost to build a NEW sim that is comparable to FSX (Feature Set, World-Wide, etc.) but updated to new standards?"

 

That's fairly an easy "guesstimate". It cost several million $US and takes about 3-4 years of development time. Why do I say this? Basically what you are asking is what LM did. P3D has the same approximate feature-set (actually more), plus-world-wide coverage and the version 2.0 will be out in 2013. It will have many of the latest standards such as DX11. Now if I am correct, will be 3-4 for years since they got the code.

 

In my eyes, MS Next IS Prepar3d. So why wish and hope elsewhere?

 

But remember LM began with ESP which was effectively FSX,. so I suggest your estimate is optimistic for a NEW simulator.

Of course, much of what you just said monetarily becomes nearly moot in the world of online distribution and social network/YouTube advertising.

 

To be on Steam you still have to pay something like 30% of the sale price to Valve. Digital distribution still costs money, just less than distribution via physical media. I agree that if you go for a full digital model you could recoup the costs with fewer sales, maybe half a million would be enough. The poster I was quoting was specifically referring to Microsoft and brick and mortar retail (Walmart).

My main point was that 'hundreds of thousands' is not a large market, a large niche market maybe, but compared to the market for a regular video game hundreds of thousands is small.

Personally I think that the next new flight simulator if/when it comes will be developed by a small independent developer, either existing or new, and use a business model suitable for the nice market, like Eagle Dynamics, Thrid Wire, or the guys/girls(?) behind Rise of Flight do.

 

You asked:

 

"How much would it cost to build a NEW sim that is comparable to FSX (Feature Set, World-Wide, etc.) but updated to new standards?"

 

That's fairly an easy "guesstimate". It cost several million $US and takes about 3-4 years of development time. Why do I say this? Basically what you are asking is what LM did. P3D has the same approximate feature-set (actually more), plus-world-wide coverage and the version 2.0 will be out in 2013. It will have many of the latest standards such as DX11. Now if I am correct, will be 3-4 for years since they got the code.

 

In my eyes, MS Next IS Prepar3d. So why wish and hope elsewhere?

 

Earlier in the thread someone quoted ORBX as estimating that development of a new sim would cost $30 million. 3-4 years sounds about right if you look at big budget game development, or even how long FS add-ons take (NGX took what, 2-3 years? FSL A320 something similar, etc.).

 

P3D is a commercial program, a commercial program that appeals to many home users, but a commercial program nonetheless. It's highly unlikely that LM will extend any effort into pulling in new simmers, or implementing features that are not of interest to it's target market (i.e. flight schools /training departments, either civilian, para-military or military, and academia).

. In fact, it would seem impossible not to make money at it, unless some Einstein comes along and decides that it should be designed for 12 year olds and remove things like the cockpit...

 

Ha! I truly sit here with a smile on my face after reading that, because it lead to an actual Laugh Out Loud...

 

Why don't you tell us how you really feel?!?!?!

I'm amazed so many people here limit themselves to one website. At one time Aerosoft were kicking around the idea of their own flight sim also.

 

P3D is a commercial program, a commercial program that appeals to many home users, but a commercial program nonetheless. It's highly unlikely that LM will extend any effort into pulling in new simmers, or implementing features that are not of interest to it's target market (i.e. flight schools /training departments, either civilian, para-military or military, and academia).

 

Does that mean its aim is to be as realistic as possible in order to attract said market? If that is the case, then by default it attracts many who are reading these forums too, wouldn't you say?

 

However, for pure flight dynamics and the attention to detail out the box one simulator flys above the crowd and for this reason will become a benchmark to aim for. After all you need to have an excellent foundation to build upon, a foundation to add your bells and whistles to.

 

What I am hoping for is that the person looking at his or hers spreadsheet, and who has no idea about what M$ has so far produced will for their own benefit I.e. 'look how clever I am' will endeavour to make a return on the investment to date. We shall see.