In an about-face QualityWings has confirmed on their forum that FS9 will no longer be supported

 

Apparently sales of their Ultimate BAE were not as expected (reaching only approx. 25%) that, and the excessive time to convert from optimised native FSX, killed the Boeing 787 project for FS9.

 

They acknowledge many dislikes /brickbats are likely following their very 'tough' decision.

I think they're wrong to equate possible 787 sales directly with the 146 product - they are totally different, as the 146 is in a niche market.

Heck, I only bought the 146 as a pledge of support for FS9!

(It turned out pretty well, but that was co-incidental.)

 

However, if that is their thinking, then the FS9 community has only itself to blame.

At the time, it was clearly signalled that the sales of the 146 would influence their thinking on the 787.

 

Perhaps the only way to get an FS9 QW787 now, would be to volunteer a non-refundable deposit on it, should the project proceed.

If enough people did that... well money talks.

 

It would be a dark day indeed if QW walked away from FS9, the 787 was to be the jewel in the crown of goodies available for the sim.

Fair enough. We should respect their business decision. I'm sure if they felt they could make a profit with FS9, they'd make products for it.

QW's decision is just that of one developer's experience with just one product, the BAe 146. Carenado, on the other hand, think that there is still enough money to be made from relasing some of their FSX products for FS9 although, of course, we have only see two a/c from them so far.

 

So, who knows what the future holds for us FS9ers? Personally, I don't think we will see much more developed or modified for us and it will be a matter of just getting along with what we have. I'm comfortable with that when I consider the alternative of investing in another simulator and all that that would cost me.

 

David

The amount of work to be fair I think though by Carenado to port over their birds is laughable to the work QW would make to design theirs.

 

I think they're wrong to equate possible 787 sales directly with the 146 product - they are totally different, as the 146 is in a niche market.

Heck, I only bought the 146 as a pledge of support for FS9!

(It turned out pretty well, but that was co-incidental.)

 

Maybe, but they are comparing the same aircraft. If the FS9 version of the same aircraft in FSX had 25% sales, that's a pretty sound number. Actually, I seem to recall that number --or something close to it-- thrown around when PMDG decided to stop FS9 development.

Personally, I don't think we will see much more developed or modified for us and it will be a matter of just getting along with what we have.

 

David

 

Take a look at simouthouse. Their freeware planes for FS9 are as good as, and in some cases much better, than any FS9 payware. Their Avia series is superb, and Milton Shupe's new Dash 7 is nearing completion, even though his old one is already excellent.

 

 

There are lots of other superb freeware designers working away in FS2004. I bought the FS2004 146 from QW as a gesture of support but I'm not surprised they've taken the easy way out, and dropped further development. I guess it won't be long before they drop development for FSX too. Then what?

However, if that is their thinking, then the FS9 community has only itself to blame.

At the time, it was clearly signalled that the sales of the 146 would influence their thinking on the 787.

 

 

It is reasonable enough. However, IMHO, I am not sure if the FSX-146's selling does meet their expectation either. I think it is fair enough that when it comes to taste or preference, FS9 and FSX simmers are quite similar. I'm worried that they too found FSX selling on their 146 is rather slow and low as a result, the streamlining costs fs9, as a 2nd class platform these days, to be turned down.

 

No one is left to take the blame why they are leaving (it's only business) FS9. This hase been disputed like hundreds of time. It wouldn't be fair one is addressing FS9 community as one reason why a developer fails.

 

I agree that 146 cannot be directly compared to 787. 146 is an amazing bird, but majority would like to see newer birds, if not bigger as well.

 

If they plan to release one of the most requested addon the result WILL be different. Say, T7 or any of those buses. I am not saying they took an unpopular decision with their 146 (whie their 757 was quite populist), nor I am judging and dictating what's best and what is not, but it doesnt take a Harvard genius to realise what the community longs for. The fact that there are costumers buying 146 is because a new aircraft released for FS9 is not something we can have once in a year, unlike when I started simming in 2003, so they invest in as a form of entusiasm - positive feedback - help them to keep suporting FS9 - or whatever we want to call it.

No problem. They don't want my money, I'm happy to find another developer who does.

No problem. They don't want my money, I'm happy to find another developer who does.

 

That's one way to look at it. An incorrect and inaccurate/distorted way, but one way nonetheless. :rolleyes: You think it's unreasonable to abandon development for an 8 year old sim?

Maybe, but they are comparing the same aircraft. If the FS9 version of the same aircraft in FSX had 25% sales, that's a pretty sound number. Actually, I seem to recall that number --or something close to it-- thrown around when PMDG decided to stop FS9 development.

 

Yes, but if you think about it, this proportion has stabilized for quite some time now. It seems we have a good estimate of how many users did not transition to FSX and most likely won't in the forseeable future.

 

Devellopers are in their own right to make their business decisions and we should respect them, even if we don't agree or they do not align with our wishes or expectations.

 

What we, as a community should / must do is show our strenght. 25% of the market is still relevant, if we consider that the total flight sim user base is stable. How?

• Supporting FS9 devellopments. No point requesting further FS9 releases and not supporting them when they do exist. One example : I'm not a General Aviation fan, but I bought the new Carenado releases and these great little planes now serve as my "test new scenery" aircraft.
  

• Explore new go to market solutions. I've mentioned it before, I believe systems like Kickstarter can be a solution for devellopers to ensure a return on investment on these "niche" launches. Not sure if it would sell? Secure the sales before the actual work.
  

• Promote our sim. Not only positioning it as the best quality / performance ratio solution available for simming right now, but actually showing people what you can get in a highly customized FS9 environment. Screenshots, videos can show that FS9.5 is still alive and well and can benefit from new product launches, particularly new airports and aircraft with detailed VC. Ifly and Airsimmer have proven that they are possible.
  

I believe that the future of FS9 is in our hands.

Disappointed, but I can't fault Quality Wings for their decision, or the way they've handled it. A class act all the way. I do agree that using a niche product like the 146 to gauge sales demand may be a bit inaccurate, but I'm not the one risking his time and capital to develop these things.

That's one way to look at it. An incorrect and inaccurate/distorted way, but one way nonetheless. :rolleyes: You think it's unreasonable to abandon development for an 8 year old sim?

 

Nope, I don't think it is unreasonable at all. What they develop, or what ANY developer decides to produce is entirely up to them. If their research and so on shows that perhaps FS9 isn't their market, more power to them. Point being that there is still a sizable FS9 market for addons, be it aircraft of this caliber or scenery, or what have you. If they are basing their decision not to produce the 787 on the sales of the BAe146, this would be a mistake in my opinion. As has been stated above, the two aircraft are completely different animals and the BAe is more of a niche aircraft that doesn't appeal to many the same as as the 787 does/will. I was planning on buying the 787 upon release, but now I will spend that money elsewhere. Same as a developer (Qualitywings in this case) decides not to support FS9, I choose not to support Qualitywings. Simple as that, and not distorted/incorrect. A matter of opinion or preference, maybe, I'll give you that much.

No problem. They don't want my money, I'm happy to find another developer who does.

 

I wish you luck finding new, high quality aircraft releases for FS2004. Carenado is just an FSX native reverse engineered model and I believe, if I read correctly, QW stated they may do the same. But it would be long down the road after FSX release, like Carenado.

They have a right to their business decision, and I respect their decision. But I think they kinda jumped the gun making that decision because of 25% of FS9 sales. That number maybe correct but I think 25% sales had alot to do with the bad or slow economy for the past few years. Where people like myself had to spend on more practical things. I have not purchased the B146 yet because I had to focus more on personal things, but I do intend to purchase it once I get some other things squared away.