Yes, I found JS setup a pain too. It does eventually save, make sure you click ok after each axis setup?

 

I eventually got my joystick setup and was able to sift my way thru one tutorial. I tried some multiplayer combat but got shot down two out of three times--still need some more practice on that end. I was very impressed with the sim's peformance in multiplayer and found that things which slow my system in FSX, such as shadows in the VC or a lot of AI, cause hardly a blip in this sim. It looks like the code is highly optimized given the default scenery. Still, I am an FSX/Tileproxy fan at heart--I don't see myself shooting at things especially when they are shooting back at me. Still, for those patient enough to download War Thunder, I do recommend it for the scenery experience.

 

John

It looks like a hell of a lot of fun to me. Might need to have some of that 5 hour energy drink to stay alert.

Amazingly beautiful pics in their gallery!

I could really get into something like this, especially if non-combat solo flight is an option.

Don't get me wrong, I love shooting and blowing things up, too, and that's one of the things I really dislike about FSX -- the lack of being able to crash your ships and blow up other objects. (In an earlier version of FS it was possible to see great crashes, and there was an add-on explosions utility that made the built-in crash effects even better, but Microsoft took that option out.) What I prefer is having the choices of just flying solo sim during some sessions along with multiplayer action and combat in other sessions.

 

But here's the only problem with what they are offering: I am NOT going to pay anybody an ongoing service fee. Period.

 

I'm perfectly content to continue with the model I've long been happy living with (and I first got hooked on flight simulator back in highschool when the simulator a classmate had brought to run on the school computers, since most of us couldn't afford home computers, was just a few squiggly lines in black and white on a monochrome screen).

 

I LIKE having my own books, my own DVDs, my own car, my own software copies. It's nice to have the option of renting the use of all of those kinds of things when the need arises, but I refuse to succumb to living completely in the cloud and having to pay an entrance fee for each and every access!

 

But here's the only problem with what they are offering: I am NOT going to pay anybody an ongoing service fee. Period.

 

 

You think maintaining servers are free? There are many many successful software titles which have a pay per month etc plan.

War Thunder is an arcade action game with very small maps in comparison to FSX's full world. The only thing it has in common with FSX is that it contains planes. Same thing with Wargaming's upcoming title, 'World of Warplanes'

 

I'm pretty sure it won't be subscription based tho, World of Warplanes certainly won't be. The subscription based model is obsolete. Today most online only games are free2play, with a microtransaction based funding model. It has been a very successful model for many games, like for example World of Tanks.

But here's the only problem with what they are offering: I am NOT going to pay anybody an ongoing service fee. Period.

 

 

 

Neither would I. I DL'd War Thunder so I could try it out and see if the graphics were truly as good as the videos and screenshots show, which they are. But I would not pay a service fee for any piece of entertainment software. There was a sim a while back that offered a free demo but in order to purchase it and use it in multiplayer, you were required to pay a yearly subscription fee--Virtual Skipper 5, a sailing sim. It was a wonderful product--it really gave the sensation of sailing. But there was no way I was going to pay a fee for something that would become useless if I didn't pony up a substantial fee every year. Such licensing models are normal in the business world, but in the entertainment software world? -- I hope they never take hold.

 

Of course mine is a personal choice, but I feel I've been a faithful member of the MSFS franchise and have purchased enough payware to state my opinion.

 

I do believe though that if the discussion here becomes one of licensing or service fees, that the mods should consider moving this thread to hangar chat.

 

John

It wont be subscription based, it will be free 2 play

It wont be subscription based, it will be free 2 play

 

They will have to charge something for the software once they are out of beta?

No, it will be free for everybody to play, but I'm sure their store will sell some stuff, like premium accounts that earns credits and xp faster than normal free accounts, premium planes that earns more credits than normal planes, custom liveries, extra plane slots for the hangar etc. It's economy will be based on micro transactions, not subscriptions. This is the new model for online games, it have been implemented in many games, for example Sonys newly released 'Planetside 2', EA's 'Battlefield Play4Free' and Valve's upcoming 'Defence of the Ancients 2'. This model is the future, or shall I say the present way of generating income for online only games

War Thunder is an arcade action game with very small maps in comparison to FSX's full world. The only thing it has in common with FSX is that it contains planes. Same thing with Wargaming's upcoming title, 'World of Warplanes'

 

I'm pretty sure it won't be subscription based tho, World of Warplanes certainly won't be. The subscription based model is obsolete. Today most online only games are free2play, with a microtransaction based funding model. It has been a very successful model for many games, like for example World of Tanks.

 

No, it will be free for everybody to play, but I'm sure their store will sell some stuff, like premium accounts that earns credits and xp faster than normal free accounts, premium planes that earns more credits than normal planes, custom liveries, extra plane slots for the hangar etc. It's economy will be based on micro transactions, not subscriptions. This is the new model for online games, it have been implemented in many games, for example Sonys newly released 'Planetside 2', EA's 'Battlefield Play4Free' and Valve's upcoming 'Defence of the Ancients 2'. This model is the future, or shall I say the present way of generating income for online only games

 

I got the sense that there would be some kind of ongoing service fees when I clicked on their Digital Store link at the bottom of the homepage and found this:

http://warthunder.com/en/store/addons/

 

Perhaps a user could play the streamlined (non-premium) game for free. But even the "Typhoon Starter Kit," which gives you

1. Access to Global Beta.
    
   
2. Typhoon Mk.IB airplane.
    
   
3. Premium account for two weeks.
    
   
4. 2000 Golden Eagles,
   

costs $19.99. That would seem to confirm that they intend to offer some kind of subscripton service at least for some users.

 

I do believe though that if the discussion here becomes one of licensing or service fees, that the mods should consider moving this thread to hangar chat.

 

John

 

I really didn't intend to derail the conversation. I just was responding to Gary's (OP) question as to whether this new kind of game might somehow threaten (or be "a wake up call") for FSX. As far as I am concerned, having to pay ongoing fees apart from any fees paid for updated FSX software or permanent add-ons is a non-starter for me, so this kind of game would completely fail at luring me away from an FSX-type sim, no matter how tantalizing the graphics. But maybe I'm just a dinosaur (except that I have a lot more disposable cash to spend than most kids do!).

I'm in the middle of it and will report in more detail at our site. It's like Crack, designed to get you addicted and then NEED to pay for premium membership, less than 50cents for a single day. That way you progress and accrue experience to get the better aircraft. You don't need to buy any planes but the base planes aren't as good as the higher level planes. To get to those levels will take twice or more longer than with premium membership. I'm finding my $25 a month limit quite good, lasting well.

Honestly, it's like crack. Personally I'm completely addicted to World of Tanks these days. I started out playing the game for free, which I could have been doing all time time, no problem, but I really wanted to earn credits faster, so I bought a premium tank, I needed more garage slots so I could play a wide variety of tanks and not having to sell a tank I like just to be able to get the next tank in the line, and on top of that I keep buying time limited premium accounts so I can earn extra XP. But it is of course completely optional, you can play the game throughout your entire virtual "career" without spending a single dollar.

Haha, actually as a community service, we should discourage take up, don't want to ruin more young lives :-)

No matter what the naysayers say, I believe there is clearly a market for a current new platform for civilian flight simulation. This is not a start-from-scratch proposition as so much of the background work has already been done that was not so available not too many years ago. Moreover, in a global weakening economy there are likely a few game-oriented programmers, Windows game programmers, looking for work. The very fact that MSFS has a relatively large global community for a base package that is over 6 years old now for its current version, PLUS the existence of several 3rd party developers, makes the proposition that the time is quite ripe for a new base platform very feasible. The model MS used, making the basic package w/ robust SDK's, is a proven model. I'd love to see a next-gen platform done in native 64-bit code, optimized for multicore, and leveraging all of this with DX11, is a model that could take flight simulation to a whole new level of realism that is difficult to move towards using code already w/in FSX/P3D. Perhaps LM could do these things and use the code they have to tweak in a big way. The base platform, if done well w/ robust SDKs, means the developer for the base package can focus on the core product--they don't have to do it all! Andd let 3rd party developers have something really special to develop for many years to come.

 

Here's where I'd love to see this go for the new core engine:

• Native 64-bit (32 bit OS is disappearing fast now)
  
• Multicore optimization
  
• Robust implementation of DX11 or whatever is accessible at the time of release
  
• Super high resolution terrain mesh--do the math to determine what machines can handle at the time of release, then put the slider in to move it up even higher. It appears CPU/GPU development for the desktop is slowing--so forward scalability does not need to be as great as w/ FSX perhaps.
  
• ATC modeled after FSX's, however improved quite dramatically. The fluidity and realism in terms of lack of concatenation is superior to everything else out there IMO, it just needs to be made more complex and with more interactivity w/ the pilot ;o)
  
• Basic Autogen can be improved dramatically, accessing DX11 features if that is reasonable
  
• Flight models improved as able. A few basic planes of different types showcasing the potential is good enough!
  
• Dramatically improved water, yes DX11 driven
  
• Basic weather
  

Leave plenty out there to keep the 3rd party devs drooling to develop for. Once they see there is serious service life in the core engine, they have plenty to look forward to as developers. I can see something like this with a service life of 10+ years if done right.

 

"Relative" is a tricky word.....

 

Id posit the flightsim market is relatively small, all things considered. Very few developers are able to sustain themselves with just fsx/p3d development, and its a very picky market.

 

Further, I'd posit the MS model of releasing a sim with sdk for third party expandability failed. MS doesnt see a dime after the initial sale of the title, so that aftermarket fails to support the initial publisher unless they are constantly releasing new versions....

 

...New versions however can fatigue your third party dev base, stifling innovation and platform investment. fsx has prospered because our community has had to make do.

 

 

 

I personally believe An ideal scenario would see a sim company launching a horizon type engine wrapped in a launcher/ store front (think Steam or Origin) that acts as a universal portal for buying and managing add-ons. The model here is that the initial publisher controls access to the customer base via this portal, and charges a commission on sales. This generates cash flows from the third parties.

 

in exchange, the third party devs have less support overhead ( this portal system can stop-gap a lot of compatibility issues), built in anti piracy ( theres that portal to the rescue again) and only one distribution/ hosting source to manage. I feel thats fair value in exchange for a modest commission.

 

Of course all this comes back to the size of the sim market, which is still very much a niche, and thus limits the scope of financial investment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But here's the only problem with what they are offering: I am NOT going to pay anybody an ongoing service fee. Period.

 

Ahh, I forgot this piece for my ideal new core engine thanks for the reminder! The ultra high resolution photoreal 3D terrain and object data can be streamed in buffered realtime and yes, I would happily pay a subscription fee for this provided it performed basically flawlessly. For example: I would easily pay $30/month for this service for unlimited use. Think of this as truly not as real as it Gets, but instead, As Real as it Is! This means there is no need to store & maintain terabytes of data in order to be able to access the entire globe--at least when it's developed that far. This too gives ultra-incentive the developer of the core engine to stay with it! I wonder what sort of network bandwidth something like this would require? I would imagine once the zone the plane was in was populated w/ terrain texture & object data in ultra high resolution it wouldn't take too much to keep it updated as the plane moves thru the environment.

 

If flight simming literally became a way to truly 'go sight seeing' (hey, I kinda do it now!), how many more users would jump on board once they experienced this sort of 'WOW' factor? I think it would be considerable! So, at $30/month, with a planet of 7B people, how many ongoing subscriptions at any one time? As I say, I'd easily pay this. Heck, it's the current price of your iPhone data fee! How about 300,000 subscribers? World of Warcraft boasts over 10Million, or did. At just 300,000, the MONTHLY gross comes in at a whopping $9,000,000. That's not a bad income. PLUS, you don't have to pay the internet fee, the subscriber does.

 

Yes, I think there is room for a whole new FS based on these ideas ;o)

 

Cheers n Happy New Year!