If we move to XP 64 so will the devs. It's that simple.

A new FS made in a shed or bedroom ?! Nice and ambitious undertaking! A Project bound to fail.

If we move to XP 64 so will the devs. It's that simple.

To do what I do in FSX/Prepar3d... I'd have to charge at least 5x the same price due to the sheer unfriendly development environment of X-Plane.  It is not developer friendly by absolutely any stretch of one's imagination.

If Carenado can do it and survive, anyone can.

If the next Windows is anything like 8 I think I'll stay with 7 for a long long while haha.

 

What's so bad about 8? I've been using it for months flawlessly and with significantly better performance overall, including in FSX.

It absolutely is difficult. The amount that the add-on developers around know is likely not nearly enough to develop an entire platform. Writing a graphics engine alone is already a difficult task. To be done properly, a programmer really needs to know what they are doing. While there are many developers that have no problem writing C++ gauges for FSX, it is a completely different animal to write the rendering engine that displays the terrain, aircraft, weather, etc. Then you've got physics, the weather calculations, ATC, AI, missions system, SDK with extensive documentation, tools, and API...the list goes on. To put it simply, creating a new simulator is no easy job.

 

It's for this reason that unless the developers have corporate backing, I can't see a new simulator ever being successful.  Without $$, for food and such, I would assume the developers would be doing it on their spare time which would take decades to develop a simulator.  Which is a problem - you'd constantly have to change the technology you are using due to obsolescence.

Im not sure I would like to see a new sim anytime soon, so much great stuff get released for FSX nowadays and the devs focus is still on FSX. And all the amounts of dollars invested in FSX and future investments it would be sad and expensive to start all over again with a new Sim, and also would take ages to get the world covered with new addon scenery again.

 

I wouldn't mind waiting 3 years+ for a new sim because FSX already gives me so much enjoyment and I can continue to enjoy it for years to come and the devs haven't covered the whole world yet so it's plenty of addons to be made and if a new popular sim pops up the FSX development would stop.

There already is one, it's X-Plane.  While not new, its been around for quite some time, it's still actively developed and improved by the developer and every year more developers jump to XP to make scenery and aircraft.  Everyone knows FSX is a dead-end and lets be honest, the FS community is small compared to other gaming genres making it a risky bet for a new developer.

 

Instead of adding yet another developer into the mix, further segmenting our small market, I'd rather see the community start to get behind one of the existing alternates that is currently alive and well.  And in my opinion X-Plane is the best alternative.

 

It's probably been said a million times at this point, but what's holding people back from getting behind X-plane is X-plane, not random stubbornness in some players. 

Until X-plane makes things like workable AI, Default airport buildings, and proper landclass (instead of the plausible stuff) a priority many will always prefer FSX.

Some people are down for being part of the develop but I feel most want X-plane to reach a level where it at least has everything FSX does before they switch. 

The FSX basic object code (its DLL and EXE files) in the main FSX folder total 22 million bytes. A widely accepted metric is that 1 line of source code expands to 17.5 bytes of object code. That implies that FSX has about 1.25 million lines of source code..

Estimates of the time to produce fully debugged code range from 100 to 500 lines of source code per developer day. That's derived by dividing the total lines of code in the completed project by the total number of developer days spent on it. The days include all the time spent on planning, managing, debugging, testing, etc. as well as writing the code itself. At the best that's about 2500 developer days or 10 developer years - a full-time team of 4 developers for 2 years seems not unreasonable.

What's so bad about 8? I've been using it for months flawlessly and with significantly better performance overall, including in FSX.

I have it on my laptop and I cant stand it because apps are always running along with no start button I mean what was the point of getting rid of it.

Why are we turning a legitimate conversation about the future of the FS world into a bickering match over Windows 8? I like it and use it, but I find issues with it - it's certainly not perfect.

 

Edit: Maybe we're not quite there yet, but I can see it coming.

Ah, now I know what the "TFD" part of "TFDi" stands for :smile:

Hahahahaha, so I'm guessing, this went down in the dumps?

Would be great to hear some news from this effort.

For ex. logout in Win8 is a pain in the a*. If 8.1 doesn't work properly with fsx/fs9 I'd even have to buy win7, as Fsx is not running perfectly on Wine.