Forget it, its the time and audience that has been changed.

Those time will not come back. The new generations arent the slightly interrested in flightsim.

They take flying for granted, arent magically attracted to its secrets, but sit in a plane with their ipad not payin attention to the outside world.

That generation with no attenion span cannot ever be the next audience to buy a flightsim

 

What does the AVSIM survey show on age ?

I think that's only part of the story. Flightsims (of a sort) are doing fine. Its just the sort of flightsims of the type generally favored here that are on the wane in the wider world. I've mentioned before that the simmers here (you yourself mentioned the AVSIM survey on age) are often at the tail end of a long journey of discovery and have often reached a level of knowledge and desire for complexity that leaves little room for newcomers.

 

For me, its kind of a question of who abandoned who first; the simmers who raced on ahead to sim nirvana culminating in sims that require a nearly prohibitive investment in time and study to "master"

 

Or those who took the sometimes very pointed hints to go play their Nintendos if they couldn't (or didn't want to) keep up, and took the hint, taking themselves, their money and their interest elsewhere?

When I started, in 1998 with real flightsim, there was a young internet, and information was barely available. (remember captain Tarmac, Mel Ott, who tought us newbies a lot), but nowadays a wealth of info is available. There is no discovery in it anymore, just a will to study!

The magic is gone.

 

Since I do a lot of training in real life to youngsters, its getting more and more difficult to do. I mean, sometimes I want to learn also something new, discover, but I cant since getting on the end of the line and been there done that feeling gets up. Like in flightsim, since one understands the FMC's, sids, stars, and whatever you can think of and more, its fun to tell knowledge to newbies, but after years one gets very tired of it to sing the same old song again. To a point you blame the newbie/youngster on why its so diffilult to understand ?. Thats the point you get/make harsh replies. Better to refrain from answering topics, untill its clear your knowledge is wanted or needed. But that maybe just me.

 

I hope I made it understandable..

I think in the end most gamers simply aren't going to spend much time flying a civilian flight simulator no matter how easily accessible it is, mostly just flight sims that allow you to shoot something interest the mainstream. I think FS will continue as a niche similar to train simulators, there will likely be one or two main platforms in the future and that's it. 

 

Personally I think guys at X Plane should consider getting X plane 10 or some future version integrated into Steam. That's where most of the PC gaming community is nowadays, I bet being able to buy it through Steam would help many potential future flight simmers to find it a lot easier than right now. Though before doing that I think they should try to make the user interface and stuff like that a bit more like what FSX has, easy to access. Nowadays I find myself looking more and more at whatever Steam has to offer and less at what can't be found from there. 

I think you are very right.

Times have been changed, we are the dinosaurs, just like mainframe computer guys.

I think in the end most gamers simply aren't going to spend much time flying a civilian flight simulator no matter how easily accessible it is, mostly just flight sims that allow you to shoot something interest the mainstream. I think FS will continue as a niche similar to train simulators, there will likely be one or two main platforms in the future and that's it. 

 

Personally I think guys at X Plane should consider getting X plane 10 or some future version integrated into Steam. That's where most of the PC gaming community is nowadays, I bet being able to buy it through Steam would help many potential future flight simmers to find it a lot easier than right now. Though before doing that I think they should try to make the user interface and stuff like that a bit more like what FSX has, easy to access. Nowadays I find myself looking more and more at whatever Steam has to offer and less at what can't be found from there. 

But why the assumption that you can't do both? Would it really be that hard to do a sim with all the trimmings, that also had a fully featured combat mode?

 

(I'm definitely playing devils advocate here)

 

My main point is that the barriers that separate the two types of simming are largely artificial.

 

For some strange and entirely unknown reason to me, many serious simmers express a near horror of warplanes that actually.... do warplane stuff. Like shoot things. But they love the planes themselves.

 

Even though there's nothing on earth forcing them to use the actual weapons systems, planes that even have them as an option are treated as.... icky.

 

I have seen people go nearly ballistic at the very thought.

 

Its theoretically simple. X-plane 10: Please select regular or combat mode.

 

But its more likely cows will fly, first.

 

We comfort ourselves that gamers wouldn't enter "our" world, so its no use to even try. But is that really true? Or a comfortable myth justifying the status quo?

 

I ask again, which side is it that really rejects the other?

 

So Mr Howards and Microsofts vision did not match the general desires of many in the community. Fine. Stuff happens.

 

But why did so many express the desire that it fail horribly? What were they afraid of?

 

 

But why did so many express the desire that it fail horribly? What were they afraid of?

  Nothing like the community shooting itself in the foot, I say. I was very happy with MS Flight just the way it was and could have waited for it to develop. What was good was very good and what was bad could have been changed. I am 68 years old and very tired of constant tweaking and crashes. So far, I am flying

Aerofly FS more now and waiting for the new version. So, there are choices out there. I for one, do not have a lot of money in FSX but I am now also looking at some GA aircraft to buy.

 

Steve

I respectfully disagree. It is true that no one is going to become a billionaire selling a flight simulator, which means that the potential investor pool would be pretty small, (most investors understandably want to make lots of money). But there is enough money to be made to support a relatively small team and turn a profit. I don't believe the community is all that "picky" with regard to what it wants and expects, but it can be rather adamant about what it does not want. There will always, hopefully, be arguments over features and functionality. I say "hopefully" because it's that sort of discussion that propels development progressively forward. The same thing applies to competition. Both help all products become better and that's good for everyone. I think users can and will allow for issues with a given release, as long as they trust the development team and the direction they're going. In the end, as long as you're not looking to become a billionaire, it would be a solid investment.

+5

Get a very strong team of 30 people for 5 years. Spend a bit under $50M with them and get back from the market somewhere north of $100M in sales. Not bad, really.

Who is going to put up $50M even over 5 years in the uncertain hope of breaking even 7 to 8 years in the future?

 

A little realism is needed here.

 

 

but after years one gets very tired of it to sing the same old song again. To a point you blame the newbie/youngster on why its so diffilult to understand ?. Thats the point you get/make harsh replies.

 

And that's the point where people have to be very careful. Its very easy when teaching, especially when you know the subject backwards and forwards, to be impatient with the confusion and questioning of someone with less experience.

 

I've always firmly reminded myself in those times that what seems easy to me now might have been anything but, originally.

 

My mom would say it as "Remember where you came from."

 

 

I think in the end most gamers simply aren't going to spend much time flying a civilian flight simulator no matter how easily accessible it is, mostly just flight sims that allow you to shoot something interest the mainstream. ...

 

From the annual Entertainment Software Association (ESA) reports that are based on NPD data, it's clear that the kind of game with which people occupy themselves is changing. These numbers provide insight into how we can try to introduce new people to the world of aviation through the simulator. But I don't think that the user base is shrinking in any significant way. In fact, I'm encouraged by the demographic spread of numbers that Tom showed in the graph of survey responders.

 

 

 

Times have been changed, we are the dinosaurs, just like mainframe computer guys.

 

I am one of those! I started out on IBM iron and S/370 Assembly. Though they aren't used nearly as much, they are certainly still around. There is an emulator available that allows one to run any of the older systems, (MVT, MFT, MVS, VM, DOS/VSE), on a PC. Cool stuff.

 

 

 

Would it really be that hard to do a sim with all the trimmings, that also had a fully featured combat mode?

 

It would absolutely not be hard to do. The flight simulator, at least, is/was in a position to be able to provide solutions for different kinds of users by simply presenting the product in different ways.

 

 

 

Who is going to put up $50M even over 5 years in the uncertain hope of breaking even 7 to 8 years in the future?

 

Those numbers are way too big.

  Nothing like the community shooting itself in the foot, I say. I was very happy with MS Flight just the way it was and could have waited for it to develop. What was good was very good and what was bad could have been changed. I am 68 years old and very tired of constant tweaking and crashes. So far, I am flying

Aerofly FS more now and waiting for the new version. So, there are choices out there. I for one, do not have a lot of money in FSX but I am now also looking at some GA aircraft to buy.

 

Steve

 

It might not be all doom and gloom. Stonelance is putting some tools on the table, and there are probably more than enough people out there who could use that as a start to try some..... good things.

 

The question is will they choose to do so.

Those numbers are way too big.

They are not my numbers!

As of today  at 1600 EDT:

 

Chart.jpg

I think that chart shows a healthy new base growing into the hobby.

 

mgh, on 14 Nov 2013 - 5:50 PM, said:

 

Who is going to put up $50M even over 5 years in the uncertain hope of breaking even 7 to 8 years in the future?

 

Those numbers are way too big.

 

 

This is a rough-cut estimate of the fully-burdened cost of having a dedicated development team of ~ 30 working for 5 years..... And of course the estimation of 30 is a wild guess that we only know is in-between the 127 people ACES had when they closed (said in one post) and what a post says X-Plane has ( under 10). And the number of years ... well.. we know how long it takes to come up with and get to full acceptance and maturity in the market something brand new really good, especially if it is starting from scratch...

And even more if it is a (complex software) FSIM that serves well to the newbies and also to the expert simmers who take simulation seriously and not much as a game...

I think that chart shows a healthy new base growing into the hobby.

 

It tells us  nothing about growth. only year-on-year comparisons could do that.

 

It does show that the average age is about 43 years.