If there was a obvious answer to the future then maybe I would say it wouldn't be worth it, but for now there isn't.

 

I personally will follow where ever PMDG goes as that is what I fly 95% of the time so for the foreseeable future it is FSX for me.

Me too, PMDG for me is a must. I won't buy any other sim where PMDG is not developing for!

Which is a good argument for making a backup copy of your install.  I have a couple of backups, representing several steps in my scenery / add-on / modification procedure.  Re-installing a pristine copy of FSX, if and when I need to, will take about 30 seconds.

 

Seriously though, without the next platform to jump to being yet available, the only person one hurts by refusing to look at any more FSX addons is oneself.  If the next platform isn't fully useable / comparable to your current FSX install for lets say, two years, you'll miss out on two years worth of potential time spent with current releases.

 

Everything computer based has a life expectancy, it's to be expected.  I'm sure I still have games kicking around on media for which I have no means of accessing.  Were those games a bad investment?  Not if I enjoyed them when they were relevant.  Who's to say in ten years from now that our current operating system will be around?  Or even our current idea of interacting with a computer?

 

The way I see it, anytime you make a software purchase for a computer you have to be aware of the fact that there's likely a finite period of time where it's: 1) useable on the current platform, 2) relevant and enjoyable compared to current software/games, 3) equivalent to the dollar value for which you paid.

 

Of course, the larger issue is that this is an extremely expensive hobby, if one wishes it to be!

 

Not sure that such a backup will work in 2 years when I've got different hardware and maybe a new OS. Bu of course, I have backups of everything nonetheless.

 

I have more addons than I'll ever have time to explore in both FS98, 2000, 2002, 2004 and FSX. I don't miss out on much since my favourite addons are compatible with P3D and FSX. Those few that aren't I can do without - no sweat. As you say, this can be an expensive hobby and I've supported more than my fair share of addon devs.

 

I'm a retro gamer and I have collected games, and flight sims for 25 years. I still play old MS-DOS and Amiga games. I don't care for the fact that the computer industry now wants us to forget about everything in a few years. That's why I am an opponent to DRM and online activation crap that devalues the future of the product. When Windows era begun it started all kinds of problems with backwards compatibility. BAO Tower, one of my all time favourite games can't be played at all on modern versions of Windows, which is sad because I would still be playing it if I could.

It's a good future, and we have choices, and we have the hardware to make it "as real as it gets" - 2014 is going to be even better year on the hardware front with Broadwell CPUs, DDR4 and 4K monitors, 3-way Titan's or AMD's ... I think 2014 is promising to be a very good year for flight simulation whether you pick one path or do more than one.

 

Rob

 

Lockheed Martin has surely put some optimism back into the community, and the addon developers have outdone themselves this year. Can't wait to see what comes next!

 

 

Yeeeees, yes, let's neglect the pretty sizeable flight simulation market for Linux and Macs so that the Windows masterrace can enjoy 8129² px textures

 

I would think that if such a market on Linux/OSX/iOS was so sizeable, we'd see huge development efforts and XP moving along considerably faster than it is ... using AVSIM as a guide of FSX vs XP interest:

 

FSX Forum
85,536 topics
616,993 replies

 

X-Plane Forum
2,198 topics
29,641 replies

 

That's a pretty significant difference.  I want to see X-Plane continue, but from a business perspective the resources they are spending to stay Multiple platform doesn't make any sense to me.

 

There is only so much "flying" one can do on an iPad/iPhone/Android ... although there maybe some first time initial curiosity, I can't see it attracting much 3rd party development support.  I did a quick search and can't find any 3rd party aircraft for iOS or Android??  On the desktop/laptop front, OSX market share is 7.4%.  I've heard over and over that Austin does whatever he wants to do and doesn't need money ... that's great for him (he's in the 5% elite), but that philosophy isn't great for a consumer.

 

It's also not "for free" keeping multi-platform code paths going and synchronized ... like it says on XPlane's own web site, they've had to do considerable "down sizing" of the code to make it work with the limited capacity of mobile devices - I can assure you that's a separate code path and hence requires a unique level of maintenance which is time consuming.  This is why you get a lot of people asking about the "snalls" pace at which XPlane development seems to move at.  I also read threads of people blaming 3rd party developers for not support XP10 enough ... why should they when Austin aims a chunk of his products at a platform base that is tiny and probably can't even accommodate their product anyway?

 

Again, Xplane will never go away (and that is a good thing), Austin will keep it alive as long as he wants to ... but he seems unwilling to move the product into a much faster growth path that could lead the way for more 3rd party support.

Uhhh...

 

There's a heck of a lot more XP users over at xplane dot org. There's a huge site and forums. The forums here were only recently created for XP users.

 

I still think FSX, has more users overall. But don't use Avsim stats to account for XP numbers.

LM has also said that at some point it will be neccessary to break the FSX link to move the technology forward. P3D 2 is a stepping stone away from FSX.  I also won't support any developer not supporting P3D. I put my money were my mouth is. I'm moving on to bluer skies.

 

As for FSX being alive for many years to come, I wouldn't count on in. I trust Microsoft as far as I can throw my FSX DVD. Suddenly the online activation goes dead. They've allready stopped support and closed down the real time weather database.  MIcrosoft has made it pretty clear that they detest the flight sim community. Me and Microsoft broke up january 2009. We tried getting back together for a while when FLIGHT was introduced, but I should have learned my lessons. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me!

 

P3D is a stepping stone, yes, but it will probably be a few more years before the two sims diverge so much that they break compatibility completely. I definitely agree that it's a good idea to only support developers that support P3D, even if you're still using FSX as your primary sim. Developers that support P3D 1.4 today are more likely to officially support P3D 2.0 and beyond in the future, than those who stubbornly refuse to look ahead and support this new sim.

 

You shouldn't really view add-on purchases as a long-term investment IMO. Most developers are small teams of 1-5 people that barely make enough to break even. I would be more worried about your favorite add-on developer shutting down support and activations than Microsoft doing the same. Buy your add-ons for the enjoyment they give you *today*, and if it still works 2 years down the road, view that as a bonus.

It is a quandry ...

 

I look over the years at Flight Simulators ...

 

I see only 2 1/2 major products left of all that have come before and one of them is stagnant...

 

Funny how one of the first programs I typed on my computer was a flight simulator, so even way back then there obviously was an interest in simulating flying but those who may not otherwise take to the skies..

 

I have flown before ( with my son and pilot friends ) and always come to the logical conclusion that for my station in life it is just too expensive for what benefit I would get back from it..

So this only leaves the simulator where I can buy 1/4 to multimillion $$$$ aircraft and have a ball.. ' there is something to be said when you belly land your $250,000 aircraft with 14 hours on it and realize you can fix it for free ' :-)

 

I can't speak to the market as to how many copies of a flight simulator have to be sold to realize a profit, but it must be a tight market or there would be multitudes of simulators on the market for sale.

 

 

There's a heck of a lot more XP users over at xplane dot org.

 

You can't really compare product exclusive forums as a user base ratio indicator?  Pretty sure I don't see an FSX forum over on X-plane.org  But the rather staggering volume of 3rd party products available for FSX is a pretty good indicator of user base ... and in that respect the ratio is very close to those numbers you see in AVSIM.  

 

 

but it must be a tight market or there would be multitudes of simulators on the market for sale.

 

There are more than I thought there would be in 2013 and there seems to be a renewed interest of recent (both consumer and 3rd party).

...

 

Mobile gaming with all it's limitations is a very different animal, so let's just leave that out of the discussion.

 

And, as Ryan pointed out, gauging interest in commercial flight simulators by the intensity of blabber produced by members of a predominantly MSFS-centric forum doesn't hold any statistical significance.

Even sales numbers since 2006 (FSX' release) are hard to compare, since X-Plane has to be repurchased upon every major version change.

 

 

Multiplatform development isn't exactly black magic as long as you do it from the start. If even the FlightGear guys can keep chucking out new Linux, OSX and Windows builds night after night, LaminarResearch can just as well.

 

The reason why P3D isn't going to be multiplatform is that there's simply too much Windows-specific code in it. Also, with a customer base exclusively composed of Windows users, there's little reason to enhance OS compatibility.

 

 

 

And development cycles and third party compatibility aren't benchmarks for a good development management strategy at all. You'll have P3D for your next fix of farting mice and ultra HD textures, so don't try to force this attitude on other simulator platforms.

Bjoern, on 30 Oct 2013 - 3:25 PM, said:

Mobile gaming with all it's limitations is a very different animal, so let's just leave that out of the discussion.

Hard to do when it's a key part of my opinion on LR's business strategy. Spending resources and time on a mobile market isn't helping LR progress forward -- it may generate some short term revenue given the low cost $10, but it's the recurring revenue that will ensure a significant growth path.

 

Bjoern, on 30 Oct 2013 - 3:25 PM, said:

 

And, as Ryan pointed out, gauging interest in commercial flight simulators by the intensity of blabber produced by members of a predominantly MSFS-centric forum doesn't hold any statistical significance.

Ryan didn't suggest that at all ... he pointed to X-plane exclusive forum which means that it's statistically impossible to compare to anything else because there is no other content other than X-plane. AVSIM is the number 1 forum for anything Flight simulation related ... you can confirm that with google statistics (and why many flight sim products are advertised here including those for X-plane).

 

Also keep in mind that X-plane has enjoyed 7 years of no development of FSX and only minor changes in P3D, yet LR still have not manage to reach the same feature set and/or same level of third party support ... why is that? I'm suggesting it's because of too few developers and too many platforms to support.

 

 

Bjoern, on 30 Oct 2013 - 3:25 PM, said:

Multiplatform development isn't exactly black magic as long as you do it from the start.

Software development is never black magic regardless of starting point. The common element between OSX, Windows, Android, iOS is OpenGL but even with the common graphics API, I can assure you there are real differences between the 4 supported platforms and there will be 4 unique code paths to maintain. Obviously it can be done, but it consumes time and resources -- and that's my point about not making good business decisions.

 

Bjoern, on 30 Oct 2013 - 3:25 PM, said:

 

And development cycles and third party compatibility aren't benchmarks for a good development management strategy at all. You'll have P3D for your next fix of farting mice and ultra HD textures, so don't try to force this attitude on other simulator platforms.

I didn't say 3rd party compatibility? I said 3rd party support - without it XP10 is going to be limited to whatever a very small crew of developers can do alone -- having 4 code paths to maintain and only a small group of developers is going to make XP's progress that much slower (and it shows). I'm not forcing an attitude on anyone, not sure how that's even possible? I'm stating my opinion of poor business decisions made by Austin which is limiting XP's potential ... as a Flight simulator enthusiast, I'd certainly like to see XP realize that potential ... if Austin's business decisions are good, then why hasn't LR caught up in 7+ years ?

 

Rob

 

EDIT: sorry, my mistake changed LM to LR

robains, on 31 Oct 2013 - 12:02 AM, said:

Hard to do when it's a key part of my opinion on LR's business strategy. Spending resources and time on a mobile market isn't helping LR progress forward -- it may generate some short term revenue given the low cost $10, but it's the recurring revenue that will ensure a significant growth path.

Exploring the mobile gaming market is worth it to at least test the waters. I do not expect X-Plane mobile to become an overly huge success, but it simply might help LR to adapt their long-term business strategy.

 

 

Quote

AVSIM is the number 1 forum for anything Flight simulation related ...

In terms of flight simulators covered, maybe. In terms of suitability for discussing other kinds of flight simulators not at all. There's (more) dedicated forums for that.

 

Quote

Also keep in mind that X-plane has enjoyed 7 years of no development of FSX and only minor changes in P3D, yet LR still have not manage to reach the same feature set and/or same level of third party support ... why is that? I'm suggesting it's because of too few developers and too many platforms to support.

It is because of too few developers and differing priorities in development and not because of too many supported platforms.

 

 

Quote

Software development is never black magic regardless of starting point. The common element between OSX, Windows, Android, iOS is OpenGL but even with the common graphics API, I can assure you there are real differences between the 4 supported platforms and there will be 4 unique code paths to maintain. Obviously it can be done, but it consumes time and resources -- and that's my point about not making good business decisions.

It obviously pays off enough to maintain it.

 

 

Also, FlightGear.

 

 

Quote

I didn't say 3rd party compatibility? I said 3rd party support - without it XP10 is going to be limited to whatever a very small crew of developers can do alone -- having 4 code paths to maintain and only a small group of developers is going to make XP's progress that much slower (and it shows).

Maybe in the AI and ATC department. The terrian, however...

 

And third party is third party.

 

Quote

I'm not forcing an attitude on anyone, not sure how that's even possible?

"Get your lazy arses up, LR, drop support for everything else than Windows, bring XP to the same level as FSX and ensure that PMDA2ARBX jump the band wagon!"

 

That's how I read it between the lines.

 

Quote

I'm stating my opinion of poor business decisions made by Austin which is limiting XP's potential ... as a Flight simulator enthusiast, I'd certainly like to see XP realize that potential ... if Austin's business decisions are good, then why hasn't LR caught up in 7+ years ?

If the business decision has served LR well and continues to do so, it can't be a poor one.

And what's the use of doing a major leap when you're living off the revenues from each release?

 

 

X-Plane *has* potential. You're just too stuck up in your MSFS-centric world* to see it.

 

 

*Don't worry, I am too. Sometimes.

X-Plane *has* potential. You're just too stuck up in your MSFS-centric world* to see it.

 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree ... maybe we can revisit this thread in another 10 years and see if XP has caught up with FSX or P3D on all 4 platforms ... my hunch the answer is already known by simply looking at history.  

 

For the sake of FS enthusiasts everywhere, I can only hope Austin doesn't continue on "same-old same-old" business strategy.  Linux/OSX <8%, Windows 78% market (http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0) ... like the reality or not, it is what it is ... pick platform with majority market share, make some money, expand development crew and then think about multi-platform when you can afford the resources to do so.

 

BTW, Austin doesn't need money (for himself atleast) ... and I think that is part of the problem.  Numerous interviews have indicated that he doesn't have a business strategy and plans at most a few months ahead.  Not having a business strategy IS a problem.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goY_QEkBow0

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmdiQcybhLw

Look at 0:44 -- "I never plan more than a few months ahead"

Look at 2:50 -- "critical to get 3rd party support"

 

So where are they after 7 years of unhindered development (less competition)?

 

Austin is an incredibly talented individual, but he has little to no business sense - and frankly, like you suggest, he pretty much does what he wants, good for him, not so good for end users/consumers.

 

And if you ever find a GoFlight driver for Linux/OSX or get my GoFlight modules to work in XP10 for Linux/OSX then please do share

 

Rob

 

P.S.  But I still keep XP on my drive, fire it up every so often for experimentation, then back to FSX.  Each release it does progress ... slowly!

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree ... maybe we can revisit this thread in another 10 years and see if XP has caught up with FSX or P3D on all 4 platforms ... my hunch the answer is already known by simply looking at history.

If I'm still with MSFS (and derivate) in ten years, shoot me, then shoot my PC.

 

For the sake of FS enthusiasts everywhere, I can only hope Austin doesn't continue on "same-old same-old" business strategy.  Linux/OSX <8%, Windows 78% market (http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0) ... like the reality or not, it is what it is ... pick platform with majority market share, make some money, expand development crew and then think about multi-platform when you can afford the resources to do so.

X-Plane has been multi platform since its inception, so they're surely as hell not going to change that.

 

 

(I'll be repeating this ad infinitum.)

 

Austin is an incredibly talented individual, but he has little to no business sense - and frankly, like you suggest, he pretty much does what he wants, good for him, not so good for end users/consumers.

If you really dislike LR's business strategy so much, boycot it.

 

And if you ever find a GoFlight driver for Linux/OSX or get my GoFlight modules to work in XP10 for Linux/OSX then please do share

Go-what?

If you really dislike LR's business strategy so much, boycot it.

 

That would only work if LR cared what it's customers think.  But it's that "I do whatever I want" philosophy Austin demonstrates that could be the reason 3rd party support is cautious ... everything could change in the next version of XP ... it's a valid concern.

 

 

Go-what?

 

Exactly!

 

But I'll keep giving Austin my money and supporting their efforts (as I do with P3D) ... and I'll probably keep repeating the same song every year "it has potential".

Well, do that then.