Now we've moved into the arena of buying DLC from DTG from Steam. Some are really getting wound up about this.

 

There is a very simple solution - Don't buy it. You don't have to. No one is making you. It's your money, vote with it.

 

Now is that so hard?

 

Many are under the impression that if you don't keep buying new planes, airports, scenery, weather,etc..... then flight simulation is no fun. Just remember back (if you're old enough) to when we had less than a dozen airports and one plane. Everything was green and wire frame. People still enjoyed it. Be glad for what you do have and don't worry about tomorrow.

Why everyone is crying about it, we have already lots of new FSX addons like DX10 fixer and fiber accelerator, Prepar3D v2 etc. If it turns out like their train simulator, then don't use. I don't have much hope from it anyway, it will take years that developers convert their addon even if it become successful.

 

Yep. No real downside here except "what could of been" (with a more serious developer) probably isn't going to happen. We are no worse off today then before this announcement though.

 

Who knows. FLIGHT was actually a good flight simulator as far as simulating flight dynamics. Maybe they'll be some interesting stuff down the road released. 

 

The biggest issue with FLIGHT, aside from the limited flying regions, was the lack of a living world. It desperately needs AI, ATC, world traffic, etc. 

What? LM out right own the IP of ESP and the source code to it.

 

Where did you get that snippet of "fact"? If that's the case, why does Northrop own it too? They didn't sell the "IP", they sold a license, which you also could purchase if you had the deep pockets necessary to do so. Of the two companies, only LM made anything of it. NG has been off the radar with it.

 

 

I think FSX was part of a package deal MS forced upon them..

 

Forced on them? Last I looked there were more than four teams that competed for this license. When you are competing, no one is "forcing anything" on you. You are competing for the license and all that may (or may not) come with it.

 

A strong suggestion for everyone... In future posts, start your post with, IN MY OPINION, I AM SPECULATING HERE, MY GUESS, MY SENSE IS, etc. If you come out with a statement that appears to be fact, then back it up. If you don't back it up, every member here, including me, should call you on it.

In my opinion and i am speculating here my guess is nothing will change, my sense is nothing will happen.  

Where did you get that snippet of "fact"? If that's the case, why does Northrop own it too? They didn't sell the "IP", they sold a license, which you also could purchase if you had the deep pockets necessary to do so. Of the two companies, only LM made anything of it. NG has been off the radar with it.

 

Every wiki page says the same thing. I can only go with what's publicly available. 

 

Prepar3D wiki

 

 

In 2009, Lockheed Martin announced that they had negotiated with Microsoft to purchase the intellectual property (including source code) for the Microsoft ESP product. Microsoft ESP is the commercial-use version of "Flight Simulator X SP2".

 

 

MSFS Wiki

 

In 2009 Lockheed Martin announced that they had negotiated with Microsoft to purchase the intellectual property (including source code) for the Microsoft ESP product. Microsoft ESP is the commercial-use version of "Flight Simulator X SP2".

 

 

Every wiki page says the same thing. I can only go with what's publicly available.

 

The interchanging of "IP" with "license" is scary. If LM owned the IP to ESP, do you think that one of their most significant competitors, Northrop Grumman, would also own it? Using Wiki to substantiate a claim of "fact" is dangerous, so I would suggest that you caveat "facts" by attributing them to a Wiki entry (with a link) and the reader can judge for themselves. Otherwise, this topic just devolves into chaos.

The interchanging of "IP" with "license" is scary. If LM owned the IP to ESP, do you think that one of their most significant competitors, Northrop Grumman, would also own it? Using Wiki to substantiate a claim of "fact" is dangerous, so I would suggest that you caveat "facts" by attributing them to a Wiki entry (with a link) and the reader can judge for themselves. Otherwise, this topic just devolves into chaos.

 

Understood completely Tom.

Maybe this is where the confusion is coming from

 

MS press release

ORLANDO, Fla. — Nov. 30, 2009 — Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) and Microsoft Corp. entered into an intellectual property (IP) licensing agreement that allows Lockheed Martin to further develop the Microsoft ESP PC-based visual simulation software platform to better train warfighters for battle.

 

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2009/nov09/11-30warfightertrainingpr.aspx

So did Lockheed Martin purchase a licence of ESP or ESP itself? Notice that ESP is not available for licencing anywhere.

 

EDIT: Never mind, saw the above post. What Wikipedia said would lead me to believe that Lockheed Martin acquired ESP, not a licence of it.

Maybe this is where the confusion is coming from

 

MS press release

ORLANDO, Fla. — Nov. 30, 2009 — Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) and Microsoft Corp. entered into an intellectual property (IP) licensing agreement that allows Lockheed Martin to further develop the Microsoft ESP PC-based visual simulation software platform to better train warfighters for battle.

 

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2009/nov09/11-30warfightertrainingpr.aspx

 

Exactly. Thank you for posting that. It is a license agreement for the use of MS' IP. MS still owns the ESP IP and it was NOT included in the sale of the FSX license to DTG.

So did Lockheed Martin purchase a licence of ESP or ESP itself? Notice that ESP is not available for licencing anywhere.

 

See my post above. You can purchase a license too, if you have the pockets to do so. Just give MS a call.

See my post above. You can purchase a license too, if you have the pockets to do so. Just give MS a call.

 

The thing is, the website for ESP was taken down sometime and only some articles about its SDK are still online. This leads me to believe that they're probably not licencing ESP anymore.

The thing is, the website for ESP was taken down sometime and only some articles about its SDK are still online. This leads me to believe that they're probably not licencing ESP anymore.

 

That could be. Last I heard, they still were, but that may have changed.

Point is, I don't see how this can make a lot of difference to us as a community. Since FSX the world has changed and Microsoft's decision not to do anything with the franchise (leaving 'Flight' aside for a moment) since 2007 meant that platform usage has since split up into those persisting with FSX, or moving onto P3D and in some cases X-Plane. There hasn't been a single new platform for the industry to coalesce around, which in many ways is a bad thing. 

 

FSX was the last major release that touched the public consciousness (remember it even had TV ads back in the day, something almost inconceivable now) and you could buy it off the shelf whilst doing your weekly grocery shopping. The boxed market is dead now and isn't coming back. Steam is probably the only way to bring new blood into the community, which as many have said has an absurdly high barrier to entry now. Part of the reason for creating Airline2Sim was to try to demystify these add-on aircraft that replicate the real ones to the highest degree. When I think back to the struggles I had trying to get that Cessna on the ground at Meigs Field back in FS98 I can't imagine what it must be like to end up sitting in the VC of the PMDG 777 as a noob now and not having your brain explode.

 

The point is, noobs become hard core simmers as they progress and for that they need some exposure to the platform. Anything that brings new blood in can only be a good thing if you ask me. And even if it's all DLC and locked down then as hard core simmers why do we need to care? There's always P3D and I suspect once PMDG push out some content for X-Plane it may well open the floodgates to that platform. I remember when FSX came out grumbling that nothing I'd bought for FS9 would work and that I begrudged walking away from all my UK2000 airports and the Level-D 767 for the vanilla FSX world. Within a year or two the tide had well and truly turned and soon if you were still rocking FS9 you were the poor relation. This may well happen with X-Plane, if there's a strong incentive to do so, such as the FSX servers being killed off, as unlikely as I think that will be. We will see. 

One of the items I found most interesting in reading the wiki for myself is that P3D hired some of the old heads from ACES Studio.  That excites me more than any of this other stuff.  I think P3D v3 might just be IT, maybe... 

Point is, I don't see how this can make a lot of difference to us as a community. 

 

Oh it won't but it sure is darn fun to talk about and speculate where it will go.

 

Again.. My theory.. FSX will be their temporary lose leader until this new project flight sim they have kicks in which I'm guessing is MS Flight in costume, new makeup and DLC structure which is where the real revenue should kick in.