My biggest concern is what about the many many many freeware and payware addons for FSX?   A steam version of FSX would cause problems with that as far as I could tell.   

 

Im not an xplane user, but i was enthused to see steam bring that aboard.  I will problably use steam to manage Xplane for the simple reason that this is still a live product with ongoing developments.    

 

The only issue with a steam version of fsx would be nothing, as it wont break anything unless DTG lock the ability to use custom content. The one issue if you wanted to call it an issue would be with manual install of addons but then if you have issues browsing to your steam common folder then you should not use a PC. Steam allows you to make full backups, set custom drives etc.. so its all good.

 

If i brought fsx through steam my manual install would be something like..

 

E:\Steam\SteamApps\common\fsx

 

Not complicated

 

As DTG cannot update the graphics engine all they are allowed to do with fsx is fix some bugs so a fully dead sim platform has been given a new lease of life which is soemthing a lot of us has wanted for a very long time. I dont have issues with DTG taking over fsx as someone needed to and if they make money from it.. well good on them. If they take the path flight did then at least we know they will set themselves up to fail and they only have themselves to blame.

 

We need to remember the most important part of all this this thread, you dont have to buy what DTG has to offer.

 

Those with the genuine MS version your product activation wont be effected if you live in Europe as they passed some silly laws which prevents company's from stopping you using your software for no reason. I will assume this is the same else where. They can release an update to prevent online activation and then take the fsx activation servers offline though but they would never do that.

I don't think the Steam version of FSX will lock out custom content. Dovetail don't have permission from Microsoft to make changes to the game (save for multiplayer and a few bug fixes), so I can't see how they could change the file structure and make it like Flight.

Wow! Watch this sh… storm! Amazing!

 

But: Did anyone look at it from this angle: :ph34r:

 

1. What is so bad about making money?

 

2. Flight simulation suffers from the many freeware developers!
Let me explain this: Professional developers skip the business of flight simulation since a lot of add-on-products are free (meaning there is no business case for the professional developers). So if they need to earn their money with products they rather develop other software instead of flight simulation add-ons. On the other hand: Freeware is often not very sophisticated and buggy. And if it is good freeware it often takes years between the first pictures (of great products) to the release and a lot of releases never happen since the developers leave the hobby. What do you thing would happen if developer could/would earn the big money with flight simulation add-ons? We would see a lot of talented developers creating outstanding content, I bet!

 

3. A reasonable flying game (based on FSX) would draw some younger guys and girls (and their Dads and Grandfathers) into the fascination of virtual (and maybe real life) flying.

 

4. For the existing developers that would mean new customers for old (and written off) content even if they have to pay a commission to Steam or DoveTail. It’s better to earn 90% of something than 100 % of nothing, correct?

 

5. If DoveTail wants to make the most money they will certainly provide a reasonable (not the best) product. Therefore they would be stupid not to incorporate the latest knowledge of tweaks into the standard fsx.cfg. And my advice would be to buy Steve’s DX10-fixer (and maybe some other great products, like FSWaterConfigurator) and incorporate it into the default product.

 

6. Nobody is forced to step over to whatever comes. Stick with your FSX or P3D and be happy about what happens on the other side of the fence!

 

And with regard to technical sophisticated solutions:

 

I fly 99.9% of my time in GA aircraft in the Orbx-North-American (NA) regions. I couldn’t care less about the whole world been simulated in FSX. If someone would provide me a “flat” world in the size of the Orbx-NA-World but provide a better sim and better scenery then I am certainly interested.  

 

Now I have to hit the road ... :Whistle: 

 

 

Everyone needs to understand XPX is lacking in real world weather and AI/ATC

 

That's only partially true Dillon.

 

I haven't been a fan of X-Plane but downloaded the demo last night in light of the news and the number of OOM's i am getting of late.

 

It does have real world weather...or at least there appears to be an option for it.

AI is terrible!  No more to be said.

ATC does exist, it's not good, but then neither is MS ATC in FSX.  Personally i use it for taxi and then ignore it until i am turning off the runway at destination.

 

I didn't really reach a conclusion, the ATC isn't a deal breaker for me for the reasons above.  What really stops me is the lack of 3rd party support, I may take another look when PMDG release into X-Plane.

And this is where DTG succeeds.. Physics wise, railroad simulation wise, AI wise... DTG have NOT improved the core of their engine a single iota since 2007 when Rail Simulator was released.  They've added eye candy and more DLC, and a in game store.  When you strip away all the eye candy and pretty menus.. TS 2014 is just Rail Simulator.. A pig with make up.  They prey on people who will throw cash at shiny objects 

true railworks  has a lot of but eye candy but nothing like run8 as far as physics is concerned. fsx on the other hand is driven by third party devs who put a lot of effort in realism and as it is fsx acheives a bit of realism.good and realistic effects will just add to that.

 

 

As DTG cannot update the graphics engine all they are allowed to do with fsx is fix some bugs

 

Where did you read this? Personally I won't even look at that, if the graphics are not improved. FSX is silly flickering and AA is broken not

to mention that you need to boot obsolete Windows.

FSX is silly flickering and AA is broken not to mention that you need to boot obsolete Windows.

 

Not sure what you are talking about! Are you sure you do?

 

Never had "silly flickering" as long as using DX9 and after using Steve's DX10-Fixer and sure did never had too much issues with AA.

 

 

to mention that you need to boot obsolete Windows.

Yes, I am running FSX on MS Windows 3.1

 

 

ported some old fsx addons to P3DV2 , not looking back, not even a bit

 

Right, well that tells me you dont fly FSX online then.  So sure that works for you.

 

Me, I am a fan of the VRS TP Rhino online with (v)CVW8, and there aint no plans to make a P3D version.

Where did you read this? Personally I won't even look at that, if the graphics are not improved. FSX is silly flickering and AA is broken not

to mention that you need to boot obsolete Windows.

 

Here you go

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/uk/2014/07/09/microsoft-flight-simulator-x-and-x-plane-10-are-winging-their-way-to-steam/

 

So if true they will not really develop fsx past what it is but use it more as a place holder to show they are serious about the flight sim platform until they have a new version out. If they do what they have done with train sim then you could expect the next major version upgrade for free.

 

I brought train sim 2012 on steam for £1.25 i think and they have always given me the next version for free which is 2014.

2. Flight simulation suffers from the many freeware developers!

Let me explain this: Professional developers skip the business of flight simulation since a lot of add-on-products are free (meaning there is no business case for the professional developers). So if they need to earn their money with products they rather develop other software instead of flight simulation add-ons. On the other hand: Freeware is often not very sophisticated and buggy. And if it is good freeware it often takes years between the first pictures (of great products) to the release and a lot of releases never happen since the developers leave the hobby. What do you thing would happen if developer could/would earn the big money with flight simulation add-ons? We would see a lot of talented developers creating outstanding content, I bet!

  :Whistle: 

 

 

"Flight simulation suffers from freeware"??? :blink:   How do you think things have gotten to where they are today?  Freeware guys become the payware developers we praise so much today.  Without freeware and people cutting their teeth on projects dear to them there is no future for payware as there's no one to hand the torch to.  Payware developers didn't just pop up from games like Afterlife or Halo.  There's a history it seems many don't understand who haven't been around for years.  FS9 was far easier to develop for and the fear was we would loose allot of that talent with the high price of admission to develop in FSX.  That has mostly been the case because we have far less freeware guys than we used to.  That being said the migration to a payware dominated market was unheard of years ago and was frowned upon.  People believed sharing great ideas and work freely in our community was the way to go (heck IT in general was like that before Bill Gates changed the game).  So now you have this strong payware market but without young freeware talent advancement in our hobby it's unsustainable.  So by no means do you want freeware to decrease because in turn the output in the future for payware and otherwise will decrease.  Freeware is what built this hobby and will continue to sustain it if kept alive.  We need easier tools a budding developer can use to create his\her work. From there they can only get better and better and create a business down the line.  Maybe I'll write up an internal history of our hobby when I get some time.  There's a wealth of knowledge people are missing in how this hobby got to where it is today.  Names like Dreamfleet are all but forgotten and most think payware just magically appeared.

One of those (rare?) occasions when I have to 2nd Dillon:

 

You don't dump college basketball because you think the NBA is so much better, do you?

Dillon, I have been simulating since FS4, and I've seen all this emerging. I still recall Justin Tyme and the likes exploring and freely sharing their knowledge on FS internals in Newsgroups. No SDK at that time. Besides, ORBX is still catching newcomers with freeware, who become customers later. You are absolutely right.

 

And, yes,a carefully written history of flight simulation by someone with the detailed knowledge would be great.

 

Kind regards, Michael

i think you missed his point Oliver

if I’m not mistaken; his point is its crucial to preserve college basketball

so we can see them later in the NBA

 

i can attest in my case

I’ve never set out to be a commercial developer

it just happened out of working and sharing my developments with the community

i think you missed his point Oliver

if im not mistaken; his point is its crucial to preserve college basketball

so we can see them later in the NBA

 

 

Nope, Chris, in my post I am concurring with Dillon.   B)   'You' would be 'Flying_Doc' in my post, and Flying_Doc should not abolish the NCAA, so the NBA drafts can go on.

 

(Now, what did Mathijs do to "my" v1.1?   )