Hi,

 

Regardless of the criticism they've attracted, I'm grateful to Rob and Bill for shedding some light on the nature of DGT's relationships with 3PDs. This may be irrelevant to some, but it answers a number of questions regarding the future of this hobby (or perhaps simply confirms suspicions, as my expectations have been low considering DTG's track record...).

 

 

 

Then why don't all developers refuse work with DTG but work with Lockheed Martin instead? Have all developers have actually refused to work with DTG or only some?

 

We probably won't get many announcements from vendors even if they did refuse, assuming they first signed the NDAs to open negotiations and then got offered a rotten deal. So, we'll simply have to see who gets on the 'approved' list of vendors and appears on Steam.

 

 

 

At the end-of-the-day, DTG will do what's in its own interests and I suspect that none of here will affect that. DTG put up its own money into a new simulator so that's it right. If the developers had put up their money (and I understand that some thought about it), they might have a different business plan. However they didn't and now have to live with reality - not might- have-been.

 

If we're talking here and now, this makes perfect sense, especially from a purely commercial point of view. The problem is, FSX is getting really long in the tooth, and the only viable options looking forward are P3D and the future sim from DTG. Considering what we've read here, there's not much hope of DTG's new sim becoming a thriving platform for all types of users - both casual flyers and hardcore simmers. There's simply no room for ambitious development projects at these rates.

 

DTG's business model is their responsibility and their risk. I'm simply glad I have a clear picture of where the future of this hobby lies for me (and, more specifically, where it does not).

 

Tym

Then I'm afraid you got conned by these middlemen.

 

Nope. I withdrew and suffered no loss.

If DTG do not offer reasonable terms to 3rd party developers, those developers can still sell their wares to users on the various other platforms as they do currently.

 

The loser in that scenario will be DTG ..... users require a constant stream of quality add-ons - if that isn't available on a forthcoming new simulator, they will vote with their wallets.

 

Dave.

 

 

The loser in that scenario will be DTG ..... users require a constant stream of quality add-ons - if that isn't available on a forthcoming new simulator, they will vote with their wallets.

 

The new DTG flight simulator business model may not be based on a "..constant stream of quality add-ons..."  For example its Train Simulator 2015 sells for £24.99 (US$38) and add-on prices range from £3.99 (US$6) to £24.99.

I could see DTG helping developers by selling their back catalog if those software sales are struggling. I just don't really see it working with newer products because of the slim profit margins.

 

 

Do the P3D updates break stuff each time? I have no idea and have NO interest in finding out.

 

Then why are you asking the question?

 

Iain Smith

Then why are you asking the question?

 

Iain Smith

Yes, exactly lol

Then why are you asking the question?

 

Iain Smith

 

 

 

Yes, exactly lol

 

 

Because when one asks intelligent questions such as this, one gains a certain amount of information for the future.

I like what Tym says .. 'If we're talking here and now, this makes perfect sense, especially from a purely commercial point of view. The problem is, FSX is getting really long in the tooth, and the only viable options looking forward are P3D and the future sim from DTG. Considering what we've read here, there's not much hope of DTG's new sim becoming a thriving platform for all types of users - both casual flyers and hardcore simmers. There's simply no room for ambitious development projects at these rates.

 

DTG's business model is their responsibility and their risk. I'm simply glad I have a clear picture of where the future of this hobby lies for me (and, more specifically, where it does not).'

 

We got 3 things going here, of which the first is redundant, but still valid..

1. FSX.. still being well supported, as we all know.

 

2. FSX:SE .. Now with 3x DLC's from Dovetail & the cross pollination (sorry if spelt wrong, I have not had my coffee yet!) from the masses of FSX stuff out there, & of those DLC's 1x is unique & the others are pretty much old, but still fun. However.. great for the newbies that have got into simming thru Dovetail.

 

3. The Sim that DTG will/may release, & of which we know zip!  Can you imagine what will happen if their business is to have that sim as a closed model (similar to MS's Flight!), only supported by DLC's? -- The mind boggles! But, if their business model is geared to newbies/gamers, as most of the DTG stuff is, So be it.

 

As I've said, there are various markets out there & I think that, just maybe those markets will become more defined if & when DTG's sim is released.

 

DTG's own sim: The Gamer/Newbie market, maybe targeting their existing captive market Who knows how sophisticated or not this will be.

FSX:SE: Existing FSX'ers s well as newbies that want something sort of sophisticated.

& then there's P3D. (for the hard core guys?)

 

The devs have challenges to where & what they decide is the best for them.

It is their decision to get involved with, from what as been posted, seems a strange & autocratic way of doing business. However, just a thought, if thaey are in the process of developing their own sim as we speak, I'm sure they would have already got some devs helping them? I doubt very much they would have developed some kind of sim without any input from devs?

 

Sorry is some of the above has been repeated before..

 

Cheers,

Robin

FSX:SE: Existing FSX'ers s well as newbies that want something sort of sophisticated.

 

& then there's P3D. (for the hard core guys?)

FSX SE +DX10 is not for the hard core guy's ? P3D is a pimped FSX, I cannot see the big gap here that you refer too quite often. There is still a lot of OOM issues with P3D and tweaking required, and latest nvidia drivers that turn off airport lights at night. I cannot for the life of me see how anyone could put up with that being a hard core simmer.

P3d will be quite nice once the bugs have been ironed out I am sure, but after reading all the faults mention in the forum, i would not consider P3d for the hard core simmer, more for those who like beta testing.

Kudos to Dovetail!

 

Smooth as silk, Looking forward to the progress going forward.

P3D is a pimped FSX? lol...

Anyone will know that P3D has been modded/updated about 10 times as compared to FSX's 1x with the re-release of FSX, called FSX:SE.

 

So, have a look at this, http://www.prepar3d.com/developers/%C2'>

 

Anyhow, my comments were not there to open a discussion about P3D vs FSX, but about DTG's options.

 

 

Anyhow, my comments were not there to open a discussion about P3D vs FSX, but about DTG's options

You always say that, but in fact you instigate the debate. You stop mentioning P3D in the FSX forum, and i won't go into the P3D forum and mention FSX.

Someone was having trouble with the dvd disks for fsx, yet you recommend getting P3D, then you state you don't wish to open a discussion. no offense, but I find your P3D pedaling getting on my nerves.

Please stop trolling me. I'm talking about different options here. Also, anyone will realise that I was offering a different option to the guy that had a missing disk.

 

Please get back to the topic here and once again, stop trolling me.

 

 

That's not quite accurate. This deviated discussion is about the terms being "offered" for third-parties to have their products in the DLC Store for FSX:SE right now, and not about the thus far pie-in-the-sky new sim that DTG may or may not produce.

 

If that's the case what is the problem? Developers can sell add-ons using their traditional methods for FSX and if they don't the terms offered in the DLC for FSX-SE they don't have accept them. They  have an alternative.