DoveTail Games: Vague, But Hopeful, Details on the Next Flight Simulator

[ErichB 3,643]

LM has the license for ESP & is marketing their product as Prepar3d. As you all know, this is a 'not for entertainment ' product, & LM is not a gaming studio. So, it makes no sense at all that a professional commercial company would be frivilous to want to get into the casual gaming market. ( & have the time & energy to deal with the likes of us)

Not sure why you see that as a threat to a serious simming crowd. Why do we need a developer to be into 'gaming' to make the platform work for us?  I'd rather see attention being given to the things that matter in a core sim rather than time spent on the frivolity of 'points', 'awards' and 'scale-ups'.

[AviatorMoser 353]

I seem to remember that around the time it was announced that Dovetail had purchased the license to the flight simulator franchise, that another group comprised of those interested on a more hardcore type of simulation had lost the bid. 

 

We never heard anything more about who those people were, what their plans were, and what finally happened to them.

 

I wonder if there is any information out there?

 

Aerosoft was one of them based on an interview in PCPilot.

[TheFlightSimGuy 514]

I seem to remember that around the time it was announced that Dovetail had purchased the license to the flight simulator franchise, that another group comprised of those interested on a more hardcore type of simulation had lost the bid. 

 

We never heard anything more about who those people were, what their plans were, and what finally happened to them.

 

I wonder if there is any information out there?

 

It was PMDG: http://www.avsim.com/topic/457475-pmdg-products-and-steam/page-3

 

post #39

 

Gents-

 

We have been in conversation with Dovetail about whether or not we will support their Steam release by pushing PMDG products via their Steam channel, but we have not yet reached agreement with them on the topic, and it is unlikely we will do so soon.

 

Since we did not agree to give (word chosen intentionally) them our products for inclusion in their steam channel, we have not been given beta/testing/advance copies of their product- and thus we do not know anything about compatibility with our products.

 

At this point compatibility between our products and the steam version of FSX is purely at your own risk until we have an opportunity to evaluate and determine how best to support this new version.

 

If you would like to know more- or have questions for PMDG-stay tuned.

 

I want to be very cautious and not give you the impression that PMDG and Dovetail are engaged in some struggle- as this is not the case.

 

Dovetail and PMDG (in partnership with a few others in the FSX development community) were competitors in the bid to purchase the rights to the FSX code- and Dovetail won.  They have been gracious with us- and invited us to participate in their steam channel- but at economic terms that make it very hard to justify for the type of products we produce.

 

Dovetail has made what we think is the correct choice with this early release by allowing access to it for outside developers like PMDG- but in order to fully support it with our existing products, we will have to rebuild our installation processes to accomodate the changes- and this is going to take us time and testing.

 

There has been none of the communication that we would normally have expected from a major publisher to allow us preparation time in order to adequately support our mutual customers who wish to use PMDG products with the new steam version of FSX- but this is likely due to the rush to make the marketing deadline- and as such all of us will have to adapt on the fly.

 

While it would have been nice to have a beta/advance copy so that we could simply roll out installation updates to you all in concert with Dovetail's release- that didn't happen so we will have to address it sometime after the holidays are over....

 

It might lag a bit after that too- since our primary focus right now is the 777 release for P3D and the 744v2.0....

 

We will look things over and report back...

 

[HiFlyer 9,361]

Dovetail and PMDG (in partnership with a few others in the FSX development community) were competitors in the bid to purchase the rights to the FSX code- and Dovetail won.

 

Specifically interested in the who's whats and why's of that. Just curious. It seems like a part of Flightsim history that could do with some documentation.

[ErichB 3,643]

 

 

Dovetail and PMDG (in partnership with a few others in the FSX development community) were competitors in the bid to purchase the rights to the FSX code- and Dovetail won

 

Is it because they paid more?  Because other than that, it doesn't make any sense.

[mgh 89]

Is it because they paid more?  Because other than that, it doesn't make any sense.

 

In Microsoft's view it was very sensible to accept the highest bid. PMDG had the opportunity to bid and lost.

[Wobbie 938]

Not sure why you see that as a threat to a serious simming crowd. Why do we need a developer to be into 'gaming' to make the platform work for us? I'd rather see attention being given to the things that matter in a core sim rather than time spent on the frivolity of 'points', 'awards' and 'scale-ups'.

 

I dont see it as a threat at all. A developer does not be into 'gaming' to make a platform for us. There are 2x distribution, for want of a better name, lines here...

LM - 'Not for entertainment' license, commercial marketers etc,..

DTG - 'Entertainment' well, if its not the 'Not for entertainment', then it is entertainment.

You are so right in saying that , to us, the things that matter do not concern 'points', 'awards' and 'scale-ups', but, what worries me if the fact that DTG's market is not really what we are all about, we, who want something more 'real' are in the minority there, compared to their gamers. So, to monetise & to responsible to their directors, DTG has to target the users where they think they will get the highest return on their investment.

My thoughts, mentioned elsewhere, is that there are 3x distinct markets for a sim.

1. is the basic teaser to swing new users to the flying fraternity

2. The weekend warrier.. someone that wants something a bit more complex, not too difficult.

& 3. the 'Complex' guys.

Maybe have a basic 'Bronze'sim, with update 'Silver' & 'Gold' packs?

Something for everyone, as there is no single solution that will appeal to everyone. 

[HiFlyer 9,361]

Is it because they paid more?  Because other than that, it doesn't make any sense.

 

In Microsoft's view it was very sensible to accept the highest bid. PMDG had the opportunity to bid and lost

 

I'd rather see attention being given to the things that matter in a core sim rather than time spent on the frivolity of 'points', 'awards' and 'scale-ups'.

 

That last quote kind of points to why, if I was Microsoft, I would have tended to favor DTG, who had a track record of taking a niche genre product and making it popular, rather than companies that might tend to be more happy making a product primarily aimed at the current market.

 

Especially since LM and X-plane and even Flightgear are already out there with product for serious and enthusiast sensibilities.

 

Why throw yet another hat into into the same barrel?

 

Which is why I expect a more broadly based product from DTG.

[louisdecoolste 12]

DTG history and business model is based on `fast and loose` distribution methods.

Thats praise not a criticism - they have an easy-access platform that can also cross-platform promote ("you like driving cars? Wait `til you try planes!") and loose distribution means anyone can log in and pay to play - they've added some 200,000 new FSX users since December 2014. It is logical to describe that as `successful` for a ten year old `game`! 

 

Now whether they have the incentive or desire to mess with core aspects of the simulation rather than dabble at the edges is a very different question - and one I suspect is driven more by license limitations in their agreement with MS than anything else. More likely, I would have thought, for DTG to use the basic tools to compete with DCS and IL2  in the shoot`em up front, than try to corner a market for `serious simming` that's met by educational and commercial products such as P3D. And to a lesser extent by XPlane. 

[alpha12125 213]

Wobbie! You haven't been paying attention to Outerra very much, have you?  :smile:

 

It is an engine, but one that's working towards functionality of all sorts of craft, including cars, trains, boats, and because of high interest from the flightsim community..... lots of work on planes.

 

What makes a civilian flight simulator and why Outerra is destined to become one

 

http://www.avsim.com/videos/view-349-outerra-sailing/

 

as much as i respect outerra and am impressed by its videos shown. It becomming a full fledged flightsim is mainly fueled by hopes and dreams of the unsatisfied. Most of the motivation to move outerra this way, comes from people that are not happy with X-Plane or P3D/FSX.

 

I know it sounds hard, but on paper Linux is much more stable and capable then Windows, however it still hasnt taken over the world. However its users are the most adament that it is the best thing since sliced bread

 

Even X-Plane with its current market share struggles from the "i wont use x-plane until xy dev is there; i wont develop for x-plane until xy users are there" problem.  Maybe in 5 years we will see something that we can realistically call flightsimulator for outerra. But personally i think Outerra will force its limited manpower to please their TitanIM client in the military and if it is successful, will get an offer they cant refuse

[HiFlyer 9,361]

Don't wanna make this an Outerra thread, as that wouldn't be fair. I would say however that the impetus to move that program towards general simulation (including Flight) comes just as much from the stated intentions and goals of the developers as anything else, with enthusiastic encouragement and participation from those that think that the current simulation genre is becoming formulaic, stale, risk averse, whatever, and is just generally in a rut.

 

Even X-Plane with its current market share struggles from the "i wont use x-plane until xy dev is there; i wont develop for x-plane until xy users are there" problem.

 

Correct! It's a type of stagnation, and nothing truly new has been brought to the genre in quite some time. The proliferation of offerings making use of "Microsoft flight technology" with various tweaks, shows how stalled things have become, and even DTG's offering might run the risk of being all too familiar as a spinoff of FSX. 

 

An alternative path, the excitement of new possibilities, innovative technology and the opportunity to participate in shaping a different approach is what drives enthusiasm for Outerra, and to a certain extent for X-plane.

 

Even a lot of the interest for DTG's future offering is (I believe) part of that restlessness with aging technology and willingness to finally move on. Witness how many people have insisted that backward compatibility be abandoned. People may cling to their favorite champions, but there's also a desire for new horizons!

 

Personally i think Outerra will force its limited manpower to please their TitanIM client in the military and if it is successful, will get an offer they cant refuse

 

The developers seem to have a strong aversion to simply cashing in. If not, they've already (apparently) received offers of development money for their technology (with strings) that they have turned down so that they can remain independent. They are building towards a possible kickstarter instead, and are laying down the functionality for a number of possible uses with an emphasis (driven by user interest) initially on flight.

 

We need alternatives. DTG may turn out to be just what's needed. Or not. It never hurts to have other options in the wings, however.

 

For myself, I'm keeping an eye on everything, and expecting some important milestones from Outerra very shortly!  :smile:

[Wobbie 938]

 

 

DTG history and business model is based on `fast and loose` distribution methods.

Thats praise not a criticism - they have an easy-access platform that can also cross-platform promote ("you like driving cars? Wait `til you try planes!") and loose distribution means anyone can log in and pay to play - they've added some 200,000 new FSX users since December 2014. It is logical to describe that as `successful` for a ten year old `game`!

 

Actually, the is a huge debate about the claimed 200,000 'NEW' users.

There are claims that the majority of this figure are existing simmers that have either 'updated' their existing FSX installs, (FSX:SE is claimed to work a lot better) & also simmers that are still running their existing FSX's with FSX:SE as an uninstalled back-up. There are no figures of new, lets call them 'virgin' installs that are being used for the very first time.

 

I'm sure that Microsoft was only too pleased to get rid of FSX. It was obviously a business decision & has saved them huge costs (global inventory, distribution, staffing, closing down ACES at the time).

 

Remember, the Flight Sims & associated products were a minute part of their business, no matter how we think about that.

I'm sure they really did not care who is taking over the franchise now, as long as they pay the license fees.  I'm sure they were happy to get rid of a 10 year old product & all the rants, demands & petitions that were going around at one time. Actually a good business decision that, for Microsoft, monetized a dusty old product of theirs.

 

So, where does it leave us?

What do we want in a sim, apart from raindrops, world photo scenery & other 'Holy Grails'?

 

We DO have simms that allow us to fly as realistically as we want (or not), we have the scenery (mostly), we have a huge range of aircraft that can be as realistic or fictitious as we want, as well as a huge immersion factor, all running on current technology as far as PC's go.

 

What more do we want/demand?

[Ron Attwood 3,465]

 

 

What more do we want/demand?

 

64 bit.

 

I'm kidding, I'm kidding!

[Wobbie 938]

lol.... I actually feel so sorry for developers out there..

What do they develop for? FS9 (some still do), FSX, FSX:SE, X-Plane, DTG's new whatever, 64bit or not? ...

So many choices for them & for us. Never mind when some-one said that our hobby is being diluted, methinks the range of add-ons will be.

I still believe in the importance of decent add-ons, both freeware & payware.

Yup, we have the simming engine, whichever one we prefer, but the immersion & realism factor comes from the add-ons!

[mgh 89]

 

 

What makes a civilian flight simulator and why Outerra is destined to become one

Outerra isn't destined to become a civilian flight simulator.   As long as I have been following Outerra development it has no funding and the developers still accept it still doesn't have funding.

On the other hand P3D, X-plane, FSX-SE, and the new DTG simulation do have have funding. If Outerra is so much better why hasn't been able to attract any funding?