The New Faster, Leaner Next Generation Flight Simulator SIM-Posium is Now Available for Your Input

[srborick 0]

Although the NGFS SIM-Posiums ultimate goal would be the development of a community driven next generation flight simulator, the start of such a venture is first and foremost determining the interest level in such a project. 

 

The NGFS isn't about one guy wanting to build a new flight simulator for profit, but rather its an attempt to see if the flight simulator community is interested in being involved in the design and planning of a next generation flight simulator or if they're totally satisfied with what they have now and what may be coming in the future. 

 

Any software design is first determined through "Brainstorming" and then bringing those ideas together into a plan.

 

If everyone could grasp the idea of the power that we have as a unified community we really could bring about a next generation flight simulator. By shear numbers we would attract the professionals needed to accomplish the task because the professionals would see the determination of the community to achieve the goal of a next generation flight simulator. Even better if we, as a community, could present those professionals with a preliminary plan for what we want to build.

 

There's an old saying "Power to the People"... it's true, and it could easily work in our favor... if ... we could join together to accomplish something that we all want.

 

Stephen B.

[HiFlyer 9,372]

 

Just Cause 3 should be interesting on how they did the dynamics of the engine, it looks cutting edge on flying.

 

AAA title...... Just the graphics team on that is probably larger than the team this effort will be able to realistically pull together. (even if all goes perfectly!) Avalanche studios has 250 employees, and this was a major effort.  :unsure:

 

I tend to be an optimist, but even I would be floored (but ecstatic) if the flight community could even under the best circumstances pull together those sort of resources (even by successfully drawing in people from other genres) I suspect just that trailer alone cost more than the total yearly income of some FSX developers. (Yikes)

 

I not sure what Stephen B's hopes are, but I think even if things go well, hard choices would have to be made on resource allocation. For myself, I think the best goal would be the creation of a powerful/expandable basic framework that gives 3rd parties (and modders!) the power they need to add the really fancy stuff.

[TooWings 17]

Nice video - excellent flight model - however the other graphics seem to be the same of the old stuff....

 

Yes I agree. But there's a bunch of folks working on a new global scenery with earth curvature.   Here's a working demo...... ;-)

 

https://youtu.be/geonRhzS08Q

[TooWings 17]

Imagine if we got those 10,000 (AVSIM) hits over at the SIM-Posium and each hit added bits and pieces of ideas from which to formulate a solid plan for production.

 

But Stephen..those 10,000 hits consist mainly of the same 'small' bunch of AVSIM members coming back to this thread again and again, hour after hour, day after day simply to keep tabs on this interesting discussion and drama (did you realise you are a star in a flight-sim soap opera/;-)      I reckon that I've personally clicked on this thread  around 200 times this week to see how the debate if progressing..  So its not as if 10,000 different people have actually visited this thread.

 

 

Activity on the (Sim-Posium) site is paramount and without it, visitors of all kinds of skills and talents are just passing us by.

 

Those guys will likely be 'passing you by' for a reason, i.e. perhaps many dont feel that your next-gen flighsim project is feasible, or maybe they feel it would take up too much of their valuable time,  or they are getting old and life is too short for them to commit X number of days weeks and years to a project that may never fly, or at least not in their lifetime.

 

 

Yes, the SIM-Posium membership is growing, but we're lacking activity... now imagine, some of you smart folks adding your vision, your talents to the mix.

 

The 'activity' you say you're site is lacking would surely be just more of the same 'activity' we've seen both there and here, i.e. discussions and chat, dreams and ideas.  

Plenty of experienced and knowledgeable AVSIM members on this forum have already 'added their vision' and provided you with suggestions and feedback - both positive and negative. So personally I wouldn't view your Sim-Posium site as an isolated island somehow different from the rest of the flightsim community.  Instead I suggest using AVSIM as your second home and taking onboard any advice or info you feel relevant without straining to boost membership over at the Sim-Posium, which after all is just a website -your real goal being to get a next-gen flightsim onto the market asap.  

 

 

Earlier one of the responses to this thread stated "how many ideas do you actually need to get started?"  To answer that question is pretty simple... if I wanted to go out there and just build a flight simulator based upon what I wanted, I could do that, no other ideas would be required. Now my idea of a flight simulator may just appeal to a few people who see things as I do, but it probably wouldn't appeal to enough people to sustain that product for too very long.

 

Yes that was me who asked "how many ideas do you actually need to get started?  But you've taken my comment out of context.  What I actually said was: many people on the Sim-Posium site and on AVSIm  have already suggested numerous ideas and ways forward to you ...so it's not, as you said, that you'd be building a flight-sim based only on your ideas..you've already got a sack-full of ideas and suggestions, many from talented and experienced simmers. 

Some of those ideas of course include the possibility that your project is simply not feasible -for various reasons mentioned by various members on this thread and others.  But there is still some positivity around so I predict the show will run for some while yet.

 

Just my tuppence worth,

 

Best wishes,

 

PH.

[Lorby_SI 2,071]

Although the NGFS SIM-Posiums ultimate goal would be the development of a community driven next generation flight simulator, the start of such a venture is first and foremost determining the interest level in such a project. 

 

 

Hi Stephen,

 

I commend your effort. But I couldn't resist throwing some "real world" in here. I have been in the enterprise software development business for 20 years now, first as a developer, then as a project manager.

 

True, a lot of projects start by brainstorming, but this is the smallest and least expensive part of it. Everyone has ideas about everything. I don't even think this is necessary at the current state, everyone knows what features a next gen FS needs to have. There have been threads and polls galore these past few years. I think at this point no brainstorming is required, but instead researching and 'condensing' of what has already been stated .

 

The next step is formulating a clear concept and detailed specification about what you acutally want to achieve, then planning, how much effort it will require, which technology and modules and development environment, communications matrix etc. You will need PMPs and software architects for that, not developers.

 

Then you go looking for resources. I don't believe for a second that professional developers will "flock" anywhere - they need to eat too! But offer them a reasonable income, pleasant working environment (= not too chaotic) and goal and they will work their a** off.

 

One big topic to adress in a community driven development (which I seriously doubt can work for a complex software like this one) will be risk management. The project manager(s) will have to be constantly on their toes battling with people calling in sick or bored or just unwilling to work any further. That is why projects of this magnitude usually are developed by core teams who then might outsource specific tasks - but always for a price and with deadline and penalties attached.

 

I estimate the initial effort for a flight sim at about 20 man-years - that is to say, 10 people working full time at it for 2 years. Full time means that you will need that cash up front, as they need to eat something on the way. At least offer them some coffee. Being cheap, you could get away with $50.000 a year each (they would have to be very enthusiastic...). So one mil is gone probably before the project is even in the testing phase. Joking aside - a reasonable starting point for the project budget would be 2,5 mil IMO.

 

This IMO cannot be done by "weekend-devs" who work on the project in their spare time. 20 man years means about 35000 hours of work. Now imagine 10 people working on their weekends, maybe 10 hours a week. How long will this take? If they constantly kept at it, 6,7 years. If they went on holidays now and then - longer. IMO you need a fixed, professional core team, or else there will not be any result at all.

 

If you want to pull this off, I suggest getting in touch with the smaller software developing companies, there are quite a lot around, probably even in your home town. Business is not all roses at the moment, and a lot of people in the IT sector are looking for opportunities.  They will quickly get to the point of financial feasibility, and you will have to come up with numbers. That is the part where your site comes in - or you could just point to the sales of XP and FSX SE on steam and try to make a case from there. Then you will be asked how this new product is supposed to compete with the existing ones, even surpass them - and that is where you have to present the 'ideas', and not only that, but how these have a significant advantage over what is already there (because if they don't only some early adopters will buy it).

 

The second thing I have my doubts about is the community itself. Yes it exists, but I don't think that is as large as everyone suspects. Much less that it is possible to 'flock' them together, interests are just too different. Looking at the numbers, like threads in the forums, dowloads in the libraries, I'm not impressed. I have a feeling that as a pro middle-of-the-pack addon developer you are lucky if you sell even a few hundred copies of a new product. Hope I am wrong though.

Edited June 5, 2015 by n4gix
Snipped excessive quote. Again.

[flyforever 269]

What is needed is a gathering of existing fsx, pd3, xplane and freelancers to determine whether a separate company can be setup so that a new platform , under new leadership and business model is doeable.

 

 

I suspect that everyone is less than perfectly happy with the outcome of various fs initiatives, yet there's plenty of talent and energy that, under one comprehensive umbrella, with some money in the bank, could make it happen.

 

Usually, the way this is ever going to happen is for one rich person, with plenty of money, becomes the leader and the initiator. Sometimes, some folks have access to other people's money.

Naturally, existing developers want to protect their existing business models. Thus the need of a strong leader, capable of putting his money where his mouth is.

 

So, if I were to start this initiative, I'd look for the person with the money first. That could be  crowd sourcing, too.

 

I know this too well.  I've been involved in projects where I've put my money and had very good results. And then projects where I've worked with other people's money and had poor results due to politicking and bureaucracy.

tony

[Lorby_SI 2,071]

BTW, the community approach AFAIK has already been implemented. Can't get more "next gen" than open source, can it?

 

http://www.flightgear.org/

[HiFlyer 9,372]

BTW, the community approach AFAIK has already been implemented. Can't get more "next gen" than open source, can it?

 

Flightgear has been mentioned several times in all the threads discussing this subject. For me its just a good example of what's possible! On the one hand, so far we've talked about teams, salaries etc, and on the other we've pointed repeatedly to a successful project done strictly by volunteers.

 

There has to be a middle ground where success is possible.

 

On the very page you linked is the announcement of the newest version of flightgear; concrete proof that there are technically savvy and talented people out there who still do things like this just for the love of it.

 

Logic would suggest that most of those people likely did indeed do it on saturdays and in their spare time, and that somehow, they were able to overcome tendencies towards chaos and move forward despite probably being told repeatedly the many ways the effort could and probably would falter. Somebody, perhaps many somebody's nonetheless had faith in the beginning, and pushed through.

 

It seems a familiar story, that so many times in trying something new, there always need to be those people that don't know enough to give up, or maybe are just too stubborn to do so. Of course sometimes they fail....... But sometimes they succeed.

 

For myself, I'm not too bothered if it takes quite a while, because for me, a few years of doing something, is always going to beat out a few years of doing nothing. And also, its not just about me: its about the future of the hobby.

 

Heres something to think about, though. An interview with the founder of Flightgear: http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/content.php?14618-Interview-With-Curtis-Olson-Of-FlightGear

 

Judging from his story, maybe we just need to sic some teens on the project!!! 

[Lorby_SI 2,071]

Hi Devon, exactly, FlightGear is the perfect example. It took 19 years to get developed to the point it is now at. This time frame is out of the question for a commercial product.  
And you really need to be a teen to see the appeal in that, not a seasoned simmer (in more ways than one). Why should I crowdfund something that will deliver what I already have now on my 70th birthday?

[propsfan 52]

The 'activity' you say you're site is lacking would surely be just more of the same 'activity' we've seen both there and here, i.e. discussions and chat, dreams and ideas. 

 

All true! There's some fine advice in this thread now, it doesn't matter what site it comes from or is gathered on when it's relevant.

Edited June 5, 2015 by n4gix
Snipped excessive quote, Again!

[HiFlyer 9,372]

Hi Devon, exactly, FlightGear is the perfect example. It took 19 years to get developed to the point it is now at. This time frame is out of the question for a commercial product.  

And you really need to be a teen to see the appeal in that, not a seasoned simmer (in more ways than one). Why should I crowdfund something that will deliver what I already have at my 70th birthday?

 

We have to look at the entire picture as much as possible. When flightgear began, It was essentially all done by hand! There were no middleware engines to cut down the amount of time the process would take. That is absolutely not the case today, and so 19 years is not in any way a realistic estimate. You said two years, but many software projects go on quite a bit longer than that. Even aerosoft projected a longer time.

 

The trap is in using old preconceptions, most especially working from an FSX-centric viewpoint.

 

In something as risky as this, somebody is going to have to be confident enough to take some chances and innovate.

[propsfan 52]

I estimate the initial effort for a flight sim at about 20 man-years - that is to say, 10 people working full time at it for 2 years. Full time means that you will need that cash up front, as they need to eat something on the way. At least offer them some coffee. Being cheap, you could get away with $50.000 a year each (they would have to be very enthusiastic...). So one mil is gone probably before the project is even in the testing phase. Joking aside - a reasonable starting point for the project budget would be 2,5 mil IMO.

 

 

Good to have a qualified estimate for an initial budget requirement, as daunting as that is. Kinda puts things in perspective.

[Lorby_SI 2,071]

Hi Devon, well, I think, the 'trap' as you call it is to forget that software is made by people, not frameworks. From the PMs point of view, the more people of different skillsets you have in a project that I cannot completely control, the harder it gets to achieve the goal in a preset timeframe. The absolute nightmare from a commercial perspective being open source, where you can't keep control of anything anymore. And people have needs too, you can't just rely on their enthusiasm for years on end.

 

Point being, if you have a professional, dedicated and well paid group of 10 people, working nonstop on the project, you should get a result in two years time. If you rely on the self organisation and enthusiasm of an open source community, you'd do better not to set a deadline at all. All could work out well and you would be done in, say, 5-8 years, but all can go south too, and you have to abandon the project. Not an option if you work commercial.

[HiFlyer 9,372]

Good to have a qualified estimate for an initial budget requirement, as daunting as that is. Kinda puts things in perspective.

 

The estimates I saw years ago suggested to have at least 20 million. 

 

Those suggestions always seem to assume everything is done in a very traditional, corporate sort of way. I've always thought that if something like this ever went forwards in reality, it would instead have to be as lean as it could be from the beginning and stay that way; while drawing as much as it could from volunteers and the accumulated talent and experience of the community.

[Glynn 405]

10 programmers on $50.000 (seems low, would any of us take on a project with an unknown outcome for $50k pa) then factor in the cost of licensing whatever 3D engine is chosen.

Does anyone know what Unigine would cost for a project like this, perhaps Stephen may want to ask them.