[07MAY17] The sorts of behaviors that cause me concern...

[A320_SX ALX 137]

I feel like everyone here's jumping to conclusions based on their personal preference or love for certain developers/products/sim/habit.

Steam gets a 30% cut from EVERY game in there. Be it Age of Empires, NBA 2k or FlightSim (yes, it is technically a game). The FS market is niche and I've seen two markets emerging the past couple of years:

• The traditional, open-ended FSX market we all know and love. It's been working like this for the past 30 years, boomed with FS20000, peaked with FS2004 and then gradually slowed to what it is now, which is not "the good ole-days" but it's not bad either. It will live on through P3D in an academic dress.
• The new, Steam market that started with DCS and continued through FSX:SE. It is still starting up slowly and like MS Flight, DTG is taking baby steps and making mistakes. The potential is there though.

There is however something important about those two markets which is their maturity. FSX in my eyes has been a step back because of bad performance and the gap between developers increasing greatly. Most simmers started learning what an FMS is with planes like the PMDG and Wilco 737, the PSS A320. Most of them though would think that the difference of the PSS A320 to the PA one was a couple of bells and whistles. The reason was that we were saturated with quality planes because the tools were easy to use but also the bar wasn't that high. Devs like PMDG raised it and created a special market.

Then, FSX came along. Once we upgraded to 20-core PCs a second generation of booming companies popped up, making use of SimConnect and the new tools FSX brought. These companies took FSX to new heights and still keep improving it. However I am hard pressed to find variety similar to the one we had with FS2k2/4. Why? 1) The tools are more relatively complicated than the old days. 2) The crowd wants more complex planes that take time to develop. Many devs didn't want any of it. Some, like Premier Aircraft Design kept going at it though. One of the few survivors. The competition dried out so we're left with the current market which has learned to demand and receive. It is also ageing as we're the guys that saw Top Gun in the cinemas (or a box TV) -avsim shows that the majority are over 50.

Steam could be the new promise land for FS devs. The user base is young and open and quick to trying new stuff, unlike the "old world". They are satisfied with lower-fidelity add-ons, which take less time and money for a developer. The potential customers are many and mod/add-on support is the best there is.

Valve gets a 30% cut from any product because they need to and they can. They run servers for 13m people a day, make some of the best games in the market themselves and run the biggest e-shop in the gaming industry. They support it well, they're worth it.

DTG wants practically a 50-50 split with the developer of a payware add-on for everything that goes through Steam. However (based on what the OP wrote) they allow you to sell through other sites, including your own -I assume with no comission, based on what I read. What's the big deal about it? ACES closed because FSX wasn't making money. This is the new model for the "entertainment" market. LM doesn't care because they are selling JSFs and P3D training licences.

Does it hurt us devs if DT gets such a big split from our products? Possibly so. Narutokun said about increasing dev costs, which stands true. Devs take pleasure at doing it (most of the time, at least), but money keeps the business running. That stands true for DTG as well. They invested in ESP and its evolution to FSW. Shouldn't they get a return on their investment? But the problem from my point of view is that everyone looks at what they're losing but also what hurts DT (the enemy). Nobody sees what the profit can be. Steam users probably don't care and don't know about the household names. How do you get in?

1) You do a 50-50 with Dovetail on Steam. No problem. You are entering a much larger market, more demanding with regards to support but easier on development.The fun, simple planes that are frowned upon by most of us today are the ones that got us in. They will also prepare the new generation of simmers. Whoever gets in now is betting on this. It is better to have less of a bigger pie than a lot of a small one. However, nobody will give up what they have without a fight and that's fair.

2) You still sell your own products outside Steam, in parallel with Steam. DT gets nothing and they don't care about it -and vice versa. The market is the same, you still get most of your revenue from 3rd party e-shops that charge you the 50-80% of the percentage Dovetail does. That's also why you pay more for a plane at a 3rd party e-shop compared to buying it from the developer. The profit margin is the same and we're happy that our devs will be here next year to continue serving us.

 

This here community will pay more but harder, demand more but are also cannot spend time like a younger guy does. They can spread the word through the forum and are like a small Gaul village, fish-slapping but loved. The market is niche so if you make a name for yourself you'll get people's love and hard-earned money. It is a "premium" niche market. 

On the other hand, Steam has a huge userbase and a big pool of customers which is Dovetail's job to bring to FSW -not the devs'. The barrier to entry is high financially, but from certain aspects much lower. MV had to develop an auto-updater for their valid reasons. Still that money could go to another good product if they were provided that infrastructure. Auto-updates, steam workshop, a central huge hub to sell from, built-in advertising, a young crowd looking for something quick and easy to fly (that's not PMDG's market), built-in social media with powerful users and wildfire speeds. Some of the rookies will bite it and become like us. However they are spoiled and demand support here and now, are unforgiving and can crash and burn a product in weeks.

That's the wider video game market. Uncapped potential and big risk, compared to the FS market we knew. So I do understand DTG's need for more juice and certain devs' decision disdain. But as long as DTG doesn't do the ultimate stupidity (See MS:Flight - a paid SDK and pay-per-street DLC), they'll make it. What I personally disapprove of, though, is our inherent tendency as a community to judge, condemn and execute everyone who tries to change something without weighing the pros and cons calmly. We've been doing it always and usually took it back when things just caught up with us (such as the switch to FSX/P3D).

PMDG, MilViz and every business is right to say that they will/not support DTG providing certain financial arguments. As a developer I disagree and that's my opinion. As a simmer, though, I'm holding my breath over what FSW will bring to the table in the same manner I'm waiting for P3Dv4. I won't condemn them before they give me the excuse. I love Steam and the only reason I don't fly FSX:SE is because I don't  see the big difference in it compared to FSX:A -which I'm waiting to throw out the window.

So it is best to keep the tones down and like the devs do, each one should cater to their liking before judging a rate which in the end, already exists in the market and we're already paying each time we buy a product.

 

My 2c,

Alex

[77west 139]

Wow... and I just came here to read the latest posts, and everything's on fire and the wheels are coming off...

I stand with Robert, Collin and the other developers who agree to this. Forcing you to be part of Steam store is not ethical. I wonder what the next few years will bring us... I use P3D myself but understand the FSX user base is still a not inconsequential part of our community.

[tonywob 4,768]

Does anyone know what the deal is for freeware? Mod/freeware support for other platforms on Steam (Such as Euro Truck Simulator, City Skylines) etc has been a big success. With Euro Truck mods, users can hosted their mods outside of steam, so I'm wondering how they would force this restriction if they choose to do so. 

 

[77west 139]

3 minutes ago, tonywob said:

Does anyone know what the deal is for freeware? Mod/freeware support for other platforms on Steam (Such as Euro Truck Simulator, City Skylines) etc has been a big success. With Euro Truck mods, users can hosted their mods outside of steam, so I'm wondering how they would force this restriction if they choose to do so. 

 

Fair point; even Dovetails own Train Simulator platform (the outgoing one) allows 3rd party mods with no restrictions. They probably will just not make the SDK and related information available, rendering PMDG out in the cold with no way of developing a plane for this sim

EDIT: And EULA / license busting is not the PMDG way at all. They will do it the proper way or not at all in my experience.

[tonywob 4,768]

I wasn't suggesting PMDG should disregard the EULA, I was just curious what the deal was for freeware developers. Will the SDK be open to anyone, or just third-parties. If I create a freeware addon, do I also have to place it on the Steam workshop?

If a tool was made to convert FSX scenery to FSW, and it's inevitable someone will try, I'd be curious how it would work. (Such a tool already exists for FSX to X-Plane). 

 

[Wobbie 937]

Robert, thank you so much for explaining your thoughts to the community. 

Although I do not use any PMDG products, I really support what you and your company stands for.

I think we should take a step back & consider a few things. DTG makes games, train & fishing games & they even call FSW a game. Yes, I know it is semantics, but..we, those using FSX, FS2004, etc, that were originally designed by ACES Gaming Studio's (now defunct). We bought then from gaming stores, & play them with gaming joysticks. We add 'lipstick' to them, & now, in our minds, it becomes a simulation. However, what we have is sold for entertainment, unlike P3D's offerings.

So, as DTG is a gaming manufacturer, & Steam is probably the largest gaming distributor, maybe, us 'serious' flight simmers/gamers should probably realise that, as DTG's target market IS gamers, maybe we are not their market?

It is scary that people accept the fact that early access is exactly the same as beta, & that DTG is expecting their market to pay for something that is probably buggy/unfinished. DTG put it very nicely that they want to work with the community. Well, they do, they want us to pay & play, & to tell them what does not work! 

Remember, in the good old days, Microsoft gave us an engine, & thanks to payware developers, & especially freeware developers (the actual backbone of our hobby), they, without any restrictions at all, have given us so many choices for us to make our hobby whatever we want it to be!

Just maybe, FSW is not for us, as Flight School was not?

[Boomer 1,619]

We are fws's market, that is obvious.

that being so, I doubt pmdg need bother with fsw.

[skelsey 765]

6 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

Remember, in the good old days, Microsoft gave us an engine, & thanks to payware developers, & especially freeware developers (the actual backbone of our hobby), they, without any restrictions at all, have given us so many choices for us to make our hobby whatever we want it to be!

I think that is really pushing the rose-tinted spectacles. 

Microsoft most certainly did not 'give us' an engine - they developed a game (as you said above, where does FSX install in to?) and sold it according to the business model of the time. They were in it FOR THE CASH.

That is why we are STILL using FSX over ten years on: it was simply not viable to Microsoft as a business proposition any more.

Creating, developing, updating, improving a sim costs money. Big money. Seven plus figures money. It is simply not viable for anybody to do it using the 1990s business model that Microsoft had for FSX.

They went too far with Flight and cocked it up. DTG so far do seem to have learned some of the lessons of that experience for MS and I personally think they are on broadly a decent track - a middle road, if you like, between the extremes that were Flight at one end and the totally open FSX at the othet. But if they can't make it pay they will drop it faster than a red hot coal, and in ten years' time we'll all still be sitting here with 32-bit software designed for early 2000s technology, wondering why no one's tried to create a new sim.

It is curious how everyone is desperate to 'support' third-party developers and talk about encouraging them to reinvest in creating ever greater addons, but nobody gives a second thought to the actual base sim itself: obviously DTG don't work to the same laws of economics as anyone else and so don't need any financial encouragement to develop or improve FSW. In fact, reading some of the posts on here you'd think DTG ought to be paying US for the sim!

If there is no platform - whether that be FSX, FSW, P3D, X-plane or any other you care to choose - there can be no third party addons, no PMDG, no FSL, no Aerosoft et al. So to turn it around - why should some of the people who are profiting by selling third-party addons not help to financially support the future development and sustainability of that platform in some way?

With regard to freeware, DTG have already stated on these forums that they have no interest in restricting freeware. So I don't envisage that situation changing at all - there will still be freeware developers and they will still be able to distribute their content as they desire.

The way some people have been talking over the last few days about the length of time FSX has stayed 'alive' you'd think MSFS was a product still under active development. It's deluded: MSFS ceased to be alive officially in 2012, and unofficially a long time before that. The fact that we still have copies installed does not make it any more alive or successful: my parents still have a VHS player under the telly, but the fact they still have some videos in the cupboard ot that you can buy old tapes doesn't make VHS 'alive'.

[Wobbie 937]

I rephrase...

Microsoft did NOT give us an engine, they sold it to us, as did/do any other developers.

Not quite a correct analogy comparing MSFS to VHS, as VHS, as we all know, is no more, with nothing available.

LOL, Maybe DTG should be paying people to beta test their product, instead of selling an 'early access' game?

Of course we must support 3rd party developers.. These are the guys that will be providing add-ons for our sim for us?

We have been talking about the longevity of FSX, not because we think that MS is still alive, but because the developers are constantly providing us with more, because there is nothing else out there (XP, apologies!)

It is quite amazing that there are still amazing add-ons being developed for such old engines!

Anyway...

[skelsey 765]

8 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

Of course we must support 3rd party developers.. These are the guys that will be providing add-ons for our sim for us?

I'm not disputing that.

But if there is no sim, what are you going to install your add-ons in to? If MS had not sunk millions in to developing FS9 and FSX, what would PMDG be doing? That's my point: we need both a decent, well-supported base sim, and a healthy third party community.

However, experience shows that whilst people are happy enough to pay for the latter, there's no appetite to lend similar support to the former. Which is why we've have plenty of outstanding 3rd party addons, but we have not had a new sim for 11 years. Not least because a point was reached where there was a critical mass and as RSR has alluded to himself -- it was (and arguably still is) in PMDG and other developers' interest to continue to prop up FSX with all it's various flaws.

11 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

Maybe DTG should be paying people to beta test their product, instead of selling an 'early access' game?

Now -- I've no idea what sort of condition "early access" FSW is going to be in. It might be great, or it might be unusable. But have you ever actually beta tested a complex piece of software?

I have - let me tell you that it is nothing like a typical "early access" release. A real beta is horrifically unstable and rarely works as advertised.

Of course, you can then get in to all sorts of arguments about when something is "finished" or "ready" -- pretty much everything gets an update, and often many updates, sooner or later (usually sooner) after release. This is especially true of complex software on Windows PCs - there is such an infinitely variable range of hardware and software configurations out there that it's simply impossible for a developer to cover all the bases in a beta program. Add in the various cocktails of add-ons and tweaks that flight simmers run and frankly it's amazing that so many things work as often as they do on release.

[KenG 492]

8 hours ago, A320_SX ALX said:

Steam gets a 30% cut from EVERY game in there. Be it Age of Empires, NBA 2k or FlightSim (yes, it is technically a game). The FS market is niche and I've seen two markets emerging the past couple of years:

 

 

I've been reading through a few game developer forums on publishing on STEAM and it is not quite that cut and dry. It seems that Valve charges anywhere between 30% to 70% to publish on STEAM. Big developers such as Id and EA get 30% while indy studios get closer to 70%. The actual agreement is under an NDA. We all think of PMDG as big and in the very small pond that is FS they generally are. In the much larger market of entertainment software where titles can sell millions of copies, I doubt their sales compete with the huge titles of other major studios. Maybe DTG, since they are a known larger studio, has already negotiated add-on percentage with Valve. Would be interesting to hear what the current rate is for FSX:SE and how it compares to the rate for FSW. I also wonder where this split of 30% to Valve and 35% to DTG came from. Has this been publically announced by DTG? Is this the point negotiations broke off between DTG and PMDG?

[A320_SX ALX 137]

14 minutes ago, KenG said:

...............................It seems that Valve charges anywhere between 30% to 70% to publish on STEAM. Big developers such as Id and EA get 30% while indy studios get closer to 70%. ............................................I also wonder where this split of 30% to Valve and 35% to DTG came from. Has this been publically announced by DTG? Is this the point negotiations broke off between DTG and PMDG?

Ken, the first point is probably right. Steam charges 30% but there could be deals where it charges more. They have the tools to predict the progress to some extent (i.e Community Green Light) and can charge what they want. As I said before, some are satisfied with a small piece of a huge pie and it makes sense. If not for moddb, indiedb and especially Steam, indie devs wouldn't have a chance, especially after the late 2000s where EA and others grew exponentially.

The second point comes from what the OP posted.

It is true that PMDG and big FS developers are small compared to some indie mobile game companies, but the truth is that the FS Market is like America after the Vikings, waiting to be rediscovered. By flaming any developer, be it DTG or PMDG we're just making this take longer.

Games are booming like the late 80s and 90s. Simulation is a couple of steps behind but going in that direction (ROF, DCS, Il-2, Naval Action to name a few).

Steam or not, Flight Sims will continue to exist. But I'd rather play FSW2 instead of FSX in 5 years from now -if it is up to the standard!

[Boomer 1,619]

FSuX is irrelevant now.

P3D is the current sim of choice for us hardcore heavy iron drivers.

[77west 139]

1 hour ago, Boomer said:

FSuX is irrelevant now.

P3D is the current sim of choice for us hardcore heavy iron drivers.

 

Well said, and I agree.

[Wobbie 937]

Methinks a bit elitist?

Those of us that do enjoy the oldies, & who are not heavy bus drivers, are certainly not lessor simmers.

FSX is certainly not irrelevant now!  

Lol, THAT sorts of behaviour causes me concern