"The main reason is that it's not designed for the massive volume of DLC and free user-generated content that we've enjoyed with FSX, P3D, and X-Plane."

I think the opposite.

Look at Rocket League - PYSONIX has made well over $200 million and more than half that is nothing BUT DLC.

And then there is the Steam workshop.

On 14.05.2017 at 0:57 AM, Paraffin said:

The main reason is that it's not designed for the massive volume of DLC and free user-generated content that we've enjoyed with FSX, P3D, and X-Plane.

I would have to disagree here. If you've ever used games such as City Skylines, you'll see just how easy it is to get user-generated content. With FSX or X-Plane, I have to search around different sites, use different methods of installing, make sure I have libraries available, and update them. With Steam, the whole process is so easy and something I wish flight simulators did have, but I think it needs to be refined somehow.

What I strongly disagree about is forcing both freeware and payware developers to use Steam. Some devs might not want to have their products or freeware on steam, and they should be allowed to do this. For any dev trying to make a name for themselves, being buried in the Steam workshop isn't the best way to do it.

Either way, the same issue exists on places like X-Plane.org. If I want to download a particular airport or addon, I have to search through lots of files (lots of them are just generic lego brick airports requiring 5000 different libraries and look nothing like the real airport) and it's very easy to miss the real gems (They are there, but the only way you'd find them is by word-of-mouth). To understand the frustration from a developer's point of view, last year I created a completely custom airport which took me a few months of hard work (I even purchased GIS data and orthos to use), and when posted on the site it was buried within a few hours by piles of generic library based content and downloads dried up within a day or two. If I search now for this airport, it is buried beneath 8 different versions of the same airport (most of them are those generic lego-brick ones), this has strongly discouraged me to put so much effort in again, especially if it costs me to do so.

 

 

 

 

Wasn't there once a database of X-plane scenery, with the standouts given special notice?

I've seen a few over the years, but the issue is the authors either get bored, move on etc. Downloading and reviewing every new upload is a lot of work so it's perfectly understandable. The only way I've discovered the real gems recently is from other users or Youtube videos.

One recent site I saw was this one:

 

How would a Stream library with all the potential add-ons listed in a single location be worse than what we have today? As it stands I need to visit sitrs like AVSIM to find out about vendors. This is effectively word of mouth and adding Steam into the mix would not eliminate the need for product reviews and comparisons.

Steam would bring the benefit of a trusted shop to purchase the addon, and it would also simply management of the add-ons that I have purchased.

A single source to view add-ons would also bring new and old ones to my attention. The only source I have today are sites like AVSIM and Google searches. Half the time I'm taken to websites that I don't feel I can trust to make a purchase. Lack of reviews, statistics on usage and a reluctance to share my credit card info with anyone means that the sale won't be made.

As had been stated before, the vendors don't have to use Steam, but I feel it would be in their best interest to do so.

But... for Flight Sim World the vendors do have to use Steam... there's no exception.  

Also, it is never in one's best interest to surrender over 50% of one's income to another party... and if you give 30% off the top to Steam and then 30% of the 70% left that leaves you with 49% of the total income for an addon... and you're the one doing all the work.  Nothing "best interest" about that at all.  There's always the argument that increased sales will offset the loss, but that's not actually true.  Return on investment is calculated based on item cost and return.  Reduce the return per item and you reduce the return on investment.  Simple math.  Nothing positive.

As one sells more product, their overhead costs shouldn't increase in proportion.

Assuming pricing doesn't change then if, and only if, there are sufficiently increased sales there will be no loss. If the sales remain flat or don't increase by much, then there will be a loss. Instead of having to sell x units, it will be necessary to sell x + y units to cover the overhead.

Again spreaking for myself, I have avoided making many purchases for security reasons. Maybe I am in the minority, maybe not. I do believe the statistics for Steam sales make a case for increased sales.

It's a business decision in the end and one that I happen to like as a consumer.

Don't forget that selling via one's own website is not a free exercise.

Factor in bandwidth costs, payment processing costs (anyone selling in to the EU, for example, should really be using a system that calculates the appropriate VAT), hosting costs, the cost of a decent DRM solution etc etc and you may find that actually there isn't quite such a huge difference in margin.