Dillon

Looks like DT needs to change it's policy on 3rd party developers

Recommended Posts

I think the Steam angle is over-blown to be honest; it's obviously correct that Steam has a radically bigger exposure than any Flight Sim only website, it's not even close when comparing a large retailer like Aerosoft...but and it's a big but, that doesn't directly translate into sales, i'll give you a personal example.  I love strategy games, i am a huge fan of the Total war series and the Paradox games (i often play Hearts of Iron IV whilst in cruise on P3D), so on Steam i saw a new Strategy game that looked interesting "Romance of the three Kingdoms XIV", it looked great (i have also read the books), then i saw the price...£70, nearly a £100 with the DLC, after that didn't touch it with a barge pole (UK expression).  So, imagine a casual simmer seeing the FSL-A320 available for FSW costing £120, that is most certainly not going to be a one-to-one translation of views to sales; then take into account they see Aerosofts A320 for £40, or perhaps a model only improvement on the FSX default A320 for £15, which are they going to buy, unless they are prepared to do there homework (at which point i content they cease to be casual simmers) i imagine that the vast majority will go for the cheapest option.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Spot on, Wotan! These things are emphatically NOT pocket-money prices. I doubt whether any kid today is going to get a Flight Simulator for his birthday if it needs a PC upgrade costing hundreds to run properly. The average family can't justify that expense on what may only be a passing interest. That's why consoles and smartphone/tablet games are the mainstream these days, and that in turn is what makes PC-based flight sims and their add-ons so costly. Only time will tell whether FSW appeals to both simmers and gamers, one or the other, or neither...

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, A32xx said:

With MSFS you could. FSX was the 10th and last version of MSFS, and unusually different to previous versions, which were usually backwards-compatible to the last one or two versions. Evolution is better than Revolution as they say, and making haste slowly is very good for business. The MSFS franchise ran for 20-odd years by making gradual additions and improvements every two or three years, rather than a drastic rebuild every 18 months.

Isn't it the general Avsim consensus that MS Flight, with all its other flaws, had a superior flight model compared to FSX?

Correct me if I'm wrong about that. I don't remember all the conversation (drama) back then, and never bought Flight myself. But I remember hearing that the Aces team couldn't make the changes they wanted to improve the flight modeling in MSFS without breaking backwards compatibility. So that's what they did, with MS Flight. That sim failed for many other reasons, but it wasn't the flight modeling. 

If nothing else, X-Plane is proving that you can keep improving (breaking) things while keeping users and developers onboard over a period of years. P3Dv4 has had a smooth transition to 64-bits, like XP10 did, a couple of years ago. But LM may get to the point where they need to break at least some backwards compatibility to keep improving the sim. Unless y'all think it's perfect, as-is. 

Share this post


Link to post
57 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

If nothing else, X-Plane is proving that you can keep improving (breaking) things while keeping users and developers onboard over a period of years.

Yes, but unfortunately not enough users to finance the two changes which everyone else is asking for: seasonal textures and ATC :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, A32xx said:

Yes, but unfortunately not enough users to finance the two changes which everyone else is asking for: seasonal textures and ATC :huh:

I don't think that's a question of financing, just development priorities. We know the ATC is being worked on, and seasonal changes (procedural, not textures) are out there in the pipeline somewhere. Its one of those "Nine women can't make a baby in one month" situations, where more money and a larger development team wouldn't necessarily make it happen sooner. .

It will get there eventually, and meanwhile there are other sims to fly if someone wants seasonal changes as an essential feature. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Paraffin said:

We know the ATC is being worked on

But LR announced in 2011 that ATC in XP was being worked on and then... nothing happened. I don't think that XP11 users should hold their breath waiting for decent ATC anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, vortex681 said:

But LR announced in 2011 that ATC in XP was being worked on and then... nothing happened. I don't think that XP11 users should hold their breath waiting for decent ATC anytime soon.

Yup. Although I'm not exactly a massive XPlane user - I do always buy it when a new version comes out and get a few add-ons in order to give it a fair crack, but it just never manages to completely do the trick for me - so I don't follow every upcoming development for the thing as much as some people might. But even I know that LR were promising they'd get around to some decent ATC even before XP10 came out. Yet we're still waiting for them to come up with something which rivals even FS2002 for flight planning, basic ATC and weather generation, which frankly, is embasrrassing for a simulator which has the slogan 'Made Usable' because that's exactly what it is not if you want to make a realistic airliner flight, and that's always seemed like a real shame to me, because there are lots of things about XPlane which make ESP-based sims look far behind it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Chock said:

Yup. Although I'm not exactly a massive XPlane user - I do always buy it when a new version comes out and get a few add-ons in order to give it a fair crack, but it just never manages to completely do the trick for me - so I don't follow every upcoming development for the thing as much as some people might. But even I know that LR were promising they'd get around to some decent ATC even before XP10 came out. Yet we're still waiting for them to come up with something which rivals even FS2002 for flight planning, basic ATC and weather generation, which frankly, is embasrrassing for a simulator which has the slogan 'Made Usable' because that's exactly what it is not if you want to make a realistic airliner flight, and that's always seemed like a real shame to me, because there are lots of things about XPlane which make ESP-based sims look far behind it.

So, does that mean that if we suddenly see a fantastic new, built-in ATC in XP11 next month, that everyone will suddenly migrate to that sim because it's the ONLY thing holding anyone back? 

C'mon... we all fly these various sims for our own personal reasons, and most of us probably use more than one sim. I don't, but that's because I fly in FSEconomy where it's just easier to use one set of aircraft models in one platform, and not hassle with the differences in fuel consumption and performance specs.

We're all looking for different things. There is no point in focusing on the one missing feature in "flight sim X" because they all lack something! Have you tried flying P3Dv4 at night, even with that limited new dynamic lighting? What about helicopters? VRS? Retreating blade stall? Mast bump?

I fly XP11 because years ago, I realized it gave me the best frame rates with a reasonable presentation of the world outside the cockpit, and it had the planes and helicopters I wanted to fly. I need frame rates in the 30-40 fps range to be happy with a flight sim. Others fly P3D because that's where the heaviest concentration of study-level modern airliner models are. They're not flying it because the built-in ATC in P3D is spectacular. Those are all add-ons, or VATSIM which is available to everyone. And yet others are flying Aerofly FS2 because they have an ortho-based scenery model that allows incredibly high frame rates that are great for VR. 

My big question about FSW remains as always -- what is the goal here? What are they offering that we can't get anywhere else, or that will appeal to newcomers to flight sims when they have all these other 64-bit offerings now?

Maybe it's the missions? That seems to be DTG's big focus, both in their promotional material, and the fact that this is the only thing they've opened up for user creation in the Steam Workshop. If that's enough to keep this sim going, then more power to them. I believe in competition in the marketplace.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

So, does that mean that if we suddenly see a fantastic new, built-in ATC in XP11 next month, that everyone will suddenly migrate to that sim because it's the ONLY thing holding anyone back?

You appear to be arguing with yourself here. If you read through my post which you quoted, there is absolutely nothing in it about just one feature being the only thing holding anyone back from adopting XPlane, all it mentioned was several lacking or poorly implemented features which stop me personally from using it more than I otherwise would if it had them.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that some people, when ATC will be improved, will find another excuse not to use it. Maybe it will be the weather depiction not being perfect. Then, if the weather will be improved, it will be the lack of seasons. Then, if seasons will be introduced, it will be the inaccurate ground handling. Then, it will be... And so on.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Paraffin said:

So, does that mean that if we suddenly see a fantastic new, built-in ATC in XP11 next month, that everyone will suddenly migrate to that sim because it's the ONLY thing holding anyone back?

No. But it's certainly one of things holding people back.

Share this post


Link to post

Let's be honest Gents, ALL flightsims have their faults which some guys can live with and others can't. That's one feature of flight simulation that will never change. We are fortunate to have a choice at all, perhaps we should count our blessings?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

It's funny but not a SINGLE dev has posted in here...Gee... I wonder why?

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, Milviz said:

It's funny but not a SINGLE dev has posted in here...Gee... I wonder why?

 

Ummmmmm....this cannot be unseen, but I wouldn't count out FSW...yet!

Share this post


Link to post

That's not what I meant by the oops... I meant that I was the first (and only) dev to post here... 

Share this post


Link to post

And thank you for making it, it's superb, but could you make the type a little larger please? That type size wasn't used until the Mk.IV version, and you've made the Mk.I version..... :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post

My flaps ARE double slotted!!!!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Milviz said:

It's funny but not a SINGLE dev has posted in here...Gee... I wonder why?

 

Okay, I'll bite.  Why?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Milviz said:

My flaps ARE double slotted!!!!

TMI !! :emu:

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Milviz said:

That's not what I meant by the oops... I meant that I was the first (and only) dev to post here... 

haha...well at least we now know you guys are lurking here :biggrin:

 

Share this post


Link to post

I truly do not understand the premise of this thread. Thus far DTG have not even forumlated, much less published, any firm policy on 3rd part development.

All I've read are suppositions and interpretations based on hyperbole... :biggrin:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, n4gix said:

I truly do not understand the premise of this thread. Thus far DTG have not even forumlated, much less published, any firm policy on 3rd part development.

All I've read are suppositions and interpretations based on hyperbole... :biggrin:

 

Really???

i wonder why they wasted their time to write their nasty 😷 eula

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, arsenal82 said:

 

Really???

i wonder why they wasted their time to write their nasty 😷 eula

 

 

May be there the same sort of people who wright other EULA`s but do not always inforce or police them,

Ray Fry.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, arsenal82 said:

 

Really???

i wonder why they wasted their time to write their nasty 😷 eula

 

 

Their EULA was quite timid compared to many I have read. Is there a specific section.sub section your are referring to? What is you interpretation of it?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now