4 minutes ago, jh71 said:

Tony,I did not say that payware developers are not welcome, but that we already have talented people on board (like yourself). I just don't believe the gospel that orbX will suddenly solve all problems people have with the current state, and I don't believe the hype every and each time they post sth related to X-plane. They will find it hard to compete with the likes of yourself and midterm.

I‘m pretty sure that it’ll bring new people to the XP community. People that want hassle free install and are willing to pay for that. And I think, that can only be a positive thing for XP‘s popularity and further development. People like you (and me) are perfectly happy with the stuff like Ortho4XP, HD Mesh v4, etc. But to each their own, right? ;-)

29 minutes ago, Mik75 said:

IAnd I think, that can only be a positive thing for XP‘s popularity and further development. 

Let us agree to disagree, I am afraid that it will hamper further independent development. X-Plane improvements came mostly from the names I quoted. But I agree some people like the hassle free from payware products, and it will attract new customer for Laminar. But I doubt the numbers: see my next point.

Looking back, I just can not explain to myself why I invested hundreds of Euros in FSX add ons (which on its own was like 50€ at the time?). Some people invested a multitude of that. And that is without all hardware upgrades needed to run the sims properly. Those people will be hard pushed to leave their setup behind for something completely new.

12 minutes ago, jh71 said:

Let us agree to disagree, I am afraid that it will hamper further independent development. X-Plane improvements came mostly from the names I quoted. But I agree some people like the hassle free from payware products, and it will attract new customer for Laminar. But I doubt the numbers: see my next point.

Looking back, I just can not explain to myself why I invested hundreds of Euros in FSX add ons (which on its own was like 50€ at the time?). Some people invested a multitude of that. And that is without all hardware upgrades needed to run the sims properly. Those people will be hard pushed to leave their setup behind for something completely new.

Good point. I’ve invested in FS9, in FSX, I could use most of the FSX stuff in P3Dv3, which is a sim I also like. But I won’t invest into P3Dv4. All this upgrade fees for the sceneries are too much for me. So, if I spend money nowadays, I mostly invest into XP11, the sim platform that has the most potential in my opinion. 

What I don’t understand, is, why still a lot of people rather buy sims like FSW or Aerofly (and others) before they get themselves XP. There is still a barrier when it comes to the „unknown“ XP world. And I’m pretty confident, that well known names like ORBX will lower that barrier significantally. And for XP as a platform, this can only have a positive effect. 

But you’re right. Let’s never forget about all these talented people that made XP what it is today, with all their effort and time they’ve put into it (and hopefull continue to do so). 

6 minutes ago, Mik75 said:

What I don’t understand, is, why still a lot of people rather buy sims like FSW or Aerofly (and others) before they get themselves XP.

I'm guessing the price? I paid $20 for FSW I think, and Aerofly FS wasn't that expensive either. They're not bad for impulse buys at the moment. Whilst X-Plane is nowhere near the price of P3D, it's still quite high and also involves an investment in time and learning to use, find addons etc.

7 minutes ago, tonywob said:

I'm guessing the price? I paid $20 for FSW I think, and Aerofly FS wasn't that expensive either. They're not bad for impulse buys at the moment. Whilst X-Plane is nowhere near the price of P3D, it's still quite high and also involves an investment in time and learning to use, find addons etc.

And at least two of your (very good) points will be adressed when the developer with the 4 big letters will finally come to the XP world. 

I‘ve started with XP9, when the sim still felt like a nerd only thing (the Linux of flight sims somehow :-) ), and certainly we’ve come. long way. 2018 will be ab exciting year, that’s for sure. 

33 minutes ago, tonywob said:

I'm guessing the price? I paid $20 for FSW I think, and Aerofly FS wasn't that expensive either. They're not bad for impulse buys at the moment. Whilst X-Plane is nowhere near the price of P3D, it's still quite high and also involves an investment in time and learning to use, find addons etc.

It's a complete myth that the price of the base flight sim is a major factor in determining the market. First of all, a large percentage of users don't pay the so-called retail price, either due to flash sales or purchasing a sim version that is is obviously cheaper but in no way limited in features.

What controls purchasing is the quality of add-on scenery, aircraft and utilities. The base sims these days are just a bunless slab of ground beef and the add-ons are the bun, the fries and the condiments. 

And for users with legacy hardware, the choices are much more limited. Most are stuck with FSX-SE until they can upgrade their computer. They have to be content in the interim with a strict diet of flight sim bread and water.

Well for me and I guess for users on P3D/FSX, if AFS or FSW were priced at $60 I wouldn't have bothered either. Considering both these sims have limited addon scenery etc, I'd say having a low price has worked in their favour. Also both sims are pretty good out of the box, AFS having decent ortho scenery and airports, and FSW having FTX Global. I was able to jump into both sims without having to purchase any addons or faff about with configuration files etc..

 

I personally think that in the flight sim market, XP has always been (and still is) a bit overpriced.

Hmm, I don’t think so. The base sim is very usable out of the box, and looks great. No need for „Global“ or regional scenery addons. It looks even better with some free- and donationware. And the airport sceneries and the high end addons are cheaper (or have the same price) than the addons for the ESP based sims. Plus, you get decent default aircraft, a good GNS and G1000 simulation with updatable navdata. 

2 hours ago, Tierborn said:

thank you for the links, however, its really about the number of copies sold and that appears to be flat based on your info - If i am reading the "interest chart" correctly.

Google trends results are relative to the total Google searches, they are not an absolute number

In any case, apart from that, I showed that in one year:

.) the number of uploaded YT videos has increased more than 150%

.) the number of threads on AVSIM (historically more centered around FSX/P3D) has increased more than 50%

.) XP11 received more Steam reviews in 9 months, than XP10 in 3 years.

Now, short of showing you hard sales number, I don't think there's much more I can do if you think that X-Plane sales are flat.

IMO XP 11 is not an option for those who have not taken the time to see the freeware available for XP 11. I have almost every airport rendered beautifully in the Tampa Bay area and when you consider the visuals and price of XP 11 it's hard to overlook.

If ORBX/JV takes doing scenery for XP seriously, it will only further enhance X-Plane and that's a win win for the community.

6 hours ago, tonywob said:

However, one thing I've learned from reading many posts here over the past year or so is that most don't want to actually generate their own orthos, follow complicated instructions to create overlays with W2XP and go through library-hell etc, but instead they would rather buy a nicely packaged and easy to use scenery that just works.

tony you hit the nail on the head. I like to fly VFR with XP11 with the best photoscenery (preferably L17 and L18 for around airfields) with accurate objects and roads. i have technical skills but don't want to spend so much time fiddling with scenery. it upsets me to spend mega hours only to find square water lines, trees on beaches,  hovering buildings and dodgy roads.  i've fixed some issues but i don't want to spend any more time not flying.  so i wouldn't hesitate to pay mega bucks for complete Orbx-quality regions (of UK / Europe). 

Well - I for one would really welcome some of the OrbX airport work in the X-Plane world..

The more the better!

Without Ortho, XP11's default texture is not so great. Especially in city area it give the whole scenery a lego city kind of looking which looks very alien. FSX/P3D's city ground texture is bad, but it does camouflage out sth that smells a bit more like a human city. 

Agree that for the vast majority of XP11 player who won't make their own orthos, Orbx can do them a great job by optimizing the default scenery in XP. Although to me it becomes more and more that XP11 is a vehicle to enjoy my ortho scenery.. 

1 hour ago, deanwings said:

tony you hit the nail on the head. I like to fly VFR with XP11 with the best photoscenery (preferably L17 and L18 for around airfields) with accurate objects and roads. i have technical skills but don't want to spend so much time fiddling with scenery. it upsets me to spend mega hours only to find square water lines, trees on beaches,  hovering buildings and dodgy roads.  i've fixed some issues but i don't want to spend any more time not flying.  so i wouldn't hesitate to pay mega bucks for complete Orbx-quality regions (of UK / Europe). 

+1