FSX-MS is the airport scenery market really that lucrative?

[harrry 322]

I was a little tongue in cheek with that. I think however the Firefighter X is not comperable to some of the airports that have been put up for sale, I have not bought that although I considered it as it looks interesting but it is not the kind of flying I like doing.  I do like missions though.  I have seen though many low quality airports that would only take a few days to make by anyone competant,  Fine as freeware but they still expected full prices. On the other hand developements like the forthcoming Helgoland Scenery obviously is worth the pricethough it may be the developer will not get as many sales as he would if it had been Heathrow or San Fransisco.

Sad to see you consider the base declining though.

 

[Lorby_SI 2,038]

5 minutes ago, harrry said:

I do like missions though.

The addon in question has nothing to do with missions, it is purely programmatic. 30.000 lines of C# code, 2000 of C++ and a few other assets.  

Best regards

[harrry 322]

OK  situations.  I know about the code....not the details....

I was using the missions in the generic sense, not a mission using Specifix FSX or P3D scripting.

[Lorby_SI 2,038]

3 minutes ago, harrry said:

OK  situations.  I know about the code....not the details....

I was using the missions in the generic sense, not a mission using Specifix FSX or P3D scripting.

Hello Harry,

no worries. It is just that this is one of the biggest issues that I have, that people think these addons are just another type of missions generator or compilation. They are not. 

Best regards

[ckyliu 1,749]

10 hours is a couple of nice aircraft repaints (using a paint kit), nothing more. Maybe 3 simpler repaints.

2 hours ago, Lorby_SI said:

Compared to the numbers that we used to have 10 years ago, I find this depressing.

I didn't realise volumes had tailed off so much; I suppose the end of MS Aces and the subsequent lack of publicity and new releases probably reduced hobby newcomers to a trickle. And now the market is fragmented between the different FSX spin-offs (plus those who migrated to Xplane), which in the case of P3D is not really accessible to newbies.

I think some developers are also partly responsible though, the price of some recommended products presents very high barriers to entry for casual users looking to move their flight simulation up to the next level (on top of the already steep although unavoidable learning curve). The fact the FSX/P3D base needs so many addons just to get it looking reasonable by contemporary standards also doesn't help.

I'd never thought of it before, but the supply of new customers (money) for developers is probably more dependent on FSW than most of us realise.

[Bjoern 1,157]

The lack of chatter in flight sim forums shouldn't be an indication of its popularity. For example, there were around 85000 Steam members who ran FSX:SE in the past two weeks.

http://steamspy.com/app/314160

Consider the P3D and FSX boxed users and you've got a large crowd - and a large market.

 

I'm not a fan of add-on airports that go beyond the low-fi freeware stuff, especially those with photorealistic elements. Although they're certainly nice to look at.

[rogwen 3]

Regarding the time required to make scenery, I just want to input some info here, having made a few myself. To make a simple building, say a hanger with four walls and two pitched roofs, the simplest hangar imaginable, the procedure is:

Find photo information, on google earth or websites like Flickr or by down loading a YouTube video. If you are lucky, give that an hour and a half. If you visit and take them yourself then it takes longer. Make up the photo textures using Photoshop, which can be simple, or (and this is more likely) if there are parked cars in the way of the view and nothing was taken at 90 degrees on then it can easily take over an hour of cut and paste etc. Let us say an hour and a half again, including the night time textures. Use FS Design Studio (or similar) to create the building shape (only 5 parts) and "attach" the textures, then load it into SceneGenX (which is what I use to make scenery) so just half an hour or maybe 45 minutes, including first measuring the building size on Google Earth. Say 4 hours total is the minimum. Small complications such as  attached storage sheds with sloped roofs and porched doorways as protection against weather double that. A complicated building such as a terminal can take 4 days.

Before you position that first building you have already downloaded the FS9 ground layout, checked it against Google Earth for accurate positioning and layout, updated it as necessary with corrected taxiways, aprons, runways, parking spots, ground markings, roads, and car parks, and noted the fence positions so you can revise the airfield grass background with SBuilder. You then also correct the surrounding terrain with SBuilder, particularly if there are buildings where there should be fields or trees (towns that are too large seem to be the norm in FS9, with or without Ultimate Terrain). I roughly noted down the time it took me to make the layout for Alma CYTF recently, an airport with only one apron and a single runway, and it was over 20 hours (though that included researching the planes that would be needed for AI, but not actually downloading the planes or making the AI). After that came making buildings, positioning them and also parked vehicles, fuel tanks, fuel pumps, fences, trees, apron lights, taxiway lights, signage, containers, radio masts, etc, down to traffic cones, a rocking chair, and a table with a pint of beer and a folded chart on it. Most of the objects were not newly made (I already have, for instance, 14 different fuel tanks to chose from for size and appearance) but I did make them at some point. How many hours? Over 100, with rechecks and tweaks to make things fit properly, revising helicopter textures, making AI, plus other details such as the wrong radio frequency etc.

[Zatoichi 45]

11 hours ago, Bjoern said:

The lack of chatter in flight sim forums shouldn't be an indication of its popularity. For example, there were around 85000 Steam members who ran FSX:SE in the past two weeks.

http://steamspy.com/app/314160

Consider the P3D and FSX boxed users and you've got a large crowd - and a large market.

 

I'm not a fan of add-on airports that go beyond the low-fi freeware stuff, especially those with photorealistic elements. Although they're certainly nice to look at.

Mostly agreed.

I bought REX HD Airports when it was half price and I had $3 in credit points. For $11 it's great.

[ms2 184]

13 hours ago, rogwen said:

Regarding the time required to make scenery,

in 2015, I make for xp10, 2 Belgian's AG fields. Take myself the photos needed, design the 3D nearest as possible to reality... Captured on Google photoreals of the terrains... Etc, etc...

The full process take me around 500 hours and then posted for free.

I suggest for Peoples are thinking is easy to do, to try realise one very small for the knowledge... And to became more realistic when evaluating the values of pay-ware addons.

Mark

[Patco Lch 1,465]

Simming like aviation itself has to be a labor of love simply because of the talents and abilities required that would be much more lucrative being expended elsewhere. I'm speaking of developers. I have never felt taken advantage of because everyone deserves something for their work. It's up to me the consumer to decide if I want the product or not. Let's not forget the freeware guys who give so much to the community. Theirs truly is a labor of love to the hobby.

[rogwen 3]

Hmmm, that "labour of love" for the hobby bit hovers rather close to zero sometimes. Too much of scenery making is actually boring and downright depressing, so much so that I really wonder sometimes "Why am I doing this?". It is only at the end and with a result that the feelings go positive. As Holger Sandmann once said to me, "Nobody realises how many thousands of clicks of the mouse it took me to position all those handmade but seemingly auto-generated houses!"

[scianoir 610]

On 10/01/2018 at 9:15 PM, flyforever said:

I'm just wondering whether one of these days all of these airports will run out of buyers.

I don't think so - just look at the rate at which FSXcenery churns out airports. He has already produced 96 airports and despite their dubious quality more continue to appear every week so they must be selling! 

Bill

[flyforever 267]

But bubbles are bubbles because no one can predict when they'll pop.

[ubersu 78]

FSXcenery is able to sell one airport to one user who has never bought his airports before. Their general look and truly awful performance will make sure that is all he will sell to that person. He desperately needs to learn to make the airports perform well on average+ systems.

DJ

[scianoir 610]

3 hours ago, ubersu said:

FSXcenery is able to sell one airport to one user who has never bought his airports before. Their general look and truly awful performance will make sure that is all he will sell to that person. He desperately needs to learn to make the airports perform well on average+ systems.

DJ

I made the mistake of buying a few of them in a sale - a stupid move on my part but they were airports I particularly wanted and I just went for it as they were at sale prices! As you say, their look isn't great (for what you pay) but leaving that aside their performance varies from poor to very bad and clearly little or no effort has been put in to optimising the airports. This is one user who won't be buying FSXcenery again!

Bill