How Much will your next Add-On Cost?

[LAdamson 240]

>I do not consider myself fully informed yet on the process of>developing a new add-on so I will try not to be too>judgmental, but there is a difference between knowledge and>effort. Making a plane for FS requires copying>something that is already available and fitting it to the>environment of the FS. Knowledge of the plane is of course>necessary and is not held by many. If a developer decides to>charge a high price for his product only because he is>knowledgable and not for the effort that he put into it, I do>not think it is very fair. And before you start typing>something like "I made it I can charge whatever I want",>don't. You are right. My point is only valid regarding the>difference between a commercial developer and one who tries to>enrich the FS community.>>Your right...............you have no clue!The best developers around here have been at it for years. They've took the product far beyond the bounds of the initial release. To believe it's just a matter of copying something already available, is really a total lack of knowledge on the subject. I've been a beta tester for Microsoft. I've also beta-tested some of the highly regarded developers products. I'm very aware of what goes on with producing these excellent add-ons. Honestly, you just don't seem to have a clue!L.Adamson ---- simmer, pilot, EAA, AOPA, kit-plane builder, bla, bla, bla

[LAdamson 240]

>Even though this discusion is not about freeware developers>there is an interesting point to be made. There are some very>high quality freeware add-ons for FS. Some of them are much>better than many payware products. If I want a simulated airplane with the best possible flight dynamics regarding use of rudder/aileron for slips and controlled aerobatic manuvers, with desired results, where will I go?One thing for certain, I will not get it from ANY freeware developer at this point...It's just taken too much time and experience to develope the programming for what I've just described. You won't find it in freeware.That's just a fact of life...L.Adamson

[Guest almogo]

>Your right...............you have no clue!>>The best developers around here have been at it for years.>They've took the product far beyond the bounds of the initial>release. To believe it's just a matter of copying something>already available, is really a total lack of knowledge on the>subject.When I said copying I was talking about the fact that the developers have to take the plane and try to fit/copy it's functions to the FS. They do not have to come up with a whole new product of their own. At least not in the conservative sort of the way. >>I've been a beta tester for Microsoft. I've also beta-tested>some of the highly regarded developers products. I'm very>aware of what goes on with producing these excellent add-ons.>Honestly, you just don't seem to have a clue!You made your point, I don't have a clue and I would really like if you or any of the developers will reveal some of the difficulties and proceses that go into developing these products.There is no question that the developers (some of them at least) are doing an excellent and demanding work but when I compare it to other fields of programming the prices do seem a little steep to me.But than again, now that I think about it, maybe the FS community is unique And I should not compare it to other game/software communities. I still tough don't see most of the add-on developers as community contributers but as businesses trying to make money. As such, I have all the rights to complain about steep prices.Oren

[Guest almogo]

If I want a simulated airplane with the best possible flight dynamics regarding use of rudder/aileron for slips and controlled aerobatic manuvers, with desired results, where will I go?One thing for certain, I will not get it from ANY freeware developer at this point...It's just taken too much time and experience to develope the programming for what I've just described. You won't find it in freeware.You won't find it freeware that is for sure, at this point every developer who has the skill to do that will develop a payware add-on. When you are confronted with the choice of to make money or not to make money, the choice is any easy one for most people.Oren

[Guest almogo]

>>"Smart & educated" people know exactly who to purchase from.I know alot of "Smart & Educated" people who purchase more crap than anything else. Why, because they have money. Too many "Smart & educated" people in the FS community have bought add-on products with no value. Driving some developers to charge for thiner products and for others to up the price.>"We" don't purchase from those few dealers who's products are>not up to current standards. We also know that the product>prices for these high standards of programming are very well>in line, considering the amount of product sold.I have no idea of the amount of products sold, I would thank you If you could supply me with that information. I also thought that the amount of products sold for this kind of community can not be too high. But I just keep seeing more and more Payware, so it must no be the case.> Most>payware developers have long realized, that it takes a group>of individuals to get it to all come together.That is why I believe that an open source kind of developing would have benefited the community much more.>Your three examples, really fit a minority of products, so>what's the point?So you are saying that most payware is no developed for financial gain, is priced exactly in the amount that it cost to develop and is mostly of high standard ? I don't think so.Oren

[LAdamson 240]

>I know alot of "Smart & Educated" people who purchase more>crap than anything else. Why, because they have money. Too>many "Smart & educated" people in the FS community have>bought add-on products with no value. Driving some developers>to charge for thiner products and for others to up the price.Wrong again. Most of the simulation population who frequent these forums, know what to stay away from. I should know, as I've been around these forums for as long as they've existed.>So you are saying that most payware is no developed for>financial gain, is priced exactly in the amount that it cost>to develop and is mostly of high standard ? I don't think so.>I'd certainly HOPE, that there is financial gain! I'd never want to be programming hundreds and perhaps thousands of hours while my wife and family starves, only to loose my home, car and everything else....Do you expect the programmers at Microsoft to do this for nothing? Do you expect Austin Meyer of X-Plane to give it away for free? What's the difference? I don't follow your logic at all!Open Source.................B.S.. It's the drive within one's self to out do the competition, that keeps raising the bar with these products. And that applies to freeware as well as payware. If payware doesn't appeal to you, then don't purchase it. I'm selective myself, know what I'm looking for, and know what to expect from certain payware developers that I've long done business with.L.Adamson

[LAdamson 240]

>I still tough don't see most of the add-on developers as>community contributers but as businesses trying to make money.>As such, I have all the rights to complain about steep>prices.>Like I've previously said,These same (payware) developers produced freeware for year after year. But that might have been three to ten years ago. Since that time, the demands for exacting realism have grown, as well as their own expertise. If you were around back in those days, to see all their efforts, I highly doubt you be making the comments that you're writing now.And BTW, what's wrong with a business making money? I've been a business owner for 21 years, and need to make a living also. I'm an expert in my field, and most of these developers are experts in their line of business. Designing airplanes for today's picky flight simmer, is a lot of work, and more than just a hobby to most.L.Adamson

[Guest almogo]

>These same (payware) developers produced freeware for year>after year. But that might have been three to ten years ago.>Since that time, the demands for exacting realism have grown,>as well as their own expertise. >>If you were around back in those days, to see all their>efforts, I highly doubt you be making the comments that you're>writing now.From what I understand back in the old days they weren't doing it for money but for contributing to the community. I wonder how has the price went up since they started charging for that.That's the big change that the developers probably made they are now doing it for their pockets (some not all) and not for the community.>>And BTW, what's wrong with a business making money? I've been>a business owner for 21 years, and need to make a living also.>I'm an expert in my field, and most of these developers are>experts in their line of business. Designing airplanes for>today's picky flight simmer, is a lot of work, and more than>just a hobby to most.Nothing wrong with trying to make money, but as you know in the world of business everyone will do everything to try and take as much money as they can away from you. You need to be careful and watch your step.This brings me to my initial argument, again, that the FS community has a very easy hand with their credit card which will only drive prices higher with no regard to the actual product you are receiving.You already made your point that you are a careful buyer but this doesn't help you if the actions of other less bright people bring you to pay more for less.BTW In another post you regarded open source as BS. Open source might not fit in the entire software business but it is perfect for this kind of software development. I recommend you to go check some of the software products that were developed "open source". Many of them, leaps and bounds more difficult and complex to develop than FS add-ons.Oren

[Guest TimD]

"Prove it. What is "exaggerated? More than you want to spend? Is it exaggerated if the dev turns a 7% profit but OK if it's only a 1% profit? What is exaggerated? As I've said many times before, the market will set the price limit. Anyone notice FSD has started reducing prices?"We are trying to do all we can to hold the lid down on the rising cost of add-ons. Remember, we don't just sell this stuff. We buy it too just like you. So we do feel your pain. We do the same thing you do. See a neat new plane and say "cool...$30? Man...I got a fortune in stuff in my aircraft folder already..."We have seen a number of add-ons lately where the price keeps inching up, where the cost of a GA aircraft is approaching or at $30 now. In a couple cases even more. We have simply come to realize that the accumulatinve cost is getting out of hand.Based on this we are thinking about expanding a "basics" line in addition to our premium aircraft, where you still get a great aircraft model and VC, and a good 2D panel, but without all the systems, custom floodlighting, and 100% custom gauge work, with a target price of around $16. That might allow everyone to expand their aircraft hangar without shrinking their wallet like a knit sweater in the dryer.http://www.fsd-international.com/team/TD_forum_sig.gif

[Guest almogo]

Thank for coming and clarifying this issue from a developer's point of view.>We are trying to do all we can to hold the lid down on the>rising cost of add-ons. Remember, we don't just sell this>stuff. We buy it too just like you. So we do feel your pain.>We do the same thing you do. See a neat new plane and say>"cool...$30? Man...I got a fortune in stuff in my aircraft>folder already...">>We have seen a number of add-ons lately where the price keeps>inching up, where the cost of a GA aircraft is approaching or>at $30 now. In a couple cases even more. We have simply come>to realize that the accumulatinve cost is getting out of>hand.When you talk about cost do you refer to the cost to end user or the cost of developing and add-on ?>>Based on this we are thinking about expanding a "basics" line>in addition to our premium aircraft, where you still get a>great aircraft model and VC, and a good 2D panel, but without>all the systems, custom floodlighting, and 100% custom gauge>work, with a target price of around $16. That might allow>everyone to expand their aircraft hangar without shrinking>their wallet like a knit sweater in the dryer.Seems like a good idea but I guess you should first check to see why are people buying add-ons in the first place. When it comes to the model itslef the freeware community seems to be able to develop some really nice models. The big difference with add-ons (for me at least) is the inside of the aircraft and the panel itself.But since I presume that extracting a "light" aircraft from the full one does not require much work and won't affect the development time of the full one, I think it is a good idea.As a developer I will be glad if you could supply us here with some "inner secrets" regarding the add-ons industry.- You mentioned that the prices continue to rise. Does it parallel to the cost/development time of the average add-on or are the prices just going up because there are people willing to pay ?- Regarding number of units sold. What do you consider a successful add-on, 1000, 10000, 20000 of units sold ? What about failure or average number of units sold ?- Are there other costs to development other the men-hours ?- How many men-hours are put into the average add-on ?I don't expect you of course to reveal inner company secrets but as a representative of the add-on industry I, and many other I guess, would like to hear some hard cold facts from the inside.

[LAdamson 240]

>Seems like a good idea but I guess you should first check to>see why are people buying add-ons in the first place. When it>comes to the model itslef the freeware community seems to be>able to develop some really nice models. The big difference>with add-ons (for me at least) is the inside of the aircraft>and the panel itself.At least for you......My favorite "payware" aircraft are due to exceptional flight dynamics. This is where many years of experience in making MSFS "feel" and react like an airplane have paid off. It's a real talent, and I can count the best on one hand. A designer with a lot of expereince can litterly transform what we see on the screen, combined with slight joystick spring forces, to actual "feel" that a pilot who has experienced these sensations can relate to. And yes, FSD is on that five fingered hand.I rate the exteriors, panels, and VC's if required ... quite evenly.But if flight dynamics are truely second rate. It gets the "flush job".L.Adamson

[Guest Shalomar]

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!An aspect of payware addons that has not been mentioned yet is that in SOME ways they are more responsive to demand. Freeware developers won't expend an iota of effort unless a project interests them personally. A payware developer might say "X is cool but Y though not quite as cool to me seems to offer a better return." If you want Y, that's a good thing.On the other hand, there is continuing cooperative effort in freeware. It is entirely acceptable in the FLY 2 community for an initial offering to be improved by others. With due permission from and credit to original authors. I am playing around with panelmaking, and it can involve the conversion of pictures with guages being overlayed, implemented into the systems files. The last 10% of effort to make an offering completely true to type seems to take 90% of the time. When it comes down to it, an altimeter is an altimeter, a torquemeter is a torquemeter etc... The guages and switches may not exactly resemble those in a particular real world cockpit, but they can be put in the proper place, give you the proper indications and achieve the desired result when activated. Unless you've been inside or seen pics of the real thing, it would be hard to tell the dif. Many aircraft exist for FLY 2 with good (to me) flight dynamics and great-looking exterior models. A lot even have fantastic panels true to the real world plane they are based on. Others simply have unmodified default panels. But there is a lot more hope of improvement from them than an initial payware product that sells poorly. The Caravelle is an example of vast improvement since its initial release, whether by original authors or others I do not know.Addon developers do not make there products available on one platform out of love for Microsoft. If Terminal Reality, X Plane, or Mattel Incorporated cornered 90% of the PC flight sim market, I would not consider it good for the long term good of our hobby. Solid economic theories support the notion less competition= less innovation.I do not think even Sonar5 expexts any real change will result from this discussion. However, assertions that I am anti-microsoft, anti-payware, or that I am demanding all developers just "do it free for the community", do not reflect the actual contents of my posts and result more from desire to inflame rather than promotion of serious discourse. Not that anything will result from even serious discourse in this thread.Best Regards, Donny:-wave

[Guest dsflyer]

Cool blimey.,this is the first time ive visited the Hangar forum, and i come across this thread!. With respect, the original post reminds me of someone logging into a forum for Ferrari owners and stating that he or she prefers to drive around in an old Austin Healy. Dont understand it myself.CheersDan :)

[LAdamson 240]

>Addon developers do not make there products available on one>platform out of love for Microsoft. Of course not. It's because there is a much more reliable customer base in terms of numbers of users. With other sim's, it's just come & go, these days.> Solid economic theories support the notion>less competition= less innovation.That's correct. And with all the freeware/payware developers for MSFS addon products, there is a lot of competition and innovation!L.Adamson

[Guest Shalomar]

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!It's perfectly true. But I wonder about the difficulty and cost of producing addons being affected by the following:The difficulty of producing within MSFS, which I have heard is a difficult platform to produce quality results on andPerpetual reinvention of the wheel? It might take hundreds or thousands of hours to produce a flight model (to use an example), but when it's done, it's done. It is also fully usable, at least on MSFS. If three payware companies come up with models of a 747-400, there are three attempts at a flight model. What about the possibility of licencing components? Far from "giving it to the community free", but not everyone wants every system duplicated. Those that want realistic avioncs might not NECESARILY want the most "realistic" flight model possible. It seems like a possible method of reducing cost and enabling developers at multiple companies concentrate on what they do best.As for major effort being poured into a shell that could provide a viable alternative to MSFS, at least in the short to mid range future it's highly unlikely. But consider this: Even if most or all of its deficiencies had been rectified, there are serious issues about FLY 2 cockpits that limit implementation of VCs. (The number of polys for instance.) Suppose you really liked VCs, but 90% of the commercial addon effort went to FLY 2? You might find yourself driving Austin-Healeys with VCs. I actually prefer high quality pannable/scrollable 2D cockpits, among other reasons if I scroll over to the radio stack with my POV or pan down to the throttle quadrant I can snap back to "home cockpit" with my primary instruments and a view out the windshield. I hear some MSFS addons implement mouse scrolling for the panel. That's the first thing I disabled on FLY 2.Best Regards, Donny:-wave