FlightSimLabs comments on MSFS 2020:

[anden145 2,284]

56 minutes ago, filoux said:

FS2020 will be a success that’s a given.

That statement, really is the definition of 'jumping the gun'.

I salute your optimism, but what are you basing this statement on?? Other than your own personal theory and feeling.

[nealmac 260]

When I read the very first post of this thread, @Ray Proudfoot was the first person I thought of 😔 #ThoughtsAndPrayers

[188AHC 2,138]

15 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

That statement, really is the definition of 'jumping the gun'.

I salute your optimism, but what are you basing this statement on?? Other than your own personal theory and feeling.

Speaking of "jumping the gun". The majority of the posts in this forum so far have been speculative and/or negative. It's good to see a little optimism. It's akin to taking a tums for indigestion.

 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,929]

20 minutes ago, nealmac said:

When I read the very first post of this thread, @Ray Proudfoot was the first person I thought of 😔 #ThoughtsAndPrayers

That's very kind of you Neal, thanks. It is disappointing that the project is on hold for who knows how long. I would have thought they would use the (minimum) six months before FS2020 is released to finish off work on Concorde.

Andrew Wilson's argument is if they do that now and then find P3Dv5 means more work fixing it there could be delays or even kill it whilst they concentrate on the Airbuses as that would have to take priority.

They want to do the conversion once only so have decided to wait until either or both P3Dv5 and FS2020 are released and then see what work is involved. The problem with that is if FS2020 doesn't come out until late 2020 and P3Dv5 after than the delay before Concorde 64-bit is released could be two years. 😕

I will be speaking to both Andrew and Lefteris at RAF Cosford flight sim show in October and perhaps better understand their reasons but also put my side of the case but by then of course we've lost 4 months.

[MarkW 1,490]

The logic on timing does not make much sense.  The reality is that if MFS2020 released with an SDK, open source and within an environment that all developers would want to work with we are still talking years...maybe quite a few years before many of our favourite aircraft, airports and utilities are ported over...work can't even start for a year until it is released.  Especially if MS have started from ground zero with no backwards compatibility.  Most of the serious simmers will be on P3Dv4 or v5 for 2 to 4 years until we can fully convert over.  And there are many giant "ifs" required to make this possible.  

[Ray Proudfoot 8,929]

@MarkW, their announcement came so quickly after the news from Microsoft that I honestly don't think they've thought it through enough. I've posted my thoughts on how the next couple of years might pan out on the FSL forum.

They're basing their decisions on unknowns or assumptions. What if P3Dv5 comes out first? They would be compelled to update their Airbus fleet to that version. Not major perhaps but that's the unknown.

Then if FS2020 appears after P3Dv5 and has an SDK available immediately they have to convert those aircraft again. That could be a lengthy or perhaps impossible process. Without an SDK it's a non-starter and FSL would be compelled to stay with P3D.

It seems unlikely P3Dv5 will be released this year given a point update has been released in the last couple of months. FSL could use the next 6 months to continue work on a 64-bit Concorde that is fully compatible with P3D v4.

Even when v5 comes out I'm sure people would be happy to keep v4 on their systems even if just for Concorde because it's 64-bit. Some may decide to stay with v4 for an extended period. I have a fair bit of 3rd party scenery that I am happy with. Others will feel the same.

The rate of updates / new products can be a nightmare for developers and users. Both prefer stability because thet gives you the opportunity to develop and buy new airports etc. If we're in a constant state of flux how can that be good for anyone? It's a nightmare.

[filoux 9]

3 hours ago, Anders Bermann said:

That statement, really is the definition of 'jumping the gun'.

I salute your optimism, but what are you basing this statement on?? Other than your own personal theory and feeling.

Simply because MSFS will be a showcase of the cloud computing technology capabilities  that MS want to use for their next business model... Flight Simulation is a highly demanding software type in terms of calculations. If they can do that the field of possibilities is wide. They have no other option but to succeed. 

Edited June 19, 2019 by filoux

[Ray Proudfoot 8,929]

A gentle reminder this is the FS Labs thread and not about general FS2020 discussion. There is another topic for that.

[irrics 1,517]

I love how we have all these multiple threads of different angles of people talking about how they also know nothing about what’s going on.

The only information is a couple interviews and the trailer. 

 

And everyone is like “stay on topic!” - lol

 

Every single thread could be titled “I’m so-and-so and I also know nothing and here are my comments based on exactly the same lack of knowledge as everyone else”

 

hey. At least the FS world is getting a fun and massive interest boost!

Edited June 19, 2019 by irrics

[anden145 2,284]

3 hours ago, 188AHC said:

Speaking of "jumping the gun". The majority of the posts in this forum so far have been speculative and/or negative. It's good to see a little optimism. It's akin to taking a tums for indigestion.

What are you talking about?! There's nothing speculative about keeping a certain distance and skepticism about this.

Honestly (and I have a feeling that quite a few of you in here would cheer about this) I feel that I need to take a break from this forum for the time being...

This place (especially the threads, which have been popping up about MS' new announcement) have been nothing from speculatory and without any sense of reason and reality. Facts and dreams have been intermixed on a level I've rarely seen, but worse; it has gotten to a point, where any meaning or counterpoint, which strays from the general consensus that this new announcement is a second coming, have been met with a hostility and an outward misplaced righteousness. 

I'm terribly sorry for saying this so harsh, but in all my years I have been a member on this forum, I have never met this kind of atmosphere. It has come to a point, where I just don't see a way forward for me personally staying here... I'm terribly sorry and sad to say so, but it has reached an edge, where it's just more grieve, than joy, at the moment - and it's not fair to you nor me. 😞 

I'm not really sure what I bring to this 'discussion' anymore - other than more 'fuel to a fire' I just can't bear to watch burning anymore... At least, I won't be a party to it. I have reached my personal limit.

So - fare well to all. I hope you find - whatever it is you seek... 

[LHookins 3,102]

I'd rather see optimism than pessimism.  Or at least positive posts rather than negative ones.

That doesn't mean everyone has to be a fanboi, as concerns can be presented in a reasonably positive manner.

Hook

[jbcallender 53]

On ‎6‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 3:25 AM, Ray Proudfoot said:

With a comment like that I'm guessing you're an American. You'll never understand how loved Concorde was by us Brits. Just because an aircraft no longer flies why should that preclude it from being in a simulation? Will you feel the same when the 747 no longer flies?

Ray, I am American of proud Scottish heritage.  My comment is based on economics as I am also an accountant.  I am guessing Leftis Kalamaris wants to make a profit.  They have already been working on the Concorde for around three years and apparently would have trouble getting it finished in the time before MS comes out with this new flightsim.  The Concorde is likely to be expensive, probably more so than the A320 which limits the market and it's been what, 10 years since the Concorde flew?  No doubt there are many that are passionate about it.  I hated to see the MD-80 go.  This is all supposition and conjecture and most importantly one man's opinion.  But if I was Leftis, it might be a good opportunity to cut my losses.

Regards,

Jeff Callender

 

  

[Ray Proudfoot 8,929]

@jbcallender, you're telling me things I already know. Let us not forget Lefteris instigated Concorde 64-bit by inviting those willing to pay over 100GBP to send him an email. From the number received he decided it was a financially viable project.

He has now partially renaged on that decision and is using the new Microsoft flight sim as an excuse to stop work. If there's no SDK then none of the Airbuses will work in that sim so they would be heavily reliant on people staying with P3D whatever version.

That means they could continue work on a P3D 64-bit Concorde and make money out of it because I suspect a lot of people were put off the 32-bit version because the virtual cockpit and associated panels were heavily compromised to stay within VAS limits.

Code sitting on a PC with no end product to sell is worthless. If FSL are not serious about producing a 64-bit Concorde then offer the code to other software houses who might decide it would be a profitable exercise.

[mwa05 108]

47 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I suspect a lot of people were put off the 32-bit version because the virtual cockpit and associated panels were heavily compromised to stay within VAS limits.

This.

It was a day 1 purchase for me, 64 bit.

I think she’s gone. 

This company has enough issues turning around timely updates for existing products for sim version changes, never mind anything else.

I do agree with the statement that they have to change their business model. Just having an updater would be a start.

What they do produce is brilliant thus why we are all so grumpy.

[Ted Striker 338]

Waiting to see what comes of MS2020 sounds to me like a weak excuse to cancel the 64 bit Concorde without saying so. After MSFS2020 is released, then they have to learn the SDK, if there even is one.  That's 2022 before they even begin working on it.

They already have experience with the P3Dv4 SDK. Why not just convert the current one to 64 bit and call it a port? They could upgrade the graphics later and call that a new version if the demand is there. I would love new graphics, but just being able to fly it without worrying about VAS would be fine with me for now.

I am not a developer and have no idea of the effort involved in doing the above. I am disappointed though as it looks to me as if we will never see an updated Concorde. I am very much looking forward to hearing Ray's report after he talks with the FSLabs developers at the upcoming conference. I know he will ask the tough questions. 

Ted