A request to MSFS team

[be1a1 25]

Like many of you I also suspect MS team reading through these forums so until they open their forums and while they are still here....MS team I kindly request your team to get in contact with major developers release SDK and work with them so by the time MSFS is released most add on developers will already have learned the SDK and converted scenery or aircraft instead of us waiting for MSFS to release then wait until developers get SDK, learn SDK then publish this will result in customers not buying MSFS straight away until developers learn the SDK which can take ages.

I know some companies may already have access to SDK like Aerosoft but please don’t ignore flytampa, flightbeam, fslabs, pmdg etc but please ignore some of the shady companies that release scenery that looks like it’s made for fs2000. 

 

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

If you want old addons, play current sims those addons were designed for imho.
Everything else will come at the right time i am sure.

[ca_metal 2,015]

1 minute ago, france89 said:

If you want old addons, play current sims those addons were designed for imho.
Everything else will come at the right time i am sure.

He didn't ask for that, he asked Microsoft to invite the devs ASAP, so they can start developing their add-ons prior to the release. He's not asking for backwards compatibility. At least it's what I understood.

But I don't think it's the right time to open things up right now. They will probably have a lot to figure out internally. It's not the time to deal with "outside" development. That's my point of view, of course, I have no idea in what stage the software really is.

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

1 hour ago, ca_metal said:

He didn't ask for that, he asked Microsoft to invite the devs ASAP, so they can start developing their add-ons prior to the release. He's not asking for backwards compatibility. At least it's what I understood.

But I don't think it's the right time to open things up right now. They will probably have a lot to figure out internally. It's not the time to deal with "outside" development. That's my point of view, of course, I have no idea in what stage the software really is.

Yeah, but inviting existing devs means they will try to port over their addons. Which means yayyy! New flight simulator, old addons. I don't see it as a good thing.

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

4 minutes ago, france89 said:

Yeah, but inviting existing devs means they will try to port over their addons. Which means yayyy! New flight simulator, old addons. I don't see it as a good thing.

That all depends... Being able to fly some of our top rated airplanes, say PMDG or a2a, in the new sim would be a good thing, I would say..

[Kevin_28 164]

In a sense, at least to me, there may not be much of a point to invite devs at this juncture. Companies like PMDG and the others are taking a very cautious approach to this sim. That's understandable. I think, if anything, they are waiting to see how the sim pans out before even considering looking at the SDK. Why spend time looking over an SDK if they don't even know if the sim itself will be successful or not. It takes time and money to develop a plane for a new sim. I think all you can do as Microsoft is say that the SDK is available, and let the devs decide whether they want to dev for it or not. On top of that, I'm not even quite sure that the sim is ready for the SDK to be opened up yet.

[Paraffin 2,197]

There will probably be some coordination with whatever 3rd parties are on board ahead of release. However, I imagine MS wants the initial release to be a highly curated showcase, with no rough edges. So there may be a short list of default aircraft and no outside content during the introductory "Honeymoon" period, to make a solid MS-branded splash in the marketplace.

Meanwhile work could proceed in the background until all the details are worked out for 3rd party distribution, including user-made free content. As long as potential customers are aware of work in progress and due for release soon, that should be enough to maintain interest.

Just a wild guess at what they might do, like everything else here.

[MikeT707 1,181]

To me it would make sense to invite a few top end add-on studios into the process when the MSFS product architecture is relatively stable and MS, as well as the add-on studios would have a solid base from which to work from. Another caveat would be to only invite add-on studios that are interested in advancing their products and technology to match a modern technical environment, otherwise add-on developers that just want to port over their stuff from FSX will hobble a modern tech environment. I want to see as much modern tech as possible in order to be a base for Flight Simulator upon release and for many years to come.

[ca_metal 2,015]

50 minutes ago, france89 said:

Yeah, but inviting existing devs means they will try to port over their addons. Which means yayyy! New flight simulator, old addons. I don't see it as a good thing.

You are probably right. If they can bring newer and better/same level devs to the mix, I don't see an issue.

It's all about having good devs to work extra stuff (airports, airplanes etc). Those devs can be first party or third party, they can be newer or older devs, I personally don't care much, they just have to bring good add-ons to the platform. 

But I get what you say, devs doing it since FSX will most probably try to reuse the old techniques, which aren't that good nowadays.

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

5 minutes ago, MikeT707 said:

.. add-on developers that just want to port over their stuff from FSX will hobble a modern tech environment. I want to see as much modern tech as possible in order to be a base for Flight Simulator upon release and for many years to come.

I am not as concerned about "stuff from FSX" being ported over.. actually, I hope that all the good stuff makes it

Carenado has been porting over FSX airplanes into XP11 and met with good user acceptance.

It is not the airplanes that are the problem with the current sim.. it is the underlying architecture that is not capable of coping with the demands for better visuals..

[F737MAX 5,542]

13 hours ago, be1a1 said:

MS team I kindly request your team to get in contact with major developers release SDK and work with them so by the time MSFS is released most add on developers will already have learned the SDK and converted scenery or aircraft. 

59 minutes ago, france89 said:

Yeah, but inviting existing devs means they will try to port over their addons. Which means yayyy! New flight simulator, old addons. I don't see it as a good thing.

53 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

That all depends... Being able to fly some of our top rated airplanes, say PMDG or a2a, in the new sim would be a good thing, I would say..

 

5 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

It's all about having good devs to work extra stuff (airports, airplanes etc). Those devs can be first party or third party, they can be newer or older devs, I personally don't care much, they just have to bring good add-ons to the platform. 

But I get what you say, devs doing it since FSX will most probably try to reuse the old techniques, which aren't that good nowadays.

I have mixed feelings about bringing in the 'old guard' of developers.

On the positive side, they would bring well-known and well-regarded add-ons to give the serious simmers the level of detail that we crave and should be able to do it relatively quickly.
On the flip side, the add-ons are likely to be as ports at the beginning, as that's the fastest and most cost-effective method. That would bring all of the baggage of old ideas and of how to implement them, with hacks, cracks and whatever else, at least initially.

When we see the level of studio that Microsoft is bringing in for FS2020, I can only be impressed at what they appear to be striving for with the new sim.

Check out Asobo:

Good add-ons is what we're aiming for. If the established FS developers bring them to us, then great. If it's the new boys who deliver, then I'll take that too.

[ca_metal 2,015]

7 minutes ago, F737NG said:

Good add-ons is what we're aiming for. If the established FS developers bring them to us, then great. If it's the new boys who deliver, then I'll take that too.

That's what I said, I don't care if the products will be 1st or 3rd party, if they will come from old or new devs. What I really want is add-ons from 2020, not from 2006. Add-ons that are compatible with their pricing. 

I don't want them putting for sale garbage. There's a lot of garbage being sold right now, for all the sims. I mean, they should keep the SDK open, but create a curated and official store. On that store I would want to see only top-notch add-ons. I'm not saying to sell only study-level aircrafts or highly-detailed airports, but add-ons with a minimum level of quality and stability.

Edited June 21, 2019 by ca_metal

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

8 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

I mean, they should keep the SDK open, but create a curated and official store. On that store I would want to see only top-notch add-ons. I'm not saying to sell only study-level aircrafts or highly-detailed airports, but add-ons with a minimum level of quality and stability.

Be careful what you wish for... A curated store may destroy the innovation that we have seen over the previous releases of MSFS..

"Painting outside the lines" is what brought us the Majestic Q400, Reality XP Garmin avionics etc..

You want Microsoft to screen that out? 

[Paraffin 2,197]

22 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

That's what I said, I don't care if the products will be 1st or 3rd party, if they will come from old or new devs. What I really want is add-ons from 2020, not from 2006. Add-ons that are compatible with their pricing. 

I don't want them putting for sale garbage. There's a lot of garbage being sold right now, for all the sims. I mean, they should keep the SDK open, but create a curated and official store. On that store I would want to see only top-notch add-ons. I'm not saying to sell only study-level aircrafts or highly-detailed airports, but add-ons with a minimum level of quality and stability.

I can relate to that desire for quality. However, there is a downside, if all add-on content is curated and there is a minimally accepted level of quality. 

Example: One of my favorite planes is the DHC-3 Otter. It's partly just because it's a neat bush plane, but I also have a personal history of ditching at sea in a Costa Rica government Otter, back when I was an aerial photographer. Tough bird, good pilot, and we all got out okay.

I have the STMA model of the Otter in XP11. It's been updated minimally from the older XP versions, and it's looking a bit long in the tooth in graphics, sounds, and systems modeling compared to current standards of XP11's best aircraft models. But I'm glad it's there at all, so I can fly it now and then! I assume everyone here also has a few oddball favorites they'd like to see.

Planes like the DHC-3 aren't in everyone's Top Ten list, or maybe even Top 50. It could take a long time for someone to decide to try modeling one from scratch for the new MSFS. But it may not be too difficult to port an existing model, especially if the new MSFS is using an evolved version of EPS. Even if it's not, it might not be too difficult. Carenado only uses the 3D modeling, textures, and sounds from their FSX/P3D models when they port to X-Plane, with ground-up flight and systems modeling for the new sim.

If the plan is to allow 3rd party distribution away from MS's own storefront, then that shouldn't be a problem. But if it's all funneled through a highly curated MS storefront, then we might not see a plane like that for a very long time.

Edited June 21, 2019 by Paraffin

[overspeed3 410]

As I fly with FSX-Steam, sure hope it does not spell an eventual end to it, either by the contractual deal with MS(?), or else with Steam users dropping out in serious numbers.  But as I have invested a whole lot of bucks in FSX payware, that leaves me, and many others, I'm sure, in a quandary.

Don't see a deal ever featuring MS2020-Steam.  But again, that may depend on the future success of the so-called 2020 version...  

 

Edited June 21, 2019 by overspeed3