Subscription

[Bobsk8 12,576]

The second that this new Sim doesn't generate a profit for Microsoft, they will close it down just like they did with flight. 

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

Just like any company would.

[vortex681 806]

20 hours ago, france89 said:

As long as we don't have that ugly behaviour of FSX/P3D in which to go at cruise speed you need to use a ton of torque and pitch the helicopter down to an unrealistic angle

Depends on the helicopter, what you think of as unrealistic and how quickly you want to accelerate. You need an initial pitch down then a constantly increasing forward cyclic (stick) input to accelerate to cruise speed. Most real-world helicopters need plenty of torque to fly at cruise speed (in particular whilst you're initially accelerating from the hover).

46 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

The second that this new Sim doesn't generate a profit for Microsoft, they will close it down just like they did with flight. 

Not necessarily. If it's part of the Xbox Game Pass library it probably won't need to make money to remain available in the library. They may stop developing it further but why would they close it down?

Edited July 5, 2019 by vortex681

[Paraffin 2,197]

15 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

Not necessarily. If it's part of the Xbox Game Pass library it probably won't need to make money to remain available in the library. They may stop developing it further but why would they close it down?

Because tech support costs money. If they're paying licensing fees to use aircraft model names, that also costs money. If there is streamed scenery content, that costs money in bandwidth and servers.

The new MFS might have a better chance of surviving when it's folded into a Game Pass/Xbox Cloud "library" than if it was a standalone product. But not if it isn't making enough to cover costs of tech support, licensing, and whatever other back-end costs are involved in that environment.

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

1 hour ago, vortex681 said:

Depends on the helicopter, what you think of as unrealistic and how quickly you want to accelerate. You need an initial pitch down then a constantly increasing forward cyclic (stick) input to accelerate to cruise speed. Most real-world helicopters need plenty of torque to fly at cruise speed (in particular whilst you're initially accelerating from the hover).

I am aware. Did you try helicopters, any helicopter really, in FSX/ESP and in DCS/XP/Aerofly FS2?

What doesn't make sense is a super pitched down helicopter nose at cruise speed.

[G-RFRY 1,708]

I think we are entering a new era MS Flight SIM is no longer a stand alone product but part of a new platform competing with other platforms soon to be created, they will all have there platform exclusive products to attract users and the broader the appeal to the users the better,

[Longranger 148]

16 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

The second that this new Sim doesn't generate a profit for Microsoft, they will close it down just like they did with flight. 

Not quite as strong. They will try to put multiple projects on the same team, so that they can switch workers faster from one project to another to grow and shrink according to their need. And there is a very good reason to give this work to another company. Microsoft has a problem. Their employees are normally part of a project and when the project ends they have to find a new project or a new company. In most European companies you are a part of a company and the company shifts you internally to another project. This means you can pause development for some time  And when you continue with this project you have a reasonable chance that it is the same guy who stopped his work several months ago. So you can always stop the project till you have some budget for it. The server costs are for a company like Microsoft extremely low. They own these servers and they are always running for them and it is totally unimportant if they play game 1 , game 3 or game 4678.A game that isn't played only takes some space on harddrives.Everything else are basic costs that are covered by the game pass..

This is one of multiple reasons why these concepts are so exciting for companies like Microsoft or Google. Even if only a few people play a game they can still earn some money and build a budget. So the games in a game pass are only competing for the time of the user. But the problem is several game passes compete with each other. I think this is one of the reasons why they reactivated this game. It is a part of their history. It doesn't matter if MSFS or Halo earn money at a certain time. People remember: "Oh I played this game in my youth" so I try this game pass for a month. This is really what they need from it. They buy this game pass play this title for half an hour and then they look around for other interesting titles. You need such titles for the fuzzy feeling people get from nearly forgotten titles. It gives the game pass some reputation.

So for Microsoft the pure numbers of MSFS do not matter. They don't think about how it is positioned compared to P3D or X-Plane. They don't care for these small numbers. But people remember that they went through game stores and there were rows and rows of this Microsoft Flight Simulator. So people are tempted to use this game pass for a month to simply take a look at this title even if they never bought anything for the MSFS. They need such titles to get people into their game pass because at this moment Google seems to be far superior. So I think they would only terminate this title if the complete game pass project fails. But on the other hand I don't think that they are ready to put a hughe amount of money in this project. They simply used their rights to take back the failed FSW. Looked around what they have in their company for this title and then they hired a company to make the FSW presentable add the internal resources that they have and make it ready to be part of the game pass and make a pretty preview video. For themselves it doesn't matter if this game won't look half as good in reality. People have bought the game pass and then they start to look around what other titles are part of the game pass. If one of these other titles catches their interest everything is perfect.

For Bill Gates the Microsoft Flight Simulator and the Railway Simulator were good examples that there are titles without violence. Today games cover more or less the complete society So you have many gamers that look around for none violent titles. Look at "The Sims" or even all the city builders. But they have none of these highlights in their game pass. So this is another reason to pick this tile as one of the attractions of the game pass.

Many reasons to include this title in their line up but at the same time those are not the reasons why we care about flight simulators So I am sure that the new flight simulator team is interested to make this title as interesting as possible but I don't expect a real continuation of the legacy. Todays environment is simply to different. There are already well established alternatives for the hard core fans. So they are certainly interested to include hard core interests in their title there is no reason to take care of this crowd if this gets outside of their own budget. This is not the budget of Microsoft we are talking about but of the current MSFS. I don't know if this is higher or lower as the budget of X-Plane or P3D. But all these projects have different interests.

Edited July 6, 2019 by Longranger

[sightseer 895]

When I was a kid (late teens) and my brother was learning programming, he gave me a copy of his C compiler so that I could try and learn on my own.  The C compiler software at that time was about $600 I think and there was no way I could afford it.  I bought books on graphics and games programming because thats what I was interested in.  because I didnt actually own the software i felt a bit guilty about using it and I never asked many questions when I got stuck.

Today, Microsoft gives its Visual C++ programming kit away for free as I understand it.  All of the AI things I was looking at recently are open source for anyone to use.  MS seems a much more generous company than they once were and its probably due to Google.  I dont know.  But all of this talk of MS and budgets and how they'll shut FS down the minute it doesnt make a profit...I know we've seen it in the past and it may happen again but then again maybe the new MSFS is just part of something larger as a guy said earlier in this thread (i think this thread??).  Maybe its better now.

EDIT: yes...Raymond said it two posts up.  I agree.  Its like Google Flight Sim is  a branch of their mapping software and the MSFS will be a branch of their map the entire world in real time initiative -- the Ai would predict cancer in people and wars on earth before they happen...hmmmm...fascinating...as Spock would say.

Edited July 6, 2019 by sightseer

[Paraffin 2,197]

9 hours ago, Longranger said:

So for Microsoft the pure numbers of MSFS do not matter. They don't think about how it is positioned compared to P3D or X-Plane. They don't care for these small numbers. But people remember that they went through game stores and there were rows and rows of this Microsoft Flight Simulator. So people are tempted to use this game pass for a month to simply take a look at this title even if they never bought anything for the MSFS. They need such titles to get people into their game pass because at this moment Google seems to be far superior. So I think they would only terminate this title if the complete game pass project fails.

I agree with your general overview of the project, in effect making the new MFS a sort of loss leader to get people interested in GamePass. And maybe also Xbox Cloud, the streaming bit isn't determined yet. 

But there is one thing different about a flight sim compared to a city builder or AAA shooter. It's complex software with a higher learning curve than most games, so the tech support load will likely be much higher than it is for other titles in the GamePass library.

I know the current mechanism companies like to use, is to offload tech support on user-to-user support forums. But no software is ever bug-free on release. Would MS continue to offer something like Laminar's bug reporting feature, or offer direct tech support contacts if the sim isn't pulling its weight in sales? 

The other issue might be licensing, if they're having to pay fees to use an Airbus or Cessna logo and model name. There are a few aspects that make a flight sim different from games like Halo where there isn't much need for direct tech support, and MS owns the entire IP. 

 

[LHookins 3,102]

22 minutes ago, sightseer said:

The C compiler software at that time was about $600

Ouch.  The Borland Turbo C compiler at the time was a LOT cheaper, like closer to 10-20% of that price, and was incredibly faster.  The debugger was so much better than the execrable Microsoft CodeView that you wouldn't believe it:  it was more like a modern debugger.  I installed my Turbo C at work, converted the Microsoft object files to work with the Borland debugger and had no problems.  Borland also had Pascal before and C++ later.

My first Microsoft C++ development environment was purchased with an academic discount.  My sister-in-law was a school teacher. 😄 She had to prove eligibility, unlike with P3D.  My first C compiler was Aztec C for the Apple II.

I was shocked when the most recent Microsoft C++ development system was free.  The only reason I got it was because the MSDN (Microsoft Development Network) refused to install and I needed the online documentation.

When I decided to spring for a new Microsoft Office instead of installing my old Microsoft Office 2000 I got the modern version, not subscription but a one time purchase,   Excel hadn't improved *that* much and I'd probably have been better off with the old version except it wouldn't read the new formats.

I still expect a purchase option in addition to a subscription.  No idea how they might work DLC pricing into that.

Hook

[Longranger 148]

18 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

I agree with your general overview of the project, in effect making the new MFS a sort of loss leader to get people interested in GamePass. And maybe also Xbox Cloud, the streaming bit isn't determined yet. 

But there is one thing different about a flight sim compared to a city builder or AAA shooter. It's complex software with a higher learning curve than most games, so the tech support load will likely be much higher than it is for other titles in the GamePass library.

Well. I don't think that they will offer any additional support. They will probably offer services to report bugs and answer question but I doubt that they will offer any additional services for this programm..

18 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

The other issue might be licensing, if they're having to pay fees to use an Airbus or Cessna logo and model name.

They would probably hope for such licences but if you only offer an A320 or a C172 they can only dream about such licenses.

[irrics 1,517]

“Come fly the Carenado Sessna 1172”

[Paraffin 2,197]

15 minutes ago, irrics said:

“Come fly the Carenado Sessna 1172”

Well, it does have "Grand Caravan" printed on the tail of the plane in the shot with the elephants. 🙂

Actually I'm starting to wonder if the licensing isn't a big deal after all, when looking at the aircraft list in my XP11 installation. All the manufacturer names and real aircraft model names are present.* No "Sessna."

So either licensing isn't a big barrier, or else XP isn't a major enough player in the market for the aircraft manufacturers to worry about.

*P.S. Most of these are aircraft I've added, which might fly under the radar by virtue of being 3rd party addons. But the default planes in XP11 are correctly labeled Beechcraft, Boeing, Cessna, Cirrus, Lockheed, McDonnell-Douglas, and Sikorsky models. So maybe Microsoft won't have a problem in this area.

[irrics 1,517]

3 hours ago, Paraffin said:

So either licensing isn't a big barrier, or else XP isn't a major enough player in the market for the aircraft manufacturers to worry about.

“Both” would be my guess there

[vortex681 806]

On 7/5/2019 at 6:36 PM, france89 said:

I am aware. Did you try helicopters, any helicopter really, in FSX/ESP and in DCS/XP/Aerofly FS2?

What doesn't make sense is a super pitched down helicopter nose at cruise speed.

Veering a bit off-topic here. The only helicopters I have installed at the moment are the EH101 in FSX (5° nose down in cruise) and the Gazelle in DCS (2° nose down in cruise). Both of those pitch angles seem quite realistic to me.

Edited July 7, 2019 by vortex681