Key things MS Needs to do (it won't be easy)

[irrics 1,517]

8 minutes ago, Greazer said:

Then they have no need to lure customers from competing sims, and thus sales and profits will be impacted.

Fair enough. I guess you can just stay on Xplane and enjoy your existing add-ons starting literally this moment. No need to wait for the new Microsoft sim anyways. 

 

[Paraffin 2,197]

20 minutes ago, Greazer said:

Then they have no need to lure customers from competing sims, and thus sales and profits will be impacted.

They can lure customers from competing sims without backward compatibility by offering something better.

That "something better" could be faster frame rates, especially for VR. Basically what AFS2 is selling as an advantage over P3D and XP (the only real advantage, I think). 

It could be better-looking scenery if they're leveraging some new technology that nobody else is using. That doesn't matter to everyone, but it matters to people who enjoy low-level flying in light GA planes and in helicopters.

It could be the ability to use a game console and not mess with a PC to get the required performance. I'm doubtful that this is enough to expand the market in the long term because I believe the "serious flight sim" and "gamer" markets are fundamentally different, but it could be a factor.

It could be the "things to do" factor missing in default P3D and XP by incorporating built-in flight training, missions, and a push towards multiplayer.

Look at it this way; there has been an increase in flight simmers moving to XP11 ever since it was introduced, and it's not because there is any backwards compatibility with FSX or P3D. There is zero. You start from scratch if you hop over that fence. And yet people are doing it, because there are features they can't get in their previous platforms, or the frame rates are better, or configuration is easier, whatever. Everyone has their own reasons.

I'm hoping the new MFS does something similar. And not because I want to leave XP. That will take a very long time for the build-out of the right kind of aircraft and competitive quality of flight modeling, if it happens at all. But I hope for something similar because a new entry that raises the bar -- if it does indeed do that -- is good for everyone.

Edited July 2, 2019 by Paraffin

[reignman40 450]

17 minutes ago, Greazer said:

Then they have no need to lure customers from competing sims, and thus sales and profits will be impacted.

Maybe they lure customers with new features/visuals, a new model that looks better and runs better? It has the Microsoft Flight Simulator name. People already have one foot in the door for the party. Put me down for  already doing a cannonball in the pool 😂

Edited July 2, 2019 by reignman40

[rtodepart 761]

im pretty sure MS BY Now know exactly what they need . and for some reason i think they have alot to do with dove tail closing  down the doors .I keep thinking they pulled the plug and someone said LETS SHOW EVERYONE WE ARE NOT DEAD . 

[pracines 823]

6 hours ago, irrics said:

The way software and games are funding themselves now is evolving and we need to be more open to that as consumers because it’s becoming the norm.

Should companies dictate to us consumers, or do we decide? - what are we consumers, white mice? or are we lab rats? "Do as we're told"?

Companies can do what they wish, consumers decide if companies survive - they need to please us, NOT the reverse.

We need to be wise consumers, not just go with whatever just because its new, it must be good for us consumers or it is not good at all, even not good for companies...just ask DTG.

7 hours ago, Greazer said:

5. Airport creator tool for anybody (easy to use). You basically zoom in on the map, generate airport project and start adding objects and more detail.

6. A way to share airports and libraries (textures and objects etc). And a way to automatically install others airports.

7. Support for p3d and XP airports, or a converter tool.

8. Support for p3d and XP aircraft and plugins, or a converter tool.

if any of this is necessary, it is not going to be a "go to" sim. If it is not the "go to" sim, it will fail - MS I think knows this.

I'm trusting that MS will have all the airports done very well, or to at least a reasonable satisfaction. 

[irrics 1,517]

27 minutes ago, pracines said:

Should companies dictate to us consumers, or do we decide? - what are we consumers, white mice? or are we lab rats? "Do as we're told"?

Companies can do what they wish, consumers decide if companies survive - they need to please us, NOT the reverse.

We need to be wise consumers, not just go with whatever just because its new, it must be good for us consumers or it is not good at all, even not good for companies...just ask DTG.

You are correct. We as consumers can do anything we want and you can certainly choose to pursue a different flight simulator if the purchasing model doesn’t fit your particular needs or desires.

I’m totally fine with a subscription model here.

I think it could make sense for this type of software product in particular. 

Ultimately I will participate with basically any purchasing model they choose because I just want this product very badly. 

Edited July 3, 2019 by irrics

[tjstreak 53]

A new flight simulator is an expensive proposition.  The costs go well beyond the cost of the simulator itself.  It also includes the costs of the addons as well.  I have a large investment in FSX/P3d.  I figure that a new flight simulator is a $10,000 investment.  So it has to be pretty word not allowed good to justify that type of investment.

If it is not backwards compatible, it needs to have every scenery, every airplane and every feature currently available with P3d on day one.  I do not want to be playing with default airplanes an sceneries for the next ten years, while the new sim plays catch up with the more developed sims.  I don't want to be dead by the time these addons become available.   And not only that, I expect these developers to offer a significant discount for those of us who have the earlier versions of their addons  (LIke a 70% or more discount.)  Microsoft is crazy if they think I am going to purchase all of my existing addons all over again.

This means, I want all of the PMDG aircraft, all of the Aerosoft aircraft sceneries, all of the FSDT, Flightbeam, Fly Tampa, Imaginesim airports to be available on day one.  If they are not, the new sim will not offer anything that I don't already have.

After years, neither X-Plane nor Aerofly have reached this level of development.  That is why I am not interested in switching.

If they are not available, I can wait for the ten years it will take to make the new sim competitive with the mature sims.  If I am still alive on that date (a rather dubious proposition), then I will reconsider.

However, by that time, the more mature sims will probably match all of the features of the Microsoft sim.  LM has had a development team which has been working on Prepar3d for  years.  Ditto Laminar research.  I seriously doubt that LM's and Laminar's development teams are any less skilled or knowledgeable than the Microsoft development team.  In fact, I suspect the Microsoft development team consists largely of neophytes.

The truth of the matter is that I suspect the new simulator will be a cleaned up version of Flight Sim World.  After all, Microsoft gets to keep all of Dovetail's work.

It appears that the new Microsoft Flight Simulator is going to be a giant step backwards.

[simmerhead 885]

59 minutes ago, tjstreak said:

A new flight simulator is an expensive proposition.  The costs go well beyond the cost of the simulator itself.  It also includes the costs of the addons as well.  I have a large investment in FSX/P3d.  I figure that a new flight simulator is a $10,000 investment.  So it has to be pretty word not allowed good to justify that type of investment.

If it is not backwards compatible, it needs to have every scenery, every airplane and every feature currently available with P3d on day one.  I do not want to be playing with default airplanes an sceneries for the next ten years, while the new sim plays catch up with the more developed sims.  I don't want to be dead by the time these addons become available.   And not only that, I expect these developers to offer a significant discount for those of us who have the earlier versions of their addons  (LIke a 70% or more discount.)  Microsoft is crazy if they think I am going to purchase all of my existing addons all over again.

This means, I want all of the PMDG aircraft, all of the Aerosoft aircraft sceneries, all of the FSDT, Flightbeam, Fly Tampa, Imaginesim airports to be available on day one.  If they are not, the new sim will not offer anything that I don't already have.

After years, neither X-Plane nor Aerofly have reached this level of development.  That is why I am not interested in switching.

If they are not available, I can wait for the ten years it will take to make the new sim competitive with the mature sims.  If I am still alive on that date (a rather dubious proposition), then I will reconsider.

However, by that time, the more mature sims will probably match all of the features of the Microsoft sim.  LM has had a development team which has been working on Prepar3d for  years.  Ditto Laminar research.  I seriously doubt that LM's and Laminar's development teams are any less skilled or knowledgeable than the Microsoft development team.  In fact, I suspect the Microsoft development team consists largely of neophytes.

The truth of the matter is that I suspect the new simulator will be a cleaned up version of Flight Sim World.  After all, Microsoft gets to keep all of Dovetail's work.

It appears that the new Microsoft Flight Simulator is going to be a giant step backwards.

Entitlement is a sure way to become disappointed, but to each his own. 

I'd be happy to start clean if it turns out to be good, and nothing in the trailer suggests that it will be a GIANT step backwards, on the contrary it looks like a GIANT leap forwards. 

But I agree with you that addons are very important and no sim will ever be complete without the ability to modify it to fit ones needs. It is of great concerns how the ecosystem of addons and modding will turn out. It is a big world, and even Microsoft can only be expected to cover a tiny part of it in a realistic manner.

While great addons are being made today, the whole system is a mess, and I'm probably not alone in being tired of the time and effort needed just to get the sim running in the first place. The tweaks, the installs, the upgrades, the accounts and passwords from all the different developers and stores, the conflicts between addons, the CTDs, the OOMs, the editing of ini and cfg files, the drivers, the assignments and calibaration in FSUIPC, the overclocking - I'd like to get rid of it all thanks... 

[SmokeDiddy 262]

4 hours ago, tjstreak said:

I suspect the Microsoft development team consists largely of neophytes.

I wouldn't count on it.

[ErichB 3,643]

16 hours ago, Greazer said:

Support for p3d and XP airports, or a converter tool.

8. Support for p3d and XP aircraft and plugins, or a converter tool.

Ermm, no

[tjstreak 53]

2 hours ago, simmerhead said:

Entitlement is a sure way to become disappointed, but to each his own. 

I'd be happy to start clean if it turns out to be good, and nothing in the trailer suggests that it will be a GIANT step backwards, on the contrary it looks like a GIANT leap forwards.  

But I agree with you that addons are very important and no sim will ever be complete without the ability to modify it to fit ones needs. It is of great concerns how the ecosystem of addons and modding will turn out. It is a big world, and even Microsoft can only be expected to cover a tiny part of it in a realistic manner.

While great addons are being made today, the whole system is a mess, and I'm probably not alone in being tired of the time and effort needed just to get the sim running in the first place. The tweaks, the installs, the upgrades, the accounts and passwords from all the different developers and stores, the conflicts between addons, the CTDs, the OOMs, the editing of ini and cfg files, the drivers, the assignments and calibaration in FSUIPC, the overclocking - I'd like to get rid of it all thanks... 

So, are  you willing to invest $10,000 in this sim, repurchasing all of the addons you already own?  Or are you going to be satisfiedt with the default aircraft and the default sceneries?

[tjstreak 53]

2 hours ago, simmerhead said:

Entitlement is a sure way to become disappointed, but to each his own. 

I'd be happy to start clean if it turns out to be good, and nothing in the trailer suggests that it will be a GIANT step backwards, on the contrary it looks like a GIANT leap forwards.  

But I agree with you that addons are very important and no sim will ever be complete without the ability to modify it to fit ones needs. It is of great concerns how the ecosystem of addons and modding will turn out. It is a big world, and even Microsoft can only be expected to cover a tiny part of it in a realistic manner.

While great addons are being made today, the whole system is a mess, and I'm probably not alone in being tired of the time and effort needed just to get the sim running in the first place. The tweaks, the installs, the upgrades, the accounts and passwords from all the different developers and stores, the conflicts between addons, the CTDs, the OOMs, the editing of ini and cfg files, the drivers, the assignments and calibaration in FSUIPC, the overclocking - I'd like to get rid of it all thanks... 

So, are  you willing to invest $10,000 in this sim, repurchasing all of the addons you already own?  Or are you going to be satisfiedt with the default aircraft and the default sceneries?

[tjstreak 53]

57 minutes ago, SmokeDiddy said:

I wouldn't count on it.

So, tell me, how many flight simulators has Microsoft's current team developed?  And which ones?

The old Aces team has gone to work  elsewhere.

Microsoft's best shot is to hire some of the Dovetail programmers.  But that is hardly a sterling recommendation.

[LHookins 3,103]

I only buy stuff I know I'll use a lot.  The last time I added it all up it came to $808 for software, about the same for controller hardware, and the hardware is used in other sims as well.

If I wanted to spend $10,000 on a hobby, I'd start real life pilot's lessons.  How much does a light sport license cost these days?

If I wanted to spend $75,000 on a home cockpit (which one person claimed) I'd not only get a PPL but buy a used Cessna 172 to get it in.  Then I'd put the Cessna out for rentals to help pay expenses.  Then I'd probably sell the Cessna before I got it paid off, for more than I paid for it, and buy a better aircraft. 

Microsoft only needs to do one thing:  attract a lot of new simmers.  I think they have that one covered.

Hook

[SmokeDiddy 262]

1 hour ago, tjstreak said:

So, tell me, how many flight simulators has Microsoft's current team developed?  And which ones?

The old Aces team has gone to work  elsewhere.

Microsoft's best shot is to hire some of the Dovetail programmers.  But that is hardly a sterling recommendation.

It doesn't matter, but where it does matter is that they have talented developers and a company and project team that will allow them to develop the appropriate platform.  The same went for Flight Sim World, they had talented developers, but DTG didn't support the development long term.  Let the developer's develop and let the flight physics experts tell them how it's supposed to be and they will make it happen.  If you want new technology and new engines, let those that know how to create them do their thing and adapt!  I have mentioned before in another thread asking if MS will use AGILE methods to develop MSFS2020 vs old school Waterfall method.  I will not get into the differences between them, but if you are familiar with these two development methods, then if I am a betting person, I would say MS will use AGILE and release the sim in increments, building and adding on each short term increment in the process via end user feedback.  So, I doubt we will see a full sim on initial release.  Sorry I digress, but I agree somewhat how your thinking, but I disagree that MS has to have a bunch of flight sim developers vs developers that know the newer development methods and procedures and can incorporate the "flight simming" peculiarities as directed.