VeryBumpy

Poll: How do you want to pay for MS2020?

How do you want to pay for MS2020?  

135 members have voted

  1. 1. Assuming MS2020 wants a money stream… ( note multiple choice!)

    • 1 - Sure, what's another subscription, I'll get it.
      20
    • 1 - If the scheme is fair I'll consider it.
      42
    • 1 - Requires a subscription, I'll not buy or play it.
      43
    • 2 - Own then piecemeal like Flight, is what I'd prefer.
      17
    • 3 - Monthly subscription is fine.
      28
    • 3 - I want pay per use, so per minute or Gigabyte payment scheme.
      2
    • 4 - Other.
      16


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

See poll. Note multiple choice.

Edit: Added "Other" option. If you don't see your choice listed, please write a comment of your Other idea.

 

Edited by VeryBumpy
Add "Other" suggestion.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

1 hour ago, simmerhead said:

Other. Own it on DVD. 

Other. Stay with P3d and all invested addons 😉

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I don't see how it could be done nor survive without being subscription based.  AZURE AI cloud servers streaming data to one's PC costs Microsoft real money, the more a user is active the more data they'll stream and hence more cost.  Since most users will not have 1-2 PetaByte (1024-2048 TB) hard drives that global data couldn't be stored locally ... so streaming data with some local buffering and then removing old data is the most likely process and that could only be done with a subscription unless Microsoft have become a new charity organization.

So it looks like 40% will not buy MSFS2020 ... lets see if they stick to their guns. 😉

Cheers, Rob.

EDIT: I think the subscription model works very well ... it has for me in the past and it ensures continued development support.  So long as "Value" of the subscription is provided ... "value" end users can identify with, then subscriptions do work and ultimately save end users money in the long.  

Edited by Rob_Ainscough
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost all major software has gone to subscription-based pricing. Why is this even being debated for MSFS 2020?

7 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

So it looks like 40% will not buy MSFS2020 ... lets see if they stick to their guns. 😉

Ha ha, it's a good excuse to use when they don't like the product for some other reason.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just a friendly reminder, topics like this tend to bring out both the best and worst in the community. Lets keep attacks toward each other and MSFT at a minimum guys!

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some members of the family that own XBOX and think nothing of subscribing to XBOX game pass they are younger minimalist they are not into PCs  just want something that fit under there flat panel TV with an on off button,and they spend more in a year then some flight simmers do on addons, and talking to my granddaughters husband he showed interest in MFS when I told him.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I don't see how it could be done nor survive without being subscription based.  AZURE AI cloud servers streaming data to one's PC costs Microsoft real money, the more a user is active the more data they'll stream and hence more cost.  Since most users will not have 1-2 PetaByte (1024-2048 TB) hard drives that global data couldn't be stored locally ... so streaming data with some local buffering and then removing old data is the most likely process and that could only be done with a subscription unless Microsoft have become a new charity organization.

So it looks like 40% will not buy MSFS2020 ... lets see if they stick to their guns. 😉

Cheers, Rob.

EDIT: I think the subscription model works very well ... it has for me in the past and it ensures continued development support.  So long as "Value" of the subscription is provided ... "value" end users can identify with, then subscriptions do work and ultimately save end users money in the long.  

Windows 10 was a totally free upgrade for so many thousands if not millions of users, so charity is a possibility (?). Competition with Google may be a factor as well.

But I agree, it all comes down to value. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Microsoft is currently the largest company in the entire world.  Unlike "small" companies such as Blizzard who charge a monthly fee for the upkeep of their World Of Warcraft servers, Microsoft very easily has the resources to offer one-time purchase and stream for free.  Google streams its Google Maps 3D map data for free and the software itself is also free.  Too many people are assuming MSFS will be subscription based just because it's on Xbox Game Pass.  The Game Pass shouldnt be viewed that way.

Edited by Heli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Heli said:

Google streams its Google Maps 3D map data for free and the software itself is also free.

It's not really free. You don't pay for it, but you're the "product" that's sold to advertisers when you pull up Google Maps on a PC or phone, and see all those nice highlighted restaurants and other places of business.

Google Is an advertising-supported business. We don't want ads in our flight sims, so streamed content (if that's what it is) has to be paid for in a different way, by the end-users. That's what the Xbox Cloud thing is all about, although we don't know yet exactly how MFS fits into that.
 

Quote

 

Too many people are assuming MSFS will be subscription based just because it's on Xbox Game Pass.

 

Not entirely. The assumptions are based two things. First, the level of scenery detail they're showing in the trailer is unlikely to fit on users' hard drives. Just the state of WA in Orbx TE scenery on my hard drive takes up 208 GB of room. Streaming and buffering is a way around that. And subscription is (possibly) how they'll pay for the bandwidth, the server hardware, and the staff to keep the servers running. 

We still don't know how it will work, this is all just guesswork. But streaming large amounts of data is never "free." Someone always pays for it somewhere.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pracines said:

Windows 10 was a totally free upgrade for so many thousands if not millions of users, so charity is a possibility (?).

No.  Windows 10 OS itself does NOT consume hours and hours of streaming data as a key part of it's daily operation.  Windows 10 will check for updates, do a check for virus definitions, maybe provide a news item (pending how you have it setup) ... that's it, very very small amount of data going/coming from an MS server.  

Streaming is at an entirely different level when it comes to data transmission, servers, etc. ... many orders of magnitude higher.

Windows 10 free update was a way to move end users away from Windows 7 and get them on a new platform for which Microsoft want to sell software and services.  Very similar to how the XBOX hardware is being sold at or below manufacturing costs ... give the consumer a cheap way into the door, then sell them 100X titles/services once inside.  This is a common sales/marketing technique that is very effective.

I am curious why almost 40% of respondents don't want a subscription process?  For folks that pirate software, it's obvious, but for all the honest people (I'll assume the better of people here) what's the negatives behind a subscription?  (posting here on AVSIM so I assume internet connection isn't a problem)

The positives for me:

1.  My software is always up to date with bug fixes and new features (I don't have to 

2.  Subscriptions are less costly up front

3.  Subscriptions provide you a means to terminate at anytime

4. They are entirely cloud based so if my PC crashes and gets wiped I can go re-download my content and never lose it

So if I pay $10 for first month and use it for a couple of months ($20) and decide I don't like it (assuming if it was a standard single retail price of $60), I've saved myself $40.  And if I do like it, and use it regularly, then I'm obviously finding value in it monthly.

Cheers, Rob.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new Fly Inside Flight simulator is streaming the whole world scenery now, and there has been no announcement of charging extra. I wonder who may be eating that cost? Well the customers are not, and I don't think Fly Inside could justify swallowing a massive cost like is being hypothesized here.

https://forum.flyinside-fsx.com/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=7602

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I am curious why almost 40% of respondents don't want a subscription process?  For folks that pirate software, it's obvious, but for all the honest people (I'll assume the better of people here) what's the negatives behind a subscription?  (posting here on AVSIM so I assume internet connection isn't a problem)

Cheers, Rob.

Subscriptions for me come down to how exactly it is setup and the value to me. I do pay for subscriptions for some software as I do see the benefits, but there is no way I could justify a subscription for all software on my PCs as I don't use all of it regularly enough. For example, many home users are fine with a copy of Adobe Photoshop or Microsoft Office they bought 15+ years as it does everything they need, and would be cheaper than the new subscription models Adobe and Microsoft have or are moving too. These days it appears that most software companies are trying to push users into subscription models, more for their benefit than the user's, that could easily total a couple hundred dollars a month, depending on how much software you use. Subscriptions are great for professionals and those using a particular product heavily, but it isn't as clear for home users.

Another negative is what happens if MS gets bored with the new sim in a few years and drops it? Will it stop working completely? Lose major pieces of functionality? Until we get more details its hard to say. FS2004 and FSX losing the Gamespy multiplayer and weather updates are two examples (that thankfully have alternatives). What happens if functionality you use gets dropped in an upgrade? Under a subscription you may lose the ability to stay with the older version. And if you have to drop your subscription, you may be left with nothing. At least with the traditional boxed copy you have something you can keep using.

If the new sim works out to roughly the same cost as buying a new $60 flight sim upgrade every two years (ie. FS2004 -> FSX, and the baseline I think many will compare it to), that would make it easier for people to get into. On the other hand, $10/month would mean you spent $240 in the same time span. This could easily be prohibitive for those on a tighter budget. Then again for those that like playing other games on Xbox or Windows 10, the Xbox Game Pass could be a no-brainer to spring for.

We really need to get more details to see if it will even require a subscription at all, and if it does, what it covers and what the cost will be.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Does anyone find it comical that some users are squawking at the notion of a subscription model while simultaneously shelling out hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on their Flight Sim environments?   If I consider just my Orbx REX environmental products (not including Airports) alone, I’ve spent the following:

FTX Global Mesh Unlimited    80.00
FTX Global                              100.00
FTX Vector                               80.00
Global OpenLC Europe            55.00
Global OpenLC North America     55.00
Global Buildings                         35.00
Global Trees            36.00
NA Central Rockies        55.00
NA Northern California        55.00
NA Norther Rockies        55.00
NA Pacific Northwest        55.00
REX worldwide Airport        30.00
REX Sky Force            30.00
REX Environmental Force        30.00

Total                $751.00 (USD)

A traditional subscription service cost $10 to 15 a month; if we consider the high end, I would have to pay 50 months (4 years) of services just to equal what I’ve paid for REX/ORBX products.  If the Microsoft delivers a game anywhere close to their trailer/pictures, we won’t need to acquire 15 applications; to that point, a subscription service may SAVE us money.  Plus, there won’t be any need to launch, update and maintain multiple applications to achieve a realistic environment.  Instead, we could get an environment that’s dynamically updated; to me, that’s absolutely worth a subscription service.  Obviously, Microsoft will have to find a way to deliver streaming services to areas lacking reliable and robust bandwidth; I’m assuming they’ll be an offline mode that will allow you fly with cache information.

Unlike most simmers, I want the new Microsoft Simulator to destroy our Eco System.  I know longer want to pay thousands of dollars to achieve an environment that’s still 5-10 years behind many current games. I know longer want spend countless hours troubleshooting a problem resulting for an environmental application install.  I know longer want to lunch 10 different application (e.g. FTX Central, FSDT Live Update, REX…) to keep my flight simulator environment updated.  IMO, a subscription service is the only mechanism to achieve this desired end-state; thus, I SAY PLEAE BRING IT ON!! 
  

Edited by kingm56
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

And if I do like it, and use it regularly, then I'm obviously finding value in it monthly.

That is the only issue really.  If we end up liking it, it will be costing us much more than a flat rate of $60.  Worst case scenario will be, imo: they set it up where the only way to obtain the game is through Xbox Game Pass for PC/Xbox.  So you aren't paying a subscription for the game itself, but for the Game Pass (and the $5/mo is only going to go up).  The bandwidth and server cost would be solved from all the non flightsim Xbox players who subscribe to Game Pass.

Edited by Heli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, pracines said:

The new Fly Inside Flight simulator is streaming the whole world scenery now, and there has been no announcement of charging extra. I wonder who may be eating that cost? Well the customers are not, and I don't think Fly Inside could justify swallowing a massive cost like is being hypothesized here.

https://forum.flyinside-fsx.com/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=7602

Flyinside is a Kickstarter-funded project in Early Access on Steam. Different economic model. You can afford to operate at a loss as an Indie developer when trying to get a project off the ground. A business like Microsoft won't work that way.

Also it's not very data-intensive to stream the scenery I've seen in previews flying at altitude. It's the resolution when you get closer that matters for bandwidth.

Edited by Paraffin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kingm56 said:

I know longer want to lunch 10 different application (e.g. FTX Central, FSDT Live Update, REX…) to keep my flight simulator environment updated.

Steam can keep all of your games updated from one place without requiring a subscription.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, goates said:

Steam can keep all of your games updated from one place without requiring a subscription.

Apples-to-Jeep comparison. Steam is a broker that provides an all inclusive platform to distribute games. They are not providing the content; instead, only a mechanism to distribute said content.  To that point, Steam by itself, is not predicated on external data.  The new MSFS appears to be.  Access to new data is not cheap/free.  That’s the key difference...

Edited by kingm56
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kingm56 said:

Apples-to-Jeep comparison. Steam is a broker that provides an all inclusive platform to distribute games. They are not providing the content; instead, only a mechanism to distribute said content.  To that point, Steam by itself, is not predicated on external data.  The new MSFS appears to be.  Access to new data is not cheap/free.  That’s the key difference...

No, it is not quite the same for updating more dynamic data like weather, but it is analogous to FTX Central for browsing, installing and maintaining your Orbx add-ons. I don't think a subscription is needed for this piece, whereas weather updates as well as detailed, accurate, and regularly updated scenery could be worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

K

6 minutes ago, goates said:

No, it is not quite the same for updating more dynamic data like weather, but it is analogous to FTX Central for browsing, installing and maintaining your Orbx add-ons. I don't think a subscription is needed for this piece, whereas weather updates as well as detailed, accurate, and regularly updated scenery could be worth it.

I should have been more clear; my apologies. I’m primarily referring to environmental updates based on updated imagery. For example, an airport is dynamically updated when new data is available (e.g. new buildings, runways or numbering). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, kingm56 said:

I SAY PLEAE BRING IT ON!! 
  

The subscription paid would for the base sim only, anybody wishing to get 3rd party addons as part of the subscription is just dreaming..

S.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, simbol said:

The subscription paid would for the base sim only, anybody wishing to get 3rd party addons as part of the subscription is just dreaming..

S.

I think the idea is that a subscription could replace many of the scenery and weather add-ons. Ie. No need to purchase hundreds of dollars of Orbx and other add-ons to improve the scenery and keep it updated, which could be worth it. On the other hand, you are right that there is almost no way a subscription is going to cover aircraft etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paraffin said:

Flyinside is a Kickstarter-funded project in Early Access on Steam. Different economic model. You can afford to operate at a loss as an Indie developer when trying to get a project off the ground. A business like Microsoft won't work that way.

Also it's not very data-intensive to stream the scenery I've seen in previews flying at altitude. It's the resolution when you get closer that matters for bandwidth.

good points👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the point of this poll. We will not get a choice - it will be Microsoft's way or the highway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now