43 minutes ago, ganter said:

Bold chaps - having absolutely no idea what code they'll be working in - or whether or not MS will even invite third party devs to the feast.

Tell them not to work too hard on it.

Yep... anyone can make a building in 3DSMax and say they’re “developing for FS2020.” 

Maybe they do have some insider developer knowledge already and are working towards that,  or they're just boldly preempting,  though the article said they would be incorporating many of the changes to an xplane 11 version anyway which to me could read more like they're building for xplane 11 with the anticipation that it will be workable into the new Microsoft FS2020

That's odd... If they they are already involved in some way, they have to be under NDA. Meaning they shouldn't be talking about it.

In the other hand, what would be the point to build a version in anticipation of an engine they/we don't know the features/capatibilities yet?

Doesn't feel right to me.

The modelling and texturing workflow will be pretty much the same, its industry standard for decades now with only the polycount and texture resolution increasing over time. I dont think MSFS will reinvent the wheel in this regard.

So they could already start working on a max-detail, 8k texture version and scale it down and add material properties (like PBR) once they get full dev access to MSFS. Once the raw modelling is done, they need a SDK and full documentation to continue development

"In anticipation of" is very ambiguous phrasing. It could easily mean they're working on high def and dynamic lighting versions of their project for XP11 and later P3D, in anticipation of the competition from MFS. Or as said above, hoping to move assets into a MFS version eventually.

If they were working on something for the initial release they'd either be under NDA or freed to say specifically that they're working on an MFS version.

Look, the whole thing is fake news by FSElite.

It's rubbish.

Not one Dev out there - if they are being commissioned by MS to create content - is going to post it online at this point in the proceedings. (Paraffin's point about NDAs being key to this.)

I've worked for MS here in the UK and the NDA I signed back in 2002 still has me keeping silent about certain aspects.

We also need to look at the context in which the post was - well, posted; One dev out there says they're developing for the new sim - so what?

So am I. I'm glued to the news and the FSInsider program wondering how much I'm going to have to "dev" my local real-world airfield to make it, well, as real as it gets.

Come on guys and girls - get a grip.

3 minutes ago, ganter said:

Look, the whole thing is fake news by FSElite.

It's rubbish.

Calling FSElite fake news is rubbish...Here's what Imaginesim posted on their facebook

Quote

A complete new-build KATL version to exceed our WSSS standard has already begun in anticipation of Microsoft FS2020. Some of the improvements for this version, including extremely fine mesh terrain data for the entire airport and surrounding areas, are already being incorporated into our KATL XP11 version and possibly a new Prepar3D version if technically viable.

 

10 minutes ago, Woozie said:

Calling FSElite fake news is rubbish...Here's what Imaginesim posted on their facebook

 

Quod erat demonstrandum.

 

 

 

Edited July 19, 20196 yr by Guest

Woozie - when did you decide to take a sip of the Kool-Aid?

The issue here is that saying "has already begun in anticipation of Microsoft FS2020" is not the same as saying "is being done for Microsoft 2020." It's a vague statement that reads more like marketing for clicks than anything else.

Another indication is the use of the FS2020 name, when it's not what Microsoft is calling the sim. It makes it sound like they're reading about it on non-MS forums and social media.

5 hours ago, ganter said:

Bold chaps - having absolutely no idea what code they'll be working in - or whether or not MS will even invite third party devs to the feast.

Tell them not to work too hard on it.

I mean, that's already confirmed to be the case.

Speaking as a lawyer, it’s extremely unlikely that an nda signed in 2002 is in any way still enforceable. They’re pretty untested 5 minutes after signing, let alone 17 years. Unless we’re talking about ‘nda’s of the national security variety...

7 hours ago, Krakin said:

First confirmation of a third party building something for MSFS

Thanks for the link.

Unfortunately it doesn't appear they're building it *for* MSFS but simply "in anticipation".  The wording is innocent and no reason to read much into it.

Mostly, it indicates a willingness to create assets for MSFS.  I'm surprised that more developers have not done the same.  Microsoft has already announced that there will be third party involvement and an SDK.  The closest I've seen so far to "We intend to develop for the new sim" is "Who knows what the future may bring?"

After earlier problems I suspect Microsoft has written an NDA with some real teeth.

Hook

20 hours ago, LHookins said:

and an SDK

Has that been confirmed though?

39 minutes ago, threegreen said:

Has that been confirmed though?

You can infer it from Microsoft's own text "We are supporting 3rd Party Content Development and Community Content creation.".

Remember a Software Developer Kit is a set of tools not necesserily an API although that should be expected as well.