1 hour ago, rjfry said:

MSFS have never released a sim with real world liveries for good reason, AI or flyable.

Why?

3 minutes ago, Noooch said:

Why?

Intellectual Property Rights. Most flight simulator add-ons are being developed in a grey area. If the companies that own the brands started demanding for their royalties, it would make most add-ons too expensive. 

So how such addons like World of AI etc... exist? And some are free!

Edited August 20, 20196 yr by Noooch

This why third party addons come in bare livery like PMDG what livery you add is up to you, you just see BA or UNITED wanting a cut.

37 minutes ago, Noooch said:

So how such addons like World of AI etc... exist? And some are free!

Because the people making those addons and individual liveries are small potatoes, not worth sending the legal teams out to play whack-a-mole.

The sim developers -- Microsoft, Lockheed-Martin, and even Laminar Research -- are in a different category, worth suing for trademark or trade dress infringement. 

I suspect there would still be a good market for Airport addons.  While MSFS may have a handful of detailed airports my guess is outside of the biggies (LAX, JFK, EGLL, etc.) many others will in need of upgrades.  While I would love MS to look at detailed Vatsim data and build out the top 100 airports in use I doubt that will happen.

There will always be a market for utilities.  Think specialized flight planning software and the like.  

Hook

I going to bet that not long after the release of MSFS and the SDK, we're going to see numerous utility addons. I think it's going to be a really interesting time in our hobby.

 

6 hours ago, nickhod said:

I overreacted to the "behaving like a little child" comment.

I understand that this can be misread. It was meant as a friendly illustration when enthusiasts start to behave like children and need to be warned not to set themselves up for dissapointment.

It was not meant in a condescending way.

7 hours ago, nickhod said:

Apologies Rick. Honestly not looking to fall out with anyone here, just throw around ideas.

I overreacted to the "behaving like a little child" comment. My bad.

 

13 minutes ago, Farlis said:

I understand that this can be misread. It was meant as a friendly illustration when enthusiasts start to behave like children and need to be warned not to set themselves up for dissapointment.

It was not meant in a condescending way.

Wow, you rarely see an exchange like that over here. Usually they escalate downward very quickly. Now the rest of us should take example from you two. 😁

I'll definitely buy anything that PMDG releases.

7 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

).Microsoft's success is hinged entirely on DLC, some don't like that, but many users do for the reason above.  Fortunately those that don't want to buy DLC will have a better base product from which to enjoy, but the SDK will decide it's longevity.

Cheers, Rob.

I’ve seen this written a lot on here. What is the evidence that the success of the new sim will hinge on dlc? Or at least masses of dlc, which seems to be the point here. I would have thought that success is much more likely to hinge on how broad an appeal they can create?

i get that dlc is an important part of any piece of software, particularly games - but “entirely hinge” on it? 

8 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Yep a few 1000 (or maybe 10,000) or so ... and the 40,000 or so airports

Microsoft's success is hinged entirely on DLC, some don't like that, but many users do for the reason above.  Fortunately those that don't want to buy DLC will have a better base product from which to enjoy, but the SDK will decide it's longevity.

I'm not convinced (yet) that the success of this release is hinged entirely on DLC. Seems to me like MS are going to deliver a really great experience out of the box, and DLC will be a harder sell to a subset of the customer base.

We can talk about 40k airports, but the reality is that maybe 2000 - 3000 or so have enough selling potential to warrant the investment in developing it. If MS had / have a team of 5 airport modellers working 2-3 years they could cover a lot of ground will very good quality airports.

I think my point is that MS will maybe wipe out the "low hanging fruit" for developers, and the bar for 3rd party content will be set much, much higher.

Ultimately though that's a good thing and there will be opportunities for those that can deliver quality.

22 minutes ago, Flamingpie said:

Heaven forbid there will be a migration tool...! 😲 I really hope MS finds a way to prevent old word not allowed from being ported to MSFS in any way! 😉

Yeah, I also hope that backwards compatibility is broken and porting isn't easy. Time for a clean slate to push things forward, not a load of low effort, shovel-ware ports.

One cannot rule out regional sceneries addons  : 

- not everybody has a connection able to stream huge quantities of data. The solution for them (me...) is to download a scenery first (during the night for instance) and then play it. I am not sure to know how big is the « vast majority » you are referring to.

- the quality of orthos may vary the world over : resolution, colorimetry, artifacts (clouds, ...). Some heavy processing will be necessary . The mixed reactions to the new TE Oregon show that even in the US the quality is not always at level. MS will do it for its  main markets (US, EU, ...) but what about  Sri Lanka, Laos, Costa Rica, Patagonia, the Samoas etc. ? And if the processing is too costly, the good ole LCs may be drafted back into service.

- there will be a need for niche sceneries. One of my top flying grounds is the OrbX two PNG sceneries. I don’t see default FS20 having that 😏

The truth is that the teasers don’t reveal much.