I'm expecting PMDG on day one

[threexgreen 3,135]

7 minutes ago, france89 said:

But again, i am not depriving anyone. If they want to use their precious PMDGs, they can use current simulators.

You're contradicting yourself here. In that scenario people would be deprived from using PMDG aircraft in the new sim and I don't see how this scenario would yield anything for anyone.

 

12 minutes ago, france89 said:

It's an incentive for developers (especially some) to never innovate. And why would they when they can make money with less effort?

Do you really believe a developer like PMDG wouldn't want to take advantage of an all new aerodynamics engine which is miles ahead of FSX/P3D (probably XP, I don't know)? After all, they're not sticking with the NGX (as in never innovate) but are developing the NG3 and the same goes for the 747 and the -8.

 

15 minutes ago, france89 said:

we saw how long it took and how they were not used to that.

The need to convert products to 64 bit was obviously new but these are software engineers with experience working full time. If it took time it was because it required higher effort, not because they weren't used to it.

[DavidP 1,408]

10 hours ago, ckyliu said:

Which they will charge a pretty penny for, you can be sure of.

Simmers amaze me - they want all the bells and whistles, they want their desktop sim to have a level of reality approaching a Level D sim, they want the scenery to replicate the real world down to the nearest centimetre, yet the don't want to pay for the work involved.

Edited October 14, 2019 by DavidP

[tyda0501 20]

2 hours ago, france89 said:

I don't want to deprive anybody. This is what i wish for, which clearly isn't what you wish for 🙂 I am free to spend my money how i see fit just like them, the same applies for opinions.
Perfected over the years is very debatable, and so is the list of innovations in their products since the offering on FSX. Besides what would be coming would be something perfected for the ESP platform, with all its limitations. This might not necessary apply to MSFS.

I am tired of developers selling the same product over and over again. Some did from FS9 to FSX, then P3D (at even an increased price for the reasons we know). Now they are hoping to do it in MS. This is the exact stagnation for which i am always against retro compatibility. They'll continue to try to make money with the same offering and i see no reason why i would spend my money on that.

You do realize that there is considerable workload (cost) to modify an add-on for a new platform. Your opinion is one that I see over and over on this forum. An abundance of simers who have a complete ignorance for how the free-market and profit motive works. Everything, from the device you’re posting this on, to the electricy that turns on your lights isn’t motivated by charity. But go ahead and tear down the profit motive and see what happens to innovation with this hobby. 

[simbol 5,805]

I read the first post and all I can say is.. Good luck 😂.

S.

[Sartanius 399]

26 minutes ago, DavidP said:

Simmers amaze me - they want all the bells and whistles, they want their desktop sim to have a level of reality approaching a Level D sim, they want the scenery to replicate the real world down to the nearest centimetre, yet the don't want to pay for the work involved.

This +1.  I just don't understand the freeware crowd.  It is great when individuals want to spend their own time developing a complex aircraft and then give it away.  They are absolutely free to do so, and many appreciate their efforts.  But it is also just as valid when companies want to create payware since there is a robust consumer market that wants to buy their products, which are typically very high quality and are likely to be supported for the long term.  Freeware and payware exist together quite nicely, and I hope they both continue to thrive in MSFS.

Edited October 14, 2019 by dmiannay

[Ted Striker 338]

27 minutes ago, DavidP said:

Simmers amaze me - they want all the bells and whistles, they want their desktop sim to have a level of reality approaching a Level D sim, they want the scenery to replicate the real world down to the nearest centimetre, yet the don't want to pay for the work involved.

Oh, and don't forget they don't want it to affect their FPS and they want it now. 

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

46 minutes ago, threegreen said:

You're contradicting yourself here. In that scenario people would be deprived from using PMDG aircraft in the new sim and I don't see how this scenario would yield anything for anyone.

Do you really believe a developer like PMDG wouldn't want to take advantage of an all new aerodynamics engine which is miles ahead of FSX/P3D (probably XP, I don't know)? After all, they're not sticking with the NGX (as in never innovate) but are developing the NG3 and the same goes for the 747 and the -8.

The need to convert products to 64 bit was obviously new but these are software engineers with experience working full time. If it took time it was because it required higher effort, not because they weren't used to it.

I am sorry, i meant that they can use PMDG aircrafts in the old sim still.
And no, i don't believe PMDG is capable of that especially considering the poor show they did with the DC6 in XP and how they left it untouched ever since.

Their claims of XP being unable to support complex aircraft is as valid as Orbx John statement back then regarding XP as a platform. It's a strategy.

38 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Are you a software engineer?  Do you understand the concept of OOP?  Old code has nothing to do at all with innovation ... you really don't understand software engineering, even Asobo indicated (in one of their many interviews) they used lots of existing code because it was good and performed well.  

When I keep seeing the same discussions over and over of "old code" from people that aren't software engineers and haven't actually seen the C++ code being used, and yet they seem to dislike the code just for no other reason than it wasn't created within some predefined period of time.  If this is really about "old code" = "slow code" and you think that is the source of low FPS, then you are mistaken.

Do you do any 3D modeling?  There is a lot of 3D modeling work that can be re-used across multiple platforms ... re-use is done to benefit the end user/consume.

Finally "re-use" is what saves the end user money.  If we can't re-use it takes longer, more work, more cost, that cost needs to be recovered and hence higher consumer prices. Re-use has nothing to do with performance/FPS.

Cheers, Rob.

I am sorry, next time i will post a picture of my library full of programming books to further validate my statements.

I agree with you regarding 3d models and textures tho. And i am aware of what Asobo did and rightfully so. If something works there is no reason to leave it behind. HOWEVER this is something that needs to go hand in hand with trying to put new features into the product, especially if it's going to be sold again in another platform after few years. And i think in this case there wasn't some big innovation.

The messages that gets you triggered are the same that gets to me, however they are different messages. For me it's mostly those "20 fps but smooth" and the "it's hard to run x sim with good fps because of it's advancements in the rendering of the whole world". This is something, i believe, that the incoming MSFS will be able to demostrate otherwise.

26 minutes ago, tyda0501 said:

You do realize that there is considerable workload (cost) to modify an add-on for a new platform. Your opinion is one that I see over and over on this forum. An abundance of simers who have a complete ignorance for how the free-market and profit motive works. Everything, from the device you’re posting this on, to the electricy that turns on your lights isn’t motivated by charity. But go ahead and tear down the profit motive and see what happens to innovation with this hobby. 

Considerable workload is debatable considering how in the early versions of P3D it was possible to port over PMDG products without much effort.
I believe the new simulator will bring in fresh interest, and with that interest also new developers who will be able to bring new flying platforms for us to enjoy.

[threexgreen 3,135]

20 minutes ago, france89 said:

Considerable workload is debatable considering how in the early versions of P3D it was possible to port over PMDG products without much effort.

How do you even know that? Do you know if there is something in a developer's custom code which requires more work to port over than what it may seem like from the outside?

 

20 minutes ago, france89 said:

And no, i don't believe PMDG is capable of that especially considering the poor show they did with the DC6 in XP and how they left it untouched ever since.

PMDG stated that the DC-6, being a lighter addon to produce than all the modern jets, was an experiment to get into XP, basically to test the waters.

Edited October 14, 2019 by threegreen

[Pastaiolo 1,686]

1 minute ago, threegreen said:

How do you even know that? Do you know if there is something in a developer's custom code which requires more work to port over than what it may seem like from the outside?

 

Your reasoning here is a bit off. PMDG stated that the DC-6, being a lighter addon to produce than all the modern jets, was an experiment to get into XP, basically to test the waters. Moreover, this is the only (flawed) example whatsoever to support your claim of them never innovating. They are constantly updating their addons and even developing new addons from the ground up with new features to replace older versions. That's the exact opposite of "never innovating".

How do you know that, tho?

From how i understood it, the DC6 was indeed a test to see what kind of "advanced capabilities" XP had and how much it could support their own simulations. And it's something that, according to them, didn't pass.
But we have examples of how the platform is instead capable of handing more advanced planes and the exam i bring forward is still the Zibo 737. Have you tried it?

Look, one of the advanced features the 777 got over the FSX version back then was a little camera which you could display in the cockpit.. this is the kind of innovation i saw. And i don't think it was much on their part. I am not saying i woudn't act the same way considering their position in the community but it wasn't enough for me.

Anyway guys, i think we'll just have to agree to disagree unless you want to continue this. Perhaps with private messages if it's more convenient.

I am happy if you get to fly your favourtie plane from your favourite developer, but i am more looking for fresh air regarding addons and its developers too for the new Flight Sim.

[bonchie 2,305]

Almost certainly not going to happen. If your entire simming experience revolves around button pushing at 30,000ft, you probably won't like this at release.

And I say that as someone who likes button pushing at 30,000ft, but I will also get a lot of enjoyment doing GA initially if that's what we have. The graphics and weather are looking to good to miss out on over aircraft preferences.

Edited October 14, 2019 by bonchie

[Lenny777 299]

3 hours ago, n4gix said:

Early access to what precisely? They are still in the process of getting the basic modules of the simulator together, and most assuredly are still in pre-alpha stage with the SDK, which won't be finalized until late in the Beta cycle. No third-party will climb on board without MS/ASOBO having even decided on such things as how the "terms" will be for their involvement. What percentage of each sale for products in MS's MFSF Store will there be? There has been some mention that third-parties will possibly be able continue selling their product through their existing portals.

We don't even know what programming language will be available for gauge/systems yet. If C++ and/or GDI+ are not supported, what effect will that have on glass gauges? Will Lua and XML be the only systems supported?

Look closely in my signature block and see what I do full-time for a living...

I know exactly what you do. Have known for years. What do you think, I'm a neophyte? Obviously if you had any contact  with MS you wouldn't be free to tell us. I guess the question for you what DIRECTLY do you know. about OTHER developers having contact other than your inferences? You have no idea if certain developers, such as PMDG, have had direct contact and have the knowledge regarding gauges and systems and Lua, etc. We only, it appears know YOU don't, unless of course your denial is pursuant to an NDA.

When you asked the question, "early access to what", we do know that MS developers themselves have stated that its the FSX program stripped down. Now that means it's stripped down to something. There's is no need for a developer to go full bore into everything it is only necessary for a developer to be given insights into the SDK and whether the SDK of the planes, re flight variables, gauges etc. is the status quo. If it is then they can start planning accordingly.  In other words, whoever it might  be MS gives them the necessary basis to begin planning so that when it is released as alpha for example,  they can have their product(s) ready to go.

 

Indeed Aerosoft stated the same: "Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020: Aerosoft plans extensions"

 

The article goes on, "Specialists from Diekmann's team are already in close contact with Microsoft and have analyzed the Flight Simulator for potential products. In year 1, Aerosoft wants to bring its own additional packages on the market, including realistic models of popular airports, aircraft, scenarios and flight routes." 

https://www.gameswirtschaft.de/marketing-pr/microsoft-flight-simulator-2020-aerosoft/

 

 

Edited October 14, 2019 by Lenny777

[DaWu 779]

Pmdg will be like: so it took our trainee 2hrs to port the 737 to FS2020 and therefore we ask our customers to pay an upgrade price of 99$

in 5 years we will release the NG v17 then with brand new features like adjustable seats for only 199$

[stevphfeniey 56]

I’m all for whoever releases the first heavies with good systems depth, is easy on the frames, easy on the eyes, and at a fair price, PMDG or not. 

Edited October 14, 2019 by stevphfeniey

[G-RFRY 1,706]

When it comes to third party developers like PMDG they will dammed if they do and dammed if they don't. 

[irrics 1,517]

4 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Have you or anyone seen all this working in MSFS yet?

Have you?