Those of you comparing the migration of FS9 > FSX to P3D > MSFSare missing a key point.  Specifically, the development time between FS9 and FSX was roughly 2 years, which didn’t allow MS much time to take advantage of hardware/software advances. Thus, the differences between FS9 and FSX were not monumental. Conversely, MSFS will utilize hardware/software advances (edge computing, machine learning and satellite imagery)that have occurred over the last 16 years. This isn’t FS9 to FSX, it’s FS5 to P3D. The differences are that stark and have been confirmed by almost everyone who has used the new sim.  To that point, I think you’ll see users adapt to the new sim far quicker than FS9 to FSX migrators. 
 

PMDGs market analysts seems to confirm this supposition; I’m sure their data indicates the add-on market has slowed to a crawl.  To combat this paradigm, they’re offering something they have not done in their 20 year history.,.an upgrade path.  This was on the heals of sale to their existing product line. I suspect they were forced to do so to meet their annual revenue projections.  If they failed to offer said upgrade path, their sales would have been significantly diminished. RR tried to spin the upgrade path as PMDG’s offering to the community; however, that’s utter word not allowed. MSFS forced their hand, and those of with a brain can read through their tripe messaging.  Regardless, this is clear evidence that the market is ready to move to the nextGen platform. 
 

In short, P3D will probably move into obscurity much faster than FS9/FSX.  Look at it this way, MSFS is a PS4 (modern platform) and P3D is a PS1 (created 19 years ago, roughly the same time differences as FSX to MSFS). The latter may still work, but it can’t deliver the same experience as the former..

Edited November 9, 20196 yr by kingm56

1 hour ago, kingm56 said:

Those of you comparing the migration of FS9 > FSX to P3D > MSFSare missing a key point.  Specifically, the development time between FS9 and FSX was roughly 2 years, which didn’t allow MS much time to take advantage of hardware/software advances. Thus, the differences between FS9 and FSX were not monumental. Conversely, MSFS will utilize hardware/software advances (edge computing, machine learning and satellite imagery)that have occurred over the last 16 years. This isn’t FS9 to FSX, it’s FS5 to P3D. The differences are that stark and have been confirmed by almost everyone who has used the new sim.  To that point, I think you’ll see users adapt to the new sim far quicker than FS9 to FSX migrators. 
 

PMDGs market analysts seems to confirm this supposition; I’m sure their data indicates the add-on market has slowed to a crawl.  To combat this paradigm, they’re offering something they have not done in their 20 year history.,.an upgrade path.  This was on the heals of sale to their existing product line. I suspect they were forced to do so to meet their annual revenue projections.  If they failed to offer said upgrade path, their sales would have been significantly diminished. RR tried to spin the upgrade path as PMDG’s offering to the community; however, that’s utter word not allowed. MSFS forced their hand, and those of with a brain can read through their tripe messaging.  Regardless, this is clear evidence that the market is ready to move to the nextGen platform. 
 

In short, P3D will probably move into obscurity much faster than FS9/FSX.  Look at it this way, MSFS is a PS4 (modern platform) and P3D is a PS1 (created 19 years ago, roughly the same time differences as FSX to MSFS). The latter may still work, but it can’t deliver the same experience as the former..

Nicely written but I do not agree.

MSFS base is still the old FSX + new weather system + DL pr tiles + custom AG

TileProxy also tried to import pr scenery into FSX/P3D but because of the IN connection flying faster than 80-100 knots lead to blurries. MSFS reverts to a lower resolution if IN isn’t fast enough or if the pc isn’t fast enough. There is no such thing as a free ride.

If LM comes with a V5 that also has an improved weather system and improved AG system then we’ll see. And if LM also adds IN Tile loading ....

Left or right : 2020 will be a great Flightsimming year 😎 

I don't expect any new P3D version to be available for the individual end consumer.

When LM got the ESP license from MS they agreed that LM is not allowed to develop for personal consumer entertainment. LM clearly state that in their EULA, but obviously do nothing to enforce it. So de facto there is a large percentage of users who use P3D for just that: personal consumer entertainment.

Of course both LM and MS know that. MS has been tolerating that so far, which on the one hand can be considered a generous gesture towards the flight sim community, and on the other hand did not hurt MS because they were not seriously competing with P3D.

That has changed completely since MSFS has been announced. Any new and improved P3D version would be a competition for their own MSFS and MS will certainly not tolerate that any more. MS will enforce the agreement with LM that LM does not develop for the personal consumer entertainment market. This agreement probably was put in place just for that purpose: when MS enters the flightsimming market again.

Thus LM probably will not be making any new version of P3D available for the individual end consumer, due to their agreement with MS.

 

Edited November 10, 20196 yr by RALF9636

Ralf, 

didn't know about that "agreement" (i'm still noob in flight simming) but if that's true, that's a shame. More competition brings new ideas and features into play, which is good for the consumer and in the long run, for developer too. Hope to see the V5 and then compare the two. Cause if M$ decides to stop LM's personal consumer development, that would also mean that they recognize LM as a "considerable contender for the future market share", which would make things even worse for the p3d comunity. What if ....

Perhaps if LM stops the end user and focuses on pro version, i'd be happy to pay some more for the pro version if all my current planes and sceneries would work in it, since prices for pro add-ons are considerably higher. 

Until then, let's all enjoy in what we have and what the future brings.

33 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

When LM got the ESP licence from MS they agreed that LM is not allowed to develop for personal consumer entertainment.

I'm sorry, but we know about that how? I read that a lot, but never saw any proof, so I am genuinely curious. If memory serves me well, anyone could buy ESP and build their own sim on it, that is what is was for. ESP was a normal product in the Microsoft portfolio. I can't remember any licensing restrictions.

I always thought that the "not for entertainment" part came from Lockheed themselves, and that they have their own reasons for it. 

Best regards

Edited November 10, 20196 yr by Lorby_SI

25 minutes ago, Lorby_SI said:

I'm sorry, but we know about that how? I read that a lot, but never saw any proof, so I am genuinely curious. If memory serves me well, anyone could buy ESP and build their own sim on it, that is what is was for. ESP was a normal product in the Microsoft portfolio. I can't remember any licensing restrictions.

 

That's how I always understood it; ESP is not licensed for personal consumer entertainment. I think I've read that several times, though I don't know exactly where or when.

I don't have any official source or proof for that admittedly.

 

It is covered here for example (in German):

https://www.flusinews.de/2015/04/prepar3d-die-alternativlose-sackgasse-teil-1/

 

Also found this:

https://www.scenerydesign.org/2009/12/lockheed-martin-and-esp/

 

Quote

 

I guess you must have heard this news already, but last week it was announced that Lockheed Martin has licensed Microsoft ESP. I was at the I/ITSEC exhibition at that time and in the Lockheed Martin booth they indeed had a solution build using ESP on display, a PC-12 trainer. It is very interesting to see that ESP is still living on in some way.

It should be stressed, this was discussed in some forums already, that this does not mean that the gaming version of FS is still living on. The license to Lockheed Martin excludes the entertainment segment. But it would be interesting to see if they plan to improve ESP and sell it on to other companies for professional use…

 

 

Edited November 10, 20196 yr by RALF9636

22 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

That's how I always understood it; ESP is not licensed for personal consumer entertainment. I think I've read that several times, though I don't know exactly where or when.

I don't have any official source or proof for that admittedly.

I always wondered about that. Why/how would anyone know the details of a contract between Microsoft and Lockheed. What I do know is, that ESP was meant as a base platform for others to build simulations on. On the now defunct product pages it looked like just anybody could buy a license for that. That nobody did is another story. Or at least, nobody that we know of, except Lockheed.

But admittedly, how it came to pass doesn't really matter, only that it is a restriction. Personally I can see a few reasons for Lockheed not wanting to sell a computer game. Especially when they try to sell the same thing to a professional customer.

Best regards

Edited November 10, 20196 yr by Lorby_SI

1 hour ago, RALF9636 said:

I don't expect any new P3D version to be available for the individual end consumer.

When LM got the ESP license from MS they agreed that LM is not allowed to develop for personal consumer entertainment. LM clearly state that in their EULA, but obviously do nothing to enforce it. So de facto there is a large percentage of users who use P3D for just that: personal consumer entertainment.

Of course both LM and MS know that. MS has been tolerating that so far, which on the one hand can be considered a generous gesture towards the flight sim community, and on the other hand did not hurt MS because they were not seriously competing with P3D.

That has changed completely since MSFS has been announced. Any new and improved P3D version would be a competition for their own MSFS and MS will certainly not tolerate that any more. MS will enforce the agreement with LM that LM does not develop for the personal consumer entertainment market. This agreement probably was put in place just for that purpose: when MS enters the flightsimming market again.

Thus LM probably will not be making any new version of P3D available for the individual end consumer, due to their agreement with MS.

 

So with FSX we were entertaining ourselves and with P3D we are training ourselves ?

We all use it the same way : before, now, in the future....

The license name they are giving to the sim doesn’t make us use it differently.

However, with a training license they can charge more ...

Edited November 10, 20196 yr by GSalden

22 minutes ago, Lorby_SI said:

I always wondered about that. Why/how would anyone know the details of a contract between Microsoft and Lockheed. What I do know is, that ESP was meant as a base platform for others to build simulations on. On the now defunct product pages it looked like just anybody could buy a license for that. That nobody did is another story. Or at least, nobody that we know of, except Lockheed.

But admittedly, how it came to pass doesn't really matter, only that it is a restriction. Personally I can see a few reasons for Lockheed not wanting to sell a computer game. Especially when they try to sell the same thing to a professional customer.

Best regards

True. There seems to be no definite official source available for that assumption.

 

This is the announcement by MS:

https://news.microsoft.com/2009/11/30/lockheed-martin-microsoft-agreement-to-bring-better-training-to-warfighters/

It states:

Quote

...

The agreement provides Lockheed Martin with access to the ESP technology portfolio enabling the company to build cost-effective simulation solutions for customized training for its worldwide customers. Lockheed Martin’s software development teams will extend the current capabilities of ESP to enable a whole new suite of innovative ESP-based solutions that will evolve beyond flight training to include ground and civil agency applications.

...

Microsoft ESP is a visual simulation software development platform that brings immersive games-based technology to training and decision support for commercial, government and education organizations.

Not totally clear what we can read into that.

 

So let's hope that assumption (that LM is not allowed to do personal consumer entertainment) is not correct. To have competition between MSFS and P3D would be good.

 

Edited November 10, 20196 yr by RALF9636

22 minutes ago, GSalden said:

So with FSX we were entertaining ourselves and with P3D we are training ourselves ?

We all use it the same way : before, now, in the future....

The license name they are giving to the sim doesn’t make us use it differently.

However, with a training license they can charge more ...

I don't think that we should talk about the implications. It is enough that there are restrictions on P3D, while in MSFS there are not.

Once MSFS has been released, and addons start to migrate, new customers have a choice. One is the Microsoft product, aggressively marketed, freely accessible, available on major distribution channels, inviting everyone to join the fun. On the other hand, you have P3D, not being marketed at all, available only on a single website, that you only know about if somebody told you about it, that before purchase brings up a license agreement with a dozen chapters, telling you that you are not supposed to use it for what you want. Which one would you choose as a customer? (and I am sure that this choice is being made already by prospective customers)

Best regards

Edited November 10, 20196 yr by Lorby_SI

On 11/9/2019 at 11:54 AM, MatthewS said:

P3D is dead. Long live FS2020.

It will be nice when we all eventually move to MSFS. No more sim platform wars !

18 minutes ago, Lorby_SI said:

 

A reasonable diagnostic with a caveat though. You may know more but we, the common folk, don’t know anything at all about the v5 features. Actually we don’t even know if there will be a v5.

LM could offer things strongly attractive to some customers, a native tacpack, airborne ATC, etc. 
Totally wild guesses of course but I meant that if they want to stay on the consumers market, they will look for a strategy of differentiation from the MS baby. There are commercial savvy people at LM too...

Who really believes PMDG will still be developing for P3D in 2022 ? P3D is a niche platform that no newbie knows even exists 

MSFS will be massive volume sales after aggressive marketing. 90% of PMDG and perhaps ORBX if they sign up will be from MSFS

P3D will be history, its just supply and demand and profits. Devs are not in it for the  love. some devs rightfully cut off FSX and now P3D is next in line

22 minutes ago, Lorby_SI said:

I don't think that we should talk about the implications. It is enough that there are restrictions on P3D, while in MSFS there are not.

Once MSFS has been released, and addons start to migrate, new customers have a choice. One is the Microsoft product, aggressively marketed, freely accessible, available on major distribution channels, inviting everyone to join the fun. On the other hand, you have P3D, not being marketed at all, available only on a single website, that you only know about if somebody told you about it, that before purchase brings up a license agreement with a dozen chapters, telling you that you are not supposed to use it for what you want. Which one would you choose as a customer? (and I am sure that this choice is being made already by prospective customers)

Best regards

If customers are able to choose between paying $ for a MSFS addon or paying $ x 1,5-2 for the same addon for use in P3D then the decision will be made very easily ...

The only question is if MSFS can live up to the hype. Like I wrote before if ‘regular’ pc’s do not have the power and/or one’s IN connection is not fast enough then the hype will be over very fast...

10 minutes ago, GSalden said:

The only question is if MSFS can live up to the hype. Like I wrote before if ‘regular’ pc’s do not have the power and/or one’s IN connection is not fast enough then the hype will be over very fast...

Unless the proclaimed "offline mode" would be working like the FSX scenery system does now, and you could re-use legacy scenery products (or their developers could adapt them with limited effort). Just a thought.

Best regards