So, noob123 is suggesting that someone creates an airport, sends it to Asobo for approval, gets paid for it, & the airport is incorporated into the sim, for download.. What about those that have already download the game? & how much will Asobo pay & how much will the size of the download grow each time the core is added to?

What if someone else develops a better version of that airport & submits it to Asobo?? Will that person be paid as well? What if there is a comparative freeware release (actually often happens) or an aircraft release or better skins?

As Dominique says above.. 

I’d rather have a « market » regulated by the user‘s common sense than by penury.

For many, flight simming is also about doodling sceneries, textures, aircraft (for the most talented) and flying them in the sim. Sharing them too.

The Wild West analogy is good, 

Free choice please!!

  

I don't see anywhere that noob123 suggests that anyone has to be paid for user created airports? In XP there is something called Gateway, sorry can't remember the excact name, where users upload improvements to airports, and if Laminar approves them, it may end up in the next update. Something similar could be done in MSFS, but that will first mean there has to be some kind of tools like IS3 or Simdirector which we can use to "build" the scenery / airport with.

To me, this is how the developers originally became the tail that wagged the dog.

I doubt MS will allow that to happen again. I certainly wouldn't. Especially after previous attempts by the developer(s) (MS and later dovetail) to regain central control while giving some nice-sounding lip service to 3rd parties ended up those 3rd parties in turn pretty much slow-walking those sim efforts.

The new sim is so attractive that MS really does have the upper hand here, and I don't see why they would give that away and return to the wild west where they swallow the massive development costs of creating the sim, and then developers swallow the profit of creating stuff for it, independent of the original developer...

Ms isn't a charity.

At least I don't think so.

If that's changed, then.... more power to them. (And thanks for the sim, bro's!)

Edited April 13, 20206 yr by HiFlyer

24 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

To me, this is how the developers originally became the tail that wagged the dog.

I doubt MS will allow that to happen again. I certainly wouldn't. Especially after previous attempts by the developer(s) (MS and later dovetail) to regain central control while giving some nice-sounding lip service to developers ended up with developers pretty much slow-walking those sim efforts.

The new sim is so attractive that MS really does have the upper hand here, and I don't see why they would give that away and return to the wild west where they swallow the massive development costs of creating the sim, and then developers swallow all the profit of creating stuff for it, independent of the original developer...

Ms isn't a charity.

At least I don't think so.

If that's changed, then.... more power to them. (And thanks for the sim, bro's!)

I would not bet on a close sim attractive or not attractive as they always failed

"developers swallow all the profit of creating stuff for it, independent of the original developer..."

Again, it wasn't mentioned anywhere that it should be paid stuff. FSX had a great Flight1 prg. called Instant scenery 3, where we could place buildings, vehicles, trees, people etc. etc. and then import it into the sim, and that way improve an already made airport. I could easily see something like that for MSFS with default MSFS libraries.

And BTW: "developers swallow all the profit of creating stuff for it, independent of the original developer."..

Isn't that what Orbx, PMDG, Aerosoft etc. already does?

Edited April 13, 20206 yr by jlund

8 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

Great, we have an upcoming sim that does its best to include it all, and so sure, let's turn it back to the the current wild-wild-west, and cram junk in there till it breaks......

Just like the good old days.

Cool.

 

No one is suggesting it would be a free for all. There would obviously be an approval process

  

8 hours ago, Wobbie said:

gets paid for it,

Noob never said they should get paid for it

 

Again, look at what X-Plane does for their default airports, it's a good system. They're all made using the generic building parts, no custom assets. 

Edited April 13, 20206 yr by Tuskin38

The 3rd party sim improvements from FS98 onwards were always unapproved hacks. 3rd parties are always pushing the limits, and attempts to limit or control or 'approve' addons will fail. It's better not to waste time and resources trying to control the sandbox. Just make a good sim (and a good SDK), and 3rd parties will make it better. If the 3rd parties abandon Dos Equis due to restrictions and control, it will die like Flight and Dovetail's FSWorld. I think they understand this. Restricted addons = restricted sales of the sim's core.

23 minutes ago, rhumbaflappy said:

The 3rd party sim improvements from FS98 onwards were always unapproved hacks. 3rd parties are always pushing the limits, and attempts to limit or control or 'approve' addons will fail. It's better not to waste time and resources trying to control the sandbox. Just make a good sim (and a good SDK), and 3rd parties will make it better. If the 3rd parties abandon Dos Equis due to restrictions and control, it will die like Flight and Dovetail's FSWorld. I think they understand this. Restricted addons = restricted sales of the sim's core.

No one in this thread is saying addons have to be restricted. 

Edited April 13, 20206 yr by Tuskin38

12 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

Great, we have an upcoming sim that does its best to include it all, and so sure, let's turn it back to the the current wild-wild-west, and cram junk in there till it breaks......

Just like the good old days.

Cool.

 

Exactly. So much payware on other platforms is released half baked or un-finished, including bugs that are never fixed. I'm reluctant to buy any payware any more unless forums advise things work as advertised. Don't know why we can't download a trial of most of this stuff, although should be a topic of another post!

I'm happy with Asobo leaving things as is!

 

10 minutes ago, tpete61 said:

Exactly. So much payware on other platforms is released half baked or un-finished, including bugs that are never fixed. I'm reluctant to buy any payware any more unless forums advise things work as advertised. Don't know why we can't download a trial of most of this stuff, although should be a topic of another post!

I'm happy with Asobo leaving things as is!

 

No one is saying any community additions would be half baked they would obviously be vetted first.

Vetted for free? No payment for community forwarded additions? 

I'm sure Asobo would not do something like that as a 'gift'to the freeware developer who sends stuff to them.

I still say.. Give the tools to both freeware & payware developers to do their thing, & give us free choice to add what we prefer to our sim.

Imagine a few developer spending hundreds of hours developing a scenery.. on what grounds is Asobo able to differentiate & select one that they prefer, whereas given a choice, we will be able to choose for ourselves.

Will Asobo be able to withdraw a particular community developed scenery & replace it with a better one? Financial & time considerations for them to do that?

Consider aircraft... there are a few great DC-3's out there, payware & freeware.. who is to say what the better one is? Asobo? Not.. The users decide!

19 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

Vetted for free? No payment for community forwarded additions? 

As far as I'm aware all the new default scenery/airports for X-Plane are vetted for free. Why can't Asobo do the same?  

19 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

Consider aircraft... there are a few great DC-3's out there, payware & freeware.. who is to say what the better one is? Asobo? Not.. The users decide!

The creator of the thread is only talking about scenery, not airplanes. And there would always be the option to replace the new default additions with something else you prefer.

Edited April 13, 20206 yr by Tuskin38

Tuskin38 said:The creator of the thread is only talking about scenery, not airplanes. And there would always be the option to replace the new default additions with something else you prefer.

So why have community added scenery into the core, as suggested, when any & community developed scenery can be out there as payware or scenery to be chosen by us? I'm sure payware devs would want to be compensated for their time & effort. Doing scenery for free, does make it into a virtual free-for-all. 

Why stop at scenery? Aircraft was just an explanation example.

Just because X-Plane does it, does not make it an industry standard,

Anyhow, I'm not getting into MSFS/X-Plane comparisons.  

6 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

There would obviously be an approval process

 

5 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

No one in this thread is saying addons have to be restricted. 

And yet you continue to state addons would be 'vetted' which is another word for censored or restricted.