The 3rd Party Dilemna.......

[Ricardo41 5,936]

10 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

EDIT: A secondary question might be: what could developers do to nudge purchasers from watch-and-wait to, buy now!

They should take a cue from Flight1 and offer a trial period and refunds. 

[Tom_L 522]

I think we'll see some diversity in the FS market as I don't think the majority of MSFS users will become hardcore simmers. For most of them it will be just another, hopefully enjoyable game for occasional entertainment, which is fine. I think you can see already how the momentum in freeware has shifted from the "traditional" sources like the Avsim library to gamers modding sites. That will imho become the resource for most of the MSFS customers, maybe with the occasional purchase from the ingame store. Remember the times before FSX? It was mostly freeware addons, downloadable from mainly two sites. The price of the product will of course play a major roll. It will be interesting to see if a larger effort in development for creating quality-addons will be honored with the corresponding sales and thus how the quality standard especially in scenery addons will develop. While the products published so far are ranging from nice to very good they are lacking the "wow-i-haven't-seen-that-before-factor" I have hoped to see with a new platform. Mostly they seem like portovers with less detail than in P3D (not moving gates in Aerosofts ENVA or missing animated trains in FlyTampa's EKCH for example). Granted, the SDK isn't fully ready and partially updates are promised, but it seems like the trend goes to faster and cheaper in an effort to conquer the mass market. When it comes to Aircraft, I think PMDG and FSLabs will still be products for the minority of gamers if the pricing remains the same. Maybe products like Aerosoft's Airbus, which is quite nice imho, is better suited for the majority of the new clientele. Let's put the crystal ball at rest and check back in a year or so.

[desbean 357]

7 hours ago, ShawnG said:

most of it, unfortunately, with the caveat that where it's good, it's really good.  Juneau, and the southeast, as you mentioned is fantastic.  most everything in the arctic is plagued by the same terrain mesh problems that the rest of the northern areas are,  theres quite a few patches of non ortho terrain scattered around, and some pretty important airports by Alaskan standards are missing (Valdez, Seward, Unalakleet, etc...  around the Wasilla area north of Anchorage theres a big patch where one ortho image slowly crawls across another ortho image... etc.

On the other hand, ORBX had been throwing various teasers out about doing "all of Alaska" since 2010 or so, and it hasn't happened, so I'm not sure they are going to do anything now.  It's still the best all around Alaska scenery ever, but not really "there" yet, hopefully at least Asobo can get better ortho, and fix the lake plateaus and roller coaster rivers at some point

True. Orbx only did southern Alaska which didn't go much north or west of PANC. Basically all of the areas that are already good in MSFS. As you say, will probably just have to hope that Asobo gets better data. Maybe even in my lifetime.

[pjs37 319]

Well that is a shame 😞 hopefully either Asobo gets better data at some point or someone else does the work

[Ricardo41 5,936]

I'm never going to buy a scenery pack ever again unless the developer finds another, better and more accurate way to recreate scenery in real time. That's the groundbreaking innovation of MSFS 2020 - you fly and you feel like you're flying in the real world, is it perfect. No. 

I've spent literally hundres of $$$ on ORBX scenery packages. Compared to MSFS, they all look quite pretty but static and lifeless. Like frozen in time. Not dynamic. 

I might buy a few airports. I don't see myself buying any addon airplanes either, certainly not the Aerosoft Airbus or CRJ, both thoroughly mediocre products. I might buy a few Carenado GA stuff, but that's it. I will also buy any improvements to the default G3X or G5X.

The money saved will probably buy me a new PC next year. 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Ricardo41

[Twenty6 692]

19 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

I've spent literally hundres of $$$ on ORBX scenery packages. Compared to MSFS, they all look quite pretty but static and lifeless. Like frozen in time. Not dynamic. 

Yep!

[wim123 758]

i will see how this evolves before forking out any extra money.

i can keep myself busy with what we have for months.

[raymar 969]

17 hours ago, UAL4life said:

Time will tell when and if Asobo will open up the API enough and expand the SDK enough to get the quality addons people are used to. Until then 3rd parties are in a holding pattern for anything serious. 

Do you realize that Aerosoft is the main developer of the SDK and has been working very close with Asobo for several months on the SDK.

[ShawnG 1,823]

1 hour ago, raymar said:

Do you realize that Aerosoft is the main developer of the SDK and has been working very close with Asobo for several months on the SDK.

As far as I am aware, Aerosoft are working with Asobo on some specific parts of the SDK pertaining to the capabilities of getting advanced c+ integration on advanced aircraft systems.  Aerosoft being the “main developer of the SDK” is as far as I’m aware complete Bull droppings.  (and certainly not claimed by Aerosoft) 

[UAL4life 237]

4 hours ago, raymar said:

Do you realize that Aerosoft is the main developer of the SDK and has been working very close with Asobo for several months on the SDK.

Lol that would explain a whole lot! 

Edited September 14, 2020 by UAL4life

[raymar 969]

6 hours ago, raymar said:

Do you realize that Aerosoft is the main developer of the SDK and has been working very close with Asobo for several months on the SDK.

Better and more accurate wording is Aerosoft is one of the main developers of the SDK and blah, blah, blah .  .  .

[JRBarrett 3,049]

1 minute ago, raymar said:

Better and more accurate wording is Aerosoft is one of the main developers of the SDK and blah, blah, blah .  .  .

Probably more accurate to say that Aerosoft (and probably PMDG), are consultants to Asobo, advising Asobo’s developers on what kind of SDK functions are needed for advanced aircraft development.

[raymar 969]

1 minute ago, JRBarrett said:

Probably more accurate to say that Aerosoft (and probably PMDG), are consultants to Asobo, advising Asobo’s developers on what kind of SDK functions are needed for advanced aircraft development.

I’m game, I like yours. Thanks.

[FilbertFlies 980]

I'm very envious of the restraint most of you lot are able to show with regard to purchasing add-ons. You're right, of course, there are thousands of potential hours of enjoyment to be had just exploring the base sim. Yet I see pretty pictures of a new airport that I will likely fly to a handful of times and my credit card's out before I can stop myself! Very much like a kid in a candy store really...

[RXP 2,338]

12 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

Probably more accurate to say that Aerosoft (and probably PMDG), are consultants to Asobo, advising Asobo’s developers on what kind of SDK functions are needed for advanced aircraft development.

18 hours ago, ShawnG said:

Aerosoft are working with Asobo on some specific parts of the SDK pertaining to the capabilities of getting advanced c+ integration on advanced aircraft systems.

 

Or viewed from a different angle: "Probably more accurate to say Asobo is being advised for what kind of SDK functions are needed from a couple vendors and for their specific needs which might not be representative at all of the greater third party add-ons vendors needs".

These are FltSim vendors with a knowledge of the platform for decades, its terminology, way of doing and all its shortcomings in any previous version since at least FS8. There are great things in the FltSim SDK which haven't changed much fundamentally since FS8 by the way, and which are still the same in FS2020 still. 

On the other hand there is as much talented 3rd party vendors working for as much decades on other simulators, with as much as knowledge, and more importantly to me used to other SDK paradigms. There are sound alternative ways of doing things worth being inspired from.

In my opinion this is one of the salient problem with the development of the SDK because it doesn't give the chance for Asobo to think outside the box, outside of the FltSim way, discarding what is perpetually wrong and introducing new paradigms for a change.  I'm afraid repeating the same old same, with the same old methods, without gathering much input from other vendors coming from other simulators is depriving the community from having a more sophisticated SDK capable of supporting the production of much better add-ons. 

PS: I'm mainly talking about what deals with systems, gauges and core functions inside the simulator. For the rest, which is incredible textures and 3D engine, 3D animations, 3D sound, the FS2020 SDK is already providing.

Edited September 14, 2020 by RXP
clarity