I know there are a lot of people who are having a hard time getting MSFS to work properly, but I am sure Asobo /MS will sort those issues out eventually. Looking past the teething pains of a huge project like this I have to think the impact of MSFS will be huge in the industry. I am not just talking about the impact on P3D or XP either. There are going to be profound changes due to this project and approach. Assuming MSFS dominates the FS market, and I expect them to do that, consider the following...

1. The MSFS Marketplace 

What impact will purchasing add-ons directly in the sim marketplace have on 3rd party add-on websites? I would much prefer to just buy the add-on in-game and have it download and update it. No more copying files and activating products outside the sim. Plenty of websites will not be getting the same ecommerce activity they once did, imo. 

2. Scenery

One of the biggest draws of MSFS is the world being rendered in near photographic quality. Why would people desire to replace that quality scenery with something added by 3rd party developers? I can see buying airports, but that would probably only include my home airport and a few favorites. I could be wrong about the airports, but I doubt people will buy regional scenery (i.e. Orbx). 

3. Airplanes

The new MSFS marketplace is a huge win for add-on airplane developers. That is the one add-on I am most excited about. MSFS basically provides the environment and 3rd party developers provide the study level aircraft. In all of this I think they will be the clear winners, and because the market will be huge we the consumer will also win via lower prices. 

4. Weather

3rd party weather engines were a must in FSX and P3D but I honestly don't see the point of adding weather into MSFS. The default weather engine is more than good enough for me. 

5. AI Traffic

I would probably lean more towards liveries and rely on the default AI traffic engine, but I could see a 3rd party developer being successful, assuming it did not impact performance drastically. 

6. ATC

Once MSFS gets their ATC working properly I think it works for most people, but VATSIM exists for anyone wanting to go to the next level. So I really don't know how big the market would be for add-on ATC that fits in the middle. It could be pretty big, as some people are intimidated by VATSIM, so I guess that niche could exist. 

7. P3D and XP

I think these sims will always have a market but unless they can really up their games in the visual department I can see them being marginalized. If I were a 3rd party developer of any of the categories above, would I devote my time to a niche platform when a massive market in MSFS (PC and Xbox) awaits? I would honestly question why they would do that. I can see a few devoted developers sticking with P3D or XP, knowing that there will be a lot less competition, but even then I wonder why they wouldn't focus on MSFS? Again, I think P3D and XP continue but I can see budget cuts coming their way, especially for P3D. But we'll see.

There are plenty of other add-ons that will be impacted one way or another, but I think MSFS will create huge waves in this industry. 

What do you guys think? Am I wrong about certain categories? 

 

 

I think you're probably right on all points.

4 hours ago, RobJC said:

my thoughts...

1. The MSFS Marketplace 

useless for me, I am staying with STEAM

2. Scenery

"... but I doubt people will buy regional scenery (i.e. Orbx). "

not true, regional bridges, regional building textures, on and on, these types of items will be big sellers.

3. Airplanes

"... study level aircraft. In all of this I think they will be the clear winners"

true, but if you are not getting FPS in the mid 40's now, forget it.  The big devs on the front will take 10-15 FPS off the top.

4. Weather

 "The default weather engine is more than good enough for me."

pointless for me primarily because it does not work often and is spotty at best.  There is no way to capture wx in the sim at specific areas, or use for airline flight planning, or adjust daylight vs wx

5. AI Traffic

"..default AI traffic engine"

I suggest that the current implementation horrible impact FPS even for the very limited number of flights.  Real liveries with light fps models on real life routes.  The first time this is offered I predict it will be the biggest seller.

6. ATC

"Once MSFS gets their ATC working properly"

I would be surprised if this is even on the back burner with MS, dont expect anything on this until Q3 21 at best.

"but VATSIM exists for anyone wanting to go to the next level"

yeah - no.  limited coverage and political overhead makes it a no go.  Pilot2ATC will be the type of future for this (it even works now)

7. P3D and XP

dont know about P3D (dont own it), but XP? - yeah they will be here for quite awhile and are currently for me the only way to do an Airline level flight.

"but I think MSFS will create huge waves in this industry"

you and I agree on this brother.

What do you guys think? Am I wrong about certain categories? 

(see above 😉)

 

 

 

Ok, I'll bite. Some good points in the original post. Sorry for the length here...

1) MSFS Marketplace
Convenient - seems like it was introduced also to make Xbox purchases easier. To me, doesn't matter, as long as content works as advertised.

2) Scenery
Easily the strongest point in terms of visuals, combined with weather. It appears, however, many default airports are in need of repair (eg taxi lights running all over the place, though taxiways, etc., beacons in the wrong place). The SDK is currently severely lacking and also cannot currently be used to fix existing airports. That aside, it's easily among the top two unsurpassed features of FS, the other being weather deptiction (more on that below.)

3) Airplanes
Too many shortcomings in functionality, especially avionics/gps functionality. Frankly, we should not have to wait to be rescued by 3rd party developers to have working avionics and a complete nav database.

Also, I'm not sure what's going on with the flight models; I fly a bunch of GA aircraft in the real world, and the FS aircraft are not there yet. I've read many comments from real-world pilots about "spot on" flight modeling, and it's likely true in many cases, but if one were to investigate something as simple as manually trimming a 172 in a climb, they'll quickly find what seems to be broken flight characteristics in the form of the aircraft racheting up and down by choppy 2-degree increments. 

Power settings are also all over the place. I fly a DA40 (older model) and the in-game representation of the newer model feels very underpowered in terms of climb and cruise speed.

4) Weather
Easily the sim's other strongest facet next to Scenery. 

That said, the promises of real-time weather seem to be a work in progress, though I haven't investigated after the newest patch. That said, a lot of commentary is starting to revolve around its undeniable beauty being tempered by certain shortcomings, some of which are severe (inability to set visiblility) and others being aesthetic, such as the same-ness of cloud appearance and things like the sunset. 

However, in my opinion, and without much argument, the strongest feature of FS is the combination of environmental scenery, including ground/terrain, and atmosphere, including weather and - what I believe is possibly the single most important facet - lighting. The combination of atmosphere and lighting in this sim should win awards.

5) AI Traffic
Seems OK, but IMO there needs to be a lot more, and it needs to be accurately self- and ATC-controlled. The performance/stuttering of the original release seemed to be greatly affected by letting traffic run, so it may be some time until we find a plausible AI traffic model working as it should.

6) ATC
Needs quite a bit of improvement. New voices are nice. But there is nonstandard language, and if I want to contact ground... let me contact ground. It's missing at some airports where it would be necessary to use unless otherwise directed. Feels about 20-30% of the way to an initial passable model. Pilotedge is fantastic (I've used it for years, but recently stopped) but too limited in coverage and expensive for most casual users. As far as VATSIM goes, I think it's good in theory, but haven't started using it as it never seems there are enough controllers online. 

7) P3D and XP
I haven't used the newest version of P3D, but flew V4 quite a bit, and it was pretty solid - my biggest gripe was the way the ground tiles were randomized, creating streets where they shouldn't be. I can't comment on the updated version, but I think that over the years, P3D did consistently feel like the spiritual successor to FSX.

Regarding XP - I've used this the most, because of the relative accuracy of using avionics I actually use (530/430) and the consistent performance of the nav database - I use Navigraph. The FS nav database, even with the promise of current AIRAC cycles, is missing at least a few approaches near me that have existed and worked perfectly in XP for years. Updates have not fixed this so far. Also in XP, I can currently use my iPad with FlyQ largely as I do in actual flight, and everything matches up as expected.

The default aircraft are also pretty good, and most things appear to work properly. In terms of flight models, while they don't feel perfect, generally at the moment they feel much better to me, at least for the smaller GA aircraft. I've never flown a jet / airliner in real life so have no idea how they fly 🙂

I believe neither P3D and XP will be marginalized in any way due to at least their level of maturity and existing user bases, but the main reason may be that they both can be used for actual real-world IFR practice (or.. "pretend practice"). In terms of IFR, FS is not currently a viable alternative... though it's pretty great for flying through clouds! For VFR, it's unsurpassed, so long as someone isn't counting on using the nav database / gps.