Something definitely fishy here. Imagine Elon Mask would say "I can't share anymore details on Space X because my marketing department said so!" LOL Frankly this is ridiculous whatever explanations we can find!  

 

I just saw recent Mathijs quote ". MFS is a entertainment product. Without any aims to be factor in the serious training platform. They never claimed that, they never said anything like that. " It sounds there is some rift with Asobo.

Now, marketing department must know that not sharing information just create more rumors and uncertainty. That is exactly what happening!  

 

 

16 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

I just saw recent Mathijs quote ". MFS is a entertainment product. Without any aims to be factor in the serious training platform. They never claimed that, they never said anything like that. " It sounds there is some rift with Asobo.

I don't read it as some sort of rift with Asobo, he is right, MSFS wasn't marketed as professional training tool like P3D, isn't? 

The reality is, no matter how much they go on about how they '<3 open source', how they are better, or different, or reformed, or whatever then they were 20 years ago, Microsoft is a publicly held company and their goal is to maximize the profit made for their investors.  They only care about anything to do with individual customers in as much as it meets that goal.  We've seen this time and time again lately with Windows 10 updates that have deleted peoples Documents folders, caused BSODs, and otherwise screwed up systems since they made the penny-pinching decision to fire all the dedicated QA people and rely on "Insider" testing for Windows 10.

So if they don't like all the comments about their SDK, then they have their legal department write up some letters indicating that the take a more expansive view of their NDA then maybe the developers originally thought, and that is that.

Maybe the idea is if none of the 3DP developers are allowed to comment, then it avoids the situation where some 3DPs might have a generally positive thread on their forums showing off the actual work they are doing, while others get beat up over their twitch stream rants.  So someone at MS said 'enough is enough, less talking'.

Edited December 28, 20205 yr by marsman2020

On 12/24/2020 at 12:42 AM, marsman2020 said:

 

If it was just left at "the product is relatively close to release"

Standard Aerosoft boiler plate. Doesn't mean it's close to release. 

6 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

I don't read it as some sort of rift with Asobo, he is right, MSFS wasn't marketed as professional training tool like P3D, isn't? 

Yes and no. P3D was not marketed as entering product in conventional sense. Yes it was designed as training tools based on legacy FSX code under license of not selling it as entertaining product. But then again anyone who wants to buy P3D not necessarily  is using it for training. Same applies for XP11. So so marketing and usage seems can go different direction. For example say Redbox simulation might use MSFS under new training license with their build in system and etc 

14 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Yes and no. P3D was not marketed as entering product in conventional sense. Yes it was designed as training tools based on legacy FSX code under license of not selling it as entertaining product. But then again anyone who wants to buy P3D not necessarily  is using it for training. Same applies for XP11. So so marketing and usage seems can go different direction. For example say Redbox simulation might use MSFS under new training license with their build in system and etc 

It’s different. LM can’t, because of their agreement with Microsoft, sell it as anything but a training tool. What happens if MS decides to enforce their agreement?

XP11 and MSFS can be commercialized whatever the way MS and Laminar want. They own the IPs of their products.

Edited December 28, 20205 yr by ca_metal

43 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

What happens if MS decides to enforce their agreement?

They kind of did by creating MSFS.  Now none of the 3DPs want to touch P3D with a 10 foot pole, except for commercial contracts.

Edited December 28, 20205 yr by marsman2020

44 minutes ago, marsman2020 said:

They kind of did by creating MSFS.  Now none of the 3DPs want to touch P3D with a 10 foot pole, except for commercial contracts.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

1 hour ago, ca_metal said:

It’s different. LM can’t, because of their agreement with Microsoft, sell it as anything but a training tool. What happens if MS decides to enforce their agreement?

XP11 and MSFS can be commercialized whatever the way MS and Laminar want. They own the IPs of their products.

That is what I wrote "under license of not selling it as entertaining product" I understand that. However, how may P3D using academic license use P3D as training tool? That what I was pointed out license vs usage.

2 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

Something definitely fishy here. Imagine Elon Mask would say "I can't share anymore details on Space X because my marketing department said so!" LOL Frankly this is ridiculous whatever explanations we can find!  

 

I just saw recent Mathijs quote ". MFS is a entertainment product. Without any aims to be factor in the serious training platform. They never claimed that, they never said anything like that. " It sounds there is some rift with Asobo.

Now, marketing department must know that not sharing information just create more rumors and uncertainty. That is exactly what happening!  

 

 

Its a joke and I'm not convinced it has anything to do Asobo, could just be the real big cheese's telling Mr M what they want, like when they told him to stop the A320 and put everyone on the A330 Mr M wanted them say on the A320, the big boys wanted another produced to sell. Now it seems the big boys have stepped in again.

Who know really but none of this is a surprise. But given Mr m has seemed to do nothing but praise Asobo I don't see them now getting upset at AS, that's why I think it could be just the big boys at AS.

Edited December 28, 20205 yr by Nyxx

1 hour ago, Chapstick said:

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Oh, I must have been dreaming when I saw numerous major third party developers saying that their sales of P3D addons are way down and that there may not be financial sense in continuing to produce new ones beyond a handful of products already at a high level of completion, or minor updates.

39 minutes ago, marsman2020 said:

Oh, I must have been dreaming when I saw numerous major third party developers saying that their sales of P3D addons are way down and that there may not be financial sense in continuing to produce new ones beyond a handful of products already at a high level of completion, or minor updates.

Scenery and aircraft are still being made for P3D. Why would you lie about such a basic fact lmao

Hes preparing the crowd for a nice looking seriously limited disappointment. Why do people think PMDG delayed any releases for MSFS? 

36 minutes ago, wiler said:

Hes preparing the crowd for a nice looking seriously limited disappointment. Why do people think PMDG delayed any releases for MSFS? 

I would add that it is not only PMDG...

Richard.

1 hour ago, wiler said:

Hes preparing the crowd for a nice looking seriously limited disappointment. Why do people think PMDG delayed any releases for MSFS? 

Because they don't have the SDK tools yet to port over their code but from what I've read that doesn't mean the SDK doesn't have all the features yet to build something complex using the new tools.