Strong sales of CRJ may lead holdout devs to prioritize MSFS

[Mace 1,753]

13 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

 PMDG changed their heart 

Well, by coincidence, the 777 just released...now PMDG can focus on the 737 product for MSFS...

[Concodroid 84]

3 hours ago, ADamiani said:

 

I believe that a Forum should be that place where people exchange experiences: good and bad. You will never convince me that I should choose a team and call idiots the "others". There are no "others": we are all here for a passion that keeps us together and makes us very much alike.

Call me a romantic, but I think that  repeating this simple concept is not useless at all.

 

That isn't what I meant - the idea I was referencing was the existence of the word not allowed / girl (Fanpeople?) crowd in MSFS that believe it can have no issues, and I was stating that it existed in every group, and that calling it out didn't lead anywhere as it isn't a MSFS-only thing. These people always find something to latch on to, and claim it does no wrong, and to quote myself here,

"...it's the same story with mac vs windows, xbox vs playstation, IOS vs android, etc. This is by no means MSFS specific, so saying it... well, doesn't really mean much, in the end."

As for "I believe that a Forum should be that place where people exchange experiences: good and bad.", of course. There are pros and cons to every flight simulator, and one person might value systems, while another values realism, while yet another values graphics. Each has a very valid claim. The issues arise when, say, a Systems guy complains about how bad the systems are, the realism guy says "ehh, it's default aircraft", and the graphics guy goes "why would you care about systems"? (full disclosure, I'm probably a graphics guy)

[FPStewy 538]

On 3/21/2021 at 11:27 AM, abrams_tank said:

I suspect more and more 3^rd party aircraft developers will  start to prioritize making aircraft for MSFS

What devs are realizing is that if you can put a Max or a Virtual on the market and sell it like hot cakes then you can sell nearly anything.

[bobcat999 7,758]

I never knew there was a three engine version? 

 

[ADamiani 470]

1 hour ago, Concodroid said:

............ (full disclosure, I'm probably a graphics guy)

I am a mathematician, so I should go for models and technicalities, but let's face it, graphics are important.

A.

[threegreen 2,592]

16 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

They said that and then last fall, they decided to switch their priority to P3D products again and shelve their work on MSFS (at least the way I read that comment implied that they would shelve their efforts on MSFS indefinitely). You can go to the PMDG forums and search for that comment from last fall.

The fact that now they are resuming their efforts on an airliner for MSFS and even prioritizing it is almost a 180 degree turn from their comments last fall.

No, it's not a 180 or anything like it. This is a common misconception. What they actually said last summer and late last year is that MSFS development (NG3) has been slower than anticipated and that the SDK at that time lacked parts they need/want to develop their aircraft for the simulator. Development for MSFS (NG3) has never stopped and was never shelved and they never moaned, as some other people like to put it, about an SDK and/or a simulator that don't support complex aircraft. In fact, they were among the first two aircraft developers (together with Aerosoft I believe) to announce they would bring their entire catalog to MSFS.

What they exactly do developing their own aircraft is obviously not public knowledge, which is why I don't think it's much of an argument to say other developers are saying the SDK allows for complex aircraft, because, while that is certainly true, a different developer can still have their own ways of developing their aircraft. An SDK suitable for one developer doesn't mean it's perfectly suitable for another; the reasons can range from tech stuff to business strategy.

The timing of the recent development update on their forums is indeed 'in time' for the CRJ release. However, the 777 update and the 200ER expansion had been planned and in the works for some time. Given this and the development for MSFS being slower than anticipated there is no surprise, in my view, that P3D development appears to have been prioritized.

Now the 777 update and expansion have been released and the post-release work has largely been finished as well, which naturally shifts the focus back to other things. Given months have passed and, as they said, they keep communicating closely with both Asobo and Aerosoft, who already got their first product for MSFS out the door, I don't think it's unreasonable to take what they said in the latest update at face value; that they received input and help to clear obstacles while the SDK matured further.

Edited March 22, 2021 by threegreen

[FlyBaby 659]

15 hours ago, tweekz said:

XP12 won't beat MSFS on the graphics / scenery part - even if they do some things better, it's still about the same level and XP is late to that party.

XPs PC platform is late to the party in many ways like dev collaboration, community engagement, and additional revenue stream (MSFS store) to fund ongoing "frequent" developement.

With respect to the thread topic, as more and more 3PDevs focus on MSFS, XP loses   its legs as the addon development disappears along with the user base needed to fund core development.

LR has yet to announced features and a release date for X12; and MSFS is stepping further...and further ahead each month or so.

 

Edited March 23, 2021 by FlyBaby

[harrry 322]

It seems to me that no sensible developer would release on a platform that was constantly changing.  Maybe the sim has reached a stage where a degree of stability is considered to have been achieved.

Edited March 23, 2021 by harrry

[Chock 17,765]

20 minutes ago, harrry said:

It seems to me that no sensible developer would release on a platform that was constantly changing.  Maybe the sim has reached a stage where a degree of stability is considered to have been achieved.

That used to be the problem with XPlane, for a long time it was a moving target, and that really curtailed the development of more complex aeroplanes for it. Ironically, when they stopped drastically messing about with it all the time, one of the first comparatively complex aeroplanes which came out for XPlane 10, was a CRJ, from Aerosoft.

[MatthewS 761]

18 hours ago, MarkW said:

I think the problem with this approach for PMDG is the effectiveness of getting those lite sales to upgrade to the full version.  Lets say they sell 100,000 versions of a 737 lite for $60. It does the basics very well but no failures and no link to their upcoming Global Flight Ops.  Now wait 6 months or a year and they release the full version and ask for another $80.  I would bet that a lot of the original purchasers of the lite version will not upgrade.  Alternatively if they release the full version for $139 they may not get 100,000 copies sold but they are still better off if they get a portion of those sales at full price.

Really?

So you're saying PMDG should just shrug off a potential $600,000 in quick/easy revenue from a "lite" version and instead put all their eggs into the "full version" basket at $139, that might be another 2 years off?

Seems to me PMDG already have done 90% of the 3D modelling work (ie for P3D) and could reuse/adapt all that work and get a "lite" version out the door in 3 months. Of course, maybe MSFS has changed everything and they need to start from scratch, but I don't think so.

Global Flight Ops, is that ever coming out? I lost interest years ago....

Edited March 23, 2021 by MatthewS

[abrams_tank 6,794]

9 hours ago, threegreen said:

No, it's not a 180 or anything like it. This is a common misconception. What they actually said last summer and late last year is that MSFS development (NG3) has been slower than anticipated and that the SDK at that time lacked parts they need/want to develop their aircraft for the simulator. Development for MSFS (NG3) has never stopped and was never shelved and they never moaned, as some other people like to put it, about an SDK and/or a simulator that don't support complex aircraft. In fact, they were among the first two aircraft developers (together with Aerosoft I believe) to announce they would bring their entire catalog to MSFS.

What they exactly do developing their own aircraft is obviously not public knowledge, which is why I don't think it's much of an argument to say other developers are saying the SDK allows for complex aircraft, because, while that is certainly true, a different developer can still have their own ways of developing their aircraft. An SDK suitable for one developer doesn't mean it's perfectly suitable for another; the reasons can range from tech stuff to business strategy.

PMDG specifically said last fall that they would prioritize their development resources to P3D products as they "awaited" the MSFS SDK to become more complete.  And yes, they did "moan" about the MSFS SDK. Much of the community, including AVSIM, believed PMDG, until the Working Title devs and FBW devs clarified that high fidelity aircraft can be created in MSFS, provided the developer uses new coding methodologies to interact with the MSFS SDK (ie. Javascript & HTML). 

You say, "a different developer can still have their own ways of developing their aircraft."  Yes, it's possible that PMDG didn't want to use the new coding methodology to develop their aircraft for MSFS but preferred their old methodology.  At the same time, $$$ has a way of changing people's minds.  It's also entirely possible that whatever hurdles were standing in the way, PMDG decided those hurdles could be overcome when they saw the $$$ that Aerosoft was banking from their sales of the CRJ.  This is all speculation of course.  But it's also within a normal behavior of a business.  Businesses all around the world change their minds in order to follow the $$$, this is nothing new. 

[MarkW 1,427]

5 hours ago, MatthewS said:

Really?

So you're saying PMDG should just shrug off a potential $600,000 in quick/easy revenue from a "lite" version and instead put all their eggs into the "full version" basket at $139, that might be another 2 years off?

Seems to me PMDG already have done 90% of the 3D modelling work (ie for P3D) and could reuse/adapt all that work and get a "lite" version out the door in 3 months. Of course, maybe MSFS has changed everything and they need to start from scratch, but I don't think so.

Global Flight Ops, is that ever coming out? I lost interest years ago....

Its up to PMDG to decide.  They are clearly not choosing the lite option so they must think the full priced and full version makes more sense.  Even if it is less financially beneficial part of their reason must be that they deliver the full sim experience and are positioned differently in the market to others.  I am sure they are not concerned at all about how long it takes, they know the sales will be there once they deliver product.

[threegreen 2,592]

12 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

PMDG specifically said last fall that they would prioritize their development resources to P3D products as they "awaited" the MSFS SDK to become more complete.  And yes, they did "moan" about the MSFS SDK. Much of the community, including AVSIM, believed PMDG, until the Working Title devs and FBW devs clarified that high fidelity aircraft can be created in MSFS, provided the developer uses new coding methodologies to interact with the MSFS SDK (ie. Javascript & HTML).

That's what I said. I replied to clear up the misconception that is floating around the community that they completely stopped development for MSFS because it wasn't possible to bring complex aircraft into the simulator, which isn't what they said. It seemed to me you were making that point earlier, hence my reply to you.

I agree with your second paragraph, obviously they will keep to wherever they can make profit. My point about this is that given their development roadmap during the last year or so it's no surprise I think that the priority was shifted at this point, with or without the CRJ being released. Of course the apparently high sales numbers of the first complex aircraft for MSFS will encourage that priority shift further, but, as I said, I think we would have seen the roadmap going in more or less the same direction anyway, since they made clear their intentions with regards to MSFS a long time ago and said they would accelerate MSFS development after the 777 release again, if I'm not mistaken.

In any case, we might see other complex aircraft sooner than originally anticipated, which is a good thing.

Edited March 23, 2021 by threegreen

[Concodroid 84]

On 3/22/2021 at 5:29 AM, MarkW said:

I think the problem with this approach for PMDG is the effectiveness of getting those lite sales to upgrade to the full version.  Lets say they sell 100,000 versions of a 737 lite for $60. It does the basics very well but no failures and no link to their upcoming Global Flight Ops.  Now wait 6 months or a year and they release the full version and ask for another $80.  I would bet that a lot of the original purchasers of the lite version will not upgrade.  Alternatively if they release the full version for $139 they may not get 100,000 copies sold but they are still better off if they get a portion of those sales at full price.

I'm not entirely sure what the player numbers of MSFS are - they're high, for sure - and based on pure guesswork, I'd say it's more profitable for a company to release a very good addon for 40 dollars, and have it sell like crazy, than to release a perfect addon for 140

[eslader 1,577]

15 minutes ago, Concodroid said:

I'm not entirely sure what the player numbers of MSFS are - they're high, for sure - and based on pure guesswork, I'd say it's more profitable for a company to release a very good addon for 40 dollars, and have it sell like crazy, than to release a perfect addon for 140

There's room for both. By your logic, Bentley should not exist. Very few people are going to buy a Bentley, but enough do that Bentley makes a lot of money at it. If Bentley started turning out Daewoos, yeah, more people would buy them, but there's a problem. Daewoo employees are paid less than Bentley employees. Bentley employees are better at their jobs than Daewoo employees. You'd be dedicating premium quality, and priced, labor at building cheap cars. Daewoo would make more profit selling Daewoo level cars than Bentley would because of that. 

It's why a law firm doesn't try to save money by having its lawyers clean the building. You don't want to be paying a lawyer $150 an hour to be a janitor when you could be paying a janitor $15 an hour or less to do it. You want that lawyer working on lawyer things that she can bill a client $600 an hour for. If you save money by not hiring a janitor, you gain $15 an hour, but lose $600 in income. That's a bad idea.

In other words, yes, PMDG could start churning out Carenado level jun...uh... Addons tomorrow. But they wouldn't make the kind of profits on such addons that Carenado does, because it's almost guaranteed that PMDG is paying their people more than Carenado -- else their people would work at Carenado, not be expected to produce as much, and get the same money. 

Plus, much as would happen if Bentley started making cheap cars, if PMDG started making cheap addons, their brand would be tarnished. I buy a new PMDG addon pretty much the minute it's released. They've built their brand such that I feel I can trust that I will be getting a quality addon. On the other hand, while I do grab the occasional Carenado, I wait until reviews come out, and I usually wait for them to be on sale. Carenado has also built a reputation and it means they don't get an automatic buy from me. PMDG would be foolish to chase such a reputation.

 

Edited March 24, 2021 by eslader