Another developer admits sales are falling for legacy sims

[Dillon 2,197]

Although the article covers what we all know overall with FS2020 at the bottom Airplane Heaven is the latest to say P3D/FSX sales are in the tank.  This along with Aerosoft's previous report on the subject is interesting. I wonder is this the case with XPlane add-on sales as well?  The reason why I ask is although FS2020 is far from perfect it's still the latest generation as far as technology goes.  XPlane for years has been a holdout with many advancements in favor of flight dynamics alone (ATC, weather, AI, etc has not been given the attention of the FS serious).  I highly doubt Laminar will changed direction and bring XPlane somewhat up to FS2020 standards.  DCS by contrast has done a wonderful job with their latest sim update.  Anything less is rapidly going by way of the Dodo Bird which is a good thing as it forces competition to step up.  I for one would like to return to the day of reasonable competition should Microsoft do something crazy like we've seen in the past.  On par competition (Lockheed, AeroflyFS) gives the community options as I feel the cloud thing is not working in our best interest (forced updates breaking the sim each month, stealth features changed that weren't reported on the change list, no way to get around forced updates, and it's impossible for the community to fully enjoy the sim without an internet connection to Microsoft).  I'm pretty sure a monthly charge is down the road.  Should Microsoft get crazy in some form or fashion we'd have next gen sim options to roll over to versus the cartoon options we have now.  Our add-on developers without missing a beat can keep making money on different platforms no matter what one decides to do.

 FlightSim.Com - Aeroplane Heaven Describes Issues With MSFS 2020 Development

Edited April 20, 2021 by Dillon

[Gazzareth 808]

Interesting to hear it, although suspected as much considering how much busier the MSFS forum is than the p3d forum.

Well that, and the fact that all of a sudden flight sim hardware is as rare as rocking horse excrement!...

G

[hansb57 493]

This sounds like the story of the fax, you made a great machine and now it's over.  I'm very sorry for developers who lose their income and I move on.

 

[andyjohnston.net 617]

You do have to have an internet connection, but MSFS is so much better.  I'm jumping around in South America right now, seeing all sorts of little places I'd have never visited in FSX or previous.

[Gilandred 690]

I love how they start the article with “it’s often easier to blame the sim for it’s shortcomings”, then proceeds to use the full article to complain about it’s shortcomings.

[bean_sprout 1,201]

1 hour ago, hansb57 said:

This sounds like the story of the fax, you made a great machine and now it's over.  I'm very sorry for developers who lose their income and I move on.

 

I've seen it many many times.  But I don't consider it sad.  Opposite.

g'day

bs

[himmelhorse 1,276]

Hello all,

From my point of view, I have not bought a single MSFS addon. I have bought 3 aircraft and xEnviro for Xplane and 2 aircraft for P3D. I have considered the Aerosoft CRJ and was about to pull the trigger, when the latest update/setback arrived.  That is on pause too. (No specific Key mapping required for that LOL)

I would also like to state that, as far as I am concerned, MSFS has the  single advantage is the scenery aspect. The other platforms have the advantages of stability, flight modelling and better aircraft generally. I admit, that this is comparing apples to Chryslers Jeeps though, and is because they are at  very different stages of development ie, MSFS is comparatively new.

Another thing I have to admit is that MSFS is currently mothballed, in my case, because of performance issues, which will eventually be resolved to be replaced, in line with current MS/Asobo tradition, of breaking something else with the next update.  Please do not misunderstand me. I still love the MSFS concept and the scenery is great or at the very least, much better than even most addon scenery in the other platforms. Nor am I abandoning this platform on a permanent basis.  I am just temporarily sated with frustration over the amount of time fixing previously working bits after each update. This will eventually stop, I am quite sure, but in the meantime, I do need a break. Stability, for me is a HUGE thing and after suffering through nearly thirty years of problems with all the other platforms, I would prefer, at least temporarily to just enjoy what I have.  This is not to say that I expect, or expected anything different with MSFS.  If I can forgive the other platforms for the grief inflicted during their attainment of maturity, then it is grossly unfair to not do the same for MSFS. 

However, I do not seem to remember the same degree of consistency with the other platforms, of breaking something else whilst fixing other bits with updates. If there is one thing MSFS have achieved, it has been incredible consistency in this aspect.

I am actually quite surprised that people are flocking to the addon market for MSFS, particularly in the scenery areas. That is because the scenery, whilst fairly outdated in Australias" case, is still on the upside of excellent. The aircraft are a different story though, and, paying due homage, to FBW, Rob Young (surprisingly quiet at the moment) and Working Title as obvious exceptions, there is a huge need tor Developers to get stuck in to this side of the platform.  

Weather is great, when it is working properly, but default ATC is something else that is woeful, bearing in mind that there are Developers who have already released for this platform, and I will definitely be buying into this aspect when things are sorted out with MSFS.

I would also very much like to see the sensitivity of controllers worked on in the very near term.  I have aircraft crabbing sideways on the runway with the slightest movement of rudder, and have spent hours trying to sort that out.  (another story)

I guess with all the above, I am bucking the trend with regard to addons, I just wonder how many are following the same pattern.  I, for one, do not want to see either P3D or XPlane add on developers suffer because of MSFS. I firmly believe that there is very much room for the platforms we have now. I can understand anyone who chooses to adopt one and one only, platform to follow due to the financial aspects, however, with the addons already purchased for P3D and XPlane, there is not a huge amount of financial input required to keep these platforms entertaining.

Regards

Tony

 

[Bobsk8 12,690]

With all the issues and hassles with MSFS, going back to either P3D or XP is not something that I will ever do. MSFS has me spoiled now. 

[bean_sprout 1,201]

49 minutes ago, himmelhorse said:

I would also like to state that, as far as I am concerned, MSFS has the  single advantage is the scenery aspect. The other platforms have the advantages of stability, flight modelling and better aircraft generally.

For how long is the question.  2 weeks? 🙏

Also it'd be a waste on modern hardware.

regards

bs

Edited April 20, 2021 by bean_sprout

[himmelhorse 1,276]

15 minutes ago, bean_sprout said:

For how long is the question.  2 weeks? 🙏

regards

bs

I am not quite sure where you are coming from here mate.

I believe that we all know that MSFS is the future. To believe that P3D or XPlane will get better graphics in two weeks or even two years is very subjective (unless you have some inside information about XPlane12 or an impending P3D update) Maybe I am reading this incorrectly.

Personally, I would love to see both of those platforms go to, or adopt, the same scenery concepts/levels as MSFS in the VERY short term. THAT, would be a very great equalizer in the scenery aspect.

Which ever way this pans out, the simmer is going to be the winner, and I do not have any problems with that.  I am happy to wait for MSFS to sort itself out and if that happens before I depart this mortal coil, I still win.

Tony

[edpatino 1,964]

3 hours ago, Dillon said:

Although the article covers what we all know overall with FS2020 at the bottom Airplane Heaven is the latest to say P3D/FSX sales are in the tank.

Nothing really new, even if we consider that MSFS is still in development.

On the other hand, I don't know how many good products that developer have released, to consider them as a good example of P3D/FSX sales drop.

 

[bean_sprout 1,201]

The transition to MSFS is already done IMO.  If you are talking about changing perceptions then that will take a while.

regards

bs

[flyforever 267]

While I understand  x-plane is a small company with limited resources, Lockheed is a very large, wealthy company--on par with Microsoft is some ways. For some reason, my impression is that P3D was on  a steady, but very slow course. Their development was just too slow, considering that they started with a fully functioning FSX. I suspect that the reason was mostly due to the fact that full motion military simulators emphasize more flight modeling and stability than scenery.  I am sure that if FS2020 had been developed by a smaller developer, it's possible that it would not have had such an immediate success in terms of market share, despite a semi finished sim. We should be happy, though. Dovetail showed us that only a very large company can pull off a new flight sim project.

Edited April 21, 2021 by flyforever

[Chock 17,769]

3 hours ago, edpatino said:

Nothing really new, even if we consider that MSFS is still in development.

On the other hand, I don't know how many good products that developer have released, to consider them as a good example of P3D/FSX sales drop.

 

Aeroplane Heaven is one of the most prolific FSX/P3D developers there is. They've averaged producing three flight sim aeroplanes every year, over the past two decades, which of course adds up to around sixty products in total. So they're probably as well-placed as any other developer, and possibly moreso than most given how much they have made, to express how things have changed.

It is worth bearing in mind however, that the thrust of their comments on this subject were less in the nature of whining for the sake of it and more aimed at keeping their customers up to date on why their Spitfire Mark 1 is taking a while to make it out of the door and also why some of their P3D products are being affected by the limited number of staff they have when many of them are working on finding ways around the limitations MSFS is imposing on their desire to include certain features.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Chock

[sd_flyer 6,040]

I left P3D because my experience was ruined by multiple CTD and it was very frustrating . Also there were a lot of micro-stutters. So vanilla XP11 was great in that respect and super smooth initially ...until one day  it didn’t . As XP11 evolved so are CTD, especially during long haul. The only difference  between P3D and XP11, XP would give you an  exception and log file. So sometimes you can find a “guilty party” and uninstall it   Also many XP developers implemented recovery system to release flight after crash and continue.   Which was nice but also was prove that CTD is very normal side effect of Laminar .
 

My experience in MSFS is bumpy ride, yet I have less CTDs then in XP11 or P3D. In fact 99.9% in FBW 32x or Aerosoft CRJ are pretty much CTD free! Yes MSFS lack significant amount of complex aircraft comparing with XP11 or P3D and system depth for now. But as far as flight modeling compression better I’d say hard NO. Each platform has stronger and weaker side but none of them (MSFS, P3D, XP11) are significantly better than another. And YES I’d rather have imperfect flight model with nice scenery ! So here I’m 🙂