7 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

There is major 3rd party product for me on P3D : Leornardo, Majestic and PMDG. They all moving to MSFS.

No, they've said nothing about *moving* to MSFS.  They are expanding into it, not leaving one for the other.  Big difference. 

It'd be really premature to scuttle the successful product lines thay have in P3D, especially with so many problem areas still remaining in MSFS--lack of historical and enroute weather, AI traffic, ATC, flight dynamics, platform stability etc.  The casual VFR flyer can get by without all of that stuff...not so much the guys that pay top dollar for serious high fidelity aircraft add-ons.

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There are no plans for a MSFS version given supersonic flight is not currently possible in that sim.

I think this notion has been eliminated now- you can definitely build an airfile that allows more than mach 1, but the afterburner part is not properly modelled (just like the FSX/P3D version) 

1 minute ago, w6kd said:

No, they've said nothing about *moving* to MSFS.  They are expanding into it, not leaving one for the other.  Big difference. 

It'd be really premature to scuttle the successful product lines thay have in P3D, especially with so many problem areas still remaining in MSFS--lack of historical and enroute weather, AI traffic, ATC, flight dynamics, platform stability etc.  The casual VFR flyer can get by without all of that stuff...not so much the guys that pay top dollar for serious high fidelity aircraft add-ons.

Like I said before, things are moving fast on MSFS, SU4 is going to big step in the right direction. Stick around and see how things moves along. 

1 hour ago, simbol said:

This is because the assumption is, XP and P3D will remain the same with no changes forever.

The problem with XP is that LR has neither a willing partner nor the financial wherewithal to produce a sim with server-based orthoimagery. LM could probably pull that off but the financial incentive is not there for them with P3d since the they are not willing to enter the broader entertainment market. So both sims are in a slow, downward fadeout, just like FSX and AF 2. None of those four sims will ever disappear completely since each have a user base that is wedded to specific 3rd party add-ons.

32 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

Yes it could, but given the historic pace and cadence of P3D development, I'm not sure that I wouldn't be better betting on bitcoin at the moment!  Regardless, LM isn't going to go away, MSFS will continue to evolve, I have sufficient aircraft and scenery to last me a long time with P3D....so I just see 2 sims, one useable for me now, one not quite yet, but both with more potential to give me better experiences down the line. 👍

 

 

And what Asobo did was not fast either.. it took years.. the issue here is ROI (Return of Investment). So why would you create a new product for P3D where "potentially" you could take current scenery, 3D models, etc. improve them and get new sales in MSFS including people that already bought it for P3D? It is a no brainier..

At the same time, you could start a new project, let say a A350.. lots of people would buy it not matter what platform.. but that takes minimum 2-3 years if everything goes well. So what makes sense right now to start first to get your company going if you already have 3D modelling available? this is where PMDG is going, and also why we saw the nonsense Captaim sim did..

For a new project you need to choose for which platform you build it and the one where you get the most ROI.. in my view, everyone is doing new projects (when possible because the lack of a complete SDK) for MSFS because it will have exposure to Xbox and therefore there is potentially more customers available there.

P3D is still supported (is not abandoned) because it retains a considerable user base, but big projects / large projects at this point in time makes no sense for P3D given the cost to develop vs potential benefit. However this can change in the future, if XP / P3D improves, even if it is in the next 3 to 5 years, at which point why it cannot take back a big chunk of the market? after all the most compelling thing about MSFS is the looks, so what people would do if XP / P3D looks as close as theirs?  

The biggest mistake made by MS / Asobo was not delivering a complete SDK from the start.. if they did, there was no race here.. everyone would be jumping the train to their platform.. but now they are so overwhelmed with so many other tasks, that it will take them a very long time (years) to get their SDK to a level as per XP / P3D.. so it leaves a big gap inside MSFS,for example:  AI traffic, vast amount of 3rd party utilities, camera systems, weather, utilities for training platform, and many other topics and things that users that have used XP / P3D in one way or another always miss from MSFS. New users arriving directly at MSFS don't miss this and never will because they haven't experienced it.

The biggest interest right now for MSFS is airlines... after it will be the environment.. it gets boring after a while when you are flying to empty airports or to airports where the traffic around is irrelevant and not real.. or while the ATC is doing an appalling job, etc. then people come back to P3D / XP.. and like the environment but hate the looks.. it is a proper cluste f.. at the moment since people are finding themselves and will find themselves for a long time unable to find all they need in a single place. Now, of course new users to MSFS might don't even care, but are they airliners consumers? or VFR consumers? or scenery consumers? it is a hard stat to get hold at the moment.

As developer the waters are still cloudy... and everyone is trying to do the best they can to reach the other side of the pond and stay "alive". Simple as that... the future for everything is uncertain at the moment from this side of the coin.. We need another 2 years to really be able to predict where things will go.. so it is a question of "what I can do today" and gamble / shift.

S.

 

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

Like I said before, things are moving fast on MSFS, SU4 is going to big step in the right direction. Stick around and see how things moves along. 

I've been "sticking around" since it released.  Spent much of yesterday experimenting with it yet again...starting with a 73GB update (that must be fun for those folks on a 1Mbps or less internet connection) and then discovering that my control assignments were all gone and had to be redone.  There were improvements, yes...but it's still not ready for prime time.  The weather piece is especially problematic given that they have explicitly said they are not planning on exposing a weather interface so that third-party talent like the guys at Hifisim can improve things. 

Putting a PMDG tubeliner on a platform where you can't get enroute winds, an accurate destination weather forecast (in fact "live" weather still doesn't produce an accurate current weather observation), or even set visibility looks like a pretty underwhelming proposition. 

1 minute ago, jabloomf1230 said:

The problem with XP is that LR has neither a willing partner nor the financial wherewithal to produce a sim with server-based orthoimagery. LM could probably pull that off but the financial incentive is not there for them with P3d since the they are not willing to enter the broader entertainment market. So both sims are in a slow, downward fadeout, just like FSX and AF 2. None of those four sims will ever disappear completely since each have a user base that is wedded to specific 3rd party add-ons.

I disagree, if LM don't step up their game overtime.. they risk losing the commercial side of the business. Alongside with their company marketing, overall view, etc., This has many other repercussions beyond a flight sim user at home..  

I believe we will see a shift on their deliverable in the future. In my view they will react by either closing down or pushing harder.. but nothing in the middle, and so far I don't see them giving up. 

S.

15 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I've been "sticking around" since it released.  Spent much of yesterday experimenting with it yet again...starting with a 73GB update (that must be fun for those folks on a 1Mbps or less internet connection) and then discovering that my control assignments were all gone and had to be redone.  There were improvements, yes...but it's still not ready for prime time.  The weather piece is especially problematic given that they have explicitly said they are not planning on exposing a weather interface so that third-party talent like the guys at Hifisim can improve things. 

Putting a PMDG tubeliner on a platform where you can't get enroute winds, an accurate destination weather forecast (in fact "live" weather still doesn't produce an accurate current weather observation), or even set visibility looks like a pretty underwhelming proposition. 

SU4 was not about weather but Martial did say in a stream they are working on an overhaul of the weather system. It's not ready yet. I've already seen improvement in weather accuracy but it's one of these things that will always create controversy. You are right. Asobo doesn't want weather injection from 3rd party. I don't know if this is going to work out for them in the long run. Maybe they will change their mind but they are using something new which is Weather prediction instead of just Metar. It need some works for sure.  It's on their roadmap. 

Edited May 24, 20215 yr by fogboundturtle

36 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

The problem with XP is that LR has neither a willing partner nor the financial wherewithal to produce a sim with server-based orthoimagery. LM could probably pull that off but the financial incentive is not there for them with P3d since the they are not willing to enter the broader entertainment market. So both sims are in a slow, downward fadeout, just like FSX and AF 2. None of those four sims will ever disappear completely since each have a user base that is wedded to specific 3rd party add-ons.

LM's primary market--the professional training world, doesn't really care about artistic attractive orthoimagery.  The USAF and LM's other military/professional customers are using P3D as a tool in their pilot training programs, and a relative few of those deep-pocketed professional customers turns any user-count based economic comparison right up on its head.  And the value that LM and their customers see in P3D as just a component of the larger full-spectrum hardware+training+logistics packages that LM is selling goes beyond sales in dollars and cents. That P3D's retail user base is shrinking does not at all infer that P3D is "in a slow, downward fadeout."  Only the budgeteers and market strategists at LM know the answer to that question.

3 minutes ago, simbol said:

if LM don't step up their game overtime.. they risk losing the commercial side of the business.

I don't see that. The commercial training market doesn't rise and fall on beautiful orthoimagery. But even if its commercial market felt threatened, LM would likely have to partner with Google and probably go to a subscription-based approach. I suspect that the cost for everyone other than commercial users would be prohibitive.

I think what's more likely is someone like Google building a new flightsim around its orthoimagery and that isn't very likely.

28 minutes ago, kand said:

I think this notion has been eliminated now- you can definitely build an airfile that allows more than mach 1, but the afterburner part is not properly modelled (just like the FSX/P3D version) 

Has that be included in the list of changes for MSFS published by MS / Asobo?

Without reheats Concorde would not be capable of achieving Mach 2.02 and climbing to its ceiling of FL600. So, no reheats, no supersonic flight.

Just now, jabloomf1230 said:

I don't see that. The commercial training market doesn't rise and fall on beautiful orthoimagery. But even if its commercial market felt threatened, LM would likely have to partner with Google and probably go to a subscription-based approach. I suspect that the cost for everyone other than commercial users would be prohibitive.

I think what's more likely is someone like Google building a new flightsim around its orthoimagery and that isn't very likely.

It does.. Prosim for example is already moving to MSFS.. All it takes is some high end General having a meeting with MSFS where it is convince their AI intelligence cloud would provide better training grounds for their USAF pilots.. specially if they can use military satellite feeds.. you get the idea..

LM has to step up or their world will be sweep under their feet.

S.

2 hours ago, james42 said:

But of course, PMDG have made some promises to P3D users. 737-MAX, 777 VC update, etc, so I do hope that these projects don't get pushed aside like the promised JS41 update.      

 

See, RSR said a VC update will be coming for the P3D 777. I think he said by end of this year but I may not be correct on the timeline. I took note that he said Vin is working on the 777 VC for MSFS. RSR also said the way they develop for MSFS had to completely change from what they have done. So that leads me to think the VC 777 update cannot be ported from one platform to the next. So if they are working on the VC update for the 777 and MSFS, one could presume that the 777 VC update for P3D is on hold.

RSR can get away with saying they are not abandoning P3D but notice on the follow up post he makes zero mention of the P3D 777 VC update. He mentions the LNAV P3D update but strategically side steps saying anything about the 777 VC P3D update. I think while not abandoned,  delayed...for a long time. But hey, they got us to purchase the update and technically they didn't break their promise for a VC update. We are just going to have to wait a year or 8.

51 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

You guys sound really insecure. There is 2 millions possible customer on MSFS.

A gentle reminder you’re on the P3D forum. Telling people who love this sim they sound insecure is not the wisest of words. There are a wealth of reasons I and plenty of others are perfectly happy with this sim. Not having to download gigabytes of data for a flight is one obvious advantage.

It’s a mature product that continues to evolve and has a huge number of 3rd party addons.

Feel free to discuss the merits of MSFS on the MSFS forum. 😉

1 minute ago, B777ER said:

But hey, they got us to purchase the update and technically they didn't break their promise for a VC update. We are just going to have to wait a year or 8.

In fairness, the "update" was free if all you wanted/needed were the updates for the existing 772LR.  If you purchased the 772ER, then you got a new acft variant along some new stuff like the EFB.