4 hours ago, kaosfere said:

Matt's point was that a narrow niche stifles innovation.   He's not saying there is or isn't any currently -- he's saying that keeping things insular does little to encourage further innovation and keeps things stuffy and comfortable, but stagnant.

And I think it's self-evident:  prior to MSFS, when was the last truly new and innovative thing in flight simulation?   I've not been in the hobby as long as some of y'all, having only gotten seriously into it in the late 90s.   So my perspective is narrower than that of folks who note in their signature that they've been simming since the early 80s, but it's still pretty broad.   And I know in the time I've been involved there's been no real revolution that I've witnessed.   The ACES engine kept limping along, XPlane did its thing off on the side and its great and all, but even the much heralded flight model at its core is based on work that's over a century old.  It all felt like it was withering on the vine a bit.

I suppose one could say VR is pretty revolutionary, but even that is is just new, external tech being brought in, and it's relatively expensive and challenging, so has limited penetration.

MSFS has been a major breath of fresh air.   And it's imperfect and flawed, and messy and chaotic things are happening in a messy and chaotic time, but that alone is exciting and full of promise, even if some people are getting their cheese moved and don't like it.

I don't know what the future will bring.  But I know it's a lot more likely to bring something awesome and exciting if many thousands of new people are brought into the hobby through initial exposure to it on the XBox.  If even a fraction of one percent of those people go on to actually become serious flight sim developers, it will still be a large number relative to what's currently present in the field.  And that's great for everyone.

Innovation for what i saw from..FSII to now, for most parts come from 3rd party dev, rarely from the plateform itself (i speak for MS franchise, on XP, guys are really try to innovate). From a simulation point of view and not from a eye candy point a view, i don't see lot of innovation making simulation experience enhanced,  If we remove bing image and we compare P3D and MSFS during a "serious" flight, i'm not shure there will be more innovation than regression (yes, VR is an innovation ,only for FS franchise, the new flight model...it could give very good things in the future, i'm confident about it needs some works and dev need time to learn to use it). all the JS stuff are a progress compare to old xml way, i am more reserved about wasm (is it planned from the beginning or added after ? that looks like a wood leg added to fill a lack) and sandbox story.
(edit : i really love the weather engine, that's the innovation of this version !)
But i admit the product is young and we have to wait a little. i'm just a little bit disappointed for some points not really evolved and in the same time, we see new content. it is cool but why adding content on a plateform not totally stable (and doing so, adding some instability) ?. I have fun to use MSFS, really great fun, and just a few things could make it above all in quality, but i don't see these things coming, nor any will to do them, perhaps i have this feeling because all efforts are focused on the market, xbox and a very locked (to not say opaque) and controlled communication.
And last, from a user point of view, the dev part seems to be going all over the place without a real project management strategy and with faulty quality control (even if it is getting better last months). Maybe because people in charge did not have, younger, the dream of aviation nor the skills in this very particular area (while their skills in video games are not to be called into question, on the contrary).

Edited July 7, 20214 yr by nirgal76

1 hour ago, MattNischan said:

This is absolutely absurdism in the extreme. In the mirror I see someone who spent thousands of hours of their free time to craft a modification to a default plane downloaded by hundreds of thousands of users, enabled by the technology shift that MS and Asobo brought to the table. And not only was the project not shut down, despite using a ton of their own IP to drive it, it was completely enabled and indeed directly helped by the simulation developers themselves, and promoted, personally, by the publisher. In what universe is that being exclusionary!? When has this ever happened in the history of MSFS?

I don't see why you need to change the subject, and misconstrue my words in the process. No one has said you haven't spent your free time, no one said you haven't crafted a modification to a default plane, no one said hundreds of thousands of users didn't download it, no one said you didn't enable the technology shift brought by Microsoft and Asobo, no one said the project wasn't enabled or that it wasn't helped by the simulation developers, no one said it wasn't promoted, personally or otherwise, by the publisher. No one said any of that, so I do have to wonder why you brought all that up. I am not here to score brownie points or victim points or any other kind of points, and I would hope you would agree with that. So let's not throw red herrings at each other, as it's beneath us both.

What I have said (and I can only defend my words, not someone else's) is that the entity that is in charge of deciding which path FS2020 takes with regard to third party addons has decided that a whole slew of addons are no longer possible. In terms of what developers can create FS2020 has brought nothing new to the table. Sure, they have new ways of doing some things, ways which are in many respects better than what they had before (which is evidenced by the many, many people who have created addons for the first time), but every single addon that can be created for FS2020, can be created for P3D or for X-Plane. But the reverse is not true. There are quite a few addons which are very popular with P3D and X-Plane which can no longer be created in FS2020. And it's not because developers don't want to use the new toolset or use the new paradigms of FS2020, it's because the functionality does not exist to enable these addons, and the functionality is meant to not exist. You may argue that these addons are no longer necessary, or they're no longer desired, or that the problems they solved no longer exist, or that they were a pain to use. Sure, all that may be true. But it doesn't negate the fact that they are no longer possible.

Any way you look at it, FS2020 has restricted the possibilities of 3rd party developers and it is thus restricting their creativity. There may be more developers making more addons, but those addons do less things. And that's what the argument is about.

1 hour ago, MattNischan said:

Just because some people are salty about technology choices does not mean they get to paint with whatever brush they feel like.

Can the same not be said for you? Just because some people are salty about technology choices (such as using the Garmin Trainer to deliver a high fidelity recreation of a Garmin GPS unit), it does not mean they get to pain with whatever brush they feel like.

1 hour ago, MattNischan said:

Look, I understand it ruffles people's feathers, especially here at Avsim, but I've been a simmer for nearly 30 years. It's not a big community, and a lot of that has to do with attitude. I've seen the same people over and over for a good chunk of those three decades, and frankly, the scene was incredibly stagnant. Sure, people were still developing stuff, but never before have I actually seen this level of normal, non-elite-simmer and casual hobbyist dev excitement. And yet still, somehow, people can still decide that's a _bad_ thing.

Couple of problems with that:

1. Sure, people had attitude. Sure, the community was small. But at no point was there any kind of authority saying "you cannot develop this". The sims were as open as they could be, especially X-Plane, the files were readily accessible to everyone, and anyone was free to develop whatever kind of addon they wanted, and they could sell it on the market platform of their choice, despite other people grumbling about it. But now we have Microsoft deliberately closing off parts of the sim. They have created the de-facto marketplace for FS2020, one marketplace to rule them all, and they're the gatekeepers, telling developers what they can and can't sell. I'd rather have those grumbling old timers that I could safely ignore rather than a gatekeeper physically blocking development. But that's just me.

2. As I said above, yes, FS2020 has brought many people to the developing table, and that is a good thing. But making it impossible to inject weather in the sim, for example, is not a requirement for that. All these new developers aren't here because you restricted development freedom, they're here despite that. 

1 hour ago, MattNischan said:

When a single successful addon nets 10x the amount of sales as it used to, don't you think more devs are going to take risks, even on things that are more niche or hardcore? Of course they are. If a company makes triple what they expected on their casual market addon, don't you think that will provide good funding for their passion project?

Sure, but I don't see what this has to do with any of the points I made. There was no need to restrict access to the sim's core in order to achieve this. In fact, had you not restricted access, maybe we'd have even more developers around.

Look, as has been said above, please don't try to misconstrue my words. Please stay on topic. Listing your achievements, whilst they are commendable, undeniable, and have had a positive effect on the community, has nothing to do with the argument put forth. I never said there hasn't been an increase in developers, or in users. I never said the new technologies being introduced are bad. What I said is that the undeniable truth is that FS2020 has limited the realm of possibility for addon developers. HiFi Simulations and RXP are but two examples of this. Until such time that developers can do in FS2020 what they used to do in P3D that remains a fact. And as I keep repeating, I am strictly referring to what they did, not how they did it. Don't make this about DLLs vs WASM, cause it has nothing to do with that.

Edited July 7, 20214 yr by Cristi_Neagu

43 minutes ago, Cristi_Neagu said:

What I said is that the undeniable truth is that FS2020 has limited the realm of possibility for addon developers. HiFi Simulations and RXP are but two examples of this.

Yes.  Microsoft replaced the 67 Chevy with an all electric hovercraft and people who used to make money selling/designing wheels and gasoline engine parts/gauges have to find new things to do.

I myself can no longer design clouds and skies.  So now I make Guajillo sauces and bake bread.

and play a really cool new flightsim.

and Im glad Matt pointed out his contribution because that was my thought too when 'no innovation' was brought up.  just my .02

FS2020 has restricted the possibilities of 3rd party developers and it is thus restricting their creativity

 

Ok but no offense to the developers shut out but who exactly promised any developer complete unrestricted access and possibilities similar to P3D? . Make me understand why MS MUST grant access to aspects of the sim they choose to develop in house without or with restricted 3rd party participation. Im not asking just to make anyone angry.  Im just asking so i can understand why its that much of a big deal if MS/ASOBO says something along the lines of "We prefer to handle the weather aspect of the sim among Meteoblue and ourselves or the nav systems with  Garmin/WT and ourselves for now.

If i was a 3rd party developer locked out of my area of expertise on this platform yes i would feel hard done but did MS ever promise that these aspects would be open for 3rd party development in the first place? Isnt it their creation after all? I am sure some third party developers are excellent at what they do and leaving them out is going to be detrimental to certain users of the platform but at the end of the day the creators will have to recon with their decisions.

I know it affects developers because as an example REX meteo based weather is accurate but without the seamless weather transitions i wouldn't be touching it for weather. There may be a possible contractual/legal restriction in regards to access to Metoblue's servers that we dont know about or the "sausage making" aspect of the weather sits on Azure and i highly doubt MS would allow access for REX or any developer to tie into that. 

However it appears they simply made the best of it and have tried their hand at something else (environment textures) which i may consider and i consider creative.

I guess the thing is.. Advocate for your cause but don't let it blind you to the point where you cannot see other opportunities available whether its on this platform or something else.

Just my opinion. Not intended to make anyone angry or take any sides.

 

Edited July 7, 20214 yr by Maxis

11 minutes ago, kaosfere said:

Sometimes I think we need a dedicated safe space here for all the "oh god my favorite feature doesn't work it's awful how can you people live with yourselves?!" victimized flight sim snowflakes to hang out in.  Then they won't have to deal with the adversity and disappointment of people having fun while they're busy trying to be bitter and angry about how big bad Microsoft and Asobo are ignoring and repressing them.

Sometimes I think we need a dedicated safe space here for all the "oh god FS2020 is the best thing ever and it does no wrong and it's the most perfectest perfect thing ever, how can others live without it!?" victimized flight sim snowflakes to hang out in. Then they won't have to deal with the adversity and disappointment of people pointing out that all is not right with FS2020 and that the emperor hasn't got any clothes on.

I can also treat this with the same level of casual irreverence. Or, you know, maybe we can stick to the actual argument. But sure, throwing around unwarranted insults is fun, albeit less educational. We can do that too, I suppose. It's fine with me. I mean, I'm just some nobody. I don't represent a major decision maker involved with FS2020 or Microsoft, I'm not a public figure for any company, so I suppose I don't have to be as careful with what I say and how I say it.

Oh, and before you say that my mock quote above does not in any way represent what your opinion is, I would like to point out that your mock quote above also doesn't represent my opinion, and this has not stopped you from making it.

9 minutes ago, Maxis said:

Ok but no offense to the developers shut out but who exactly promised any developer complete unrestricted access and possibilities similar to P3D?

This has started as a response to people claiming that FS2020 provides a less exclusivist environment for developers, whereas P3D and X-Plane were very elitist. So this is in response to those claims, and I believe that it is pretty obvious that the range of possible addons has been restricted compares to P3D and X-Plane. As I have said above, it can be argued that those addons aren't necessary, or desired, or feasible, but that's besides the point. The fact that you cannot make the equivalent of ActiveSky in FS2020 means that choice is now limited. And while it cannot be denied that what Microsoft, Asobo, and WT have done has enabled a lot more developers to start producing addons (which, despite the fact that this does lower the average quality of addons, I am convinced is a good thing), the range of addons is limited. We get more content, but there's less variation.

What's more, Microsoft have centralized the market in one place. Before there were a bunch of stores, and all of them were pretty much equal. If for some reason you couldn't sell on one store, no worries, there's another just as good. But now Microsoft's store is where it's at. That is the place to be, especially when FS2020 arrives on the Xbox and that is the sole place where you can buy addons. And Microsoft set the rules for what you can and cannot sell on there. Is it still the case that you cannot sell any addon that depicts guns? I would also argue that this is a much more elitist and exclusivist environment that ever before.

Again, you can argue that these things are good, that they're better, that they make sense. My argument has nothing to do with any of that. I am not saying that it's a good or bad thing. I am saying it's a thing, nothing more, nothing less.

15 minutes ago, Maxis said:

Make me understand why MS MUST grant access to aspects of the sim they choose to develop in house without or with restricted 3rd party participation.

Why should I? I made no such claim. In fact, I made it pretty clear that if Microsoft wants to completely close down access to developers, that's their choice. Please read my posts with more care.

2 hours ago, sightseer said:

Microsoft replaced the 67 Chevy with an all electric hovercraft

Apt description, considering an electric hovercraft doesn't have the range, speed, comfort, capacity of a Chevy, and no person in their right mind would pick an electric hovercraft as their daily driver. And It would be fine if those developers couldn't sell tires and gasoline anymore were it not for the fact that we have had several people here claiming that despite this electric hovercraft not having tyres or needing any fuel, developers can sell more things than ever before.

3 hours ago, Cristi_Neagu said:

Look, as has been said above, please don't try to misconstrue my words. Please stay on topic.

I didn't misconstrue them, I quoted them. You replied directly to me, asking those who claim that the culture is exclusionary to look in the mirror. So I did.

Look, I don't know why you always have a bone to pick with me, or why you feel the need to always paint me in a negative and conspiratorial way, but the truth is, every platform has it's limitations. I can't do whatever I want on any platform. I can't make JS instruments in X-Plane. Previously I couldn't code in 64bit on P3D. SimConnect in C# isn't a first class citizen compared to native on FSX or P3D. Is X-Plane now blocking me, or P3D, or FSX, because my technology of choice isn't available? Of course not. So, if X-Plane was the dominant platform, I would use the technologies that _are_ available to do what I want. Trying to place me as some kind of goonish caricature doesn't change my goal: to enable as many developers as possible, within the platform limitations. And it's a goal I intend to continue. You only need ask the numerous developers I personally talk to daily: not even huge 3PDs, just folks that ask me questions or DM me on our Discord. And you know what? I take the time out of my day, every time, to try and answer their queries, because no matter who they are, they deserve it, and the platform needs to grow. I ultimately believe extremely strongly in being positive, humble, and forward looking, and I just can't get behind the negative rhetoric.

But some technology decisions are made and won't be unmade no matter what, and the reality is that if those 3PDs who rail and rail had just started working within the platform to build something great instead of against it, on day one, they'd be making sales already. The reality is that nobody prevents any dev from selling elsewhere. PMDG isn't on the Marketplace, they don't seem too upset about it. If you use the tech that the platform provides (just like every other platform in simulator history), then you can build things. It's that simple.

I wish you nothing but the best, but I don't plan on engaging you on this or any other topic further. You and I have covered all the ground we can cover, multiple times over.

-Matt

Wow ..Being told to read your post with more care is laughable considering. My question was NOT based on something specific you wrote. I simply asked for you to make me understand. Because you seem to be VERY concerned about the plight of locked out developers. I twice stated that there was no malice in the question. But apparently you either misread or mis interpreted my intentions yourself. While completely not commenting on the second part of my post. But it is what it is and none of us are at the decision making table to influence the powers that be.

So i will leave you to advocate.. while at the same time pretending to not advocate. while writing walls of txt and effecting no change.

Will also take a q from Matt and not comment any further..

The thread was about Xbox after all.

Cheers and have a good one.

 

Edited July 8, 20214 yr by Maxis

On 7/5/2021 at 2:47 PM, Matheus Vallim said:

anyone here aiming to move to xbox? What are your expectations?

 

I don't need to do this but I do want to buy a Xbox (series X?) just to experience what it's like to run MSFS on a console for the first time ever! This is the first time in history the MSFS series will be running on a console and I wanna be a part of it.

On 7/5/2021 at 6:26 PM, wim123 said:

there is much more to do on xbox, like builders, farmsim, racing games

Yeah, it's almost as if this "video-game" is something people can "do" on Xbox (One and Series X): https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/p/kerbal-space-program-enhanced-edition/brbd7bdk271p?activetab=pivot:overviewtab

And it's almost as if kids at NASA and quite a few universities "play" this "game" for entertainment:

https://www.space.com/kerbal-space-program-nasa-spacex-crew-dragon-challenge.html

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/gamers-tackle-virtual-asteroid-sampling-mission

Minecraft in space: why Nasa is embracing Kerbal Space Program
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/22/kerbal-space-program-why-nasa-minecraft

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/329196521314713601

To give students this hands-on application experience, Montgomery County Community College and Assistant Math Professor Christopher Scott Vaughen used the Kerbal Space Program – a space flight simulation video game – as a pilot program called the Kerbal Math & Physics Lab during the 2020 fall semester
https://www.mc3.edu/news/2021/01/kerbal-math-physics-lab

https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/ac7dyi/do_schools_use_ksp_to_teach_students/

How Kerbal Space Program Puts The Fun Into Astrophysics https://www.teachwire.net/news/the-stars-my-destination-how-kerbal-space-program-puts-the-fun-into-astroph

KSP At The University Of Adelaide https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/129692-ksp-at-the-university-of-adelaide/

https://www.commonsense.org/education/game/kerbal-space-program

https://www.studiosity.com/blog/surprisingly-educational-games-kerbal-space-program