Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RobJC

What would it take for LR and/or LM to win your money back?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

So as some one who studied business as my major and my degree (I also run my business), you spend every day studying business case studies day in and day out.  I view MSFS vs X-Plane/P3D as another case study that I would have studied back when I was studying business for my major.  I can say this since it is an obvious fact: if X-Plane and P3D had modern graphics (like MSFS does now) and also modeled the entire world with accurate satellite & photogrammetry (plus the conversion of 2D satellite to 3D by a company like Blackshark AI), Microsoft & Asobo would have looked at X-Plane and P3D and told themselves it's a waste of money trying to compete against X-Plane and P3D.

Companies are out there to make money and if Microsoft & Asobo viewed the competition as too high, they would have just moved on to another project that could make them money, rather than lose money on developing MSFS.  The fact that Microsoft & Asobo looked at the home flight simulation market, and realized how far behind the technology was in P3D and X-Plane, they came to the conclusion that they could make a modern flight simulator like MSFS and take market share away from P3D and X-Plane.

This is a fact that Microsoft saw a business opening in the home flight simulation market for PC.  That opening shouldn't have been there in the first place if P3D and X-Plane were using modern graphics and was covering the entire world with accurate satellite & photogrammetry.  

In the last 10 years of flight simulation in the home market, P3D and X-Plane barely moved the ball forward.  P3D and X-Plane, at most, moved the ball forward by a few yards in the last 10 years.  Microsoft & Asobo come in, and they punt the ball 90 yards down the field, rather than the few yards that P3D and X-Plane managed to moved over the last 10 years.

I can't teach Austin how to run his own business since he knows best how to run it.  I can say though that Austin and LM left Microsoft an opening to enter the home flight simulation market, which is pretty obvious by now.

This is a good post. I guess that is my fascination. It looks on the surface like check mate in the consumer flight sim market for LM and LR, but is it? Could there be a series of moves by these two companies to get them back in the game? Sure they have a user base, but that user base is cracking, and the 3rd party developers have mostly jumped ship. And with every release of new add-ons the cracks get larger. When PMDG, Fenix and others ship their products it will only be harder for LM/LR. So given all of this, what is the best move for these companies? They barely moved the ball, as you rightly point out, for a LONG TIME. This is the classic case of a company getting complacent. I have to think they are smart enough to know the situation they are in, so how to they get out of it? 

MSFS is not standing still either. Weather will get better. Traffic will get better. Visuals will get better. And...the onslaught of add-on aircraft (that is one of the only advantages P3D and XP hold currently) will be gone soon enough.

What is the best move for these companies? Tread water and hope that MS decides to pull the plug at some point? That isn't a strategy I would recommend.   

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

i9 10850K@5.1 GHz Water-cooled | 32GB 3200 RAM | RTX 3080 | 1TB M.2 SSD | 1440p LG 27GL850 G-Sync | Win10 x64 Home

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, mtaxp said:

More like wishful thinking, sorry to ruin it for you, last time I checked steam stats show that x-plane had a slight growth since MSFS released.

3rd party devs are as well claiming their sales on the platform are mostly untouched (unlike P3D) + even more developers are joining the x-plane eco system which currently has active developemnt of study level aircrafts that MSFS can only dream of for now; just to name a few: LEVELUP 737, FF777, FF787, TOLISS A340, INI A380, FELIS 747-200. 

Also professional contracts (this is where the true money in flight simulation really comes from, and not a random user on avsim pretending to be a737 captain) + millions of other customers on the mobile platform. The latter mobile category, just an FYI, has more users than all of MSFS's sales combined. 

All of this while everyone who uses XP11 is mostly waiting for 25.9 when the next major version is announced.

"Whose future appears to be dire" , massive LOL, at least you got 4 likes and some more confidence boost online, this forum is a bubble indeed, your opinion is a niche of a niche compared to real stats and numbers, I hope you get over it soon it seems like you really wanted it to happen.

Well, you'd hope they would have something to offer after all of these decades.  Stay tuned and see how it all shakes out in the next couple of years...

  • Like 2

Noel

System:  9900K@5.0gHz@1.215v all cores, MSI MPG Z390M GAMING EDGE AC, Noctua NH-D15S w/ steady supply of 40-60F ambient air intake, Corsair Vengeance 32Gb LPX 3200mHz DDR4, Sabrent NVMe 2Tb x 2, RTX 3080 Ti FE, Corsair RM 850W PSU, Win10 Pro, Dell curved 3440x1440, TCA Boeing Edition Yoke & TQ, Cessna Trim Wheel, 30 frames vSync to 60Hz.

 

Share this post


Link to post

I have not switched to MSFS, yet.  I tried it for a month last year, but the only thing I liked was the scenery.  I'm just waiting for it to mature and become more stable before I make the switch. 

If LM provided streaming satellite terrain and imagery-based rendering of 3D objects then I'd stick with it.

I think the core FSX/P3D simulator is actually pretty darn good.  It is stable, easy to work with, and has stood the test of time.  Marry that with the satellite terrain + accurate 3D objects and it would be a winner.

I know that LM can do this.  The question is: is it worth their time and money?  Is it really necessary for a mission simulator to have scenery like MSFS?  Only they can answer that.

Dave


Simulator: P3Dv5.3

System Specs: Intel i7 9700K 4.7GHz CPU, MSI Z390 Gaming Edge AC MB, 32GB DDR4 3600MHz RAM, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super video card, 2x 1TB Samsung 970 EVO SSDs, Windows 10 Home OS

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, RobJC said:

This is a good post. I guess that is my fascination. It looks on the surface like check mate in the consumer flight sim market for LM and LR, but is it? Could there be a series of moves by these two companies to get them back in the game? Sure they have a user base, but that user base is cracking, and the 3rd party developers have mostly jumped ship. And with every release of new add-ons the cracks get larger. When PMDG, Fenix and others ship their products it will only be harder for LM/LR. So given all of this, what is the best move for these companies? They barely moved the ball, as you rightly point out, for a LONG TIME. This is the classic case of a company getting complacent. I have to think they are smart enough to know the situation they are in, so how to they get out of it? 

MSFS is not standing still either. Weather will get better. Traffic will get better. Visuals will get better. And...the onslaught of add-on aircraft (that is one of the only advantages P3D and XP hold currently) will be gone soon enough.

What is the best move for these companies? Tread water and hope that MS decides to pull the plug at some point? That isn't a strategy I would recommend.   

I think both LM and LR can fall back to their commercial market.  LR is also targeting the mobile market, so let's see how that plays out.

I am guessing LM doesn't care too much about the home consumer market since P3D was never intended for the home consumer market anyways.  So LM may just keep their focus on the commercial market, and more home consumers will keep abandoning P3D.

For X-Plane , a comeback is possible for X-Plane 12.  However, there is a steep hill for X-Plane to climb in order to catch MSFS.  I don't know how Austin will do it but since I am interested in how businesses operate and I am also into flight simming, it will be interesting to see what Austin does up to the release of X-Plane 12 and what he will do after its release.

Edited by abrams_tank
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

i5-12400, RTX 3060 Ti, 32 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post

This thread is reminding me of the old Ford - Chevy arguments of the late 40s and early 50s and the HO versus N gauge model railroader arguments of not so long ago.

Noel

 

  • Like 1

The tires are worn.  The shocks are shot.  The steering is wobbly.  But the engine still runs fine.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Noel said:

Their main concern, which worked quite well for them pre-MSFS, is creating 'cockpit simulators' for people willing to falsely claim they are bonified aviation students in order to pay the $50 academic license fee for each of now 5 iterations, or $200 x 5 for the more honest among us.  

This is the classic denegration of 'real world graphics' into the poorly veiled derogetory descriptor of that as, 'eye candy', an inherently dismissive lable for real world scenery, lighting and atmospherics.  Perhaps for you flying thru landclass-based, completely inaccurate, can't tell where you really are, sometimes pretty, and always unreal environment that the expensive cockpit simulator offers.  Of course you can get your wallet out because absolutely everyone does to try to turn the 'cockpit simulator' into a real world flight simulator, and cough up another $1000 only to discover performance suffers immensely in the process--go ahead and fly that PMDG 737 NGXu into KSFO-HD in Orbx NCA w/ detail maxed and tell us how it all worked out...🤣

Sigh. I don't even know where to begin. Let's try the comment "...can't tell where you really are...". As an instrument-rated pilot in RL I always knew where I was. And, how about this " ...and always unreal environment that the expensive cockpit simulator offers." Ever sat in the left seat in a Level-D simulator? Maybe a 737 or 747? I thought not. Looking out the windscreen in one of those makes FS95 look good. And I've often flown the PMDG 737 into KSFO with ORBX NCA with all the details maxxed. And it worked out just fine. In fact, the ILS to 28L is my favorite approach. I'm just curious, how long have you been a RL pilot?

  • Upvote 1

Intel 10700K @ 5.1Ghz, Asus Hero Maximus motherboard, Noctua NH-U12A cooler, Corsair Vengeance Pro 32GB 3200 MHz RAM, RTX 2060 Super GPU, Cooler Master HAF 932 Tower, Thermaltake 1000W Toughpower PSU, Windows 10 Professional 64-Bit, 100TB of disk storage. Klaatu barada nickto.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

This is a fact that Microsoft saw a business opening in the home flight simulation market for PC.  That opening shouldn't have been there in the first place

Microsoft created that opening in the first place when they decided they'd disband ACES.  Which could happen again with another change in corporate direction.  This difference this time is that when they decide to decommission the MSFS server infrastructure we lose the best features of MSFS.  Microsoft has every intention to monetize MSFS as much as they can, and hopefully it's enough to cover the cost of both continued development as well as the infrastructure costs. If it doesn't then I personally hope they'd introduce a subscription fee to at least cover the streaming costs, instead of just abandoning the product.  


Brian W

KPAE

Share this post


Link to post

The funny thing is even if Microsoft closed up the MSFS shop today and withdrew scenery streaming it would still take the competition an age to catch up. 

  • Like 3

Specs: 11900K (5ghz), 64GB ram 3600mhz, RTX 3080 ti

Share this post


Link to post

To get my money one of the two (and I doubt it would be LM) would have to move to the client/server streaming model that MSFS is using to gain the same or better graphics fidelity and have a more moralistic flight model than anything out now. If this happened 3rd party and community content would follow.

But its not going to happen because of cost. Worst case financially the MSFS/Asobo team is "buying" map data and cloud services at cost from the Bing Maps & Azure. Best case is that Microsoft as a whole subsidies Bing Maps & Azure to the MSFS/Asobo team.

I cant see LR being able to afford what it would take to pull off was Microsoft has. I don't see LM trying to compete in this market.

  • Like 2

MSFS, NaviGraph Charts & FMS, Pilot2ATC, FsHub
R5 3600X ,RTX 2060S, 32GB, SSD

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, W2DR said:

Sigh. I don't even know where to begin. Let's try the comment "...can't tell where you really

I never wrote the post you quoted and attributed to me W2DR unless there is another Noel here.  I tried to find that post to see who wrote it but I couldn't.

Noel


The tires are worn.  The shocks are shot.  The steering is wobbly.  But the engine still runs fine.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, rocketlaunch said:

The funny thing is even if Microsoft closed up the MSFS shop today and withdrew scenery streaming it would still take the competition an age to catch up. 

Pretty much this ^^^.

The gap between MSFS and P3D/X-Plane is so large already.  It won't be easy for P3D & X-Plane to catch up.


i5-12400, RTX 3060 Ti, 32 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, W2DR said:

As an instrument-rated pilot in RL I always knew where I was.

Now, I'm just a lowly student pilot in real life, so by your valuation I probably I don't know much, but what I do know is this:

In both P3D and MSFS I have been able to make extended cross-country flights in IMC, generally using only radio beacons because I enjoy the challenge and relying on a GPS almost feels like cheating.  And at every point along the way I am usually able to have a solid idea exactly where I am, and examining my flight paths in Little Navmap afterwards I almost always nail the actual plotted path pretty dang well, even in full cloud cover and just using VOR and DME.

Again, I can do that in both P3D and MSFS -- either one fills that need, because they both provide a solid foundation for instrument navigation.

Now, as I said, I'm a student pilot, and recently I've been using the sim to take practice flights out of the field where my school is based.   This is to help me get a better feel for the local towns, highways, and other landmarks; how to make my way to the practice areas; and generally to get increased familiarity with the visual environment I'm learning in both to improve my SA and to help me get more actual benefit from my expensive and limited time in the air.

I would only be able to do this in one sim, currently, at least without spending a lot of extra money acquiring additional scenery, or even making it myself using time-consuming methods of dubious legality if it didn't already exist.  And that sim is the one that you denigrate with the term "eye candy".    That "eye candy" has a function, and it makes the sim useful for me in a way that your fanciest Level D sim could not be.

Perhaps "eye candy" shouldn't be used so dismissively, is the point that I'm trying to make -- and the one that Noel was making before you decided to make it a "RL pilot" e-peen contest.   It has actual, real-world value in many applications, and just because you're a super-skilled instrument rated pilot and have no use for such trivial fripperies, it doesn't mean they're worthless.

Though even if they were,  it still doesn't make the statement that "MSFS is mainly focused on eye candy" any less incorrect. 

Also, Ford and Chevy both suck. 😄

 

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, W2DR said:

Let's try the comment "...can't tell where you really are..."

It's all relative.  You could probably tell where you were in FS9, but that is not the same as seeing buildings, roads, landmarks, ambient occlusion, lighting and atmospherics and the immersion this affords over the fake facsimile.

2 hours ago, W2DR said:

Ever sat in the left seat in a Level-D simulator?

It's all relative.  I don't fly real planes, nor use Level-D simulators.  What we're comparing here is the expensive cockpit simulator that is P3D.  Used all versions of it so I know full well of what I speak, as it applies to me of course.  Others will see things differently, except for a few hard data like cost for what you get in exchange.

 

2 hours ago, W2DR said:

I've often flown the PMDG 737 into KSFO with ORBX NCA with all the details maxxed. And it worked out just fine

Would not be my experience, and my hardware is just dandy as evident in how well MSFS runs on it relative to the whole awesome package that it already is, and how other other demanding programs run.  Benchmarks are all good.  Details are beyond maxed.  And it continues to evolve at a frantic pace compared to the absolute weak $50-$199 new versions that brought almost nothing save move to 64-bit in version 4.  Just my opinion, and of course the opinion of some others. 

 

2 hours ago, W2DR said:

I'm just curious, how long have you been a RL pilot?

If it only that was relavent to the discussion.  As  you must know many RLP use prefer MSFS now that the critical core component of the scenery and lighing engine has gotten to a high level of usefulness on a broad range of platforms, since the flight model has afficianados as do the flight models of X-Plane.  P3D's flight model was really like flying on rails, and further turbulance effects were not ideal.  It was the best show in town for me, I still have it installed but have only used it when MSFS floundered, which has been rare for me at least.   But otherwise I don't use it and when I do simply fly from dusk to dawn when scenery, lighting and atmospherics are trumped by decent quality payware airports and their night lighting which can be lovely.   This also allows me to dial back settings, disable Orbx FTX NCA or SCA and fly into into any terminal w/ liquid-smooth performance, with an occasional 'long frame', but they are not show-stoppers.  

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Noel

System:  9900K@5.0gHz@1.215v all cores, MSI MPG Z390M GAMING EDGE AC, Noctua NH-D15S w/ steady supply of 40-60F ambient air intake, Corsair Vengeance 32Gb LPX 3200mHz DDR4, Sabrent NVMe 2Tb x 2, RTX 3080 Ti FE, Corsair RM 850W PSU, Win10 Pro, Dell curved 3440x1440, TCA Boeing Edition Yoke & TQ, Cessna Trim Wheel, 30 frames vSync to 60Hz.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Good evening pilots

What kind of pilot are you ? do you prefer IFR at low altitudes or VFR with realistics flight plans, observing high routes and SID & STAR procedures before a perfect ILS landing ?

For VFR, no doubt that MSFS is a great success, or will be when the boring updates (and the bugs they make) will be a "souvenir", when the customer will not be captive of MS.
The thing which did the success of FSX whas the number of free developments, made by a wide community of enthusiasts fans, as well as payware made by well known labs. Unfortunately, the "philosophy" of MS now a days is oriented towards a total dependance of the customer (MS Store, Ms count, MS anything...)

At the opposite, if you are a liner pilot, flying at 35000ft, the precision of the ground details is not a problem, especially when you fly above thick clouds strates. For those pilots, the attention will be focused by the functionnalities of the cockpit instruments, the flying model...

Besides these essential elements, there are add-ons to approach a realist environment as it was said in the previous posts : FO present and doing his copilot's tasks, ATC realistic and reactive, sounds of environment, cabin calls adapted to the specific flight (from, to, phases of the flight..)

My opinion is that P3D V4 or V5 are more robust than a too young product as MSFS, embarrassed by a constraining environment.

Perhaps in some years...:rolleyes:

Sorry, my english courses are far away...

 

Good flights anyway !

  • Like 2

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 4,4GHz, RAM 16 Go, CG NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8Go. Écrans 2x22", 1x7" et 2 tablettes 10".
Simulateur : Prepar3d V4.5 Hardware : Saitek/Logitek ProFlight Yoke + 2 quadrants, radiopanel, multipanel, rudders

Site perso simulation de vollogosimu.png

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, kaosfere said:

Now, as I said, I'm a student pilot, and recently I've been using the sim to take practice flights out of the field where my school is based.   This is to help me get a better feel for the local towns, highways, and other landmarks; how to make my way to the practice areas; and generally to get increased familiarity with the visual environment I'm learning in both to improve my SA and to help me get more actual benefit from my expensive and limited time in the air.

When I was a student pilot in the mid 50s our airplanes had no navigation or radio systems.  We flew by a method called 'pilotage'.

The evening before a flight I would get out a chart and draw lines to designate my course.  Then I would examine the chart for landmarks and circle them.  During my flight I had the chart on my lap and I would look for the next landmark.  When I flew over it I would mark an 'X' in the circle so I always knew where I was.

Noel

  • Like 4

The tires are worn.  The shocks are shot.  The steering is wobbly.  But the engine still runs fine.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...