Competition for the future of the hobby is good

[Dillon 2,205]

Most comments seem to get heated talking about our sim options.  In short MSFS is a threat to all our GA competition especially with the upgrade put into DCS.  DCS is almost MSFS quality and that's a fighter jet simulator.  The old look is no longer working unless your going for Flight Gear as a standard.  Laminar's new version shows they had to up their  game.  Now there will be a native weather and ATC engine in the sim.  That was unheard of before and flat out refused by Laminar in the past.  This means age old thinking of focusing on flight dynamics alone is a sure way to go out of business.  If it wasn't for the limitation of real world data from sources like Google and Bing XPlane most likely would have had that covered in the next version as well. In fact that's the real primary hurdle at this point for our competition.  Once that's cracked the sky is the limit for what we can see in all the sims and no longer will there be a  need to buy so many add-ons to make the sim look decent (XPlane, P3D, etc).  

All this being said I wish Laminar the best as they are making major improvements that are most welcomed.  By all means we need our options to stay vibrant and viable going into the future.  I don't trust Microsoft in the long run.  MSFS being so controlled by Azure to a point you can't run the sim without their servers is not something I personally care for.  I like the days of not being controlled by big brother and using my sim no matter what my internet connection is. XPlane is still usable in this way.  Satya Nadella (current Microsoft CEO) loves the sim but the next CEO could want to 'can' it and/or turn MSFS into more of a game.  This is not something on Asobo it's orders from Microsoft that could change what we love today.  That's why it's good to have options and I'll be the first to switch to XPlane especially with the new version that's coming out.  The direction Laminar is going now will make it a choice option depending on which way MSFS develops into. I feel we have another four years with MSFS and the current team before major changes could come that would be either good or bad for this community.  We wake up one day and an update changes the whole experience.  XPlane should be on version 14 by then with an easy uninstall of MSFS to XPlane at our fingertips.  

The best thing Asobo did was push the hobby forward.  That's FS2020's legacy that will stand the test of time but it's not sustainable.  One day we'll have the memory in our personal computers to cover the whole world in Bing like detail.  A sim like XPlane would be amazing and the whole sim would be usable with our without the cloud. The bar MSFS gave us raises the bar with the competition and the meek shall inherit the earth or should I say the under dog will ultimately get the bulk of the sim community. 

Edited October 7, 2021 by Dillon

[FlightSpinner 52]

27 minutes ago, Dillon said:

.....All this being said I wish Laminar the best as they are making major improvements that are most welcomed.  By all means we need our options to stay a vibrant option in the community.  I don't trust Microsoft in the long run.  MSFS being so controlled by Azure to a point you can't run the sim without their servers is not something I personally care for. ,......

Nice summary, Dillon.

Being new to Avsim I  naively posted a question -over on the main forum- regarding the future of Xplane now that MSFS is on the scene. I wasn't prepared for the negative reaction and amateur dramatics from some commentators. Obviously I touched a nerve relating to previous debates on the subject (maybe there should be a warning notice about which 'touchy' subjects are banned ;-)   But anyway,  I did receive a couple of helpful and courteous replies that were in keeping with your post above. Basically that competition is healthy, and we wish Laminer and MS all the best.

[Paul Deluca 170]

Very well said Dillon.!!!!!!!

Edited October 7, 2021 by w6kd
Mod edit: removed excessively long quote

[Dillon 2,205]

4 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

It's a double edge sword ... I generally agree that competition is good but in this small market (flight simulation) it also segments developers both core and DLC that work on the same product just for different platforms.  Imagine the level of detail and quality and timeliness if we had all the IXEG, PMDG, CS, iFly and Milviz developers working together on a 737 Max, more features, more quality, would get done faster if there was only ONE platform.

Don't get me wrong, competition is good but when working with much larger market potential/audience ... Flight Simulation (even with MSFS) is still relatively small compared to other genres.

The problem is we don't have ONE platform that does it all and meets expectations for everyone's specific desires.

Cheers, Rob.

Just like developers adjusted for FS2020 so can they do the same if Microsoft pulls the plug on the 'sim' and goes by way of the 'game'.  Developers will have to learn XPlane and there will be no dual development because the community as a whole has taken a hard turn to the better sim much like what's going on today.  The longer FS2020 holds up the more the competition will catch up and that's a good thing.

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

Competition is always good, it is the rivalries within the Flight Sim Community that becomes the stinker 

I like trying the different approaches to each platform they all have their place

[Tim_Capps 479]

I tried this argument with my wife. Still have the scar. But seriously folks, competition is not always good. To use an airline analogy, competition between the L1011 and DC-10 split the market and was one of the factors that made the arguably superior L1011 (the bankruptcy of Rolls-Royce being one of several other factors) lose out over the DC-10. As far as I know no L1011 crashed due to mechanical problems (a light bulb going out doesn't count) and the tri-jet market never really had its heyday. (It's just an analogy, folks, so yes, we could all go down the tri-jet hole(s), but that's the analogy that came to mind.)

As long as flight simulation is dependent on third-party developers, competition means only one thing: there are going to be winners and losers because most devs have to make a choice. And most have. Good luck, bon voyage, thanks for the memories, those who have chosen MSFS. I never argue with somebody else's business decisions because I've run a business and it always comes down to the bottom line.(Exception, I believe I have questioned the assumption that spending and user numbers are necessarily the same thing, but that's sort of a thinking-out-loud thing and I'm not committed to the issue.) PMDG, for instance, has evidently concluded that the effort to gain my $69 or whatever for a v5 DC-6 is not a business priority. So, end of story, Always liked PMDG, bought plenty of their stuff in FSX, and wish them the best. A2A will get my money for their Connie and I'll learn to live without a DC-6.

I actually don't see MSFS and P3D as true competitors (except for third-party support) anymore than I see DCS as competing against either. I don't think MSFS and P3D offer the same thing in a sort of Coke vs. Pepsi way. I guess I'm in the minority that sees these as two really different experiences that prioritize different things. Applish and orangish. And that's not a comment on the merits of MSFS, or saying that MSFS will never have everything P3D already offers and do it a million times better. I mean just right now and that is largely determined on what your flying interests are.

I don't have the time or the money to use multiple platforms, and imagine I'm not alone there, so most people end up with the one that ticks their boxes. Competition is often a good thing. With all due respect, not always. And I think when resources flow from one person's chosen platform to somebody else's it's hard to see that as a good thing if you happen to be the one with a lot less third-party support. If you want to argue Hobby Darwinism, you might say that MSFS deserves to run everyone else out of business because it's objectively superior and that's the way things work. We'll see. In the meantime, it's more academic than practical, because there's still more toys available for P3Dv5 than I can use and I have plenty to keep me busy. And, I do see some little up-and-comers that might grow up to fill the "P3D Gap" for however long that lasts. Do I wish P3D had the third-party support it would if MSFS didn't exist? Of course! Am I bent out of shape about it? Not at all. My P3D looks gorgeous, too, but I've spent a lot of money with devs to get it there. Maybe I wouldn't have to with MSFS. (Now there's an two-edged sword.)

What I do agree with is that no one needs to come here and slag somebody else's toys. With the hobby now well and truly split, I suppose some rivalry is inevitable. As long as we keep it friendly in a Cards vs.Cubs way, I don't have a problem with it in the Hanger. It always seems to generate some interest. But I think I've probably said all I have to say about the state of affairs. Just good to see people enjoying their thing enough to take an interest one way or another.