32 minutes ago, F737NG said:

Sure, that's one way of looking at it.

I see it as what's the point of a developer spending time on a platform whose fundamentals change every couple months?
There's an opportunity cost in devoting time to understanding, working with and working around the (lack of) tools and functionality of a constantly shifting sim platform, compared to earning revenue from another platform whose strengths and weaknesses are already understood.

Some developers can afford to shift their development focus entirely to MSFS. The bigger players have the resources to burn until they get the returns they envisaged. Even they aren't enjoying themselves:

• RR at PMDG says it takes "four developers a total of 40 man hours to do something that, when done in Prepar3D using modern debugging tools takes a single developer approximately 3 minutes"
• Scott at A2A said "Today for the first time, I took off and performed a bunch of maneuvers in the air, came back with a nice flare and landed in an all-new Accu-Sim Comanche 250." That's some 16 months after MSFS was RTM.

The smaller developers don't have the resources to do likewise and are at risk of/have already closed shop.
There's nothing to stop a developer returning to MSFS when it settles down some more to reap the rewards, yet try and keep the doors open by developing on a known platform.

You are being disingenuous with your praise of MSFS updates being only a good thing. When there are reams of threads both on the official MSFS forums and here asking 'when is the hotfix coming?' or 'what's broken this time?' after every single update, that's not sustainable.

I don't have enough free time to mess around with 'which add-on is no longer compatible and will give me a CTD?' So I have sadly given up on MSFS. The scope of the platform is incredible, the project management of it and delivery is absolutely not.

Despite some of the (justfiable) criticism of LM with P3D, at least I have all of my add-ons working and I can get the sim to start, something that cannot be said each time I launch MSFS.

Very well written.. as a 3rd party developer I thank you for your post..

One of the biggest challenges currently with MSFS is a combination of issues, which when added all together is causing lot of tension and causing many devs to give up.. I list:

1). The lack of a proper BETA Testing program with 3rd party developers, basically you either get invited to a flight or not. If you do it last only 1 month and you don't get all the latest changes that will get released to public, more over things you discover during the test might not be posible to be addressed before going public. As a result not matter you tested or not.. your product (in production or released) might be broken and there is nothing you can do before the sim update goes public given the short time.

This is not a situation that is improving, SU7 flight test was cancelled and then brought back but only for 1 week.. 

2) There is a incredible amount of piracy going around with MSFS, this is because the SDK design is so sand-boxed that 3rd party developers are now unable to protect their content against piracy at all. The only opportunity to protect your content is if you publcish via Market Place since they offer the DRM for you..

3) Unfortunately Market Place staff is so overloaded, that new applications are on hold (I have been waiting for 10 months).. and when you submit NEW content to the Market Place it takes 3 to 4 months to get approved.. updates to a product have priority.. and they can take 1 to 2.5 months.. (NOTE: Microsoft is trying to improve these times..).

4) Because the tight deadlines, the SDK gets severely broken with each SUx.. causing many disruptions to your normal developing time. SU7 for example, has increased the compile time for a project by about 10 times.. and it resets all our settings to default when we build something.. If you are wondering how this affects us, we have to build over 300 times per day to check how our changes are being reflected, etc. with SU6 I could do up to 50 changes per hour.. Since SU7..this is reduced to about 5 per hour..

5) We cannot test content inside Xbox.. we assume it will work.. except sometimes it doesn't.. and the only way to test a fix.. is asking Market Place staff to try it.. there are no official ways to test on this platform so far..

Now imagine what happens when an update is released.. you had 5 products published.. SUx breaks all of them.. you are selling only in the market place to prevent your content being pirated in less than 2 hours since release.. all your current customers go angry because they cannot get their products working! you just found out they are broken because despite your best efforts trying to prevent the problem, well.. the update was released and it broke your stuff.. You fix the problem, but guess what? you submit the changes to Market place and it will take 1 month to 2 months to be checked and approved by Market place staff.. and in the meantime your angry customers are yelling at you.. (HUD displays is an example with SU7 among other things)

By the time the update finally reaches your customer and they can finally use the product as intended.. the next SUx is about to be released and the cycle repeats again!..

Since SU7 lots of 3rd party devs are starting to give up.. this is not sustainable and we have requested many times to Asobo to please implement a proper BETA testing program to minimise these issues specially with the current limitations of Market Place (time to process content updates).. unfortunately their response is clear, this sits with Microsoft and that they have requested this already many times.. so.. their hands are tied as much as ours.

That's the world we live in... you can check https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/index.html where we communicate with Asobo very often about issues with the SDK and you will understand the challenges ahead..

S.

@simbol, what an absolute horror show. 😳

Nonetheless, as a user I feel very well using MSFS, and I buy more addons than I did for any simulator before, so the number of developers going on with MSFS is  more than enough for me.

I will leave it with this, though, as I feel further remarks on MSFS from my side would be misplaced in this thread on the future of P3D in the P3D forum.

Kind regards, Michael

20 minutes ago, simbol said:

Very well written.. as a 3rd party developer I thank you for your post..

One of the biggest challenges currently with MSFS is a combination of issues, which when added all together is causing lot of tension and causing many devs to give up.. I list:

1). The lack of a proper BETA Testing program with 3rd party developers, basically you either get invited to a flight or not. If you do it last only 1 month and you don't get all the latest changes that will get released to public, more over things you discover during the test might not be posible to be addressed before going public. As a result not matter you tested or not.. your product (in production or released) might be broken and there is nothing you can do before the sim update goes public given the short time.

This is not a situation that is improving, SU7 flight test was cancelled and then brought back but only for 1 week.. 

2) There is a incredible amount of piracy going around with MSFS, this is because the SDK design is so sand-boxed that 3rd party developers are now unable to protect their content against piracy at all. The only opportunity to protect your content is if you publcish via Market Place since they offer the DRM for you..

3) Unfortunately Market Place staff is so overloaded, that new applications are on hold (I have been waiting for 10 months).. and when you submit NEW content to the Market Place it takes 3 to 4 months to get approved.. updates to a product have priority.. and they can take 1 to 2.5 months.. (NOTE: Microsoft is trying to improve these times..).

4) Because the tight deadlines, the SDK gets severely broken with each SUx.. causing many disruptions to your normal developing time. SU7 for example, has increased the compile time for a project by about 10 times.. and it resets all our settings to default when we build something.. If you are wondering how this affects us, we have to build over 300 times per day to check how our changes are being reflected, etc. with SU6 I could do up to 50 changes per hour.. Since SU7..this is reduced to about 5 per hour..

5) We cannot test content inside Xbox.. we assume it will work.. except sometimes it doesn't.. and the only way to test a fix.. is asking Market Place staff to try it.. there are no official ways to test on this platform so far..

Now imagine what happens when an update is released.. you had 5 products published.. SUx breaks all of them.. you are selling only in the market place to prevent your content being pirated in less than 2 hours since release.. all your current customers go angry because they cannot get their products working! you just found out they are broken because despite your best efforts trying to prevent the problem, well.. the update was released and it broke your stuff.. You fix the problem, but guess what? you submit the changes to Market place and it will take 1 month to 2 months to be checked and approved by Market place staff.. and in the meantime your angry customers are yelling at you.. (HUD displays is an example with SU7 among other things)

By the time the update finally reaches your customer and they can finally use the product as intended.. the next SUx is about to be released and the cycle repeats again!..

Since SU7 lots of 3rd party devs are starting to give up.. this is not sustainable and we have requested many times to Asobo to please implement a proper BETA testing program to minimise these issues specially with the current limitations of Market Place (time to process content updates).. unfortunately their response is clear, this sits with Microsoft and that they have requested this already many times.. so.. their hands are tied as much as ours.

That's the world we live in... you can check https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/index.html where we communicate with Asobo very often about issues with the SDK and you will understand the challenges ahead..

S.

Looks to me like they are discouraging 3rd party developers.

FUBAR

Edited November 25, 20214 yr by newtie
Add

3 minutes ago, newtie said:

Looks to me like they are discouraging 3rd party developers.

FUBAR

I don't feel this is the case, It is just a management miss alignment somewhere.. hopefully with the extent of the problem going bigger changes will be introduced to reduce the impact of what is going on.

In hence my quote:

“The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams.”
― Eleanor Roosevelt

Perseverance is a beautiful thing..

S.

At this rate, maybe there is hope for P3D AI Traffic Reborn Runway Control after all

26 minutes ago, simbol said:

[...]

Since SU7 lots of 3rd party devs are starting to give up.. this is not sustainable and we have requested many times to Asobo to please implement a proper BETA testing program to minimise these issues specially with the current limitations of Market Place (time to process content updates).. unfortunately their response is clear, this sits with Microsoft and that they have requested this already many times.. so.. their hands are tied as much as ours.

Sorry to hear of the issues you face.
Even when presented as a passing comment, I found the problems highlighted by the bigger third party developers to be concerning. Flight simming has always relied upon these external developers to enrich the sim and give us an experience that is far greater than the vanilla version of a flight sim could ever achieve, due to cost, time and experience constraints of the sim's development team.

 

Dragging the topic back onto P3D's future.

You have to wonder why LM is so poor at communicating with us, the masses? Us retail/home flight simmers could surely provide some added value beyond that of unofficial beta testers for the platform? If we were engaged and asked for what we would like to see in a possible v6, LM devs could choose from a list of our replies—even if some/a lot of the items would probably be unachievable.

Some engagement with us, and more importantly, implementation of some of our ideas, could be enough to sustain our interest and (hopefully) bring a sizeable number of flight simmers (back) to the platform.

Some aspects of P3D really do still feel like it's a sim from 2006. The bigger bonus from implementing some of our ideas could be a base sim to sell to their commercial customers that feels appropriate to 2021 and beyond.

At this stage, the thread is definitely turning into a 'Future of MSFS' and no longer even  close to topic.

Spoiler

Error

Excepting F737ng's post above

Edited November 25, 20214 yr by Sparkrite
Spelling

6 minutes ago, Sparkrite said:

At this stage, the thread is definitely turning into a 'Future of MSFS' and no longer even  close to topic.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

I disagree. The future of MSFS is a factor that influences the future of P3D like it or not. All the posts I've read are relevant in that sense, and there's nothing come close to any 'my sim is better than yours ' argie-bargie.  No reason to close it IMHO.  Remember this particular bit was precipitated by the news that a major Dev was producing only for P3D....

2 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

I disagree. The future of MSFS is a factor that influences the future of P3D like it or not. All the posts I've read are relevant in that sense, and there's nothing come close to any 'my sim is better than yours ' argie-bargie.  No reason to close it IMHO.  Remember this particular bit was precipitated by the news that a major Dev was producing only for P3D....

Fully agree the presence of MSFS will have an effect on all others sims, of that there is no doubt.

However discussing indepth the problems inherent within another sim  and its addons, should IMHO be discussed in another more appropriate thread. 

I do not want this thread locked for straying too far from topic as I'm enjoying it too much! 

2 hours ago, Sparkrite said:

I do not want this thread locked for straying too far from topic as I'm enjoying it too much! 

I see no need for a lock as things stand. Just remember to keep P3D in the conversation.

If considering where LM may go with P3D I raised the problem of the issues in the marketplace. So the fact we have 3 sims is interesting. I do a lot of development work on flight dynamics and that sort of nuts and bolts FDE for a number of developers - did is the operative word. The reality is their sales for P3D have simply evaporated. It is this impact on all of us that was of concern not the mistaken issue of which is better - you cannot ignore what the introduction of MSFS is doing to so many of the developers and others (and I include amateur or lets say enthusiasts). I can only think of one modeller from the pre MSFS era who is now continuing with any sim model development - they are clear that they have neither the time nor the inclination to relearn just for MSFS.

Look flight simulation is not an unlimited never ending market where never ending growth is possible. There are also major cultural or social issues as well - the lack of interest or enthusiasm amongst younger people or the public at large for aviation at all, it is just part of the scenery now a means of transport, the adventure and experimentation era is gone as well. So your left with two distinct markets or groups - commercial flght simulator users and hobbysts or as MS have targeted - gamers. After all it is still a game in many aspects no matter how good a simulator is procedurally and technically in terms of response fidelity (screen numbers match real world numbers). 

I would rather discuss how can we get LM more engaged with us - enthusiastic amateurs so the contribution of suggestions and improvements has more resonance or response - I have no issues with continuing and using P3D as my preferred and only flight simulation platform, easy enough decision but for others not so well that is there choice.  We all depend on the developers, small and big so what happens there is of concern but then again there are no rights of ownership to any marketplace and I guess we are going to see a bit of loss or dissappearing acts in that regard which of course leaves us as users of P3D deprived of ADD ON content - or does it? If I have a 100 different models and more world scenery than I can ever possibly go to or visit then I am well satisfied with addon content. My issue is that there will be a need to update software as LM incrementally updates their software (it is the nature of the software business) but we at least have the benefit of a stable platform that will only be update incrementally - not a brand new platform that will be updated continuously. 

3 hours ago, F737NG said:

Original post edited for length:

You have to wonder why LM is so poor at communicating with us, the masses? Us retail/home flight simmers could surely provide some added value beyond that of unofficial beta testers for the platform? If we were engaged and asked for what we would like to see in a possible v6, LM devs could choose from a list of our replies—even if some/a lot of the items would probably be unachievable.

Some engagement with us, and more importantly, implementation of some of our ideas, could be enough to sustain our interest and (hopefully) bring a sizeable number of flight simmers (back) to the platform.

Some aspects of P3D really do still feel like it's a sim from 2006. The bigger bonus from implementing some of our ideas could be a base sim to sell to their commercial customers that feels appropriate to 2021 and beyond.

At FSEXPO, the LM representative made it clear that it was LM's policy not to disclose timelines or future plans. And in regards to support, the TOS makes it clear about what you are buying. It was also made clear there in my opinion, we are small, small fish in their community. I would think that if a customer (like DOD) needs something new or corrected, it would happen fast. Like or not, that is what the reality of the situation is and continuing to complain about engagement is pointless. Just my 2 cents worth as a retired Federal CIO who managed large internal development projects.

1 hour ago, Sparkrite said:

Fully agree the presence of MSFS will have an effect on all others sims, of that there is no doubt.

Could it be that finally there is a dawning realisation amongst those of us in the flight swimming community that there is now a very real risk that we could lose it all and history will confirm that the finger of blame can only be pointed in one direction?

The lure of impressive in-your-face visuals along with the vague and possibly disingenuous promise of something better who knows when in the future has proven to be a very effective marketing ploy and is now threatening to destroy the existing flight swimming ecosystem.

For what it’s worth, my guess is that MS/ASOBO knew only too well that their product still needed much work but, at time of release, had sufficient substance to wow the enormous gaming community whose priorities are distinctly different from those of the so-called ‘serious’ simmer. The latter expects degrees of simulation fidelity and complexity which extends far beyond the needs of the average gamer whose primary interest is entertainment. There can be little doubt that MSFS is succeeding in this respect. 

Whether or not it was intended, the consequence has seen legions of core third party developers being lured away from P3D because this is the economic reality if they are to survive. This despite their evident frustrations as highlighted by some posts in this thread. Seems they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. LM has provided a comprehensive mature SDK which continues to invite groundbreaking third party product development and yet those same developers have been enticed away from P3D to a simulator that appears to offer so much promise, but very little substance in terms of practical support and encouragement from the main developer and its financial backer.

Meanwhile, LM remain silent and uncommunicative. Perhaps the decision to compete with the new sim has been deemed unnecessary. After all, they already have a perfectly stable sim out there with a multitude of effective, enhancing integrated third party products. Instead, maybe a policy of waiting patiently in the wings while observing the unfolding of an undoubted mess (no further need to elaborate) is being considered as being the more sensible approach. If MS/ASOBO fail to appreciate what is really happening then their initial success could revert into becoming another disaster which benefits no one and will see fortunes turn full circle as developers volte-face and return to the fold.

Mike

10 minutes ago, coastaldriver said:

how can we get LM more engaged with us

It takes 2 to tango, I don’t think they want to dance I’m afraid.  I have noticed there seems to have been an ever so slight difference in communication levels depending on who has been the project lead.  Chris Metel, the current boss, seems to firmly be in the incommunicado camp.