8 minutes ago, threegreen said:

They said work on P3D stuff is halted right now, not that they've abandoned P3D. Or did I miss something?

What I mean by that is that PMDG has made it clear it needs MSFS to work. Period.  P3D work is halted because PMDG has essentially bet the company on MSFS.  Moreover, when I read between the lines, any future P3D work will be incidental, except maybe something they've already more or less finished.  And I could easily imagine a situation where P3D v.6 is released in say, 2023, and PMDG does not update for it (much like those still waiting for DC-6 P3D v5 installer -- not me personally).  I'm not saying it's definite that PMDG has abandoned P3D, but PMDG is starting to sound more and more like Aerosoft when it comes to the platform.  Finally, I don't begrudge PMDG making the choice they think they need to, but I do think they need to be more upfront with P3D users -- especially since they are still selling those P3D products and RSR is still suggesting that it will provide updates for them.

Edited December 15, 20214 yr by Iadbound

I don’t begrudge PMDG making what they feel is the best business decision either but I do feel they should fulfill previous promises/statements  made to customers such as fixes, upgrades and installers made to past customers. This should be in the interest of good will and IMHO ethics. If they would just do that it would go a long way.

On 12/15/2021 at 9:28 AM, Iadbound said:

it needs MSFS to work. Period.

Exactly.

And the fact that it doesn't mind selling P3D products at the same time it has written off P3D is something I might observe, but I don't begrudge them that, either. It's like in the Godfather: “It’s not personal, Sonny. It’s strictly business.” I'm just a ordinary Joe talking over coffee with no stake in the outcome. I think betting the farm on MSFS makes sense for a lot of devs. But, if your reputation and income depend on supplying gold standard complex airliners to a niche in the hobby, I can see that strategy ending poorly, and re-opening a door you've slammed in someone's face might be hard. On the other hand, if MSFS gets plenty of support for tubeliners--and not just the latest and greatest--and becomes the best platform for that style of flying, then I think PMDG will deserve a lot of credit for taking the risk.

I just don't think MSFS is there yet for me, nor will it ever be until there is the same availability of classic jets. But I recognize I am a small niche of the hobby. Maybe the math works out and I'm not worth bothering about. My credit card would disagree.

You know, I watched that interminable panel about MSFS with various developers a few months ago, and while it might be uncharitable to mention, it seemed to me there was general smugness and a couple of gratuitous snarks at the expense of P3D. I think Iadbound is absolutely right and that is the "industry" mantra. If all P3D will ever be is a tiny line item in Lockheed Martin's PR budget, then that still means it will be around for a long time. Devs have a business to run. It's senseless for us users to worry whether P3D is dead or not, because there are very, very few things I miss in P3D right now. LIRF and a 747-200 are the only two things that I hate not having, plus PHNL would be nice. Even LAX I can live without since there's are great payware airports up and down the western seaboard. But in Italy, I have to fly out of LIML? Don't me wrong, it's great scenery and there are few airports were you taxi by a cemetery. But currently NO roads lead to Rome in P3D v.5. Seriously?

But I'm not going cut my nose off to spite my face. I just bought (apparently wisely) the PMDG DC-6, and am pretty well saturated with ORBX. I have an iFly NG now, and (except for a 747) every airplane I want. Anyway, we really have two very different hobbies going on concurrently. I'm sure there are those who enjoy both MSFS and P3D, but probably most put their chips on one or the other. I don't begrudge anyone their fun or profit. I wish devs would just dev and not provide a stream of commentary, though.

On 12/15/2021 at 3:28 PM, Iadbound said:

What I mean by that is that PMDG has made it clear it needs MSFS to work. Period.  P3D work is halted because PMDG has essentially bet the company on MSFS.  Moreover, when I read between the lines, any future P3D work will be incidental, except maybe something they've already more or less finished.  And I could easily imagine a situation where P3D v.6 is released in say, 2023, and PMDG does not update for it (much like those still waiting for DC-6 P3D v5 installer -- not me personally).  I'm not saying it's definite that PMDG has abandoned P3D, but PMDG is starting to sound more and more like Aerosoft when it comes to the platform.  Finally, I don't begrudge PMDG making the choice they think they need to, but I do think they need to be more upfront with P3D users -- especially since they are still selling those P3D products and RSR is still suggesting that it will provide updates for them.

Fine by me, I'll just move over to ifly

On 12/15/2021 at 10:28 AM, Iadbound said:

  Finally, I don't begrudge PMDG making the choice they think they need to, but I do think they need to be more upfront with P3D users -- especially since they are still selling those P3D products and RSR is still suggesting that it will provide updates for them.

I agree.  RSR is somewhat of a wordsmith.  But being honest, transparent and to the point would be more appreciated here.  Over the last year I've went from thinking msfs is my future, to really questioning that.  Mainly over the last couple weeks.  I agree with @kevinfirth.  If P3DV6 comes and I'm interested in it.  Then I will continue along the path with iFly.  The recent update solved some of the biggest issues.  The only other two main issues I see are not using trueglass, and livery availability.  Problem 2 I would fix by buying some custom paints from somebody like inibuilds. 

56 minutes ago, Tim_Capps said:

I just don't think MSFS is there yet for me, nor will it ever be until there is the same availability of classic jets. But I recognize I am a small niche of the hobby. Maybe the math works out and I'm not worth bothering about. My credit card would disagree

LOL, this post sent me down memory lane. Before I retired, I was a route sales rep for the worlds' largest snack food company. At times a customer would ask me why we quit making no salt potato chips. People on a low sodium diet wanted them. As explained to me I would tell them to legally call them no salt the plant would have to completely shut down the assembly line and hose out all the friers and belts taking a whole shift to make a very low volume niche product. Cost too much. Maybe that principle applies, maybe not. 

Potato chips to airplanes, Apples to oranges?🙂

46 minutes ago, Patco Lch said:

no salt potato chips

No salt on my potato chips and no classic jets? Some sacrifices are just too great. By the way, How many individuals buy $150 of any kind of potato chips per month? 🤪

36 minutes ago, Tim_Capps said:

No salt on my potato chips and no classic jets? Some sacrifices are just too great. By the way, How many individuals buy $150 of any kind of potato chips per month? 🤪

You might be surprised. 😄 By the pound, chips cost a heck of a lot more then beef steak.

On 12/14/2021 at 6:44 PM, simbol said:

 

Hi Guys,

First many thanks for all the support, feels great to see how customers really value that close relationship. It just re-reiterate my position regarding supporting my customers since I want then to remain loyal not matter what happens in the future (which is always uncertain).

Now I think it is important for me to clarify few things:

1) Number one, new sales on P3D are incredible low, worst in history.. I have said this a few times here on Avsim so people understand current 3rd party developers position and to give everyone an insight from the other side of the coin. Something I always try to do since it is important in my view, we both understand each other, me understanding customers needs, you understanding our limitations, challenges, etc.

2) If I had to live from new sales from P3D alone, my business would crash in about 7-12 months easy.. Neither I would be able to support my home, bills, food and family... I have also mentioned this few times on forums here at AVSIM so people understand what "some" 3rd party developers are going thru during this transition and the multiple market shifts happening on this hobby. As a result, I have a full time job on technology during shift of 10 hours per day and I have to work on flight sim stuff at nights, weekends and holidays so I can catch up with the competition or I would be wiped out of the map much quicker.

Just to give you some insight, my normal total sleep times per week are between 10 to 20 hours maximum sometimes, being thinking to change my nickname to Zombie. 

3) For the reasons above, it doesn't mean I haven't change priorities at all.. I have to adjust, after all I have a business to run and to keep alive, not only for the future of my family, but also because I own such responsibility to all my current loyal customers, they put faith on me and accordingly they deserve continuing receiving updates, supports and many new products for many platforms in the future.

4) Let's make it clear before my next point, I am not abandoning my customer base behind, I will continue supporting and providing updates for P3D (V5.X, V6, V7, V10, wherever it goes), so rest assured if you bought something I worked with, you will not be left behind with a piece software that suddenly stops working. Supports for past, current and future sales is ongoing and I will always do my best to respond and provide the best support experience you will ever have with any product on this hobby, any of my current or past customers that has requested my assistance can confirm what I just said.

In addition any new features I can introduce to current products will continue to happen, and if the market allows it and I see good signs of ROI new products for P3D will then come.

So now let's get to the last point.

5) So you wondering, so Simbol what are you up to then? well I am shifting my business a bit doing something I never expected I would ever do.. but hey, life you either evolve or your are left behind and go extinct!. Now I am a person that very rarely quits!! never surrender is my moto. So you will hear the news of what I have been cooking very soon, I need a couple of weeks or maybe 1 month to finish something so I can do a video so everyone can see and start judgement day lamao.. 

I do hope you all feel re-assured about my commitment to you as customers, we are all together on this journey.. many of you went to MSFS.. then came back to P3D, others went to MSFS and never saw them again.. others decided to stay on both platforms, wherever you go or wherever you do it makes no difference to me, you supported me once, I support you forever... that's the deal with me... So my objective / mission? I want to continue seeing you, not matter on what platform you are.. and for this, I need to "evolve" and expand.

Hope that gets the message across, see you in the sky 🙂

Regards,
Simbol

 

 

I like the explanation you gave Simbol, my respect to you sir..

I'm sure like a lot of people, I was very excited for the release MSFS. I thought it would be everything you could every want in a sim, great visuals, realistic aircraft, realistic weather, great airport scenery all out of the box. 

On release day I decided to go all out and get the deluxe version. I thought this is it, this is the future. But after the initial "oh look there's my house!", I quickly found my self getting bored of flying the default ga planes and the light on systems default airliners and found myself longing for my PMDG 747 in P3D. Within a week of the release I was back in P3D full-time. 

I think I share my story with many other flight simmers. Weather your an X-plane guy or a P3D guy, many have returned to their older platforms in search of an overall more realistic simulation. 

So, where does that leave payware developers like PMDG? Assign resources to a far newer and perhaps for the time being, a more popular and lucrative cash wise sim? Or continue developing for an outdated but yet a more tried and tested sim that only really appeals to the more hardcore simmer? 

In my opinion, the next year will be huge in terms of where we will be and what sim the majority will be using. If Asobo can fix the bugs and make it easier for 3rd party developers to work with the sim, I think that's where the majority will be. But if not, who knows? Perhaps all the developers that have put all their eggs in the MSFS basket will have made a huge mistake. Only time will tell.

Old adage in business you get 80% of your money from 20% of your customers and 20% of your money from the other 80%. PMDG made their bed now they can lay in it! They burned me with the DC-6 twice, first in P3D and then again in XPlane. What was it the Oscar Wilde famously said - " Once was an accident, twice was unfortunate, three times was deliberate". Won;t get fooled again!

While it would be silly to shed a tear for how one corporate giant stuck it to another, it does rub me the wrong way that Microsoft released a product for retail that was at best an early beta to accomplish exactly what it accomplished - to take LM by surprise and drive the hobbyist and developer market away from Prepar3d on the promise that “this is the future” when in reality we are a year and a half from its release and besides it’s stunning visuals it’s not clear to me that MSFS has the functionality of even FSX, let alone Prepar3d. Oh sure, people like RSR have touted its “superior” flight modeling, but why would he or anyone else in a similar position have any credibility on the topic - having pushed their chips in with MSFS it’s clearly in their interest to tout these capabilities that we are told will appear at some indefinite time in the future? 
 

The other amusing thing to me is the reliance on this “10 year commitment.” Given the questionable business ethics of a major corporation releasing an arguably not ready for market product to kill competition, why would I place faith in its unenforceable commitment to MSFS? Not to mention, even if the people in power to intend to stick with this commitment, corporate power structures change, new people come in, and they don’t always have the same “vision” as their processors. Sometimes they kill projects for no other reason that they were their predecessor’s projects. At least LM has a pretty significant commercial commitment to maintaining Prepar3d beyond the hobbyist realm; sure, they could also cut us out at any time, but their isn’t really an economic reason for them to do so whereas MSFS’s viability is largely dependent on the consumer market (notwithstanding the idea that the world simulation in MSFS may be seen as a platform for other programs). 

yeah.  No such thing as a 10 year firm business plan in corporations.  

58 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

It's clear visual candy sells, and UE5 has by far the best visual candy of any graphics engine and it can run on moderate (affordable) hardware.  Maybe this is why MS raced to release MSFS

Pretty sure it's simpler than that... many triple A games are rushed out the door these days with a "release now, patch later" mentality, especially under the games as a service model. I doubt they cared about what graphics engine was around the corner (isn't there always one?).

1 hour ago, IUBrian said:

 it does rub me the wrong way that Microsoft released a product for retail that was at best an early beta to accomplish exactly what it accomplished - to take LM by surprise and drive the hobbyist and developer market away from Prepar3d

Lockheed doesn't care what Microsoft does, and Microsoft doesn't care what Lockheed does. It's two different markets. Also, if MS put in another year+ of development and then released, they would still kill the P3D market, probably even faster. 

 

I disagree that Microsoft doesn’t care what Lockheed does, at least in terms of add-on developers; maybe they don’t care about LM specifically, but they absolutely cared about bringing in add-on developers.
 

And this isn’t analogous to a “release now, patch later” situation typical with console games. This is a “new” “flight simulator” that was released lacking much of the functionality of its approximately 10 year old 32 bit predecessor - that’s not a “bug” that was a conscious decision to release a product that in any other world would be years from release. If I buy, say COD or Red Dead Redemption, they may have bugs that need to be patched, but the core game functionality is typically present at release. 
 

it may very well end up being the future of flight simulation it promises to be but that seems to me to be far from certain.