3 hours ago, irocx said:

I  aren't there more pressing issues with the sim at the this time? 

Also, with the current poor implementation of the actual marketplace regarding developer admission/vetting/release/updates

A welcome reality check. Just let us look back at the history of updates since August 18th, 2020.

The MSFS project manager is unable to have its MSFS payware shop work properly after 16 months. It gives you an idea indeed how freeware would be managed. It is pretty obvious that inserting home made stuff would bring a tsunami of problems. 

And there are indeed more pressing matters for the team including in the scenery department, like asking Blackshark.ai to improve the building rendition, better homogenizing colors between tiles to erase seams etc. 

This sim needs to be stabilized and polished as it is now not to be perpetually « enhanced ». A little bit of stagnation, yes 😆 or rather some time to catch its breath.
 

Although I can only make assumptions I feel there are 2 parties. Microsoft and the MSFS team. Microsoft needs to make money. They want to meet deadlines as far as money making releases are concerned and dont have to take direct flak from the community.

I think SU7 is a prime example of that. I cant imagine that the MSFS team was not aware of some major issues. SU7 and Reno is released no matter what, and after that MSFS team has got the time to fix the problems.

I think part of the problem and solution is the community AND the voting system.  "I demand that....." or "it is a showstopper that I cant see trees from the last row of my jetliner. Like in real life the loudest voices get the most attention but that doesnt mean that they act in the best interest of the total community.  The MSFS team should listen but not necessarily act immediatly based on voting.

30 minutes ago, hansb57 said:

Although I can only make assumptions I feel there are 2 parties. Microsoft and the MSFS team. Microsoft needs to make money. They want to meet deadlines as far as money making releases are concerned and dont have to take direct flak from the community.

I think SU7 is a prime example of that. I cant imagine that the MSFS team was not aware of some major issues. SU7 and Reno is released no matter what, and after that MSFS team has got the time to fix the problems.

I think part of the problem and solution is the community AND the voting system.  "I demand that....." or "it is a showstopper that I cant see trees from the last row of my jetliner. Like in real life the loudest voices get the most attention but that doesnt mean that they act in the best interest of the total community.  The MSFS team should listen but not necessarily act immediatly based on voting.

I do not see a problem with them issuing scenery updates to the sim as these in general are not done by the same team as those who program the workings.  I do have a problem with them thinking that what it looks like is all that counts.

Scenery Gateway is something great. It's what made XP finally worth playing airport-wise.

The community effort allows more detailed airports than AI could possibly create. If I think about those two five-storey appartment blocks instead of hangars in default LOWZ... and that's nothing rare.

1 hour ago, harrry said:

I do not see a problem with them issuing scenery updates to the sim as these in general are not done by the same team as those who program the workings.  I

You don’t 😃 ? I like and play this sim almost every day, I think that Asobo did a great job overall  but I also see that its evolution over time is an ambulating systemic mess and there is no end in view to it. Adding one more mess-inducing layer doesn’t seem to me the greatest idea.

25 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

You don’t 😃 ? I like and play this sim almost every day, I think that Asobo did a great job overall  but I also see that its evolution over time is an ambulating systemic mess and there is no end in view to it. Adding one more mess-inducing layer doesn’t seem to me the greatest idea.

“Oh ye of little faith”. Cheers.

Just now, FrankPilot said:

“Oh ye of little faith”. Cheers.

thats me all right 😄

@Dominique_K, you have your French Update, we want our Aussie Update!  😁  Cheers.

28 minutes ago, FrankPilot said:

@Dominique_K, you have your French Update, we want our Aussie Update!  😁  Cheers.

 I have flown a lot in Australia with Orbx, not much in MSFS yet. A little bit around Alice and the bush strips on a 100 nm miles radius and around Darwin. What do you expect better for the forthcoming Aussie WU ?

PS add to that a flight from YBOI to YHID that I am doing right now 😉

Edited December 15, 20214 yr by Dominique_K

So, if I understand it well, the scenery gateway system, will be an interface, maybe a list or a map or both, with a lot of freeware airports, like the one we can find on website like flightsim.to, we can select the one we want to install and like other assets on MSFS, we can update them under the content manager section.

Am i correct?

2 hours ago, harrry said:

I do have a problem with them thinking that what it looks like is all that counts.

They definitely do not have that mentality.

1 hour ago, bendead said:

So, if I understand it well, the scenery gateway system, will be an interface, maybe a list or a map or both, with a lot of freeware airports, like the one we can find on website like flightsim.to, we can select the one we want to install and like other assets on MSFS, we can update them under the content manager section.

Am i correct?

No. The community can create or modify airports (presumably using default assets only) and submit them. If they’re approved by MS/Asobo or whoever will be in charge of this, they will replace the default ones. At least that‘s more or less how it works in Xplane.

29 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

No. The community can create or modify airports (presumably using default assets only) and submit them. If they’re approved by MS/Asobo or whoever will be in charge of this, they will replace the default ones. At least that‘s more or less how it works in Xplane.

Right - and that worked well for me in XP11. I hope that it works the way in MSFS. We can still buy other add on airports or get freeware from other sites. This would more rapidly improve airport quality.

40 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

(presumably using default assets only)

Thanks for the reply

And that's the major issue, a lot of cool freeware airport are made with customs assets, I hope Asobo will also incorporate freeware assets library, some extensive freeware are using shared library.

For those interested in how this works, the following link might help

https://gateway.x-plane.com/

As of this moment. over 3,000 artists have submitted almost 40,000 airport revisions to the gateway. IMO, this has worked much better than I had ever imagined it might. The revisions are all curated for validity by Laminar Research and included in the next sim update automatically once approved. Users can also use the gateway to log errors in existing airports. In my experience, minor errors can be corrected in a matter of weeks and then downloaded/deployed much as MSFS does in its Community folder until the next simulator update. 

Overall, it has been an amazingly successful experiment. And yes, independent scenery artists still create freeware and payware airports using custom assets. Yeah, it's kind of surprising, but there we are.