Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
abrams_tank

Navigraph 2021 survey is out

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, mSparks said:

Now, iirc you were trying to make some point about the future of flightsim... what was that again?

 

I dunno, you keep going around in circles 🤣.

If XP 12 is released in 2022, let's revisit these numbers again at the end of 2022 👍

  • Upvote 1

i5-12400, RTX 3060 Ti, 32 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, abrams_tank said:

If XP 12 is released in 2022, let's revisit these numbers again at the end of 2022 👍

Not really any if about it at this point, given it already escaped the labs in 2021.

  • Upvote 1

AutoATC Developer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Ok. According to your logic, Microsoft has 100% of the market then if you add MSFS + FSX + FS 2002 + FS 2004 in that survey 🤣

Seems like you aren't able to understand a trivial matter. That's not a market percentage, but HOW OFTEN a sim is used. If "MSFS SU7" and "MSFS SU6" were in the poll, would you really think one can't add them together? Jeez...

  • Upvote 2

"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." [Abraham Lincoln]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Seems like you aren't able to understand a trivial matter. That's not a market percentage, but HOW OFTEN a sim is used. If "MSFS SU7" and "MSFS SU6" were in the poll, would you really think one can't add them together? Jeez...

And if you add MSFS + FSX + FS 2002 + FS 2004, that's 100% of the time a Microsoft made simulator is used, which I don't agree with. There are probably a lot of people in that Navigraph survey that don't have any Microsoft simulators installed.


i5-12400, RTX 3060 Ti, 32 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, abrams_tank said:

And if you add MSFS + FSX + FS 2002 + FS 2004, that's 100% of the time a Microsoft made simulator is used, which I don't agree with. There are probably a lot of people in that Navigraph survey that don't have any Microsoft simulators installed.

sb-6QhLABYqXKhSlft518_iz5jqm8YdB6q-625ap

  • Like 1

AutoATC Developer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

And if you add MSFS + FSX + FS 2002 + FS 2004, that's 100% of the time a Microsoft made simulator is used, which I don't agree with. There are probably a lot of people in that Navigraph survey that don't have any Microsoft simulators installed.

If you had a software upgrade for blackberry does this mean you bought a new phone?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say I don't fully understand why X-Plane 11 is divided between < 11.50 and 11.50+. I understand due to the change of the rendering engine, some existing addons might not work but, as far users are concerned, it's should be the same platform, since you don't have to buy a new license and it runs on the same hardware.

That seems to indicate the survey was more directed to developers rather than users, because having some idea how many are using the latest version, that might require changes to addons, is quite useful.

However, using the same logic, P3D 4 should also be divided in pre-4.4 and 4.4+, because 4.4 saw the introduction of PBR and, for a developer, it can be a big change that might require changes to existing addons to be supported, seems similar than the switch from OpenGL to Vulkan in XP 11.50

Edited by virtuali
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, virtuali said:

I must say I don't fully understand why X-Plane 11 is divided between < 11.50 and 11.50+. I understand due to the change of the rendering engine, some existing addons might not work but, as far users are concerned, it's should be the same platform, since you don't have to buy a new license and it runs on the same hardware.

That seems to indicate the survey was more directed to developers rather than users, because having some idea how many are using the latest version, that might require changes to addons, is quite useful.

However, using the same logic, P3D 4 should also be divided in pre-4.4 and 4.4+, because 4.4 saw the introduction of PBR and, for a developer, it can be a big change that might require changes to existing addons to be supported, seems similar than the switch from OpenGL to Vulkan in XP 11.50

11.5 actually has higher hardware requirements than earlier versions.

It doesn't support windows 7 and even opengl now struggles on junk win 10 laptops with intel cards, whereas 11.40 (or maybe its 11.30) will run on pretty much anything from the last 15 years.

That would be my guess.

Edited by mSparks
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

AutoATC Developer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, virtuali said:

That seems to indicate the survey was more directed to developers rather than users, because having some idea how many are using the latest version, that might require changes to addons, is quite useful.

Undoubtedly. This is a targeted survey carried out for the benefit of add on developers; be it software or hardware.

Not too sure what long term conclusions can be reached from this.

The stand out results from this survey?

The flight sim genre continues healthy and contrary to previous predictions MSFS2020 has not bulldozed all before it during this last year and....that’s it🙂

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be wrong here, but it also seems to me the survey was promoted mostly onto the survey "partners" channels, which are listed page 8, and when looking the full list, most are not really present in the X-Plane eco-system and some of them are very "hype" in the FS2020 world. Furthermore, I might have been living in a cave or the advertisement pre-campaign done by Navigraph on "social medias" didn't reach me, because I honestly discovered the survey only when it was out and not prior, where I could have offered to partner Reality XP with Navigraph and to participate in the elaboration of the questions. In other words, I believe there could be a strong bias because the survey was promoted on medias and from companies that are reaching more of the FS2020 audience too, especially FBW for example which has a strong presence on social medias, and is reaching a lot of more "hard core" simmers on FS2020, some of them using it in FS2020 while they are waiting for other vendors 737 and A320, instead of using existing 737 and A320 from renown vendors on XP11.

Edited by RXP
  • Like 4
  • Upvote 5

Jean-Luc | reality-xp.com
This message from Reality XP is protected by a disclaimer: reality-xp.com/aboutrealityxp/email.html

Let your voice be heard and help us make a difference for you: Vote !
Open up communications with Reality-XP (Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DD_Arthur said:

Not too sure what long term conclusions can be reached from this.

From an xplane perspective its pretty positive if not unexpected to see almost everyone has moved over to 11.50.

Early in the year there was quite a lot of voices on windows 7 who were vocal about not going to 11.50 because they quite rightly didnt want to install the absolute junk that is windows 10 - Windows 7 even now still has like 15% market share of windows pcs iirc.

From a general flight sim perspective I dont see anything that disagrees with what we already think we knew - except tbh those xplane 11 numbers seem almost unbelievably high given the massive influx of "new blood" brought in by the huge MSFS marketing budget. 

Anyone know when the last survey was?


AutoATC Developer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, RXP said:

 In other words, I believe there could be a strong bias 

I don’t think there is any sort of intentional bias in this survey at all, especially since it’s whole raisin d’etre is to provide commercially useful information for the third party dev market.

 In my view, If ‘hardcore users’ are defined as people who enjoy simulating commercial airliner flight and procedures then, frankly, MSFS2020 has gone backwards this year.

Edited by DD_Arthur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

I don’t think there is any sort of intentional bias in this survey at all, especially since it’s whole raisin d’etre is to provide commercially useful information for the third party dev market.

 In my view, If ‘hardcore users’ are defined as people who enjoy simulating commercial airliner flight and procedures then, frankly in my view MSFS2020 has gone backwards this year.

I don't think there is any intentional bias either, but a bias nonetheless only because of who promoted the survey to whom in general. The question I'm raising is: if the list of partner would include 50% of partners dedicated to X-Plane only (add-ons and news), would the numbers read the same? It is also worth noting they indicate that their turnover was about 50% (about same number of total respondents but 50% of them in 2020 didn't participate in 2021). 

Edited by RXP
  • Upvote 2

Jean-Luc | reality-xp.com
This message from Reality XP is protected by a disclaimer: reality-xp.com/aboutrealityxp/email.html

Let your voice be heard and help us make a difference for you: Vote !
Open up communications with Reality-XP (Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's undoubtedly something we cannot forget regarding the two platforms, independently of both being great to have and enjoy, each on their own, and that is the fact that in X-Plane users from the MacOS and Linux niches can also have a general purpose flight simulator, while in MFS the platform has been ported to xBox. I am not counting the mobile versions here, where again X-Plane has presence...

ELITE was until v7 a multi-platform simulator, but from there on they started supporting Windows only.

Flight-Gear is also available for Windows, Mac and Linux, but albeit being an excellent platform, it can't compete with either MFS or XP regarding graphics and add-ons... yet it includes a rather complex weather engine, in some aspects more capable than what we have in default MFS and XP...

Then there's also Aerofly FS, in Windows, Mac OS, iOS and Android ...

So, X-Plane 12 will, again, be a good option for all of the Mac and Linux simmers, and that alone makes it unique in terms of reach.

Then, in my case and irrespective of any oppinions / surveys from the community, when I use X-Plane I do so because I find it models aerodynamics in more detail / complexity than the MSFS-derived platforms. OFC the top add-ons in any platform can make it shine, but still, a detailled / hardcore / study addon for X-Plane still offers me a more reliable representation of how the real thing handles. There aren't many, but then, for MFS and until now there are even less.

The future will tell. I am awaiting Fénix to release their Prosim-AR-based A320, FBW to continue supporting their excellent A32N, PMDG to do the same at least to their dc-6 debut into MFS. Meanwhile I have given up on expecting to see much of what I wanted to in the focus of ASOBO, so I'll revisit the tittle when something worth the try is made available.

Since I am not going to invest further in XP11 either, all I have to do is wait for XP12 to get released too...

In, probaby 4 months from now, by April 2022, we should have new reasons to use each of the platforms. Let's enter 2022 being Positive ! There's a LOT to uninstall in 2022 !!!!

Edited by Anatoli-Kagari9
  • Upvote 1

Limited only by Imagination... 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RXP said:

Furthermore, I might have been living in a cave or the advertisement pre-campaign done by Navigraph on "social medias" didn't reach me, because I honestly discovered the survey only when it was out and not prior

Jean-Luc (and other prospective partners), just send an email to survey@navigraph.com and express your interest and we'll invite you next year!

56 minutes ago, RXP said:

I don't think there is any intentional bias either, but a bias nonetheless only because of who promoted the survey to whom in general.

There will always be some bias as long as we don't know the entire population or can reach a completely random sample in this population. Sampling bias is discussed in the final report page 119. However, it should be valid to draw conclusions about trends when comparing years. 

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

And if you add MSFS + FSX + FS 2002 + FS 2004, that's 100% of the time a Microsoft made simulator is used, which I don't agree with. There are probably a lot of people in that Navigraph survey that don't have any Microsoft simulators installed.

You can't add the percentages together since the same respondent can have answered yes to all these options. For this specific purpose we provide a separate analysis on the different sim platforms where we collect the responses together for each platform irrespective of version. See page 121 in the final report - and I've pasted the graph below for simplicity. 

spacer.png

 

I'd really recommend reading the full report!

Cheers,

Stephen
Navigraph

  • Like 4

Stephen O'Connell

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
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...