3 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I can understand their dilemma. Imagine if they said they would now develop a Concorde for MSFS. Of course it would take a considerable length of time (years?) for it to be released but it could impact quite severely on P3D sales. Many might decide that biding their time is preferable to buying Concorde now only to have to buy it again in a few years. All that time invested in a P3D Concorde would be wasted.

It’s probably the most difficult time for aircraft developers there’s even been. I can understand why they’re keeping their cards close to their chest. Much time and effort has been invested in P3D - a very advanced and stable platform.

Imagine if LM announces that v6 will have satellite scenery and will be streamed. If the scenery is of the same quality as MSFS that would bring the two sims back on equal footing. LM could be at an advantage with a single product rather than the plethora of options the rival offers.

Exciting times for fans but the opposite for developers.

I don't think so at all... It's only really FSL that are keeping their cards close to their chest on MSFS.  Most other dev's have been pretty straightforward in their communication and direction.  

I can't see their dilemma when they are getting leapfrogged left and right by every other developer out there. At least announcing something could put a wrench in Fenix's potential MSFS sales by the FSL loyal who would prefer to wait.  

Now I digress but I see this entirely different.  Look away if you aren't interested in the P3D's future discussion LOL...

Just my opinion as a P3d user and fan who is still investing but P3D will continue to be an afterthought if a developer is concerned primarily with consumer revenue. It's those of us that are already invested that want to see it succeed and stick around so we can maximize our current investments.  What if P3D says we will stream it but that means forced updates and streaming bandwidth?  How else could they realistically achieve it?  Now it has the same features but also the same limitations.

You said it yourself in the other thread, they are horrible at marketing or promoting their product.  The question is why?  Do they even want to, do they care?  

Your assessment is very true and unfortunately why it will probably never battle the masses like MSFS no matter how good it is unless LM change their go to market...   LM aren't in it for the consumer market and the lack of any advertising/promotion or even a nod to the gaming market tends to re-iterate that.  MS with their Activision acquisition are all in, I even heard rumors that Steam is open to allowing MS Gamepass onto the Steam Platform. MSFS and XP are already there.   A gaming giant LM is not.  

Think about this, and this is no way a knock on Avsim I spend more time on this site than anywhere outside my racing sites on the web but the "other" site dedicated to MSFS alone has more registered users in under 2 years than Avsim (which for years has been the go to in the FS world) has registered in 20 years.. That's the scale of MSFS's impact on our hobby..   Outside of the FS inner circle the "average user" knows nothing about P3d,. For the first time I can ever remember and only because of MSFS I have co-workers talking about flight sim and see them introducing it to their kids.   It's almost like LM don't want it advertised. Outside of LM themselves who actually promotes P3D?  No one sadly.  The only reference I could even find on Steam was an old thread that stated "Yes, Prepar3D (now v4) is a training tool and priced as such. It is NOT intended to be sold for entertainment."

Most aircraft are already done in P3D, iFly was a great example that people don't want something they already have.  The masses aren't lining up to buy another $100 PMDG 737 or 777.  Even you have said you would never buy it again.. People want scenery updates at a discount and aircraft updates included.  I just don't see any way P3D competes no matter how good it is. I'm more concerned they say the consumer market is such an afterthought let's just drop it altogether and focus exclusively on our commercial/academic training customers.

It's going to take a massive marketing and direction shift for V6 to be a reason for developers to come "back" and invest in P3d but for everyone's sake myself included I hope I am wrong.  

#digression complete  resume normal programming 🙂  

 

 

Edited March 12, 20224 yr by psolk

7 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I thought the Registry edits and drivers 471.96 would have resolved those for you. Oddly, I got the error today but it was when I was on the ground and switching views inside and out. A two hour flight from Madrid to Amsterdam was fine as are all my other flights over several months.

I am not running as advanced hardware as you but I really cannot remember the last time I had a CTD or any graphics problems (that weren't of my own causing through deliberately setting things too high). 5.3 is completely stable.

I really think we will get an update from them this year about MSFS. With all the high end addons closed to be release or well advanced in alpha, they will start to see concrete sales number, well for those who communicate them, and will have to make an announcement.

I still think it was a missed opportunity not to annonce the new concorde for P3D and MSFS early on. Keep you P3D customer happy and softly prepare the market for MSFS.

 

I curious on how well Concorde will sale for P3D. Except for a few diehards many have moved over or stopped buying P3D products. I still plan on using both sims and will most likely buy the next FSLabs Airbus product for P3D unless I find it’s not worth it anymore. 

Edited March 12, 20224 yr by Wise87

well,

at least DC Designs are clearly saying their MFS Concorde is coming this March 2022,

FSL cannot even announce plain speak, common sense plans for their Concorde (whenever that will be), nor an intended platform,

…

3 hours ago, psolk said:

iFly was a great example that people don't want something they already have.

Based on?

 

8 hours ago, 757FO said:

I am wondering if they are keeping quiet about their FS20 plans because of the competition that the Fenix A320 is going to bring to that platform, I would love to see how these 2 are going to measure up, but based on the features announced by the Fenix team, it will be a a challenge for FSL to surpass what Fenix has announced. Competition is healthy so I am looking forward to see what these 2 will deliver on their release date. But I agree with others that it would be nice of FSL to share a bit more and keep us looking forward to their upcoming projects, giving us bits here and there is not really doing it for me tbh....

If the Fenix A320 is all that it is hyped up to be in MSFS (this is not a given, let's wait until it's released), the Fenix A320 plus the FBW A320 would saturate the MSFS A320 market.  I'm not sure it would make sense for FSLabs to proceed with the A320 for MSFS, if the A320 market in MSFS is that saturated already.  And I am going to guess that Fenix will tackle the A319 and A321 next in MSFS, because they can reuse their code from the Fenix A320.  Fenix will have effectively taken the A319, A320, and A321 market away from FSLabs in MSFS.

Not sure what FSLabs will target in MSFS with Fenix there.  Fenix has definitely put FSLabs between a rock and a hard place for MSFS. FSLabs would probably want to target something in MSFS that is not in competition with another high fidelity developer.

Edited March 12, 20224 yr by abrams_tank

A330......which is probably the mystery A3xx product in P3D. I guess it could be the A350, but the A330 seems like the natural progression from the A320, and there are a heck of a lot of them around.

Edited March 12, 20224 yr by Christopher Low

cause it is still civil :-)

7 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

What version of FSL Spotlights do you have installed?  64bit 5.0.0.3?

No platform mention ... hmmm ... 

Cheers, Rob.

I don’t have it installed Rob. It required a very old Nvidia driver to remain trouble-free with Concorde in P3D v3.

After removing it in v3 I can use my current 471.96 drivers and not have any problems.

7 hours ago, psolk said:

I don't think so at all... It's only really FSL that are keeping their cards close to their chest on MSFS.  Most other dev's have been pretty straightforward in their communication and direction.  

I can't see their dilemma when they are getting leapfrogged left and right by every other developer out there. At least announcing something could put a wrench in Fenix's potential MSFS sales by the FSL loyal who would prefer to wait.  

I don’t know why FSL don’t come out with a statement. The only clue came from Andrew Wilson aka @MachTwo saying the situation is highly fluid and is being constantly assessed. As I don’t have MSFS I can’t comment on the Fenix situation.

I won’t comment on the rest of your post as you clearly say it’s off topic. 😉

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Not sure what FSLabs will target in MSFS with Fenix there.  Fenix has definitely put FSLabs between a rock and a hard place for MSFS. FSLabs would probably want to target something in MSFS that is not in competition with another high fidelity developer.

Agreed 100%, which is why Concorde would have been their obvious candidate for MSFS. Making it (as others have pointed out) quite a missed opportunity for them at this point. You’ll shortly have DC Designs who will poach the casual-to-mid-range market from them in MSFS.

Anyway, I’ll leave it there since this is the P3D forum, but it’s increasingly hard for me to perceive any strategy from FS Labs for staying in business, let alone thriving. They seem to have been a deer caught in the headlights for what, two years now since MSFS was announced? Quite a shame, honestly.

James

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I don’t know why FSL don’t come out with a statement. The only clue came from Andrew Wilson aka @MachTwo saying the situation is highly fluid and is being constantly assessed. As I don’t have MSFS I can’t comment on the Fenix situation.

I won’t comment on the rest of your post as you clearly say it’s off topic. 😉

To be fair, Ray I only said "I digress" because it was so longwinded and was following your comment down the P3D V MSFS rathole but I was directly responding to A. your comments about this being a tough time for developers and more specifically B. the potential of V6 having parity with MSFS and what that would really mean for P3D developers... 

 It was you that opened the P3D v MSFS Pandora's box with the assertion below that I disagreed with (respectfully) and made the assertion it is much larger than "just" feature parity and would require an entire Go To Market shift by LM.  Until you brought up P3D hypothetically having parity with MSFS there was nary a mention on my part.  Had you not brought it up I would not have made my comments at all but I was directly responding to this comment.  

12 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Imagine if LM announces that v6 will have satellite scenery and will be streamed. If the scenery is of the same quality as MSFS that would bring the two sims back on equal footing. LM could be at an advantage with a single product rather than the plethora of options the rival offers.

48 minutes ago, honanhal said:

Agreed 100%, which is why Concorde would have been their obvious candidate for MSFS. Making it (as others have pointed out) quite a missed opportunity for them at this point. You’ll shortly have DC Designs who will poach the casual-to-mid-range market from them in MSFS.

Anyway, I’ll leave it there since this is the P3D forum, but it’s increasingly hard for me to perceive any strategy from FS Labs for staying in business, let alone thriving. They seem to have been a deer caught in the headlights for what, two years now since MSFS was announced? Quite a shame, honestly.

James

We do not know the business contracts that FSL have in place. They could have a very lucrative training simulation deal with various customers for all we know, which is something that is definitely more suited to P3D. A lot of people seem to be critical of the lack of information being provided by FSL with respect to Microsoft Flight Simulator, but it may not be as big an issue for them as some forum members think.

46 minutes ago, psolk said:

To be fair, Ray I only said "I digress" because it was so longwinded and was following your comment down the P3D V MSFS rathole but I was directly responding to A. your comments about this being a tough time for developers and more specifically B. the potential of V6 having parity with MSFS and what that would really mean for P3D developers... 

 It was you that opened the P3D v MSFS Pandora's box with the assertion below that I disagreed with (respectfully) and made the assertion it is much larger than "just" feature parity and would require an entire Go To Market shift by LM.  Until you brought up P3D hypothetically having parity with MSFS there was nary a mention on my part.  Had you not brought it up I would not have made my comments at all but I was directly responding to this comment.  

Fair point Paul. It was idle speculation on my part thinking that what if v6 should go down the streaming / forced updates route but I do think that is a very long shot. The ESP code would require a significant rewrite and that could be outside the agreement LM have with Microsoft. So let’s assume that’s off the table.

Back to FSL the “coming soon” comment by Lefteris will hopefully mean some helpful screenshots of the virtual cockpit including the Flight Engineer’s panel. How that will be navigable with the help of ChasePlane is of great interest to me. The multiple 2D pop ups will be a thing of the past I guess.