I'll add my vote to forced updates too for the reasons stated above. I've been working in the software development industry for over two decades now and have seen the gamut of software delivery methods and all their pros/cons.. the "agile" methodologies that are de rigueur these days, i.e. frequent incremental enhancements/fixes, can work wonders if done right (i.e. when a feature or bug fix is ready, then it makes the next "release train"). And for a software system like MSFS that relies on the cloud for a bulk of its functionalities (i.e. streaming of scenery, weather, AI, etc) then forced updates is the *only* practical way to hold the system together, where server-side and client-side is all at the same level, and developers providing add-ons/extensions to the system are also working with the same codebase across the user base.

Of course a perceived disadvantage is that  this "base" is a moving target every few months, but that just requires a new way of development and mindset. And if done right, the changes/fixes and introduction of new functionality are done in an "additive" way where previous functionality is not broken... something Asobo still needs to work on alongside with their QA.  But at year #2 after initial release, they are getting better definitely, and the open betas are hugely welcome that only serve to benefit this process.

Edited April 13, 20224 yr by lwt1971

I still see everybody here parroting on about how low priced that the PMDG is gonna be, and that PMDG has seen the light.   I will be highly shocked if it doesn't cost significantly more to buy all four variants sold separately for MSFS, than it did to buy a base pack and expansion for p3d/fsx.  He's just gone from the major carrier model to the Ryanair model in how he plans to get your 150 bucks, as far as I can see.

6 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

I still see everybody here parroting on about how low priced that the PMDG is gonna be, and that PMDG has seen the light.   I will be highly shocked if it doesn't cost significantly more to buy all four variants sold separately for MSFS, than it did to buy a base pack and expansion for p3d/fsx.  He's just gone from the major carrier model to the Ryanair model in how he plans to get your 150 bucks, as far as I can see.

For me, I don’t mind if it costs more to get all the variants.  Because I only plan to get the 800 variant.  So anyway the price can be lowered for just the 800 variant, I would prefer that, and that seems to be what Randazzo is doing.

After getting the 800 variant of the 737, I would rather spend the extra money buying another plane altogether.  Maybe buy the PMDG 777 in the future.  Or maybe consider the Fenix A320. Or maybe the upcoming Inibuilds plane for MSFS. Or maybe if A2A comes out with a plane for MSFS in the future,

For those who want to buy all the PMDG 737 variants, I hope you get a discount for buying multiple variants.

Edited April 13, 20224 yr by abrams_tank

I think many here think a whole lot of people are gonna buy the expensive stuff.

I suspect that is not the case. The vast majority of people using MSFS2020are gamers not simmers.

Don't even get me started on the people that refer to this stuff as "Study Level"! There is no such thing yet for a game.

 

Priced right gamers might be enticed, priced to high and people that know what a higher level aircraft is worth might pay a higher price.

I'm with Abrams_tank anything above $60ish generally gets a pass by me unless the product is outstanding.

The FBW A320 and the Zibo 737 on XP11 both free, suffice for me.

Edited April 13, 20224 yr by tpete61

3 hours ago, Bob Scott said:

XBox gamers and others who don't have an understanding of basic flying, much less operating an airliner. 

A gamer who will potentially be a simmer. Let’s get this classes out of Avsim 

The market is extremely hungry for a high quality airliner and for that matter, high quality aircraft of any type.

No matter the cost, the first couple of big jets out of the gate are going shatter all previous sales marks.

I'd say it will probably be the Leonardo MD-80 and PMDG 737 first to market.

To say " MSFS users expect lower prices than before for airliners" - Just speaking for myself, I never expected lower prices especially given the volume of expected sales.

The support factor alone is going to be a killer as good support staff doesn't work for free and such support can be very time consuming, especially considering we're talking about complicated airliners and people of all skill levels buying them.

How about the back office costs for handling accounting, payroll and taxes?

It goes on and on.

The dev houses would be smart to price appropriately and not chance leaving any money laying on the table but I'm confident that they know what they're doing.

59 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

A gamer who will potentially be a simmer. Let’s get this classes out of Avsim 

¡Aya carramba!  Classes??

The point is not gamer bad/simmer good, but that the usual PMDG customer is/has been someone with some background in simming/flying because of how/where it's been marketed (including being priced more for afficionados than casual users), and therefore likely to need less support answering basic questions about stuff that he already knows.  If Stihl were to market chain saws at Wal-Mart instead of a power equipment shop, they'd be more likely to have buyers unschooled in the care/use of chain saws needing support after breaking poorly-tensioned chains, gumming up carbs due to storage with unstabilized gas in them, trying to start with the kickback brake engaged etc.

If you expand your target market to a population that's not familiar with the product and its use, your support tail quickly gets much longer.

 

I would say a good starting price for  major airliner from a 3rd developer should be 59.99. of course u have to figure all their overhead, But that is the most I will spend.  I bought this computer and monitor about `7 months ago for about 3,500 dollars and boight the premium package along spending about another 200.00 on scenery.

This was a big investment for me to play this particular sim.

Yes I will buy a PMDG 800 Maddog md-80 BAE 146, and I will  stay  away this time from Captain Sim.  But like most I have a budget, but lookin forward to some nice big jets.

10 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I hope the high fidelity airline developers are paying attention to what MSFS users are saying about pricing.  A lot of users for MSFS are not willing to pay the high prices for high fidelity airliners that was charged in P3D and XPlane, even if these users originally came from P3D and XPlane. The best way I would describe this is that the demand curve for high fidelity planes in MSFS has shifted left among the "hard core flight simmer market.  However if you're a 3rd party developer working on a high fidelity plane, what you lose in a lower price, you easily make back though from the increased units you sell, because the MSFS market is that much bigger than before.  So even if you lower your price, you can make a higher total revenue because your Total Revenue = Price x Quantity Sold.  And the interesting thing about 3rd party planes sold for MSFS and other flight simulators, is that there isn't really a material cost for each additional unit sold because it's a digital good.  When a car is sold, there are costs spent on the materials and parts that went into manufacturing that car. But for a digital good like 3rd party planes for simulators, you can sell 1 copy, or 1 million copies, and there are zero material costs for each additional unit sold (there are development costs and fixed costs into making a 3rd party plane though, but those are sunk costs by the time the 3rd party plane is released for sale).  There is probably support costs though, meaning the more planes sold by a 3rd party developer, the more they have to spend on support personnel. But the support costs can probably be covered if the 3rd party developer is maximizing their Total Revenue.

Assuming the additional support costs can be covered if a 3rd plane party developer is maximizing their Total Revenue, 3rd party plane developers make the most total profit if they can maximize Price x Quantity Sold.  And I also hope that 3rd party developers understand that the demand curve for their 3rd party planes is probably a convex demand curve, rather than a linear demand curve.  A convex demand curve means if the price is lowered by say, 10%, the quantity sold can jump exponentially.  So just by lowering the price a little, the quantity sold can be that much more, leading to a much higher Total Revenue.

Regarding high prices for high fidelity airliners, you can read the user feedback in the Just Flight thread, after Just Flight said they would price their BAe 146 at $79.99 USD.  Remember, the typical user that comes to Avsim is probably your "hard core" flight simmer, the type of user that would buy a high fidelity airliner.  I don't think many casual flight simmers come to Avsim.  And you can see the number of users in that thread who refused to buy the Just Flight BAe 146 for $79.99 USD.   Here is another Reddit thread with so many users commenting that they wouldn't buy the Just Flight BAe 146 for $79.99 USD. Then Just Flight lowered the price of their BAe 146 to $64.99 USD - look at the number of users who said they would then be willing to buy the BAe 146 when they lowered the price. And the subsequent Reddit thread with the user response for the BAe 146 after the price was lowered to $64.99 USD.

I think PMDG also played a role last year in setting the expectations of price for MSFS users, when they set the price of their DC6 in MSFS to $54.99 USD.  Yes, the price of the DC6 in MSFS was lower than the P3D price of the PMDG DC6. But despite lowering the price of the DC6,  Randazzo said the sales of PMDG DC6 in MSFS outsold all the DC6 sales in FSX, P3D, and XP, within hours: https://youtu.be/qKadQrREujM?t=557.  PMDG played it smart here because I think they maximized their Total Revenue, that is, they maximized the Price x Quantity Sold.  Had PMDG kept the price of the MSFS DC6 the same as the P3D price, they probably wouldn't have sold that many copies of the DC6 in MSFS, and they may not have maximized their Total Revenue for the MSFS DC6.

Having said this, I think the TDFi MD11 being priced at $89.99 USD is too high. I don't know if TDFi is paying attention to the price of the PMDG DC6 or the Just Flight BAe 146 in MSFS, but I suspect the sales for the TDFi MD11 for MSFS will be very poor if they keep that price.  TDFi should probably read the reaction to users to the original pricing of the BAe 146 at $79.99 USD and how many users said they wouldn't buy it at that price.  Hopefully, as the TDFi MD11 comes closer to release, TDFi will come to their senses and price more accordingly.  Otherwise, if TDFi keeps that price, I don't think they are going to maximize their Total Revenue.

TLDR: 3rd party high fidelity airline developers for MSFS can make way more $$$ if they price smartly.  Price it like PMDG did for their MSFS DC6.  Price it like Just Flight is for their upcoming MSFS BAe 146. Don't price it like TDFi is planning to for their MD11.  

If you are against the higher prices of P3D and XP, please post here to let some of the 3rd party devs know your price expectations for MSFS!

 

You pay for what you get! If you want to just spent $30-$50 and get a plane full of bugs that is never finished stick with CS and Carenado! I am happy to pay a premium price for a premium product! At the end of the day it is your choice!

5 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

It’s amazing that people are willing to pay over $100 USD for a high fidelity airliner.

I judge the use I'm going to get out of a product to judge its value.  I'll be buying the Just Flight 146 and was more than willing to pay the $79.  If I use it 50 times I'll be paying $1.58 per flight - bargain for several hours of entertainment. If the documentation that comes with it is also comprehensive and the company offers fixes/updates, then that makes $79 very good value imho.

 

 

4 hours ago, tpete61 said:

Don't even get me started on the people that refer to this stuff as "Study Level"! There is no such thing yet for a game.

The aircraft about to be released (Just Flight BAe 146, the Maddog, PMDG 737)  will all need to be 'studied' before the first flight, otherwise those simulated aircraft are going nowhere.  Why does the term 'study level' annoy you?  To me it is just a term picked up in the flight sim world to mean a high fidelity simulated aircraft.  If I see an aircraft referred to as 'study level', I know I'm getting a comprehensive product with a nice thick manual 🙂

I generally judge value in terms of dollars per hour spent learning it and flying it. My Warrior II must be down to just a few cents per hour by now.

Exceptions would be things like the Nieuport 17 that I knew full well I would rarely fly but wanted it anyway.

With regard to support costs - ironically the whiniest most entitled most unreasonable purchasers tend to be among the people only willing to pay peanuts. Hence as your price drops you get both more support calls and more of the irrational demanding ones.

 

 

Edited April 14, 20224 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

6 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

It’s amazing that people are willing to pay over $100 USD for a high fidelity airliner.  I have been absent from flight simulation for 10 years and when I returned because of MSFS, I was shocked to read about the prices for some airliner add ons.  When the add on costs significantly more than the base simulator, that raises some questions, IMO.

I hope those days are gone with the introduction of MSFS.  MSFS costs $60 USD, and even less if you buy it with a discount.  I understand some 3rd party devs need to make back the money for what they invested in developing the high fidelity plane.  I think the price PMDG set for their DC6 is a fair price. I also think the new price Just Flight set for their BAe 146 is also a fair price.

TDFI though, I think they set the price too high. They are going to drive away some purchasers if they insist on keeping it at $89.99 for their MD11.

I have no issues paying for a high fidelity airliners. I never liked any of the default airplanes in FSX or P3D. If paying $100+ for an airplane that brings me several years of joy, to study and fly as close to real world as possible,  than that is a small price to pay for years of enjoyment.  I just paid out $200 for a 3 person dinner at the Keg last night, and that only lasted 2 hours. 

I see my flight simming experience as a hobby, and hobbies cost money to enjoy. If you see flight sim as just a game, for some fun once in a while, then I understand people not wanting to pay more for add-ons then they did for the sim itself. Everyone values things differently. 

Who stirs up these arguments?  Sims are wide spectrum in regard to interests.  Just fly what you fly.  It is time better spent than responding to these ....

Edited April 14, 20224 yr by fppilot

12 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I think PMDG also played a role last year in setting the expectations of price for MSFS users, when they set the price of their DC6 in MSFS to $54.99 USD.  Yes, the price of the DC6 in MSFS was lower than the P3D price of the PMDG DC6. But despite lowering the price of the DC6,  Randazzo said the sales of PMDG DC6 in MSFS outsold all the DC6 sales in FSX, P3D, and XP, within hours: https://youtu.be/qKadQrREujM?t=557.  PMDG played it smart here because I think they maximized their Total Revenue, that is, they maximized the Price x Quantity Sold.  Had PMDG kept the price of the MSFS DC6 the same as the P3D price, they probably wouldn't have sold that many copies of the DC6 in MSFS, and they may not have maximized their Total Revenue for the MSFS DC6.

I'm all for lower prices if it sustains the developers.   It's a bit of conjecture though and I wonder how valid it is.  It may well be more of a function of more MSFS users over FSX/P3D/XP that accounts for greater sales numbers, and that it may well be the vast majority of those folks who bought DC6 for MSFS qualify as 'hardcore', (that ill-defined label you may know when you see it 😉) and therefore a lot of those may well have been willing to pay P3D prices.