19 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

One thing about Fenix announcing a wide body airbus though, is that I don't know if they have the base code/engine for that.

So, and my opinion here is complete conjecture with 0 facts, but I imagine Pro-Sim was just a one-time strategy that Fenix used to get their first product to the market at a level of fidelity that would have been completely cost prohibitive without pro-sim. BUT, once they start to collect on the massive influx of revenue generated by the A320, they'll be able to grow their development team to fund future products at a speed that won't require pro-sim. And so, in my opinion, the A320 could allow Fenix to fund a from-zero-to-hero production line of products, as long as Aamir and the team don't spend all the revenue on vacation homes and nights at the pub. 😂

5 minutes ago, WestAir said:

So, and my opinion here is complete conjecture with 0 facts, but I imagine Pro-Sim was just a one-time strategy that Fenix used to get their first product to the market at a level of fidelity that would have been completely cost prohibitive without pro-sim. BUT, once they start to collect on the massive influx of revenue generated by the A320, they'll be able to grow their development team to fund future products at a speed that won't require pro-sim. And so, in my opinion, the A320 could allow Fenix to fund a from-zero-to-hero production line of products, as long as Aamir and the team don't spend all the revenue on vacation homes and nights at the pub. 😂

Software development is not that easy though.  I think the money Fenix makes, can definitely help them to hire new developers.  But adding, say, 2x more developers to their team doesn't mean they will develop at 2x the speed.

For some tasks, like textures and graphics, yeah, I think adding more artists can speed things up.  But not for software development, it's not that easy. Having said that, adding more specialized people can help in a software project, and does speed things up, just not at a 1 to 1 factor (ie. 2 people working on a software project does not necessarily mean double the speed of 1 person working on it).

Edited May 12, 20224 yr by abrams_tank

Not sure why FSL is wasting time and money developing the Neo for P3D. There is already an amazing freeware product on a arguably much more advanced simulator.(msfs) FBW will only get better and better as we wait an age for the FSL development cycle. FSL need to get their skates on as they are quickly becoming irrelevant. 

This flight simmer will also never give Flight Sim Labs another dime, but for another reason:  Their crazy obsession with proprietary  rights, plus crazy installation requirements, and RE-installation of their products has driven me batty over the years.  I spent untold hours trying to re-install the A320 to no avail (I have given up and it is now lost to me), and the Concorde is still is not right working right after re-install.  Yes, I contacted FSL Support - totally inadequate...   

Better late and done right than something thrown into the simulator as is right now. Even PMDG's 737 which was superb when launched for FSX and P3D later on is buggy in MSFS, missing features and even has flickering screens due to the state MSFS is in. MSFS needs a lot of time to mature, there's lots of time to enjoy P3D still.

FENIX? We don't know what that is, it's not even out yet. FBW? It's getting somewhere, but still underway, in a WIP environment.

MSFS should be the future, it's not there yet.

1 minute ago, Nuno Pinto said:

Better late and done right than something thrown into the simulator as is right now. Even PMDG's 737 which was superb when launched for FSX and P3D later on is buggy in MSFS, missing features and even has flickering screens due to the state MSFS is in. MSFS needs a lot of time to mature, there's lots of time to enjoy P3D still.

FENIX? We don't know what that is, it's not even out yet. FBW? It's getting somewhere, but still underway, in a WIP environment.

MSFS should be the future, it's not there yet.

That's not true at all. Almost any version 1.0 software as bug. To blame MSFS for every issue that are most likely on the PMDG side is not the correct representation of the situation. 

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

No, historical weather in MSFS is possible with compromises.  Like @JRBarrett said, storing all that data, and storing many years worth of it, is not feasible.

But compromises can be made, such as only storing 7 days worth of data, taking smaller areas of data and averaging it into a larger area, etc, to save on space.  Interpolation can also be used between two points of data to save space (ie. if it's 30 degrees at noon and 24 degrees by 5 PM, you can interpolate that at roughly 2:30 PM, it's approximately 27 degrees, so there is no need to store data for 2:30 PM).

As someone coming from a software development background myself, I don't see any technical reasons why historical weather is not possible, if certain compromises are made.

Asobo needs to get the current weather in check before worrying about historical weather, just saying.

Just now, KERNEL32 said:

Asobo needs to get the current weather in check before worrying about historical weather, just saying.

I don't disagree with you.  I guess that's where the voting system comes in, so Microsoft/Asobo knows what the priorities are.

21 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

That's not true at all. Almost any version 1.0 software as bug. To blame MSFS for every issue that are most likely on the PMDG side is not the correct representation of the situation. 

 

3 minutes ago, espent said:

So because one airplane has a bug the whole sim is in a "state"? I am curios on which developer lately has said that the sim is in a "state" that stops them from developing great products.

 

 

The  f a n b o y s  are in, i'm out. 

I really should stop picking up any flaws....er... i'm sorry, "issues" MSFS might have, it's too dangerous in AVSIM nowadays.

Edited May 12, 20224 yr by Nuno Pinto

OK, this is going way off the reservation.  Back to the topic please, which is not "my sim is better than your sim", or the PMDG 737, or weather in MSFS...

Members defending their turf to the death provides no end of entertainment. At the risk of incurring the wrath of all and sundry, I have BOTH P3D and MSFS installed. No intention of deleting P3D and will buy the FSL Concorde and 330 for P3D.

There, I've said it. 🤣

Live and let live...

Edited May 12, 20224 yr by DavidP

I wouldn't write fslabs off just yet, even if they are very late to the MSFS party.

They were revolutionary in many ways with both, their Concorde and especially their A320 series. They are a very talented and passionate group. It's not without reason they have (had?) a large fan base amongst serious simmers, which could have been even bigger, if they had chosen a better way to protect their software from piracy.

If I was in their position, I would try to get the P3D Concorde out the door quickly and sooner rather than later concentrate on the A330 for MSFS - and only that.

Concorde sure. A320 ,way too late to enter the game. 

Glad to see FSL is coming to MSFS.  Sure they will be out after the Fenix a320, however, I only care about one thing and that is having the highest fidelity in my sim as I can, if the FSL is better in anyway than I will buy it, even if I bought the Fenix a week prior. 

 

Same can be said about the Neo.. sure, the FBW is great but I will pay happily for a more in depth experience 

FSL should do the A350. A320 is saturated now.