iniBuilds A310 new update/screenshot

[Swe_Richard 1,172]

2 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

If they aren't intending for this product to be easily accessible to the mass audience that's great, but everything MS has done so far has courted that mass audience so going that way would be a significant shift to their current policy

Time will tell, I suppose. 

[lwt1971 7,417]

43 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

Thing is MS has made MSFS a huge success by marketting it to as wide an audience as possible but a plane as complex as the A310 would not be accessible to all players unless they are willing to invest significant time in learning the systems.

If MS want to embrace that I'm very happy but I'm not entirely convinced they fully understand the possible implications of this.

I guess I'm still not understanding you completely maybe... are you saying that the mere inclusion of a complex high fidelity airliner (for free and *optional* use) in the core sim is going to scare off a chunk of that wider audience?, even if they have various non-complex aircrafts also in the box? Conversely, does this then mean that the mere inclusion (again, for free and optional use) of simple aircrafts in the core sim put off that small "hardcore" subset of the audience? 🙂

My point is that it's not an either-or ... MSFS can continue to be a huge success precisely because it can cater both to a wide audience from those wanting simple aicrafts and scenarios, and those wanting complex aircrafts and scenarios.  And going by your assumption, if MSFS has already had a huge audience in capturing that wider ("simpler") audience, is it not anything but good to also include complex aircrafts, for free? Then it will capture an even wider audience wouldn't it? If some complex processes/usage was *forced* upon *all* users including these "simpler" folk then maybe there's an argument to be made like yours (but I don't think even that's remotely what MS/Asobo want to do)... but here, a complex aircraft is being included in the box for free, and only for use if the user chooses to... ya I don't see the issue here.
 

Edited June 30, 2022 by lwt1971

[jcomm 5,939]

ASOBO is in the game to please all potential users of the MFS platform.

The only area they didn't ( yet , probably never... ) embrace appears to be air combat, and I really hope they don't...

So, great to be able to get a rather sophisticated airliner addon for free !!!

[Matchstick 1,886]

9 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

I guess I'm still not understanding you completely maybe... are you saying that the mere inclusion of a complex high fidelity airliner (for free and *optional* use) in the core sim is going to scare off a chunk of that wider audience?, even if they have various non-complex aircrafts also in the box? Conversely, does this then mean that the mere inclusion (again, for free and optional use) of simple aircrafts in the core sim put off that small "hardcore" subset of the audience? 🙂

My point is that it's not an either-or ... MSFS can continue to be a huge success precisely because it can cater both to a wide audience from those wanting simple aicrafts and scenarios, and those wanting complex aircrafts and scenarios.  And going by your assumption, if MSFS has already had a huge audience in capturing that wider ("simpler") audience, is it not anything but good to also include complex aircrafts, for free? Then it will capture an even wider audience wouldn't it? If some complex processes/usage was *forced* upon *all* users including these "simpler" folk then maybe there's an argument to be made like yours (but I don't think even that's remotely what MS/Asobo want to do)... but here, a complex aircraft is being included in the box for free, and only for use if the user chooses to... ya I don't see the issue here.
 

Not that it's going to potentially scare off a chunk of that wider audience so much but rather potentially be intimidating and inaccessible to a significant chunk of the audience. If you want learn a complex plane almost anyone can do it but you have to be willing to invest a significant chunk of time and effort in doing so.
That is the nature of really high fidelity airliners (whether third-party add-ons or part of the core product) - which is why as I say I love the idea of mid-fidelity options as well - and I don't know how willing MS will be to allow content for which they are presumably paying a significant fee to not be easily accessible without significant investment from the users.

But of course I really do hope this experiment works - that MS do deliver the plane in all it's glory and that, as you say, it expands the audience for hight fidelity airliners in the way that MSFS has expanded the flight sim market in general, we'll have to see.

(I also hope ini will be able to sell A310 Freighter, MRTT and ACJ expansions as well)

[ha5mvo 254]

You'll be hard pressed to name much more than 10 "high fidelity" aircraft ever built for FS starting from the Dreamfleet 737 and the 767 PIC way back than.

If the inibuild airbus will turn out to be such, then it's an unexpected bonus. Personally I believe it will turn out to be more of a mid-tier , bae-146 level but time will tell.

Anyway, there are plenty of options available for those who merely aim at hitting control E and enjoying the scenery. They won't use the higher end planes just as others will never load a default pilatus.

Edited June 30, 2022 by ha5mvo

[lwt1971 7,417]

1 hour ago, Matchstick said:

Not that it's going to potentially scare off a chunk of that wider audience so much but rather potentially be intimidating and inaccessible to a significant chunk of the audience. If you want learn a complex plane almost anyone can do it but you have to be willing to invest a significant chunk of time and effort in doing so.
That is the nature of really high fidelity airliners (whether third-party add-ons or part of the core product) - which is why as I say I love the idea of mid-fidelity options as well - and I don't know how willing MS will be to allow content for which they are presumably paying a significant fee to not be easily accessible without significant investment from the users.

But of course I really do hope this experiment works - that MS do deliver the plane in all it's glory and that, as you say, it expands the audience for hight fidelity airliners in the way that MSFS has expanded the flight sim market in general, we'll have to see.

Ok I think I get you now... you're asking if MS/Asobo will consider it worth the spend if only a small portion of their audience actually uses the high fidelity iniBuilds A310 etc. Ya at this point it's pretty clear that MS/Asobo are very serious about building up a sim platform that caters to wide variety of audiences, and especially the serious simmer crowd even if they are the minority in this wide audience. If not, MS/Asobo wouldn't be wasting time doing CFD technology involving Navier Stokes equations, or building up a complex atmospheric airflow system for gliders and other aircrafts in general, or hiring Working Title to beef up the default avionics (to the point now where the G1000 Nxi is fairly high fidelity and best-in-class vs other sims' default avionics), or spending the funds to contract aircrafts from renowned developers like iniBuilds, etc etc.

With the iniBuilds A310, as iniBuilds themselves clearly stated (https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/621240-inibuilds-a310-new-updatescreenshot/?do=findComment&comment=4804939) this A310 is going be serious business, better than the already high-fidelity XP version, all for bl**dy free 🙂 And I wouldn't be surprised if MS/Asobo do further contracting out to other expert developers in the future.

As for medium-fidelity birds in the default fleet, maybe the coming Milviz Beaver might fall into that category, as might the Nemeth Bell-407 heli.  I also think that once Working Title gets to work on the default 787, 747, etc and their avionics, they'll eventually get to medium-fidelity tier. Bottom line, MS/Asobo are not mulling over either-option-A-or-B-or-C scenarios here.. they are pushing ahead on all fronts so as to cater to wide a variety of a flight simming audience as possible with the serious simmers very much their main focus, and I'd say they are succeeding in just under two years of being released, with much more to come.
 

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by lwt1971

[abrams_tank 7,424]

What a heist by Jorg, to get iniBuilds to become a partner of MSFS, and possibly secure iniBuilds to only make products for MSFS for the next several years! 

IMO, the two best business strategical decisions Jorg made for MSFS was hiring Working Titles, and getting iniBuilds to become a partner of MSFS with their A310 becoming a free plane for MSFS.  This is how you win over the market.  Well played by Jorg and Microsoft!

[abrams_tank 7,424]

12 hours ago, Matchstick said:

If there is a risk to the the fidelity of this A310 I don't think it would be iniBuilds dumbing things down by choice but rather MS insisting systems be simplified in order not to "scare off" less experienced simmers.

I'm hoping of course that's not going to be the case.

Hmm, can't users of MSFS start on the runway with all the systems running already?  Or the users can hit Ctrl-E, and that will automatically turn on everything for the user.

I don't understand why making the iniBuilds A310 a fully study level plane will make it harder for casual users to use.

[ha5mvo 254]

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

 Or the users can hit Ctrl-E, and that will automatically turn on everything for the user.

I don't understand why making the iniBuilds A310 a fully study level plane will make it harder for casual users to use.

Unless I misunderstand you, anything that would start using Ctrl+E would be a bottom tier addon as this means that plenty of stuff is not modelled.

[Kopteeni 819]

6 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

Unless I misunderstand you, anything that would start using Ctrl+E would be a bottom tier addon as this means that plenty of stuff is not modelled.

CTRL+E doesn't say anything as regards to the depth of the modelling. Sim planes are not physical things and you can implement code that bypasses the simulations if you want to support one click startup.

[abrams_tank 7,424]

27 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

Unless I misunderstand you, anything that would start using Ctrl+E would be a bottom tier addon as this means that plenty of stuff is not modelled.

 

19 minutes ago, Kopteeni said:

CTRL+E doesn't say anything as regards to the depth of the modelling. Sim planes are not physical things and you can implement code that bypasses the simulations if you want to support one click startup.

Yes, I agree with @Kopteeni. Ctrl-E, and starting off the runway with all systems running, has nothing to do with the depth of the systems modeling.

Edited July 1, 2022 by abrams_tank

[iborg1979 99]

15 hours ago, Matchstick said:

Not that it's going to potentially scare off a chunk of that wider audience so much but rather potentially be intimidating and inaccessible to a significant chunk of the audience. If you want learn a complex plane almost anyone can do it but you have to be willing to invest a significant chunk of time and effort in doing so.
That is the nature of really high fidelity airliners (whether third-party add-ons or part of the core product) - which is why as I say I love the idea of mid-fidelity options as well - and I don't know how willing MS will be to allow content for which they are presumably paying a significant fee to not be easily accessible without significant investment from the users.

But of course I really do hope this experiment works - that MS do deliver the plane in all it's glory and that, as you say, it expands the audience for hight fidelity airliners in the way that MSFS has expanded the flight sim market in general, we'll have to see.

(I also hope ini will be able to sell A310 Freighter, MRTT and ACJ expansions as well)

Who cares? If one doesn't want to fly aircraft X, whatever the reason, they don't fly aircraft X, period. Heck, I never flew 90% of the included a/c in MSFS. And it's fine. It didn't detract me from flying those I wanted to.

[Matchstick 1,886]

16 minutes ago, iborg1979 said:

Who cares? If one doesn't want to fly aircraft X, whatever the reason, they don't fly aircraft X, period. Heck, I never flew 90% of the included a/c in MSFS. And it's fine. It didn't detract me from flying those I wanted to.

You, however, aren't Microsoft paying a (presumably) very substantial sum up front to include this specific plane in your core product.

[iborg1979 99]

35 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

You, however, aren't Microsoft paying a (presumably) very substantial sum up front to include this specific plane in your core product.

Sure, but MS has deep pockets, and I'd wager the "very substantial sum" on the scale of the flightsim "hobby" is piddly stuff when, well, you're on the Microsoft scale.

That, and while the intended public for such high-fidelity addons might be smaller than the fabled casual Xbox Halo Pelican zoom-zoom crowd, they're also much more likely to follow down the line with out-of-pocket buys, whether directly in the Marketplace (thus MS getting a share of the profit) or outside, but nevertheless strengthening the MSFS ecosystem at large, hence bringing revenue later.

It's really win/win for MS.

[Matchstick 1,886]

9 minutes ago, iborg1979 said:

Sure, but MS has deep pockets, and I'd wager the "very substantial sum" on the scale of the flightsim "hobby" is piddly stuff when, well, you're on the Microsoft scale.

That, and while the intended public for such high-fidelity addons might be smaller than the fabled casual Xbox Halo Pelican zoom-zoom crowd, they're also much more likely to follow down the line with out-of-pocket buys, whether directly in the Marketplace (thus MS getting a share of the profit) or outside, but nevertheless strengthening the MSFS ecosystem at large, hence bringing revenue later.

It's really win/win for MS.

Everything we've seen from MS up to now has been about delivering a flight sim product with mass market appeal - and that's a good thing, MSFS quite possibly would never have existed if MS didn't believe they can do that and along the way at the very least they've create a substrate into which more niche products can be integrated by third parties.

If MS now feel confident enough to alter direction somewhat and allow portions of the core product to be actively targeted at smaller niche audiences  that is genuinely great but it is out character with what we've seen so far from them.