16 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

What “signs of weakness”? MSFS numbers this year are exactly the same as last year at 75 percent.

I know it LOOKS like a higher number of users would suggest the opposite. In fact, that was my first thought, too! Similar to the way you'd think higher gross/net revenue is good for a for-profit business. 

But I wait to form my opinion until I've had a chance to read some of the comments in the forum here. There are some very, very intelligent XP devs here that have explained exactly why the numbers actually look bad for MS. And who am I to argue w/ people who are clearly my superior? 

Some quotes you should really think about:

"If xbox supported VR there is, imho, a good chance this navigraph survey wouldn't have been so disastrous for Asobo..."

"Its looking increasingly to me like the fall of msfs as it becomes dated will be a lot quicker than it was for FSX and P3D, I'm not picking up anywhere near the commitment to the MS based sims that there was in the past."

And this quote, showing how in-touch these people are with younger generations!

"I'd say discord (and the new top gun movie) has played a huge role in this, the lack of a "safe space" for the younger generation hurl abuse at each other and to share their need to post baby yoda and anime memes had almost completely pushed them away for the longest time."

20 hours ago, GoranM said:

Not really.

No offense, but it's basic math.

No problem.

Check the graphs.  They're the source.

Here's my breakdown.

Keeping in mind that not every person who uses a flight sim took the survey, but the numbers always average out in the end and end up looking like the graph.

Approximately 70%-75% of flight simmers who took the survey use MSFS.

Approximately 35% of those same people use X-Plane 11 and 20% use X-Plane 12.

If we're going to take the ratio of MSFS to XP11.  75/35.  2.15.  Or close to one half.  

Comparing XP12 to MSFS.  75/20.  That's 3.75.  So between 1/3 and 1/4.

                                      OR

I'll use it in actual numbers as an example.  Let's say 100 people in total are in the flight simming community (I'm using actual numbers to represent percentages).  Going by the survey, about 75 of them use MSFS.  35 use XP11 (A little less than half of the MSFS users).  And 20 use XP12 (A little under 1/3 of MSFS users).  If we were to combine XP11 and XP12 together, then that's a very healthy percentage of people who use X-Plane.  

No assumptions.  No guesses.  No privileged information.  

I know there are people who simply refuse to believe these numbers, as I've seen the comments in other forums.  I've seen posts where people were accusing the X-Plane community of taking the survey more than once.  It's just ridiculous.  

The numbers don't lie.  And they're there for everyone to see.  No opinions.  Just hard facts.

EDIT:

My apologies, I was wrong due to looking at an outdated pdf. 

Edited December 25, 20223 yr by UrgentSiesta
I was wrong

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

It's entirely possible that I missed a v12 usage metric

Under 11.50+

4 times as many as msfs for xbox....

Edited December 25, 20223 yr by mSparks

4 hours ago, GoranM said:

Several years ago, Carenado contracted an X-Plane dev team by the name of Thranda to make X-Plane versions of some of their add ons under the Carenado name.  It was either some time this year or last year that Carenado and Thranda decided to amicably part ways so Thranda can create add ons under their own name for X-Plane while Carenado return to an MSFS only workflow.   They never switched to X-Plane.  They included X-Plane in their add on catalogue.  

It was interesting to read between the lines of the little Thranda shared publicly. Around that that time, Thranda discovered that their Kodiak was popular with simmers, and they felt they could make a go of it themselves.

So I think that while it was amicable, it wasn't necessarily friendly. It was along the lines of, "quantity over quality" in terms of Carenado's demands. It would seem to make sense that's also one of the reasons the PC-12 didn't ever get fully upgraded to v11 status (just a minimal compatibility). Hence SimCoders are unable to release a v12 update for it... 😞

Similarly, Thranda also sub-contract for Just Flight, and brought their very nice BAe-146 to X-Plane, among others. Sadly, though, there is very little news there now, and the crumbs they shared hint that XP will be a "third class" citizen for JF, at least for the present.

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

XP v12 isn't measured by this instrument other than in "likelihood to buy".

That’s what i thought as well. How did they get the numbers about the frequency of using XP12? Isn’t that an error then?

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

it is also true that 51% use XP v11.5, and a further 10% use v11.4

What is the source for these numbers? It’s not what the graphics says.

11 hours ago, mSparks said:

meanwhile, everything you said there is false, so perhaps you should review how you came to such incorrect conclusions.

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/ps-vr2/

https://www.ign.com/articles/no-mans-sky-playstation-vr2-release-date-psvr2

There is also answers in this navigraph survey showing VR is very much no longer niche.

I do agree flight sim + VR is highly computationally intensive tho, that's why lacking OS support for multicore is the difference between being good at them vs not when everyone has access to the same hardware.

For background, since we are very much entering an era where that topic is make or break for every tech stack I would very much recommend taking time out of your day to watch

It touches pretty deeply on all this, MS, SUN, IBM, Unix/Linux etc. All that fun and games is now, 20 years after it "finished" in the server space, coming to consumer hardware.

It's always fun to see what tangential citations you'll come up with to "support" your contentions.

Instead of finding the widely available information to support your ridiculous "xbox can't handle multicore" assertion, you jump out to other manufacturers who have a different strategy.

Microsoft have a very good experience in developing AR/VR, and obviously they have decided not to go down the path of adding additional low-margin hardware. This is likely down to their experience/belief that expanding the user base by offering more games is a more profitable path, or at least more in line with their strategy.

As we have seen before, Microsoft do make big mistakes from time to time, and they are not known for innovation. BUT, what they excel at is coming from behind in areas that they have good experience.

VR is 15% of the Navigraph market, and at least for the flight sim data we to which we have access, that number seems is consistent for several years now. And I'm sorry, 15% is niche, and it's easy to see why when you flip it on it's head: 85% DON'T use it, so why bother at this time, especially since it doesn't match well with the target user base? Answer: it doesn't.

Folks like you have been prognosticating the demise of Apple, Google, and Microsoft for decades now. And we have seen the exact opposite happen. And in most cases, it has little to do with superior technology, and much to do with good business decisions.

 

19 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Folks like you have been prognosticating the demise of Apple, Google, and Microsoft for decades now. And we have seen the exact opposite happen. And in most cases, it has little to do with superior technology, and much to do with good business decisions.

I still remember fondly from the early 2000s the year of the Linux desktop (I struggled on with my Gnome desktop)... still waiting 

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Instead of finding the widely available information to support your ridiculous "xbox can't handle multicore" assertion

It can. It of course has the hardware for it, its hardware is even stronger than the PS5.

The problem - and the reason it ends up performing worse on the same or better hardware is the OS support for it - specifically and especially for application developers - is virtually none existent. Games only need one core right? No need for more...

Up to 2018 on windows basically the only choice was including the boost libraries, in 2018 they added core VSC++ support (one of the exes bundled in the 744 releases, because even that is optional) = more developer effort for less performance.

But all these are vastly inferior in efficiency/performance/latency timing and hardware support to the OS's that were built on SMP and friends from the ground up. (see the SUN video I posted earlier) again = more developer effort for less performance.

Using a car analogy its like having a simple basic fuel map that considers nothing but accelerator pedal input and capped at 50% vs a full dyno tuning in all atmospheric conditions pushing each engine cylinder to within an inch of life all the way.

So windows phone died because to get the same perf as android or ios your battery would last 2 hours, xbox doesnt have VR because MS has nothing in house (save the disaster that is hololens) capable of leveraging the hardware to the perf levels needed for a decent VR experience.

Steam/Valve is absolutely dominating the VR space on PC because they basically abandoned windows based dev in house even before I did, to the point they launched the Steam Deck this year that is looking like it will leave xbox in 3rd place behind playstation. (and they are all behind occulus which is doing it with android/linux/arm - also see the same SUN video I posted earlier)

Edited December 25, 20223 yr by mSparks

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

It can. It of course has the hardware for it, its hardware is even stronger than the PS5.

The problem - and the reason it ends up performing worse on the same or better hardware is the OS support for it - specifically and especially for application developers - is virtually none existent. Games only need one core right? No need for more...

Up to 2018 on windows basically the only choice was including the boost libraries, in 2018 they added core VSC++ support (one of the exes bundled in the 744 releases, because even that is optional) = more developer effort for less performance.

But all these are vastly inferior in efficiency/performance/latency timing and hardware support to the OS's that were built on SMP and friends from the ground up. (see the SUN video I posted earlier) again = more developer effort for less performance.

Using a car analogy its like having a simple basic fuel map that considers nothing but accelerator pedal input and capped at 50% vs a full dyno tuning in all atmospheric conditions pushing each engine cylinder to within an inch of life all the way.

So windows phone died because to get the same perf as android or ios your battery would last 2 hours, xbox doesnt have VR because MS has nothing in house (save the disaster that is hololens) capable of leveraging the hardware to the perf levels needed for a decent VR experience.

Steam/Valve is absolutely dominating the VR space on PC because they basically abandoned windows based dev in house even before I did, to the point they launched the Steam Deck this year that is looking like it will leave xbox in 3rd place behind playstation. (and they are all behind occulus which is doing it with android/linux/arm - also see the same SUN video I posted earlier)

Yes, and as I've said multiple times, superior technology frequently fails in the face of better tactics or strategy.

I was working directly with Microsoft during the time period you're referencing. And one of the things they appreciate is if you use their stuff. So, my MacBook Pro was running Windows via Boot Camp, and I even found a way to cover the Apple logo in such a way that it became a Windows logo.

And I powered down my iPhone, put it in a drawer, and switched to Windows Phone.

Because hey, the money was really good. 🙂

Never had a problem with battery life or performance, though I fully admit to only using my phone for business comms, and y'know - phone calls.

Sad thing was they actually came up with a good Phone OS. But they arrogantly assumed that, based on their Windows dominance, that 3rd Party Devs would jump right over and create WinPhone versions of their apps - which never happened. So they couldn't get any traction with consumers...and the rest is history.

In terms of mobile hardware performance, Apple is, IIRC, exceptionally fast, even vs Android. Yet Android is quite successful. And is superior Linux under the covers, no? So why is Android more successful? It just goes to show, again, that superior technology does not always dominate.

Bringing it back to the topic at hand, VR remains a small minority of the user base in all the stats I've seen, and it's even somewhat flat-lining for a few years now, at least in the flight sim community.

I expect to see less adoption of VR for flight sim in the console community than in the PC community, and IMHO, the reasons are predominantly affluence and affinity. We'll see how that shakes out.

2 hours ago, Franz007 said:

That’s what i thought as well. How did they get the numbers about the frequency of using XP12? Isn’t that an error then?

What is the source for these numbers? It’s not what the graphics says.

I was looking at an oudated copy of the metrics, so I was wrong.

My apologies for side-tracking the convo.

49 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Never had a problem with battery life or performance, though I fully admit to only using my phone for business comms, and y'know - phone calls.

quickly checking specs 

Lumia 950 gets roughly the same battery life out of a 3000mAh battery with two 1.82 GHz Cortex-A57 and four 1.44 GHz Cortex-A53 cores  as the iPhone 6s did from a 1750mAh battery and its 2x1.85Ghz A9 .. So not quite twice as power hungry and hence heavy - but close.

Or to put it another way, windows took 6 cores and twice the battery to do what IOS could with just 2.

That was, as I make it, the point MS gave up on windows phone. (very hand wavy, mostly checking specs against what I recall) and mostly switched its business model to renting out linux servers covered in its brand name and recognition (microsoft azure) under Satya Nedela circa 2014...

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

even vs Android

pretty much equal, but Android was a total mess for everything else until Android 6 (2015) started to improve at 7, which is when apple started to lose all its mobile market share (shockingly low overall now, but still reasonably dominant in the US because brand).

fun fact, Austin was on the inside of apple iphone and ipad from very early on, before much of them were public....

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Bringing it back to the topic at hand, VR remains a small minority of the user base in all the stats I've seen

From the survey:

The VR usage has been increasing steadily over the past two years according to the respondents. More than one in four now owns a VR headset, and over 62% of the VR owners use it for flight simulation.

So more people own a VR headset than MSFS(XBOX) and Xplane 12 combined, hardly a minority.

I would put the low ball usage for flight sim down to there still being a way to go on PC to get an experience similar to PSVR, and most of that is entirely down to the ___show that is windows.

11 hours ago, blingthinger said:

You're conflating network data streams with MMO multiplayer. The latter is a small portion of their development efforts. I haven't heard Austin or anyone else mention it, even in rebuttal form, during the course of 12 so far.

I have zero DCS experience but am certain it's up there with goal and intent akin to vatsim et.al. and I'm putting that latter category in with 'networked data stream' where there is a specific rule set or intention of the feature.

A free fly option like what XP mobile currently offers can indeed be a fun thing to do from time to time, but on average I'd rather not have a bunch of kids swooping all over my approach path, threatening both my itchy TOGA trigger finger and the photometric immersion that's got me drooling onto my keyboard! Buzz off ya little twerps! : )

I'm certain that a majority of people turn it off most of the time which makes it a gimmick. Fun to have, but neither a critical component nor ultimate selling point (aside from game platforms: mobile, xbox).

Actually, it is still none. None of them has abandoned the platform entirely, which was my original statement. I understand if there's a scale-back. I would not be surprised if the beluga was a bit of a bust, so no love lost there!

Milviz's decision wasn't predicated on xp12 vs f2020, was it? I think that decision was made some time ago. Non sequitur, as you say? Same w/ the PMDG DC6 which was also a terrible first offering. The product was certainly high quality, but who cares about a DC6? Almost nobody. That's up there w/ Beluga. PMDG who? Zibo for the win.

You're listing airframe availability discrepancies (some a bit obscure) that have always existed. Nothing has really changed for XP and there's nothing Austin could / would do to be able to sway them. It didn't happen during XP11's successful run. He's got a path in mind and clearly has enough money and sales to continue enroute.

As for scenery, I'm still scratching my head wondering who Tony was talking about? Drzewiecki maybe? I don't think they've confirmed either way but have certainly embraced fs2020.

I freely admit to turning off MP in MSFS from time to time, esp if things are extra chaotic. 
But the fact is it’s still quite fun/amusing to see what other folks are doing, even if not behaving well. 
And again, flying with friends, or friendly strangers, is a great deal of fun and takes a great deals of the boredom away. 
 

It’s very similar to my IRL motorcycle road trips  

In terms of DCS & Il2, I only fly SP for scripted missions/campaigns. Even if I’m training, I use a “no kill” server. Because again, it’s way more fun knowing that the other planes have human pilots. 
You do need to be a bit more careful as collisions are active and they can kill you with their antics. Which only adds to the challenge (in a good way). 
 

another reason I fly MP is, frankly, that watching all the noobs makes me feel better about my own middle of the pack performance. And I frequently run into folks who are clearly better than I, so tagging along with them usually ends up being instructive. 
 

so, while MP may be just as niche as VR, it’s also no more a gimmick, and like you yourself said, if it serves a useful purpose in the sim, it ain’t a gimmick. 
 

Austin hasn’t spoken about it since before MSFS came out. Because once everyone saw that, it was pretty clear what features needed attention to remain competitive. To be clear, I think LR have done a great job with that prioritization and I already feel like v12 is money we’ll spent. 
 

In terms of devs leaving the platform, it’s far better to look at what they’re doing rather than what they’re saying. When they left is almost immaterial. They left because X-PLANE did not give them the RoI they were expecting. 
for eg, PMDGs dc6 would seem to be a “toe dip” product for them. Relatively unpopular and unsophisticated, it lets them get a feel for the new platform without too much trouble or potentially dissatisfied customers. 

In XPs case, it didn’t work out, in MSFS’ case, it paid off handsomely. 
 

MilViz similar, except they are too distracted by their high margin Mil contracts, and Colin is famously intolerant (for better or worse). 
 

neither has ever released another project for the sim. (Actions over words, right?)
 

FIS? iB? Cowan? Very similar.
 

While you think that they still sell XP addons means they haven’t “left” the platform, the fact that there have been extremely few updates or new products tells the truth of the situation. 
(it’s too early to tell with Cowan, but he’s working on new build MSFS addons while his XP addons aren’t being updated, even though that’s a lot less work.)

8 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

so, while MP may be just as niche as VR, it’s also no more a gimmick, and like you yourself said, if it serves a useful purpose in the sim, it ain’t a gimmick. 

My take.

MP is incredibly important.

Doing MP "right" so that it actually matters is a hulluva lot easier said than done, more often than not it is just done lazily/badly.

But get it right, and you have a Quake/2/3 arena, CSGO or Battlefield series on your hands.

DCS is actually getting very close, but requires to much to get started - similar to XP11 taking to much to make look half decent.

Which also brings me to what this whole discussion has really led me to fundamentally conclude.

Flightsims biggest problem is actually the huge expense involved in controller hardware required to enjoy it and now we know an xbox controller doesnt fix that.

From watching a few recent DCS VR videos I'm also starting to think I may also be wrong that VR should go a way to alliviate it, "doh" moment when I see them struggle with the hand controllers and realise I dont use hand controllers.... 

I think we may well need to get to the point that VR gloves work, and then simple super cheap "no function" controls to grip onto and press replace cyclics, joysticks and panels (probably not pedals, but at least they can also potentially serve car sims).

And now I'm just impatient for openXR, humpf XP12 had just about satisfied me.

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

the fact that there have been extremely few updates

Because it was finalized a week ago and still has some rough edges. 

There's no evidence to suggest that your declarations aren't a 'sky is falling' sense of 'panic'. Nothing is different now from when xp11 was released. 

 

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

watching all the noobs makes me feel better about my own middle of the pack performance

I don't doubt you here and I guarantee the lack of MMO multiplayer capability wouldn't change the sales and game-pass click-through stats.

Let's look at some numbers since we all know steam stats are 100% gospel: I see 8k players using fs2020 right now. It's mid Christmas evening in US. Fewer perfect times to expect to see tons of folks flying happily together like a flock of fowls. Moving among all major airports in the US, I see a grand total of 15ish green dots on the opening map. That's LAX, JFK, ORD, ATL, DFW and some others.

=0.2% of the current user base. Rounding up. Actually, it's smaller than that because the green dot count also includes non-Steam logins, so the denominator should be even bigger. Based on what I've heard, I'm confident that's a consistent stat outside of a twitch or YT streamer throwing a party.

Gimmick.

Yes, there a few of us now relaxing after the Christmas rush/family/food blowout! Almost installed XP12 a couple of days back, but holding off till the rough edges get sorted. Hard to get a true sense of performance this early on into the release. Anyways, is fps consistency a real issue? Some reports of serious fps fallout?