13 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

To be fair, the A310 was already in development before Microsoft came in and paid them to include it in the base sim. No idea if the ATR was already planned before MS got involved.

That's not really my point.

My point is that Microsoft doesn't see the need to dumb down the aircraft it releases to appeal to a wider audience, as the A310 demonstrates, so from what we've seen so far and the fact that the A310 exists, we can infer that there's plenty of chances that the ATR is going to feature similar simulation complexity.

I've thought for quite a while now that Milviz is gradually winding down the Consumer sim side of their business.

 

58 minutes ago, Pathfinder633 said:

I've thought for quite a while now that Milviz is gradually winding down the Consumer sim side of their business.

 

Just wait and see (I am a beta tester for them).

1 hour ago, Abriael said:

My point is that Microsoft doesn't see the need to dumb down the aircraft it releases to appeal to a wider audience, as the A310 demonstrates, so from what we've seen so far and the fact that the A310 exists, we can infer that there's plenty of chances that the ATR is going to feature similar simulation complexity.

Yes, and I wonder if this is not what led Milviz to the decision to discontinue. They waited to see how the Asobo version was shaping up. If the Asobo ATR was basically a modelled shell with default systems they may have gone ahead, but if it is basically a high-fidelity aircraft then it is reasonable for them to conclude it would not be worth their while to continue for an aircraft with a few additional features that only a small percentage would purchase. 

6 hours ago, b1bmsgt said:

Isn't he the one that took like 7-8 years to finish the Aerosoft CRJ for FSX/P3D?

He is also the one who did Flight1's ATR back in the day, and that was simply an amazing bird. One of the best add-on aircraft available at that time alongside the PMDG birds and the Level-D 767.

 

Edited January 10, 20233 yr by Farlis

2 hours ago, mrueedi said:

It can, but close or duplicated products are also not only bad for the devs (who have to share profit) but also for us, because it means an opportunity was lost to bring another highly wanted aircraft.

I understand what you're saying. But, I'd say let the market decide what the winner is, not two companies working in cooperation.

I appreciate what both Laminar Research and Microsoft bring to the flight sim community. While people certainly have their strong platform preference, there is a market for both platforms. Both platforms exist because one platform fills a gap that is missing in the other. The innovation we now see in MSFS is a response to the innovation introduced by XP, P3D, etc.

If you want a better platform, a better flight model, better weather representation, a better FMC, etc., encourage competition and reward the winners with your $$$.

I continue to support both MSFS and XP because I appreciate the innovation both are introducing into the flight sim community.

If two airplane developers produce the same plane, let them compete for customers by providing the superior aircraft along with superior support.

Edited January 10, 20233 yr by N9718

The delirious entitlement in this thread is atrocious, deflecting and making Hans Hartmann's work out to be the problem instead of Milviz biting off more than they could chew.😒

You are not getting a study level Milviz ATR because that particular developer has run out of steam, point blank period!

 

I respect their move as it is what it is. From a project and product management perspective, it's all about ROI(return on investments). You estimate this in the beginning to see if it's even worth starting the project/product. You also do a continuous review with ROI so that you know when to kill a project/product to cut your loses. The things they mentioned are spot on with ROI evaluation. The big advantage in creating a competing product is to be first to market! You are ok with taking on more risk if you can be first to market. A lower advantage of being second to market is betting on a failure of a competitor and capitalizing on their flounder. You might benefit from a competitor's product issue and provide your own product with the solution.    

At the end of the day, it's all a guess and bet. In this scenario, it seems they are stopping the bleeding and weighing the second to market option. Asobo has the funding, capacity and velocity, so it's a good move to see just how in depth they will go.  

Another first to market option is the cash grab. You throw something together with minimal investment to fill that high demand and squeeze it as much as can. You all have seen this tactic before🤣. It's a very risky move because it can ruin you reputation.

2 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

.😒

You are not getting a study level Milviz ATR because that particular developer has run out of steam, point blank period!

 

Lol!   Not even close.  It's exactly as they described.  MS is already going to release one - it's going to steal a lot of the purchases away.  

Interesting discussion, but I think some points are being overlooked:

First of all, we're talking about DIFFERENT birds here. Milviz was working on the -500 variant, while Hans is doing the -600 variant, including also the ATR42. The -600 has different engines, cockpit, upgraded avionics, passenger capacity and some other differences. Maybe not as obvious, but it's almost like the 320 ceo to neo transition. I see no reason for either side to articulate with the other to see who releases. And if I had to pick just one, the -600 would be my choice.

I understand Hans got a bit of bad rep because of the CRJ (can't really elaborate since I don't own it). However, as some already pointed, he developed the Flight1 ATR which was a great addon at the time. I'll go even further and remind you he was part of the team that developed the Digital Aviation Fokker 100 (and 70) which was a FABULOUS addon.

So, bearing in mind that Hans has over 20 years experience working with the ATR and also that he has been given full cooperation by ATR, I believe the ATR will be a high-quality product.

As for Milviz, I'm sorry to see the project go, but it should serve as a cautionary tale - when a project takes so long that the platform you designed it for becomes irrelevant in the meantime and you have to start from scratch, maybe it means you are lacking proper planning, resources, or both. Reminds me a bit of the absurd development history of the Just Flight 747-200.

 

45 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

 it's going to steal a lot of the purchases away.  

Since when have you "hardcore study level sim consumers" ever accepted this as an excuse?

If it were any other developer in this particular situation that excuse would not fly, and they would be shot down into flames here.

Talk about extreme bias, from moving the goalpost to blatantly flipping it upside down. Sheesh!

Whatever helps you sleep better at night.🤣

Edited January 10, 20233 yr by blueshark747

The Milviz ATR has a long history of unsuccessful releases. Happened the same with their P3D edition, don't know if for the same reason as MSFS's version.

BBS is a much smaller development team compared to say PMDG.  I don't know for certain but I'm guessing the risk was too great to continue work on it because of the MS version.  The hardcore niche people represent a tiny minority of all MSFS sales volume anyway.  Still though many newcomers would fly an ATR.  MS will release theirs first therefore they would get more sales.

11 hours ago, Donka said:

I wonder if the Asobo Porter had any bearing on this. Blackbird took their time to get Phase 2 released and wonder if that was due to an impact on sales.

Slightly off topic, but I’m interested to know what people think about the quality of the Asobo Porter. Personally, I really like it and use it quite a lot, but I’ve never been in one in real life and have no idea how close the Asobo one is to the real thing.

9 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

BBS is a much smaller development team compared to say PMDG.  I don't know for certain but I'm guessing the risk was too great to continue work on it because of the MS version.

I do not know the amount of personnel per team but what I do know is that Milviz/Blackbird are/were working on many aircraft at the same time: F16, (new)F15, C130, ATR, etc. When they indeed are a smal(ler) team, than I understand the low development pace. Maybe they need to make a choice and go for it with all the people they have?