Honestly I don't understand why cancel it. There are very good ways and healthy ways to compete vs MSFS default airplanes. Hell these news are making me considering to put an ATR-400/500 2x1 for 1 price on my roadmap and just plum ahead!

S.

1 hour ago, simbol said:

There are very good ways and healthy ways to compete vs MSFS default airplanes.

But it's not a default plane, from what we saw so far, Hans ATR seems to aim to get close to the A310 in term of quality and systems.

Just now, bendead said:

But it's not a default plane, from what we saw so far, Hans ATR seems to aim to get close to the A310 in term of quality and systems.

So like the CRJ, etc. so you saying nothing can compete with that? common.. 

Just now, simbol said:

So like the CRJ, etc. so you saying nothing can compete with that? common.. 

With the CRJ, you have a few things :

- First "Major" aircraft release for MSFS, young SDK.

- It was rushed and fixes/updates did not follow well.

- Aerosoft stated that they did not aimed at hardcore simmers.

- A lot was ported over from P3D, I don't think the ATR-72 600 is available on this sim.

 

9 minutes ago, simbol said:

So like the CRJ, etc. so you saying nothing can compete with that? common.. 

Also, if you loose a big portion of your sells potential because of a competitor, really makes you think about invest more money. If they planed to released first that would be another story

Path is cleared for the 737-200 and SR-71 tho

Edited January 11, 20233 yr by bendead

The SDK hasn't change much since 2020 my friend, what has changed is the core SIM.. CRJ uses the same SDK WASM modules the "inibuild" A310 (re-branded as Microsoft is using), and the same SDK modules WASM PMDG and myself use this day.

I find it amazing how people assume because MS or any other developer already did a plane, is game over.. the time of exclusivity in MSFS is gone.. we have too many 3rd party developers and clearly, there is a limit of airplanes that exist on this world to be build.. so either you compete or you leave.. simple as that..

S.

Edited January 11, 20233 yr by simbol

19 hours ago, qqwertzde said:

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

Insider knowledge is always welcome but claiming you have it (not saying you dont) without saying what that knowledge actually is doesnt really make anything clearer

Perhaps you could elaborate?

 

7 minutes ago, simbol said:

The SDK hasn't change much since 2020 my friend, what has changed is the core SIM.. CRJ uses the same SDK WASM modules the "inibuild" A310 (re-branded as Microsoft is using), and the same SDK modules WASM PMDG and myself use this day.

I find it amazing how people assume because MS or any other developer already did a plane, is game over.. the time of exclusivity in MSFS is gone.. we have too many 3rd party developers and clearly, there is a limit of airplanes that exist on this world to be build.. so either you compete or you leave.. simple as that..

S.

From what Milviz is saying, the ATR will be more expensive and be released later, to the small minority of customer left willing to spend extra cash on nearly the same airplane. It's like if FS labs puts priority over other project on releasing the A320 for MSFS as soon as possible, when you have the Fenix version already here most likely a lot cheaper

Not sure why some are beating Hans up over the CRJ.  It’s not like he was the guy who determined what features or “study levelness” it was going to be.  Those decisions are made by the financiers, which in CRJ’s case is Aerosoft.  If Microsoft wants to pay Hans to develop a “high fidelity” plane with all the bells and whistles, then I’m sure that’s what we’ll get.

So then FSlabs should give up? and don't bring their product? you think their customer base would not support them in MSFS with a A320? I doubt it.. the maths are not working out.. MSFS market is huge.. competition is also big.. not going to go away..

14 minutes ago, simbol said:

So then FSlabs should give up? and don't bring their product?

They are currently developing the concorde, A330 and A320. Of course it would be a good idea to focus on the first two, since no other devs are working on serious version of those planes, meaning a lot of potential customers, they should also release the A320 NEO after.

You understand the concept of un tapped market?

If Milviz took this decision, they probably analyzed the market a lot better than what you are doing right now.

 

Edited January 11, 20233 yr by bendead

2 minutes ago, bendead said:

they probably analyzed the market a lot better than what you are doing right now.

A bit harsh no? what if my analysis is better than theirs? how can you possible know this?

In passing Aerosoft is building a A330.. so perhaps FSLabs should give that up.. or Aerosoft should give up.. hmm..

This is a niche market.. competition and exclusivity is over.. you will see from this year onwards 2 to 5 airplanes of the same type developed by multiple firms.. they will come in multiple flavors, colors, and level of simulation. Take for an instance bedrock3D 737 is there.. then you have PMDG 737.. and I know 2 other firms bringing also 737's.. the truth is, people will buy the best product based on reviews, company preference, company reputation, you name it.. the market in MSFS is evolving and companies will need to adapt to it, or do something else entirely.

S. 

26 minutes ago, simbol said:

So then FSlabs should give up? and don't bring their product? you think their customer base would not support them in MSFS with a A320? I doubt it.. the maths are not working out.. MSFS market is huge.. competition is also big.. not going to go away..

With so many people already flying the Fenix, I seriously doubt if FS Labs is going to get much market share with another A 320. 

Just now, Bobsk8 said:

With so many people already flying the Fenix, I seriously doubt if FS Labs is going to get much market share with another A 320. 

On that basis Latin VFR sales should have been zero.. and yet I know this is not the case :)

Just now, simbol said:

A bit harsh no? what if my analysis is better than theirs? how can you possible know this?

If it's the case, please contact Milviz, they need about 30K$++ to finish the ATR, if you feel that you are in the right, go ahead, that could be a great investment.

7 minutes ago, simbol said:

In passing Aerosoft is building a A330.. so perhaps FSLabs should give that up.. or Aerosoft should give up.. hmm..

HAHAHA, when you run out of bad faith, please let me know 😅