2 hours ago, Krakin said:

So you're just regurgitating things you've heard people say, then. The ATR is far from bad. I'd say it is very good. The main thing it is lacking when it comes to features is failures and that was at the request of ATR. Hans has shown that he is committed to keeping the plane up to date (probably a contractual obligation) and it has already gotten more updates than his CRJ. At $13 it is an amazing value. I've watched flywithmagnar's tutorials on the Asobo ATR and not once did he ever say it was bad. If you want to beef with someone because Blackbird dropped the ATR, beef with Blackbird because considering how low the cost of the Asobo ATR is, a lot of people would have been willing to pay more to get some more, including me. It is a very popular aircraft so it would have been worth their while. While we're at it, them pulling out is actually proof that the Asobo ATR isn't bad. If this was some Captain Sim level pos, Blackbird would not have been phased and would have forged ahead with the development of their ATR.

And who's to say the Blackbird version would have been better.

Certainly, when it comes to system modelling I'm deeply unimpressed with what they have achieved in MSFS so far.

Edited October 7, 20232 yr by Matchstick

On 10/7/2023 at 2:30 PM, Gazzareth said:

Not at all. They've done it because the default is nowhere near the quality they are trying to have in the defaults, and as good as the FBW is, it isn't on XBOX.

Sorry but I think it’s naive to take their explanations at face value. It’s just an attempt to squash anything good and free and that people want, but that Microsoft can’t monetise .

 

deleted

Edited October 8, 20232 yr by BrammyH

11 minutes ago, tfm said:

Sorry but I think it’s naive to take their explanations at face value. It’s just an attempt to squash anything good and free and that people want, but that Microsoft can’t monetise .

 

Just because that's what you think doesn't mean it's right, there's plenty of other freeware out there be it aircraft, scenery or utilities, MS going to do the lot?

Also why stop there, what about the stuff that's good and not free? They've even made sure people can choose to buy stuff on the store or direct (where they make nothing).

Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold water,

 

G

 

Consider also: The premium edition aircraft were originally encrypted, making it hard to mod them. At some point, the encryption was removed (in response to community requests).

Why would they do that if they didn't want people to mod the default aircraft?

4 minutes ago, martinboehme said:

Consider also: The premium edition aircraft were originally encrypted, making it hard to mod them. At some point, the encryption was removed (in response to community requests).

Why would they do that if they didn't want people to mod the default aircraft?

Personally I think it's far more to get/keep people using the XBOX as their preferred gaming platform.That's in their commercial interest.

G

1 hour ago, Gazzareth said:

Just because that's what you think doesn't mean it's right, there's plenty of other freeware out there be it aircraft, scenery or utilities, MS going to do the lot?

Also why stop there, what about the stuff that's good and not free? They've even made sure people can choose to buy stuff on the store or direct (where they make nothing).

Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold water,

It’s speculation of course, but that doesn’t make it a conspiracy theory: I’m merely calling out Microsoft for what I consider to be their likely agenda.

I might, of course, be wrong - but if so, it’s not for reasons you have identified.

As to your first point: MS has preferentially targeted one of the most sophisticated, mature, labour intensive add-ons (the FBW A320, I mean): I have not seen any credible explanation for devoting development resources to targeting this (rather than giving people something they want, like a free 737) except the one I have suggested.

As for your second point: It suits Microsoft to normalise payment for add-ons and to disincentivise non-profit providers. It is true that MS allows profit transactions outside its “marketplace” without taking a cut, but the key point here is that this is in MS’s control: it can change the rules at any time, when it judges the time is right to make yet more money.

 

Edited October 8, 20232 yr by tfm

16 minutes ago, tfm said:

I have not seen any credible explanation for devoting development resources to targeting this (rather than giving people something they want, like a free 737) except the one I have suggested.

They have a license already for the A320Neo. They do not have one for the 737. They mentioned another aircraft coming out soon was delayed for licensing reasons. By doing the Neo, lawyers don't need to be involved. 

18 minutes ago, tfm said:

As for your second point: It suits Microsoft to normalise payment for add-ons and to disincentivise non-profit providers. It is true that MS allows profit transactions outside its “marketplace” without taking a cut, but the key point here is that this is in MS’s control: it can change the rules at any time, when it judges the time is right to make yet more money.

The word on the street is this Neo will be free. Going back to the license, their license likely is for it to be included in the sim as default aircraft and not as a paid add-on. Charging for it would require renegotiating a license.

We will see when the SU14 betas come out, but it's not one of the Famous Flyers/Local Legends they keep close to their vest.

Also, frankly, while the FBW A320 is fantastic, let's keep a few things in mind: they based theirs off the default NEO. As absolutely fantastic as the FBW is, it is missing things like FINAL_APP, missed approach, etc. We will see if these are in the Ini A320, but maybe the FBW can mod that one as well.

The people this really affects are the Fenix devs. It's hard to compete with free, or even a price point like the ATR. They have mentioned on their Discord this is forcing them to take a hard look at their business model.

2 hours ago, Gazzareth said:

Personally I think it's far more to get/keep people using the XBOX as their preferred gaming platform.That's in their commercial interest.

G

As much as I want to believe their thinking process I don't see majority of the serious flightsim community converting over to a console anytime soon for their needs as to flight sim as they are trying to push. Now playing Forza, COD or Y2k sure as most will get bored and move on to the next thing on console and the MSFS 2024 missions (nor a new A320neo) are going to change that either but can't fault them from trying. I'm sure V1 Simulations ( RL A320 pilot) will have some fun streams on youtube comparing the new Neo vs FBW and Fenix though.

6 hours ago, tfm said:

It’s just an attempt to squash anything good and free and that people want,

That is complete bull.

Asobo approached FBW to put the A320N on the marketplace for a bit, but FBW asked for it to be removed because of how long it takes to get updates on there, back when most Sim Updates broken the mod. I think there was also something in the licence agreement FBW didn't like.

  

6 hours ago, Gazzareth said:

Personally I think it's far more to get/keep people using the XBOX as their preferred gaming platform.That's in their commercial interest.

G

But you can't mod aircraft on the X-Box. So decrypting the premium aircraft is useless for x-box pilots.

  

4 hours ago, tfm said:

I have not seen any credible explanation for devoting development resources to targeting this

Because the X-Box doesn't have a good A320Neo.

Jorg wants to update all the default aircraft to be better than they were at launch, they've already updated the default Garmin avionics, and the default 747 and 787 have been upgraded.

 I guess he wanted something more than just update the A320N's avionics for this time.

  

4 hours ago, BrammyH said:

We will see when the SU14 betas come out, but it's not one of the Famous Flyers/Local Legends they keep close to their vest.

The A310 wasn't part of the 40th Anniversary Beta, so the Neo may not be in the SU14 beta.

I do worry, as they had no images to show of the Neo during the Q&A, 3 months for the planned release.

There was also no presentation slide at all, so it's possible that was just a surprise last minute announcement and not planned which is why there wasn't anything to show.

Edited October 9, 20232 yr by Tuskin38

7 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

Asobo approached FBW to put the A320N on the marketplace for a bit, but FBW asked for it to be removed because of how long it takes to get updates on there, back when most Sim Updates broken the mod. I think there was also something in the licence agreement FBW didn't like.

It was removed because of changing our licensing back to GPL3. Asobo only allows MIT licensed products on the marketplace. You can read more about it here.

 

11 hours ago, BrammyH said:

Also, frankly, while the FBW A320 is fantastic, let's keep a few things in mind: they based theirs off the default NEO.

The only thing based on the default NEO at this point is the model itself. Everything else is custom-built. There'll be nothing that ties us to the default aircraft after the re-model. Even so, we're still an entirely seperate entity. The default A320 could suddenly dissapear from MSFS and we'd still be fine.

 

11 hours ago, BrammyH said:

but maybe the FBW can mod that one as well

That's pretty much out of the question, we already have frameworks for building our A320. The aforementioned features you said were missing for example, is in internal testing.

 

14 hours ago, tfm said:

It’s just an attempt to squash anything good and free and that people want,

I don't really agree here. Asobo has provided a lot of free world updates that they could easily make DLCs. We're getting the Scenery Gateway that will basically allow free revamped default airports. Asobo has done a lot of things for free that they've easily been able to make a DLC but didn't. Not every action microsoft takes needs to have a monetary incentive as their focus here might be adoption. Similiar to how Xbox game pass was burning cash for a while to adopt more and more subscribers. Or how the PS4 console basically sold at a loss, because all the money was in PS Online, Game Sales etc. All of those situations was just about adoption.

Edited October 9, 20232 yr by Lucky38i

3 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

The only thing based on the default NEO at this point is the model itself. Everything else is custom-built. There'll be nothing that ties us to the default aircraft after the re-model. Even so, we're still an entirely seperate entity. The default A320 could suddenly dissapear from MSFS and we'd still be fine.

Thanks for the clarification. I forgot you forked everything but the model off to a separate plane.