The ever increasing need for $$$ is a result of development costs.  There are many factors to increase cost to develop software:

1.  Secure the application (against theft)

2.  Secure the application (against malicious integrated content)

3.  Work with technologies that are always changing, evolving, or deprecated (switch to the latest APIs/libraries)

4.  Technologies have poor or unclear or missing documentation resulting in considerable developer trial and error (expensive)

5.   Far too many technologies being created that aren't solving engineering problems but exist entirely for market leverage (expensive)

6.  Working with graphics companies to resolve driver issues (time consuming chain that one must go thru to get "attention" and often requires stand alone code sample to demonstrate the issue)

7.  Cost of support (ticket system, forums, moderation, etc.) 

8.  Marketing (in some cases exceeds the cost of actual product development)

9.  Working with contractors and/or 3rd party companies (time zones can really slow this process down)

10.  Infrastructure setup to ensure multi-developer content (source code and other assets) is secure and merged without conflicts.

BTW, Project Manager, Software Manager, and Software Engineer with decades of experience here.  

I can see the need to expand the market, but that isn't cheap to do and there is often some sort of LCD (Lowest common denominator) associated with that ... meaning feature X never gets implemented because one of the desired platforms doesn't support it or doesn't have sufficient processing power to support it.

The biggest hurdle for MSFS is that other content is more interesting than just flying around ... hence MSFS 2024 push for "scenario" content to try to add more 'purpose' than just flying around.  "Subscription" is something many do NOT want or like ... the lower the user base count the higher the subscription cost needs to be to sustain development.

 

5 hours ago, jcomm said:

We need better representation of stratified clouds

xEnviro 2020 has really superb Stratus type clouds.  Rex WeatherForce has very good Stratus too.  Just the built in weather that is lacking.

9 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

I am barely surprised. The video games are getting poorer and poorer innovation-wise. The Steam front page is telling. Makes you cry. Oh yes games are visually magnificent, most of them are anyway.  But thee same types of games declined ad nauseam, FPS,RPG, MMO, city builders, zombies, etc. The same franchises in their umpteenth versions. They copy each other recipes. There are exceptions of course, mostly from indies. But rare. 

I'm HOPEFUL. There's innovation and different stuff still happening in flight simulation.  It's just not the same old tubeliners, GA props, airports, and kaleidoscope-like copies ad nauseam...

MSFS was an innovation in itself and more so since it was made to be available in the Xbox console.  Other examples are in MSFS too. Arguably A2A's Comanche, Blacksquare's Duke, the ornithopter, Top Gun Maverick, and generally lower pricing for add-ons.

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

....

The biggest hurdle for MSFS is that other content is more interesting than just flying around ... hence MSFS 2024 push for "scenario" content to try to add more 'purpose' than just flying around.  "Subscription" is something many do NOT want or like ... the lower the user base count the higher the subscription cost needs to be to sustain development.

Nice post. For me, the biggest hurdle to innovation in MSFS and for that matter in all software... is compatibility with earlier iterations.

P.S.  If MSFS really wants to add more 'purpose' to the game, they should allow planes to start shooting. Nothing focuses the mind more than surviving against the competition and squashing an enemy to a pulp eg. imagine doing that to the Avsim poster who annoys you the most. lol

Edited March 31, 20242 yr by bofhlusr

1 hour ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

xEnviro 2020 has really superb Stratus type clouds.  Rex WeatherForce has very good Stratus too.  Just the built in weather that is lacking.

The built-in weather is 1,000 times better when you consider that the alternatives produce the same weather all over the globe with abrupt changes. I certainly won't be going back to 2006.

20 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

The built-in weather is 1,000 times better when you consider that the alternatives produce the same weather all over the globe with abrupt changes. I certainly won't be going back to 2006.

xEnviro doesn't have abrupt changes to the weather, it transitions between areas slowly and intelligently.  Granted, if one cannot do without locally produced weather, it isn't an option, but it absolutely does produce many more cloud types than default, something I value in the depicted weather.

2 hours ago, bofhlusr said:

Nothing focuses the mind more than surviving against the competition and squashing an enemy to a pulp

To each his or her own, I'm perfectly happy flying around but as posted, weather depiction is not accurate and seems have no real impact on my flight planning nor enroute ... I never divert because I know I can land it in any condition presented in MSFS in any aircraft.  Fuel planning is almost useless without proper weather depiction especially when most aircraft try to hop on a jet stream ... just not simulated at all in MSFS.

For some, shooting things provides the "purpose", for others like myself, flight is a challenge WHEN the environment is simulated enough to make it a challenge ... right now MSFS just doesn't do that for me ... and sadly I doubt it will ever do just because I don't think the majority of users are interested in a high level of simulated fidelity ... I'm forever a niche user looking for a massive investment in development of a flight simulator that does it all and does it well so that I do feel challenged ... catch-22 ... there will never be a large enough user base to support the level of development needed to make flight realistic and a challenge.

So for me "purpose" is a realistic simulation of every aspect of flight from weather to ATC to ground surface and sadly that doesn't really exist to any degree where it would impact my flight or decisions during a flight.  But with that said, shooting and blowing things up is probably a much easier task to simulation for Asobo and my hunch is we'll see something like that in future -- anyone else remember Microsoft Combat Simulator 1 and 2 and 3 based on the same engine?

 

35 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

To each his or her own, I'm perfectly happy flying around but as posted, weather depiction is not accurate and seems have no real impact on my flight planning nor enroute ... I never divert because I know I can land it in any condition presented in MSFS in any aircraft.  Fuel planning is almost useless without proper weather depiction especially when most aircraft try to hop on a jet stream ... just not simulated at all in MSFS.

For some, shooting things provides the "purpose", for others like myself, flight is a challenge WHEN the environment is simulated enough to make it a challenge ... right now MSFS just doesn't do that for me ... and sadly I doubt it will ever do just because I don't think the majority of users are interested in a high level of simulated fidelity ... I'm forever a niche user looking for a massive investment in development of a flight simulator that does it all and does it well so that I do feel challenged ... catch-22 ... there will never be a large enough user base to support the level of development needed to make flight realistic and a challenge.

So for me "purpose" is a realistic simulation of every aspect of flight from weather to ATC to ground surface and sadly that doesn't really exist to any degree where it would impact my flight or decisions during a flight.  But with that said, shooting and blowing things up is probably a much easier task to simulation for Asobo and my hunch is we'll see something like that in future -- anyone else remember Microsoft Combat Simulator 1 and 2 and 3 based on the same engine?

 

Your comment shines with truth.This is one of the most honest comments I've read here and this is exactly the feeling I've had for a long time.

When I read certain comments here that are intended to be serious and technical on the MSFS environment it makes me laugh, and laugh... 

We are so far from the reality that a flight simulator should represent in its fundamentals.

8 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

Now, what about a Nobel laureate in Physics playing bongos in strip bars ? I see a lot of potential here.

They almost did it in 1996: Infinity, starring Matthew Broderick. It um.. Wasn't great, and it also ended right after his first wife died when he was still at Los Alamos on the Manhattan project. So it cut out a lot of the interesting things he did over his life.

16 hours ago, jcomm said:

I see no problem with MSFS one day running even in a mobile. Why not? If mobiles get the necessary performance, the only problem I see is that it'll not be good for your eyes... just as any game with detail played in a mobile screen...

Msfs is already playable on mobile; including a phone. You just need Microsoft Game-pass ultimate, and Xcloud gaming....

 

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by HiFlyer

3 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

So for me "purpose" is a realistic simulation of every aspect of flight from weather to ATC to ground surface and sadly that doesn't really exist to any degree where it would impact my flight or decisions during a flight.

Yes, I do not think MSFS is really trying to reach that level of fidelity; it would be exceptionally difficult if not impossible to achieve at a price that would be affordable to make it viable. Those do not seem like realistic expectations for what is essentially an entertainment product for people at home. That is, as you say, a very, very niche market and I suspect not many people, even who linger on these forums, are looking for that kind of 'realism'. If it was available, I suspect, few would want it. If I really wanted that I would save my money and buy time on a proper commercial simulator.

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by Cognita

15 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Too late, the weather was mutilated around SU5.

That had nothing to do with consoles though. It had to do with them switching to the METAR weather.

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by Tuskin38

39 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

That had nothing to do with consoles though.

Er…um…🤔

Since the X-Box versions have customized graphics settings, according to the last Dev Q&A X-Box Series X runs on a mix of High and Ultra, while the Series-S runs on a mix of Low and Medium.

The changes to the clouds in the SU5 updated were probably unrelated.

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by Tuskin38

51 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

Er…um…🤔

It was related to the changes to weather rendering with METAR, not consoles.

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by Tuskin38