Interesting new tidbits from FSL (Flight Sim Labs)

[lwt1971]

FSL rarely speak, but they did chime in on a thread and said way more than I thought they ever would, starting here: https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/topic/34366-future-msfs-product’s-availability/?do=findComment&comment=271329
(side note: On a previous thread post they since deleted they also said their first MSFS product will be out before MSFS 2024, i.e. <= November)

"It's not just about NDAs; it's about competition in a wider marketplace and we prefer not to showcase our upcoming titles, for the time being - as many of the innovations we've designed have not been seen before on the MSFS platform. 
Once we are ready to announce our first title for MSFS, we'll be in a position to share more details with regards to what the team have spent these past few years working on."

"Why so dramatic Bob? We never told our customers to wait for us. Do we mind them flying the competition while we build ours? Of course not! Will all of our P3D customers buy our first MSFS title? Probably not, but we're very confident that many will try ours once available, because, like Andy said, we'll bring things to MSFS that were not available at this level of quality/realism before. 

"But why would people who have never flown P3D not look at ours once available? There's this thing called marketing one can do to make people curious about something they don't know yet 😉 Look, we know we're late to market. But we still think we'll have lots to offer that no one else does, and no we don't get offended if you wait with getting excited until you see the evidence :)"

"Alas, between the NDA's that we individually sign when invited into internal testing and the "commercial sensitivity" (as Andy mentioned) behind as yet non-publicly available product(s), our hands are well and truly tied for the time being.
Generally speaking I've certainly noticed a correlation between developers who are (as yet) uncontested within their respective spaces. This lack of competition presumably allows them to take a more "open" approach towards development/communication to some extent.
I'm sure folks would prefer that FSLabs continue to release products for years to come. To accomplish that, there needs to be enough USP's (unique selling points) to set our products apart from other addons on the market, and to that end a certain amount of secrecy is required around what those USP's might be.
Please try not to misconstrue any of the above as us being disrespectful towards you all as valued customers, or that we're "not listening". We all very much hope that your patience (and loyalty) will continue through to MSFS, as well as being an opportunity to attract new custom.
Everyone's continued patience on the matter will eventually pay off for all concerned. We are still focused on bringing the very best products to market and I know we all look forward to the day when we're able to share more."

"I think MSFS will be somewhat of a "new era" for us all, and we're absolutely here for that."

"We are developing for the current version of MSFS. However, as far as Asobo have communicated, aircraft developed for the current iteration of MSFS, should continue to work in 2024. Based on this, and to directly answer your question/concern regarding "Is FSL behind the curve again"; I don't believe so, and no more than any other MSFS developer. According to the announcement they made at FSExpo, they said the SDK is likely to be made available to developers in September 2024. We'll know more upon the sim's and the SDK's release. Until then, it remains challenging to comment."

"On the general comments around being "behind the curve", I too was there (as a customer) when many P3D developers announced they were discontinuing support & development over P3D. I was there for the backlash, the hurt and borderline betrayal over said standpoint, especially as (in my eyes), little could pull me away from P3D. Looking back retrospectively, these developers are undeniably reaping the benefits of said decision from a commercial standpoint. They had a head start on retooling, head start on being the first to release to market, arguably learned many important lessons very early on, helped feedback to Asobo regarding core sim issues that their product potentially exacerbated, and generally helped made the sim what it is today.". In contrast, FSL stuck firm with their promise to deliver Concorde for which I, and I'm sure many others are grateful for, but still find ourselves in a situation where we seemingly "can't do right for doing wrong". To a certain extent, there's an element of being "generally behind the curve" as a result, but we're doing our utmost to make up for "lost" time. On the flip side (to all those early adopters), we're developing on a much more stable platform than presumably they were in the early days, so it truly is "swings and roundabouts".

They seem to be confident they'll be bringing something of higher fidelity than what's available for MSFS currently, with "many new innovations not seen on the MSFS platform before". Those are fighting words, proof will be in the pudding. But competition is goodness for us as MSFS users 🙂
 

Edited August 14 by lwt1971

[guenseli]

 

 

5 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

They seem to be confident they'll be bringing of higher fidelity than what's available for MSFS currently.. those are fighting words, proof will be in the pudding. But competition is goodness for us as MSFS users

 

Maybe they do not talk about the addon itself, but their new DRM? 😉

[RichieFly]

I'd all but forgotten about these guys.

At first, I thought this was a thread about FSS and their new 727 (my eyes only saw the first two letters...FS), but it's not. It's about FSL. Well, what a surprise.

[ianb2469]

I mean, their busses were amazing. I know Fenix is amazing, but if FSL pull something new out, well…

[Lucky38i]

I do wonder if these new USPs mean they’ll retain P3D pricing habits or severely undercut the market to garner buyers. Curious of their economic strategy to try and make some ROI from the majority who already use Fenix. 
 
never the less, super curious to see what they have to bring to the table.

[Sethos]

I just shrug my shoulders reading anything from them, their so-so reputation and completely missing the entirety of a platform's first iteration cycle with barely a word, they sort-of fade into obscurity in my mind.

But as said, proof is in the pudding, now let them prove themselves with a bangin' product...

[UrgentSiesta]

Thanks for sharing.

IIRC, they said Concorde would be first to MSFS (and have shown at least one in-sim screenshot) and I'd greatly prefer that over yet another Airbus. 

Perhaps they have something completely different, as in "neither". And yes that could be very interesting.

Whatever it is, I hope it's great.

And I hope it's not $200!

[lwt1971]

What they're saying also counters the silly narrative that some still push about the platform being not enough for (and/or preventing) high fidelity aircraft development. Not that we needed FSL as an example to counter that given the numerous high fidelity aircraft already developed, but those pushing this narrative kept pointing to FSL as their proof 😀

[carlanthony24]

We already know they have been flying The 321CEO/Neo in MSFS not sure what they can bring to the sim that as not already been done. Potentially needing a base package to enable you to fly the variants and a cost that will make people buy. I can't see people wanting to buy the 320CEO family just to get a Neo. I would hazard a guess they will make the 320Neo and form it as a base package to then get the 321Neo working alongside. 

Edited August 14 by carlanthony24

[DavidP]

I always supported them in FSX/P3D etc, but to be honest, they would have to bring something ground-breaking to the table before I would be interested.

If it's another A320 then forget it.

I'd consider the Concorde but they would really have to improve their VC because even though the P3D was an improvement on previous versions, it is still pretty poor and cartoon-like.

As for their customer relations, then let's not go there.

 

 

[Gilandred]

1 hour ago, carlanthony24 said:

We already know they have been flying The 321CEO/Neo in MSFS not sure what they can bring to the sim that as not already been done. Potentially needing a base package to enable you to fly the variants and a cost that will make people buy. I can't see people wanting to buy the 320CEO family just to get a Neo. I would hazard a guess they will make the 320Neo and form it as a base package to then get the 321Neo working alongside. 

But have they?  Just because it looks like an A320/321 doesn’t mean that’s what it actually was.  For all we know it has the flight model and systems of something else entirely.  At least that’s what I would do if I was trying to keep something under wraps 😉 

Edited August 14 by Gilandred

[carlanthony24]

15 minutes ago, Gilandred said:

But have they?  Just because it looks like an A320/321 doesn’t mean that’s what it actually was.  For all we know it has the flight model and systems of something else entirely.  At least that’s what I would do if I was trying to keep something under wraps 😉 

Its been proven. From the screenshots shared around from Volanta and Vatsim.

Edited August 14 by carlanthony24

[Gilandred]

14 minutes ago, carlanthony24 said:

It’s been proven. From the screenshots shared around from Volanta and Vatsim.

Screenshots of what?  You can make a brick fly by giving it the flight model of an aircraft, so not sure what seeing an A320 in-game proves.  Unless you mean there is leaked info from FSLabs?

[V1ROTA7E]

Another airbus?! Oh man, I can’t wait…🙄😑

[B777ER]

If it's the Concord, I'll be disappointed and won't be purchasing it. It is a niche of a niche aircraft that quite frankly would bore me. Now if they come out with an Airbus, now you have my attention. But Fenix is very very good. My gut tells me the comment made about some dev's being more open due to lack of competition is aimed at Fenix and their openness in their Discord server.