Interesting new tidbits from FSL (Flight Sim Labs)

[Krakin]

I think if FSL dropped an A320 NEO, they'd be very successful. Us simmers have a voracious appetite and MSFS' user base is (to quote Lionel) very very big lol. The FBW and ini variants are great but it wouldn't be difficult for FSL to release something that really set theirs apart.

 

[Cognita]

1 hour ago, Speedbird 217 said:

There's really nothing I can think of that FSL could do with an A320 that would make me consider using that over the Fenix in MSFS.

This is pretty much how I feel, but of course that post was basically trying to say that they have developed some features that they feel will be so compelling as to make me want to move from the Fenix to FSL. I also can't think of what that is -- has to be more than simulating the effect on aircraft performance of sloshing waste in the lavatories. It would need to be revolutionary.

It is not just the product offering but the company I am investing in and I like Fenix and the kind of open, engaging, educational manner they have engaged the community; FSL is on the other end of that continuum for me. So, indeed, it would take more than a few novelty features to purchase another 320; but as others have said a NEO would be interesting; and an A330 NEO would likely be a for sure sale.

[pete_auau]

5 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Concorde boring? 😳 Really? The only passenger aircraft with reheats and capable of flying at Mach 2 12 miles above the Earth’s surface? Mach 0.95 to Mach 1.7 in under 8 minutes. Rotating at 187kts and 250mph as the gear comes up. Landing at 160kts with a 11° nose-up attitude.

If that’s boring I’d love to know what excites you.

yep i agree  and  one  of  the hardest  aircraft to master,  since not as  easy as  others  may think

[Ray Proudfoot]

3 minutes ago, pete_auau said:

yep i agree  and  one  of  the hardest  aircraft to master,  since not as  easy as  others  may think

About as far removed from Boeing and Airbus as you can get. But fly-by-wire was used in Concorde and would then be used in the Airbus fleet.

Not just the speed of course but a completely different autopilot aka AFCS. VNAV? What's that? 😁

[B777ER]

10 hours ago, carlanthony24 said:

Not buying it from a lead developer who was shown flying it in MSFS clearly says all three are in MSFS. I doubt the lead developer would be flying the Latinvfr one. especially coming from a well known source who would have no reason to lie. I can't wait for you all to be proven wrong. https://prnt.sc/zBBxUTQBRyz1 One of the other FSLabs developers. https://prnt.sc/_9qi6smF0zuj This is from one of the testers.

Let me be clear. I for sure hope I am wrong and they do release an A321NEO. It would be a day 1 purchase. I’m just not getting my hopes up. 

[B777ER]

4 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

Tough to see how FSL compels the customer and stands out against the current offerings for MSFS if it's an A32x, even if it's a NEO. Perhaps customers who don't already have the Fenix might be the initial adopters, but then again the price point better be at around current norms rather than yesteryear prices in the stratosphere 🙂 

Personally (and perhaps for their sake) I hope it's an A330 or something yet not available in high fidelity form for MSFS. If it's a Concorde, I feel even that would do better than an A32x as their first MSFS product.

But really really curious as to what they feel are "innovations not seen on the MSFS platform before" and the "unique selling points (USPs)" 🤔
 

Fenix is doing the A321ceo. I would safely say the A321NEO is a different type of mission aircraft. US west coast to Hawaii type missions.

[ca_metal]

7 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

If FSLabs releases another A320 for MSFS, I really wonder how much money they will make from it. There are already 2 decent A320s in MSFS already (FBW and iniBuilds), and one outstanding A320 (Fenix) in MSFS.

A fourth A320? Well, I'm not going to complain about the lack of A320s if FSLabs releases a fourth A320 for MSFS 😄

Not for Xbox, for Xbox you only have the Inibuilds V2 (considering good A320s). Some statistics from the MP presentation at the FSExpo:

The console has more users than Steam:

The % of Xbox users that actually buy something is higher than any other platform:

The platform is responsible for 36% of MP revenue:


That said, with good strategy, they can sell a lot there. 

[abrams_tank]

2 hours ago, ca_metal said:

Not for Xbox, for Xbox you only have the Inibuilds V2 (considering good A320s). Some statistics from the MP presentation at the FSExpo:

The console has more users than Steam:

The % of Xbox users that actually buy something is higher than any other platform:

The platform is responsible for 36% of MP revenue:


That said, with good strategy, they can sell a lot there. 

Thanks for these charts! I'll have to check up on the Marketplace presentation from FSExpo.

Overall, Windows + Steam revenue is 60%, so PC revenue is higher than XBox (I assume the chart meant Windows 10 + Windows 11, I don't know why it just says Win 10). What would be interesting to know is the sales of the more expensive add-ons for X-Box like the PMDG 737.  If XBox users are willing to pay as much as PC users for the expensive add-ons (ie. add-ons that are $50 or more greater), that would be a very lucrative market for some of the add-on makers that make the more premium add-ons.

[ca_metal]

33 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Thanks for these charts! I'll have to check up on the Marketplace presentation from FSExpo.

Overall, Windows + Steam revenue is 60%, so PC revenue is higher than XBox (I assume the chart meant Windows 10 + Windows 11, I don't know why it just says Win 10). What would be interesting to know is the sales of the more expensive add-ons for X-Box like the PMDG 737.  If XBox users are willing to pay as much as PC users for the expensive add-ons (ie. add-ons that are $50 or more greater), that would be a very lucrative market for some of the add-on makers that make the more premium add-ons.

Sure, no doubt the PC market is larger, my point is FSLabs have the chance to access an also huge market (36%) that has no good airbus planes available (besides the two inibuilds planes avaible in the base simulator).

I have no idea how this will unroll for them, I'm just adding a different perspective.

A sidenote: the fact that PMDG released the 777 pretty fast in the MP, within a few weeks, makes me believe it's an important market for them.

Edited August 15 by ca_metal

[Matchstick]

1 hour ago, ca_metal said:

Sure, no doubt the PC market is larger, my point is FSLabs have the chance to access an also huge market (36%) that has no good airbus planes available (besides the two inibuilds planes avaible in the base simulator).

That presumes they are able to deliver a good modern Airbus within the restrictions of XBox compatibility.

That's not necessarily easy to do for a first time MSFS developer.

[pmplayer]

I hope it is the Concorde, nothing else i would wait for..

cheers 😉

[pete_auau]

2 hours ago, pmplayer said:

I hope it is the Concorde, nothing else i would wait for..

cheers 😉

yep thats my guess  too it  will be  the Concorde  for  msfs

[ca_metal]

4 hours ago, Matchstick said:

That presumes they are able to deliver a good modern Airbus within the restrictions of XBox compatibility.

That's not necessarily easy to do for a first time MSFS developer.

I remember them saying they would work on MSFS back in 2019/2020. I believe they are working on their products for MSFS for a while now, but they've decided to finish their P3D products first. 

[jcomm]

I look fwd for an FSL-level Airbus in MSFS 2020 or 2024...

Good "news" even given the rather restrict info available so far... But promising anyway !!!

[GentleGroove]

I bought the entire 32F family for P3D and despite being somewhat pricey, I've never regretted it. They were fabulous aircraft and some of my favourite addons. That said, if they released them for MSFS now, I don't think I would make the investment as I am very happy with the Fenix. On the other hand, a neo variant (especially a 321) would be an instant purchase, as I don't find any of the current offerings interesting.

That said, the whole tone of the thread is a bit disconcerting. Yes, they certainly seem to be trying (in their very own way) to get closer to the customer, but the way they speak about their NDAs and their development process, one might think they are developing some revolutionary ultra secret weapon or a new miracle medicine instead of an addon for a home sim. And on top of that, they seem to view everyone as just too dumb to understand the "brilliance" of their strategy.

If we don't consider the issue of deadlines (a very delicate topic in the sim community), has open communication ever harmed a developer in any way?

To sum it up, as a prospective paying customer, the whole discourse just comes off as a bit too self-important and condescending.