21 minutes ago, Maxis said:

We obviously talking PAST each other at this point .. your opinion is noted..

 

Have a good one.

Yeah we are because you clearly cant seem to read more than 3 sentences unless I say something that triggers you. Even the reply above made a great point asking what dev has mentioned their stuff will work in FS2024 on day one? OR has Fenix said they are working on a native FS2024 A320 series right now yet you are trying to be critical on a new developer for why they themselves aren't focusing only on FS2024 only for their first aircraft. 

 

Have a good one as well

Edited October 23, 20241 yr by environmental_ice

One post says not to mention anything but the Bluebird product....

Yet  another post wants to chastise me for not addressing their "point" about other products not related to the issue at hand since they were already purchased for MSFS2020 and the issue of moving to MSFS2024 for those products have nothing at all to do with the Bluebird discussion.

What does PMDG/FENIX have to do with anything discussed here? .. Those products were already released. We were discussing a product or products  NOT YET RELEASED and how development should probably adjust to satisfy consumers on both platforms concurrently since as it stands there will be two platforms to service in a few weeks. Yes absolutely this is not a move from P3D to MSFS so the dev should be able to accommodate releasing on both platforms unless barring some unforeseen circumstance a substantial program rewrite hopefully may not be required.

Your last post says that I'm triggered. Well yes and no...

The substance of your point of view is not what is triggering me, its your method of delivery and to be honest if that's how you want to engage people that's 100% your prerogative but alternatively i also have the choice to engage or disengage and to avoid getting "triggered" as you say I'm going to disengage.  

I am willing to participate and interact with those who can be respectful and agree to disagree respectfully . So if anyone cant do that I'm not interested.

 

Edited October 23, 20241 yr by Maxis
Cleaned up

19 hours ago, Maxis said:

I didn't think anyone would have to explain that when we say we are moving to MSFS 2024 it would be as soon as our essential addons are ready to be ported over  and there will be some overlap.  With that in mind, with the desire of the people looking to move over to the new sim as soon as possible would you want your next "NEW" product purchase be put into your old sim that you want to move away from or your new one that your trying to move to ?

Well the way people were commenting above seemed to me like they were going to instantly move to MSFS 2024 when it releases and uninstall MSFS 2020 on the same day. Some people want to do that - I've got no problem with that. But when they start saying MSFS 2024 is going to be major player with absolutely zero payware addons, I don't understand that. The only developer that has worked with 2024 SDK is inibuilds - others have not even got their hands on SDK. It is too early to say what MSFS 2024 brings. Me I don't go with default aircraft. 

With regards to B757 - I think what they trying to do is because they already spent many years developing for MSFS 2020 - it would be waste of time and effort to abandon and start over again for 2024 version - if they do that we could be waiting for another couple years for proper 757. Makes sense to release it on 2020 version, similar to what Fslabs did with their Concorde on P3D - It was in development for several years way before MSFS 2020 appeared. Besides not everyone is going to abandon MSFS 2020 - MS/Asobo has said they are going to continue supporting 2020 version post 2024 release. Many people might run it in conjunction with MSFS 2024, similar to what people do for P3D and MSFS 2020. Me personally I will have both sims installed 2020 & 2024 version, Make it 3 sims if you include the good old P3D. Besides they have said it will be free upgrade to 2024 version so for me it is win-win situation. Going forward however new development projects like B767 might be only for 2024 version. 

Edited October 24, 20241 yr by CAP1234

38 minutes ago, CAP1234 said:

Well the way people were commenting above seemed to me like they were going to instantly move to MSFS 2024 when it releases and uninstall MSFS 2020 on the same day. Some people want to do that - I've got no problem with that. But when they start saying MSFS 2024 is going to be major player with absolutely zero payware addons, I don't understand that. The only developer that has worked with 2024 SDK is inibuilds - others have not even got their hands on SDK. It is too early to say what MSFS 2024 brings. Me I don't go with default aircraft. 

With regards to B757 - I think what they trying to do is because they already spent many years developing for MSFS 2020 - it would be waste of time and effort to abandon and start over again for 2024 version - if they do that we could be waiting for another couple years for proper 757. Makes sense to release it on 2020 version, similar to what Fslabs did with their Concorde on P3D - It was in development for several years way before MSFS 2020 appeared. Besides not everyone is going to abandon MSFS 2020 - MS/Asobo has said they are going to continue supporting 2020 version post 2024 release. Many people might run it in conjunction with MSFS 2024, similar to what people do for P3D and MSFS 2020. Me personally I will have both sims installed 2020 & 2024 version, Make it 3 sims if you include the good old P3D. Besides they have said it will be free upgrade to 2024 version so for me it is win-win situation. Going forward however new development projects like B767 might be only for 2024 version. 

Im not sure why FSLABS keeps getting brought up... FSLABS did not provide two release timeframes and not meet them.  FSLABS apart from saying they will release a product for MSFS2020 have said nothing further and there is absolutley minimal discourse with the MSFS2020 community. Again ive never used their products and for other reasons i will not get into probably never will. At least for MSFS2020.

 

Im sorry if all my posts prior was not more clear but ill try again ..

No one is asking for Bluebird  Simulations to abandon releasing the aircraft for MSFS2020.

What i was thinking Sherv (Bluebird) should  to consider since developer access to the new SDK and sim release is imminent is to simultaneously develop the product for both platforms at this juncture so when it is ready for release the installer would theoretically ask you .. "Which sim would you like to install to" .. Also known as cross compatibility. You can install on your platform of choice  and the people moving to the new one can install on theirs upon release of the product.

I hope that makes it more clear for you now.

 

11 minutes ago, Maxis said:

Im not sure why FSLABS keeps getting brought up... FSLABS did not provide two release timeframes and not meet them.  FSLABS apart from saying they will release a product for MSFS2020 have said nothing further and there is absolutley minimal discourse with the MSFS2020 community. Again ive never used their products and for other reasons i will not get into probably never will. At least for MSFS2020.

 

Im sorry if all my posts prior was not more clear but ill try again ..

No one is asking for Bluebird  Simulations to abandon releasing the aircraft for MSFS2020.

What i was thinking Sherv (Bluebird) should  to consider since developer access to the new SDK and sim release is imminent is to simultaneously develop the product for both platforms at this juncture so when it is ready for release the installer would theoretically ask you .. "Which sim would you like to install to" .. Also known as cross compatibility. You can install on your platform of choice  and the people moving to the new one can install on theirs upon release of the product.

I hope that makes it more clear for you now.

 

 

The reason why I had brought Fslabs up is because it was a similar story with their Concorde development - When MSFS 2020 appeared, many people suggested they abandon P3D in favour for MSFS 2020 but because they have spent so many years developing it, they elected to continue with P3D version. I don't know why people always feel negatively about Fslabs either here or on MSFS forums, Yes there was a known issue with them in the past - but they have created some solid products in the past. 

Same thing can be said for Bluebird's 757 - This plane is in development for some time now & developers would have spent number of hours working on it, why would they now abandon that start working again from ground zero? Yes 2024 is great and what not but I don't think they even have their hands of SDK let alone starting development for it. Besides the changes between them are drastic or at least from what one developer has said - it makes sense to release it for 2020 version then work on 2024 version. 

Bear in mind that Raul (FSReborn) has indicated that developing two versions of the same aircraft for FS2020 and FS2024 is not really feasible (presumably due to the differences in the SDK for both versions).

You bring it up and your entitled to your opinion with FS LABS .. i honestly do not think it applies here.

Reasons below

FSLABS released their Concorde for P3D.. the barrier to entry in terms of getting the product compatible for MSFS will be immensely higher (Note the time to market for PMDG since examples are being brought up)

FSLABS) Decided to switch to MSFS late and missed the optimal revenue window for its already niche product. In addition to that they also missed the revenue window completely for their bread and butter product for MSFS2020. Yes sure concord enthusiast will fly it on MSFS2020 but that will not be the current sim in less than a month.

Added to their tendency to love to keep everyone in the dark ...i have a skeptical view of their operation (I did not sim in P3D so they have yet to earn my dollars or respect)

 

Bluebirds situation is different.

1 They projected a release period twice and missed. This concurrent development gives Bluebird the opportunity to catch up in development so there is no further need for ANOTHER wait for the conversion

2. The barrier to convert the product from MSFS2020 to MSFS2024 is SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER according to Asobo and Microsoft This should not be a substantial rewrite of code.

Again .... No one stated that they should abandon the work already put in  .. the work that they are doing now for MSFS2020 is going to be needed anyway for MSFS2024

Documentation about the SDK was already released. Marketplace Devs already got their development Alpha yesterday. Bluebird will probably get theirs in three weeks time..when the sim is released  so everything needed to make this happen will be available shortly.

They can either take the opportunity and go for cross platform compatibility or go the long way with a serial mode of development and watch market segments get disinterested by the time this does get released on MSFS2024.

Just my take on the matter.. I noticed i am not alone in this recommendation judging by a few comments in the youtube video by the dev.

1 minute ago, Christopher Low said:

Bear in mind that Raul (FSReborn) has indicated that developing two versions of the same aircraft for FS2020 and FS2024 is not really feasible (presumably due to the differences in the SDK for both versions).

I feel its a matter of availability of tools and human resources. The tools are in the process of being released. It can be done ..the question of whether a dev wants to do it is another story altogether.

30 minutes ago, Maxis said:

They can either take the opportunity and go for cross platform compatibility or go the long way with a serial mode of development and watch market segments get disinterested by the time this does get released on MSFS2024.

The underlying assumption here is that if they start working on MSFS 2024 compatibility now ("parallel development"), they'll release an MSFS 2024 version earlier than if they finish the MSFS 2020 version first, then work on MSFS 2024 compatibility ("serial development").

This isn't necessarily true. I think the serial development model may actually get them to an MSFS 2024 version faster than if they went with parallel development.

Here's my reasoning.

From the updates they've given, my sense is that all of the bits that interface closely with the simulator (3D model, animations, effects, sound, flight model) are mostly done. The bits that are left are the FMC and custom systems. While these obviously need to talk to the simulator, that's a pretty "thin" interface -- the majority of the code is independent of the version of MSFS.

So if they first complete the bits that remain to be done for the 2020 version, they'll be doing work that will all be needed for a 2024 version anyway.

OK, but why not also get started on MSFS 2024 compatibility in parallel? That might make sense if they could simply hire an extra person to do this, but I'm pretty sure this isn't viable for the type of operation that Bluebird is right now. Instead, one of the existing developers would need to take on the 2024 compability work -- and that would be a distraction from their main task. It's less efficient to have to context-switch between different tasks instead of concentrating on one thing.

So I think it makes sense for them to finisht the 2020 version first. Most or all of that work is needed for 2024 anyway. In the meantime, let other devs report the bleeding-edge bugs in the 2024 SDK and get them fixed. Once the 2020 version is done, Bluebird can then concentrate on 2024 compatibility.

As I say, I think this may well get the 2024 version done quicker than if they spread themselves too thin by trying to do 2024 now in addition to all of the other things they need to get finished.

9 minutes ago, martinboehme said:

The underlying assumption here is that if they start working on MSFS 2024 compatibility now ("parallel development"), they'll release an MSFS 2024 version earlier than if they finish the MSFS 2020 version first, then work on MSFS 2024 compatibility ("serial development").

This isn't necessarily true. I think the serial development model may actually get them to an MSFS 2024 version faster than if they went with parallel development.

Here's my reasoning.

From the updates they've given, my sense is that all of the bits that interface closely with the simulator (3D model, animations, effects, sound, flight model) are mostly done. The bits that are left are the FMC and custom systems. While these obviously need to talk to the simulator, that's a pretty "thin" interface -- the majority of the code is independent of the version of MSFS.

So if they first complete the bits that remain to be done for the 2020 version, they'll be doing work that will all be needed for a 2024 version anyway.

OK, but why not also get started on MSFS 2024 compatibility in parallel? That might make sense if they could simply hire an extra person to do this, but I'm pretty sure this isn't viable for the type of operation that Bluebird is right now. Instead, one of the existing developers would need to take on the 2024 compability work -- and that would be a distraction from their main task. It's less efficient to have to context-switch between different tasks instead of concentrating on one thing.

So I think it makes sense for them to finisht the 2020 version first. Most or all of that work is needed for 2024 anyway. In the meantime, let other devs report the bleeding-edge bugs in the 2024 SDK and get them fixed. Once the 2020 version is done, Bluebird can then concentrate on 2024 compatibility.

As I say, I think this may well get the 2024 version done quicker than if they spread themselves too thin by trying to do 2024 now in addition to all of the other things they need to get finished.

 Fair argument and everything you said makes sense and falls within what i was thinking . It all depends on if the dev can justify that extra "body" responsible for the conversion. They may be able to they may not. We will see.. 👍

 

$80 on release.

That seems a fair price for it’s apparent level of complexity.

 

6 hours ago, jon b said:

$80 on release.

That seems a fair price for it’s apparent level of complexity.

 

That's what they said about the A-350..

38 minutes ago, Dreamflight767 said:

That's what they said about the A-350..

😆fair point !

Far more interested on the 767, but i'll keep on monitoring :)

Someone will need to revive this thread again next year.