MS/Asobo still have at least to more significant revenue sources in the bag if they want to pull them out … 

1.  MSFS 2024 for PS5

2.  Add weapons and blowing stuff up (aka Combat Flight Simulator)

TFX damage freeware … hmmm … expand on that …

MSFS still has plenty of place to go for more revenue.

There are a few notable naysayers missing. I'm guessing they haven't seen their WhatsApp group message yet - "They're doing it again, saying good things about MSFS2024, quick we have to act fast"

23 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

MS/Asobo still have at least to more significant revenue sources in the bag if they want to pull them out … 

1.  MSFS 2024 for PS5

2.  Add weapons and blowing stuff up (aka Combat Flight Simulator)

TFX damage freeware … hmmm … expand on that …

MSFS still has plenty of place to go for more revenue.

Actually, what the negative doomsayers are missing is that Microsoft is using MSFS to perfect the digital twin earth.  The problem with their digital twin earth right now is that it looks poor at ground level, within cities. Outside of cities in MSFS 2024, it looks good, so they have addressed the world outside of cities. But the photogrammetry still looks poor inside cities if you're at the ground level, rather than 300 feet in the air.

So thier next biggest goal is to figure out how to make cities look good, from the ground level. Once they perfect their digital twin earth, it will have use not just for video games, but for other real world applications as well. This is another reason Microsoft will keep funding MSFS for some time, they know they have a golden egg in their hands, they just need to nurture and perfect it.

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by abrams_tank

8 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Actually, what the negative doomsayers are missing is that Microsoft is using MSFS to perfect the digital twin earth.

Source please.

7 minutes ago, gunther said:

Source please.

No source. It's common sense, lol.

If you have any business sense at all, and you have actually listened to and read Jorg's interviews, it's obvious. 

And if you're a Microsoft executive or the CEO, and you don't recognize the value of the digital twin earth you have right now with MSFS 2024, and the upside of developing it further, you should probably be fired (fortunately, Microsoft does see the value and upside of perfecting their digital earth further).

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by abrams_tank

7 hours ago, MassiveSim32 said:

Well said mate.  Some of the rubbish posted on here is laughable.

"I don't trust Jorg anymore" LOL......get over yourselves.

Jase

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, just a shame the irony is lost on the regular posters here who jump on people for daring to have a difference of opinion. But hey that's AVSim!

2 hours ago, SayAgain said:

MS/Asobo still have at least to more significant revenue sources in the bag if they want to pull them out … 

1.  MSFS 2024 for PS5

2.  Add weapons and blowing stuff up (aka Combat Flight Simulator)

TFX damage freeware … hmmm … expand on that …

MSFS still has plenty of place to go for more revenue.

Damage stuff not going to happen due to limits of commercial licences.  Deliberately blowing (non-licenced) stuff up, marginally more possible but unlikely IMHO

8 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

Damage stuff not going to happen due to limits of commercial licences.  Deliberately blowing (non-licenced) stuff up, marginally more possible but unlikely IMHO

That's interesting, I am genuinely interested in this subject. Can you please explain what you mean by this?

Even if Microsoft were to take the MSFS engine and MSFS data, and develop & rebrand a new combat flight simulator which is not related to MSFS at all, under an entirely different name, there are still limits due to commercial licensing?  Can you be specific about the commercial licensing that you are referencing?

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by abrams_tank

Microsoft combat sim vs DCS. 

It’ll be a failure waiting to happen. 
 

The proof is in the pudding, will check back in again when SU4 is out... 

10 hours ago, kerosene31 said:

super useful in helping me keep my ignore list populated.

I never used to use the ignore function, as I figured that even those whose opinions I disliked occasionally posted something useful, but since 2024 came out I too have found I now have an active and ever growing ignore list.

Way of the world these days, I guess. Life really is too short to waste time on some of this stuff.

As to what may or may not happen with MS, Asobo, and the sim in the future, whatever it is, we'll just have to deal with it. I'd like to think that the digital twin concept would more than just survive, and would probably even flourish, as the basis for a variety of commercial uses for MS. Given the costs and complexities of creating it, getting some additional payback in the form of some kind of leisure software, be it the continuance of MSFS, road and/or rail based sims, even geographically accurate zombie killing stuff, seems likely to ensure we can sim for a while yet.

I can imagine all sorts of recreational uses for that twin world, and once in place it seems reasonable that whole new genre might spring to life. And given that the underlying base would be a standard, it could be relatively cheap to develop new games/sims, in which case it wouldn't be the same level of disaster for a developer if a new concept "failed", i.e. didn't go on to make mega-bucks. 

Imagine a realistic mountaineering sim, or a canoeing sim. Maybe a surfing sim? Potholing? Leave the photographically accurate rendition of your house, get in the car of your choice, drive to the appropriate airport and either board as a passenger on a scheduled flight (maybe with the option of hot-keying into the role of pilot) or just go straight to your own aircraft, and head off to the location of your choice. Were you can rent a car/pick up your own Bentley that you keep there and drive to your luxury hotel (itself built or modified by you to your personal tastes) or your beachfront hut, and then go surfing/fishing/cruising or whatever was the point of your trip.

Liike the song said - "the future's so bright I gotta wear shades"

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

That's interesting, I am genuinely interested in this subject. Can you please explain what you mean by this?

MS licence ability to use aircraft with manufacturers.  Terms of those licences most probably include not showing their aircraft damaged or allowing them to visibly crash.

16 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

MS licence ability to use aircraft with manufacturers.  Terms of those licences most probably include not showing their aircraft damaged or allowing them to visibly crash.

Ok, I see where you are coming from then.

I think if Microsoft comes out with a combat simulator, it will be under an entirely new name, and new brand. I don't think they will really use any of the civilian aircraft they have licensed for MSFS, if they make a combat simulator.  They will probably use the MSFS engine, and the Bing and photogrammetry data though, but the combat simulator itself would probably be an entirely separate product of MSFS.

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by abrams_tank

21 minutes ago, andy1252 said:

As to what may or may not happen with MS, Asobo, and the sim in the future, whatever it is, we'll just have to deal with it. I'd like to think that the digital twin concept would more than just survive, and would probably even flourish, as the basis for a variety of commercial uses for MS. Given the costs and complexities of creating it, getting some additional payback in the form of some kind of leisure software, be it the continuance of MSFS, road and/or rail based sims, even geographically accurate zombie killing stuff, seems likely to ensure we can sim for a while yet.

I can imagine all sorts of recreational uses for that twin world, and once in place it seems reasonable that whole new genre might spring to life. And given that the underlying base would be a standard, it could be relatively cheap to develop new games/sims, in which case it wouldn't be the same level of disaster for a developer if a new concept "failed", i.e. didn't go on to make mega-bucks. 

Imagine a realistic mountaineering sim, or a canoeing sim. Maybe a surfing sim? Potholing? Leave the photographically accurate rendition of your house, get in the car of your choice, drive to the appropriate airport and either board as a passenger on a scheduled flight (maybe with the option of hot-keying into the role of pilot) or just go straight to your own aircraft, and head off to the location of your choice. Were you can rent a car/pick up your own Bentley that you keep there and drive to your luxury hotel (itself built or modified by you to your personal tastes) or your beachfront hut, and then go surfing/fishing/cruising or whatever was the point of your trip.

Liike the song said - "the future's so bright I gotta wear shades"

Yes, if the digital twin earth were more mature and advanced, such that it looked good from the ground level inside cities, it would make for an excellent base for a new game developer. Without writing one line of code, you already have an entire 3D world modeled, that looks nice and realistic already.  And there will be all sorts of non gaming applications for it as well. 

I think that's what Microsoft's goal is. And for this reason, they'll be invested in MSFS for some time, because we are effectively their test bed, to make their digital twin earth more advanced and sophisticated.

 

6 hours ago, kevinfirth said:

Damage stuff not going to happen due to limits of commercial licences

Already happening with:

https://msfsaddons.com/2025/07/22/tfx-brings-dramatic-fire-and-damage-effects-to-microsoft-flight-simulator/

TFX listed in MSFS 2024 opening screen.