17 hours ago, Bjoern said:

The request for a native, "official" photogrammetry or ortho solution is absolutely not new, but licensing issues and server hosting costs are unsurmountable roadblocks for any company that is not one of the biggest tech players, who can afford the licensing and hosting and drive cost down by means of synergy effects from using the data in other products.

As I suggested earlier, if LR can provide the underlying support in XP code base and can work with a source that provides the data like BlackShark.AI, then the customer can elect to pay for the subscription to getting the data into XP.  All LR has to do is provide the support in the code base.  There is always a solution.

 

17 hours ago, Bjoern said:

If a million people buy XP because they're intrigued by a some feature, but 90% of them ditch it after a few hours because feature x or y is not as good as they thought it was, Laminar may ultimately not retain a lot of market share, but gets to keep the money, which in turn funds X-Plane's continued development. Same as for any prduct that is a one-time purchase with a limited or nonexistant return policy.

 

This is not a viable business model and XP wouldn’t still be around if this was/is their approach to future development work.  BTW, Steam provides a refund option for XP12.

I wish LR sold $1M units of XP12, as that would be $60M and more than enough income to employ more developers for a few years. 😉

19 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

can work with a source that provides the data like BlackShark.AI

How much an end user pay per month or year for a subscription to BlackShark's products?

Would that fee include access to the source imagery and 3d point cloud data?

Or would that access be limited to just the knowledge that there's a tree in a field at a particular lat/lon?

Asking for a friend (Carl Sagan).

 

17 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

This is not a viable business model

Steam access arrived in v11 (or was it 10?). So it's very possible that for the prior few decades, that is exactly what Austin woke up every morning telling himself in the mirror...not that he's been waving his "business model" for the prior few decades...oh wait....he did brandish that Macbook a few times.

1 hour ago, blingthinger said:

Asking for a friend (Carl Sagan).

And we’re off … just couldn’t keep it civil could ya?

12 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

And we’re off … just couldn’t keep it civil could ya?

Hardly. I'm literally curious. How much would this cost the end user? You keep tossing out grandiose plans. Let's discuss. Per your own signature line. Tongue-in-cheek doesn't mean offensive or argumentative, to 99% of the population at least.

2 hours ago, SayAgain said:

This is not a viable business model and XP wouldn’t still be around if this was/is their approach to future development work.

I agree - if a user feels he gets burned with a one-time purchase, he will not be willing to purchase the next version of X-Plane.
It´s not quite a subscription model...but if you plan on using X-Plane over the decades and benefit from it improving over time, you will have to shelve out those 59,99$ every few years.

There is no refund if you buy from LR directly (which I strongly advocate), but if you are too lazy to download the Demo and form an impression for yourself, you don´t deserve a refund, imho.

X-Plane builds a reputation with every iteration, and those that know and like X-Plane will usually need no prompting or persuading to get the new version. Even if version .0 is usually not mature and just a starting point, LR´s track record shows that they WILL iron out the bugs and issues over the lifetime of a major version, until the cycle starts all over.

22 minutes ago, Litjan said:

but if you plan on using X-Plane over the decades

I started with XPlane 7 (around 2003/4 as I recall) thru every iteration thru to XP12.x … typically stay updated with latest revision unless it has important breaking changes to some of my add-ons.

I have no problem with a subscription model if it helps progress development faster and hits more features user want … more than happy to reward the LR dev team with their work efforts (would do the same for MSFS or P3D).

37 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

user? You keep tossing out grandiose plans.

Established technology called “Streaming” is grandiose plans?  The cost will vary based on implementation and service agreements.  For example MSFS provides the means to download rather than stream (not everything but some) … Or setup large cache that is retained (and not flushed all the time) … if such an implementation feature were provided, over time, then end user’s data requirements would diminish.  

Google’s geo data offerings also provide several different plans from pay-as-you-go to $0.40 or $2.00 per GB.

For example MSFS 2024 uses under peak demands around 180Mbps with maxed out settings but on average around 100Mbps.  Since I never suggested following exactly what Microsoft does, this data set could easily be accumulated over time (assuming one has sufficient storage … I have a 160TB NAS on 10/20G internal network just begging to be used).  I’d venture to say most are not going to need the entire 1-2 PT of world data, probably not even 20% of that is needed on tap at all times.  As one accumulates more data locally, the cost will go down over time.  There are many options here to make this a reality for XP in a cost effective approach to their development.

Others have used the word “Professional”, then by all means lets follow that thru to leveraging the hardware of “Professionals” and services they are willing to pay for to take simulation to the next level.  I can’t see a valid reason to NOT support those will to spend the money.

There are ways to do this without LR spending a fortune, just gotta think outside the box and not use MS/Asobo as the only way PG can be done.

Another video showing the amazing weather effects in Xp12.3, merged with it's flight dynamics and and excelent freeware addon, the Zibo 738.

The light, the colours, the crisp instruments with excellent displayed with superb fluidity, all come together to create a unique experience, IMHO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4lGGkvd9Ks

 

Edited September 16, 2025Sep 16 by jcomm

Flight Sim + Subscription in the same sentence scares me. Please!!!! no more subscriptions. At this rate it is going to be hundreds of dollars (USD) per year just to maintain a SIM.

Edited September 16, 2025Sep 16 by brinx

4 hours ago, SayAgain said:

As I suggested earlier, if LR can provide the underlying support in XP code base and can work with a source that provides the data like BlackShark.AI, then the customer can elect to pay for the subscription to getting the data into XP.  All LR has to do is provide the support in the code base.  There is always a solution.

Yes, there is. But in the form of a third party developer who leverages whatever methods the next gen scenery system supplies to provide scenery data from any third party source within the simulator. 

 

4 hours ago, SayAgain said:

This is not a viable business model

Ha! Haha! Tell that to the companies pumping out products that people buy and use for two days and which then end up in the bin or the back of the garage...

5 hours ago, FPVSteve said:

Are you using the new assets?

Yes. this lego block thing does have some limitations, but with all the new assetss you can get some nice detail.

4 hours ago, SayAgain said:

This is not a viable business model and XP wouldn’t still be around if this was/is their approach to future development work.  

People have being writing xplane off for years. Its still here.

4 hours ago, SayAgain said:

Google’s geo data offerings also provide several different plans from pay-as-you-go to $0.40 or $2.00 per GB.

Excellent. Thank you for backing some of this up with numbers. I can't personally estimate a cost because I don't stream ortho. I'm not sure if those values include photogrammetry or not. I also presume that's just for little old you and me. i.e. if I were to build my own google map interface and not try to sell it. What happens for commercial ventures that sell their delivery mechanism? How much would LR have to pay just to legally include hooks in the sim to let the user enter their own login info? I doubt that number is 0. 

Another asterisk is that the photogrammetry is just a dumb cloud of points. What you stream into asobo's engine is heavily massaged and layered with additional data. Street lights for example. Building lights, etc. So in order to look good, LR would have to custom-massage the data that they'd be annually leasing (not owning). Aside from the artist army's wages, the massaging capability would partially come from e.g. BlackShark. How much do they cost? Certainly not 0.

Now... you've said "well but I don't wanna get it from LR. I just want to enter my google account info and fly" That's fine. Then you get more-than-likely questionable visual results (photogrammetry) that will only look good in the daytime. You can do that already manually. YT video link is in this thread.

 

4 hours ago, SayAgain said:

I can’t see a valid reason to NOT support those will to spend the money.

If they're a tiny minority that doesn't justify the costs? Of course LR wouldn't. Even the multi-screen networked configs in home setups are byproducts of LR targeting the pro market.

We seem to be basing X-Plane's future on how it can catch up to MSFS while ignoring the latters failings (of which there are many, including some of the rendering). Personally, I prefer X-Plane as it is right now to MSFS and if they can tweak it a little to get rid of the rough edges (roads, rivers, vegetation etc) I'd be more than happy.

As I've said previously MSFS is too "uncanny valley" for me to enjoy it - I'd hate it if X-Plane ended up looking like that simulator too 😂

13 hours ago, SayAgain said:

This is not a viable business model and XP wouldn’t still be around if this was/is their approach to future development work.

Attention! The following answer may contain traces of irony. Incidentally, we have already ruminated on this topic umpteen times (whereas “ruminating” contains a double irony - whoever recognizes it can keep it 🙂).

Other people have already failed with your opinion. Back then it was called 'Hooray! We'll never have to buy add-ons again'. The reality over 5 years later looks different.
<irony> But you've given me an idea: I'm going to suggest to my local (gourmet) restaurant that they do it like McDonalds. Their locally limited offer is not a viable business model. They have to sell burgers. Burgers, burgers and more burgers. If necessary, even for a surcharge, so that they sell what 'the market leader' does (isn't he the market leader because he does what he does?) That will make them AND me filthy rich (I will of course demand my share).

But wait! Why should people go to the local restaurant and buy what McDonalds already offers, but for an extra charge? And wouldn't all restaurants have to sell burgers, burgers and more burgers because that's what the market leader does? Then we would have clones all over the world, 'because that's the only viable business model'. And we would no longer have any restaurants with a different offer. Not everyone likes to eat burgers. </irony>

Edited September 17, 2025Sep 17 by flying_carpet