On 9/20/2026 at 7:51 PM, Krakin said:

Recurring revenue is already achieved through their marketplace.

I think we here on Avsim constantly underestimate the amount of revenue the marketplace generates...and we also underestimate the interest in features like the career mode.

I'll put my hands up here and say I have absolutely zero interest in the career, in bush trips and landing challenges but it's obvious from a quick perusal of the official forums that an awful lot of people do and the majority of complaints or demands for extra features centre around these things.

All these continuous features, being developed for free, are the fruit of marketplace sales. I'm constantly puzzled by the prediction that MSFS will become subscription based. It already has a subscription model through Xbox game pass.

The next iteration of MSFS? Neither Jorge nor Asobo has given even the slightest indication that this is even being considered but it seems patently obvious that the next iteration of MSFS is going to depend on the next generation Xbox in whatever form that takes.

3 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

When have you seen MS do this with any of their other products

Microsoft Office used to be a standalone product that could be purchased outright. I’m still using Office 2010.

The current equivalent is Office 365. Subscription only.

37 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Microsoft Office used to be a standalone product that could be purchased outright. I’m still using Office 2010.

The current equivalent is Office 365. Subscription only.

EXACTLY. 👍

Not that I’m in favor of it, but…

4 hours ago, Matchstick said:

As opposed to every 4 years just lying about backwards compatibility and screwing devs with another platform they need to support ?

Fair points. However…

I’d posit that the devs who followed the SDK most closely were the ones who were, as a result, able to bring their 2020 addons to 2024 the quickest. E.g., FS Reborn (Day One: no problems), A2A’s Comanche (Day One: 👍), and several others I can think of.

The ones who hadn’t, like PMDG’s 737? Well, you know how that went…

And in any case, how is that different from Lockheed Martin and Laminar Research…? I still own (expensive) P3D and XP addons that will NOT function in the various later versions of those sims, or who charged upgrade fees, Etc.

Why are we acting as thought this is a uniquely Asobo problem?

9 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Fair points. However…

I’d posit that the devs who followed the SDK most closely were the ones who were, as a result, able to bring their 2020 addons to 2024 the quickest. E.g., FS Reborn (Day One: no problems), A2A’s Comanche (Day One: 👍), and several others I can think of.

The ones who hadn’t, like PMDG’s 737? Well, you know how that went…

And in any case, how is that different from Lockheed Martin and Laminar Research…? I still own (expensive) P3D and XP addons that will NOT function in the various later versions of those sims, or who charged upgrade fees, Etc.

Why are we acting as thought this is a uniquely Asobo problem?

Companies like FSReborn at least has access to the 24 SDK because they were working on default planes for the sim.

Edit - Ignore that I got FSReborn and FlightFX mixed up yet again

(Obviously this isn’t the case for A2A but I did wonder at the time if using external code for all the actual simulation aspects and just using MSFS as a rendering engine insulated them from the worst of the debacle ?)

Other devs were not so lucky, presumably a significant number believed what Asobo was telling them about backwards compatibility and assuming the lack of access wouldn’t be a serious problem.

as for X-Plane it seems to be heading for a slower release cadence (almost 6 years between 11 & 12 and over 4 years since the first public beta releases of 12) with an extensive closed beta then a full public beta allowing devs to get to grips with the changes ahead of time.

Edited September 21Sep 21 by Matchstick

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Microsoft Office used to be a standalone product that could be purchased outright. I’m still using Office 2010.

The current equivalent is Office 365. Subscription only.

Please help me understand what this has to do with MSFS. These are completely different products, with completely different technologies behind them. If you really don't understand the difference, then...

There are other alternatives. X-Plane is a standalone product if that's what you want and, of course, P3D soldiers on. There are good (even great!) things about that. And also significant drawbacks in the modern era. You get to choose. I've chosen MSFS, but it's an informed decision with eyes wide open as to what it takes to support a client/server product like this. Reality is... reality. Wishful thinking is - yeah.

Scott

On 9/20/2026 at 2:51 PM, Krakin said:

Recurring revenue is already achieved through their marketplace.

It certainly helps, but sufficient to keep the servers running?

Scott

On 9/16/2026 at 1:03 PM, Bigmack said:

I feel the same, but not interested in XP.👍🏽👍🏽

You could always “fuse”. YMMV. TANSTAAFL. Slightly tongue in cheek LoL

-B

https://www.prepar3d.com/fuse/

On 9/16/2026 at 2:10 PM, ryanbatc said:

Better FPS and Performance: at a HUGE cost of downgrading visuals. This is what has been happening and it's terrible.

Well stated Ryan.

2 hours ago, Matchstick said:

Other devs were not so lucky, presumably a significant number believed what Asobo was telling them about backwards compatibility and assuming the lack of access wouldn’t be a serious problem.

AzurPoly, Blackbird, CowanSim, COWS, Fenix, Flying Fries, flysimware, HPG, India Foxt Echo, TFDi, et al, all had compatibility more or less immediately.

When you write good code, you get good results. 🤙

2 hours ago, Matchstick said:

as for X-Plane it seems to be heading for a slower release cadence (almost 6 years between 11 & 12 and over 4 years since the first public beta releases of 12) with an extensive closed beta then a full public beta allowing devs to get to grips with the changes ahead of time.

And yet, even tho this all happened, it still took most of the devs awhile to adjust their addons and update their flight models, etc. AND I still have XP addons from Hi Fi devs that still don’t work in XP even after all this time.

Custom code creates custom problems. And in this case, it was / remains the Addon Devs that screwed me over, NOT the Sim Dev.

1 hour ago, btacon said:

You could always “fuse”. YMMV. TANSTAAFL. Slightly tongue in cheek LoL

-B

https://www.prepar3d.com/fuse/

😁🤙

I’d be interested as it’s definitely a graphical upgrade, but alas it’s not for us filthy commoners 😂.

Most of us probably wouldn’t go for it, either: There’s only a few hundred airfields and most Of them are military. And of course, being built on Unreal Engine 5, I can’t imagine compatibility with P3D addons is very good, if at all…

But hey, If we could get our hands on some of those mil training birds, too, it might be quite a bit of fun!

2 hours ago, tttocs said:

Please help me understand what this has to do with MSFS. These are completely different products, with completely different technologies behind them. If you really don't understand the difference, then...

I believe he’s supporting the position that MS is always looking for recurring revenue. Not necessarily that MSFS will be going monthly subscription.

And if you think about it, a product that you pay for every 3-5 years to get new features is a bit of a “subscription” itself.

2 hours ago, tttocs said:

It certainly helps, but sufficient to keep the servers running?

Scott

That's correct. If the last CEO of the gaming division said it is cheap for them to make use of Microsoft's existing infrastructure, who am I to disagree? Jorg has made it very clear that the cost which justified putting out another sim was man hours.

2 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

I believe he’s supporting the position that MS is always looking for recurring revenue. Not necessarily that MSFS will be going monthly subscription.

And if you think about it, a product that you pay for every 3-5 years to get new features is a bit of a “subscription” itself.

Exactly. I'd be more than happy to pay for it monthly instead, like I do with Office and Photoshop which is updated frequently and becomes a new version every year. Paying once for a game every few years seems so last century now.

6 hours ago, tttocs said:

Please help me understand what this has to do with MSFS. These are completely different products, with completely different technologies behind them. If you really don't understand the difference, then...

Scott

UrgentSiesta asked this question… “When have you seen MS do this with any of their other products.”

I gave an example from the same company - Microsoft.