DOVE Tail FSW release May 2017

[ryanbatc]

Well this also happened to the switch to FSX from FS9. Although many old aircraft would port to FSX, some needed work, an some didn't. Some of boys from Aces are part of the dev group so this may be what FSXI was supposed to be. Still, many of us have some serious $$$ tied up in FSX. There needs to be a way some of our investment can be returned.

FSX is ANCIENT. I've spent thousands on addons too but if people truly want a new sim none of the old addons should work. Or, I'd be ok with the fact that none of my old addons work if the new sim is earth shattering.

I already use XP11 - it's amazing , but I didn't want to switch topics on you guys lol. I'm mostly XP nowadays anyway.

 

[DennyA]

Ah, you guys. If they somehow let y'all download a real P-51 Mustang, you'd complain that there's only plane choice and repaints are really hard.

I'm going to give it a chance.

I'm also not going to slam it if it's missing a ton of features from FSX at launch, because it takes time to build out something like that. If they're headed in the right direction and continuing development, I'll be excited to see a new entrant in the category.

I look at AeroFly FS 2. It's also in early access, but because it's only getting rolling and is admittedly missing a lot, many hardcore sim guys haven't given it a chance. Despite the fact that AFFS2 with VR goggles is by far the most amazing VFR experience ever (for the moment).

Given the number of hours a $50-60 sim promises to offer, even if it's in early development and will take a while to gestate, I'm aghast at the pushback against spending the equivalent of the cost of a mid-range dinner out for two people to get a whole new sim to explore and watch grow.

 

[ejoiner]

\

If somebody finally renders the city of Atlanta decently accurately in a sim, that will be all I will fly. FSX and P3D are a joke in this regard and nobody has published the city of Atlanta as a payware or freeware package. Even Xplane 11, which has a better rendition, isnt that great. I know nobody cares, but being able to fly decent VFR around my home area would be great. (and yes I know that KATL has been done a few times by several groups over the years. my interest is the city.)

 

[rcbarend]

However, best not to jump to negative conclusions before the finished product becomes available.

Very true ...

By the way, the same applies to positive conclusions too ...

Sorry, I couldn't resist.
In my 25 years of flightsimming I have allways wondered why people get so exited about a new flightsimulator (either a completely new one, or the Microsoft fs* line of products) solely based on marketing statements, pictures and videos.
Don't judge it untill it's available, and only then comment on what you feel are the pro's and con's compared to existing sim's.

And if something is a pro or a con: even that might be personal.
Like lack-of backward compatibility is a showstopper for one, others don't care.

To me, the fuzz around DTG's FSW is the same again as e.g. the hype around the announcement of FSX (Original release) and MS-Flight.

 

[gman5250]

The money you have tied up in FSX is not invested, it's spent:

Excellent point.

I think I've got about as much invested in FSX and P3D eye candy as most others here. It was a lot that trickled out over time, but I always knew those indulgences were as transient as the few dozen pistons I've torched in the HD.

On the other hand, I've made a sizeable investment in hardware, software and time...lots of time, based solely on a calculated speculation that this technology will keep improving as we move forward. Old platforms will fade while new platforms take their place bringing improvements in performance and immersion. I'm in the camp that views these inevitable changes, and the adjustments required to re-direct focus, in a more favorable light.

I'm also in the camp that views these technological leaps forward as presenting a broad range of opportunities for those seeking to find a niche in the commercial aspects.

The break from 32 bit will allow so many extremely talented developers, artists, programmers, coders and CEOs to stretch their wings...so to speak. The benefit to the community will be immense, but will indeed come at a cost. I'll wait until I get some seat time before I attempt to make any in depth observations or comments along those lines.

I must admit that I am very pleased to see two 64 bit platforms emerging, apparently very close to one another.
I'm apparently going to be needing a couple of additional $$Ds to accommodate the additions. I checked...there's room under the hood.

 

[Bjoern]

I honestly dread the day the community gets a 64 bit sim. While FSX' VAS limitation surely is annoying at times, it at least forces you to thing what and what not you can afford in terms of memory consumption, be it as a user or a developer. Efficiency reigns supreme. Now with basically endless amount of RAM available, add-ons will be even more demanding to produce due to all the desite for millions of polygons and ultra high res textures and pixel-accurate cockpit displays. Not to mention any environmental stuff. This will reach a point where you will see people whining about low performance, stutters or else because all they ever did was adding so much junk to the sim that all the data effectively started clogging the memory buses. And hardware limitations won't go away that easily.

If somebody finally renders the city of Atlanta decently accurately in a sim, that will be all I will fly. FSX and P3D are a joke in this regard and nobody has published the city of Atlanta as a payware or freeware package. Even Xplane 11, which has a better rendition, isnt that great. I know nobody cares, but being able to fly decent VFR around my home area would be great. (and yes I know that KATL has been done a few times by several groups over the years. my interest is the city.)

Search for landmarks t the SketchUp Warehouse, convert and place them with ModelConverter and presto - instant improvement!

 

[YoYo]

The rain looks really nice:

 

[Naismith]

Much of the problem re "money Invested" lies in the longevity of FSX. It is a program that is almost 11 years old. Previously in the MSFS world we had a new sim every 2 years and we didn't have a huge build up of commercial titles. Also with FS9 and before it was largely a freeware\enthusiast supported market (some notable exceptions). The serious 3rd party commercial vendors really only came about with FSX. What I suspect will happen is that there will be an initial flurry of hard core simmers like us lot here rushing to get/buy the new sim. Then it will settle down largely because there is not the variety of available aircraft. It'll be a while before it starts to make inroads into things like Vatsim or Virtual airlines etc. But with faith on all sides I am positive that the new sim will be a success.
Perhaps it should be P3D and XP who are worried. Time will tell. +ve thoughts people.

 

[hairyspin]

A big reason for that longevity is MS stopped development after Acceleration and the code was 'frozen'. Developers have had years of an unchanging code base to work on and we still haven't (quite) seen all that FSX is capable of. FSW is projected to be a work in progress for some years to come, but developers await news of an SDK. Without that, pthbbttttt!

 

[Montie]

I am looking forward to this. I welcome the 64-bit application, this is what we need to move forward.

 

[DennyA]

I honestly dread the day the community gets a 64 bit sim. While FSX' VAS limitation surely is annoying at times, it at least forces you to thing what and what not you can afford in terms of memory consumption, be it as a user or a developer. Efficiency reigns supreme. Now with basically endless amount of RAM available, add-ons will be even more demanding to produce due to all the desite for millions of polygons and ultra high res textures and pixel-accurate cockpit displays. Not to mention any environmental stuff. This will reach a point where you will see people whining about low performance, stutters or else because all they ever did was adding so much junk to the sim that all the data effectively started clogging the memory buses. And hardware limitations won't go away that easily.

By this logic, we should still be playing on the Commodore 64, as you had seriously efficient programming when every byte counted!

An updated engine doesn't just bring access to more memory. It also brings DirectX 11/12 support, support for newer processor optimizations, and all kinds of other things.

I still see low performance and stutters on the creaky old FSX engine 10+ years after it was released, even though my computer and video card are magnitudes faster. It's time to move to a new, efficient codebase.

FSX and P3D won't stop working if DTFSW succeeds.

 

[ryapad]

FSW is projected to be a work in progress for some years to come, but developers await news of an SDK. Without that, pthbbttttt!

Let's they din't charge extra for it, like everything else! Like many people have said, It's a good idea to approach the new sim with a positive attitude, because nobody want to make a game that everybody whines about before they even release it. Only time will tell.

 

[TuFun]

Not looking good in respects to marketing wise for payware... statement from PMDG.

This statement...

I don't worry about much in the future of our hobby- except for two things:

• 1) Someone making a grab to control distribution channels and their associated profit margins.
• 2) Flagrant dishonesty/concealed motives.

They are willing to do this at the expense of the continued growth and product quality of the community by toppling well established developers and development organizations such as Aerosoft, Flight1, PMDG and the like.


As I said, I don't like money/power grabs, nor do I like dishonest brokers.


From where we sit today, it seems we are dealing with both and that is a very troubling thing indeed.




https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/509763-07may17-the-sorts-of-behaviors-that-cause-me-concern/

 

[zswobbie1]

& THAT is the best and most important posting so far!!!
Take a step back, & think what DTG is actually doing......
Releasing a paid beta.... yes, they are giving it away to owners of Flight School, & locking developers into a distribution path! (amongst other stuff)

 

[stiz]

Take a step back, & think what DTG is actually doing...... Releasing a paid beta.... yes, they are giving it away to owners of Flight School, & locking developers into a distribution path! (amongst other stuff)

and then take a further step back and realise

1 - "paid betas" are nothing new, devs have been doing it for over 5-6yrs now

2 - No body knows anything about how DTG will handle 3rd party mods. All thats been said has been rumour and forum gossip.

3 - Steam is not the monster everyone thinks it is, its the industry standard for games now, deal with it, its not going anywhere.

4 - Anyone who thinks that MS made any flight sim for any other reason than pure profit is kidding themselves, so give DTG a bit of slack!

5 - DTG are investing in flight sims with the future in mind, which is GOOD , FSX is about 12 yrs old .. theres kids in secondary (high) school that weren't even born when it was released. Lockheed might well change their mind on P3d and make it military customers only.

Lets just all agree to wait and see and not spread forum gossip shall we??

 

[Daube]

and then take a further step back and realise

1 - "paid betas" are nothing new, devs have been doing it for over 5-6yrs now

More than that actually. Let's remember how "final" FSX was when it was first released...

2 - No body knows anything about how DTG will handle 3rd party mods. All thats been said has been rumour and forum gossip.

This, precisely.

3 - Steam is not the monster everyone thinks it is, its the industry standard for games now, deal with it, its not going anywhere.

Indeed, it always makes me smile each time I hear people complaining about the fact that a game is on Steam. What's wrong with that ? Is the installation too easy perhaps ? Not enough problems ?
No.
The only problem with Steam is the financial fee they require (30% if I understood correctly), which might impact the price of our software. But again, the vastly superior audience plays a big role here as well, so it's hard to imagine the real impact on the prices here.

Lets just all agree to wait and see and not spread forum gossip shall we??

Good advise. So far, all the info we have is "nothing at all". They just said that FSW is going to exist, and a bit more commercial bull fertilizer around it.
The info given by PMDG is approximatively the only side-information we got until now.

 

[stiz]

The only problem with Steam is the financial fee they require (30% if I understood correctly), which might impact the price of our software.

Depends how DTG handles it , for the other shops (flight1/simmarket/fspilotshop etc etc) it shouldn't make any difference as they charge about that to have your product listed anyway.

 

[Rick_Piper]

Exactly Stiz

I think DTG have gone quiet as they know that one wrong move over this storm in a Tea Cup and it could backfire.
Better say nothing than put their foot in it.

No idea Why Rob has posted so much as it's sort of started a pointless flame war on Avsim.

Where's the popcorn Smiley ??

Rick

 

[wombat666]

Depends how DTG handles it , for the other shops (flight1/simmarket/fspilotshop etc etc) it shouldn't make any difference as they charge about that to have your product listed anyway.

Good to see you again stitz!
And you've learned 'to spell'.

 

[txnetcop]

Depends how DTG handles it , for the other shops (flight1/simmarket/fspilotshop etc etc) it shouldn't make any difference as they charge about that to have your product listed anyway.

Stiz you're all grown up youngin! Glad to hear from ya and you're right! Our negative speculations have almost always been wrong anyway!
Ted