Indeed, it was stated when the new sim info was made available.

One has to wonder about freeware add-ons though.

41 minutes ago, nickhod said:

If it's better for you to wait until MS announces anything, cool. I'd rather start thinking right now what I could develop for the (highly probable) MSFS marketplace store as I think it'll be a great opportunity.

Common Nick, you cannot be serious.. you cannot start any development until MS releases their SDK, their agreements, their guidelines, steps to test your product, and about another million things required to plan any road map.

What are you going to develop and how if we are currently clueless about anything regarding integration of any type of content for MS2020?? hell we don't even know what type of content the SDK will support.

S.

The only thing one can "develop" right now are 3D models.

23 minutes ago, simbol said:

Common Nick, you cannot be serious.. you cannot start any development until MS releases their SDK, their agreements, their guidelines, steps to test your product, and about another million things required to plan any road map.

I did say "thinking" about what could be developed, to be fair...

I started developing a C208 for Aerofly (my current go-to sim), but decided to shelve that as there's one included with MSFS.

So, my intention is to pick another aircraft that I suspect wont be in MSFS (pure guesswork), develop for Aerofly now and be ready to port to MSFS.

I also have a European airport project near completion for Aerofly. It's not in a photogrammetry area, so I believe it's a good contender for a MSFS product. (Again, pure guesswork, who knows).

If all the 3D and texture work is done in Max, I'll certainly be in better place than having done no work at all, waiting for MS to release an SDK.

So yeah, I'm absolutely serious.

Edited August 23, 20196 yr by nickhod

16 minutes ago, nickhod said:

If all the 3D and texture work is done in Max, I'll certainly be in better place than having done no work at all, waiting for MS to release an SDK.

So yeah, I'm absolutely serious.

So without any recommended LOD levels, poly counts, instructions about how their PBR textures should be done, how the lighting should be implemented for the model, how the internal VC should be created, how the lighting of the internal VC should be done, how you should create the animations of the model for each part, how many bones per object is actually supported, how animation tags can be linked to the sim and be exported, how you should implement VC particle rains, how the flight dynamic model works and should be programmed, how their camera systems works and how they should be integrated with your airplane, how gauges can be implemented and developed,  how the sound system works, etc., etc. the list goes on.. you think you can start now??.. sorry for saying this to you, but you are being very naive my friend.

What you should do is continue your current roadmap for AF2, finish anything for it and proceed to analyse the MS2020 SDK when it becomes available in order to see how your current products can be developed for MS.

S.

Edited August 23, 20196 yr by simbol

29 minutes ago, cepact said:

The only thing one can "develop" right now are 3D models.

The only thing one can "develop" right now are expectations 😁

21 minutes ago, nickhod said:

I started developing a C208 for Aerofly (my current go-to sim), but decided to shelve that as there's one included with MSFS.

So, my intention is to pick another aircraft that I suspect wont be in MSFS (pure guesswork), develop for Aerofly now and be ready to port to MSFS.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAC_P-750_XSTOL 😉

 

 

 

1 minute ago, simbol said:

What you should do is continue your current roadmap for AF2, finish anything for it and proceed to analyse the MS2020 SDK when it becomes available in order to see how your current products can be developed for MS.

Yes, that's exactly what I am doing. Obviously I'm developing for AFS2 right now and following their standards of how things should be done.

Porting is always a challenge, but porting is usually less work than starting from scratch.

My point is that it is possible to think, even at this early point, "might this project be a good fit to potentially port to MSFS". The Cessna 208 seemed like it wouldn't be, for obvious reasons, and so I abandoned that project while I hadn't sunk too much time into it.

11 hours ago, nickhod said:

Seriously? Does the title "Marketplace Producer, Microsoft Flight Simulator" not offer any hints at all?

I don't think anyone needs to guess anything here.

Good find, 100% Confirmed Flight Sim Store coming for FS2020.  Some people need to read properly before posting embarrassing comments!

Next question is, if MS want to control the store, are other stores locked out from selling addons?  Will users install directly from the MS Store into Flight Sim?  How will user addons be installed?   Million dollar questions....................

51 minutes ago, nickhod said:

Yes, that's exactly what I am doing. Obviously I'm developing for AFS2 right now and following their standards of how things should be done.

Just a tip, take a break from it. AFS2 is going to be a Dead Sim.

Just now, Greazer said:

Just a tip, take a break from it. AFS2 is going to be a Dead Sim.

I fear that you might be right. 😥 It's a shame as I love VR in Aerofly.

All depends how well VR is done in MSFS, if at all.

Just now, nickhod said:

All depends how well VR is done in MSFS, if at all.

We don't know, but we do know MS would be crazy stupid to leave that feature out when the competitors all have it.

Actually i'm happy about seeing that there will be a Marketplace. Depending on how happy we will be with the final product why not paying them money to keep it alive. For example i am an iracing user and i am very happy about their internal marketplace. Every addon you buy from them works properly. Automatic updates and no major bugs. I will be willing to rebuild my whole "Mancave" and invest some money for the latest and best flight simulator when it will be out (Hopefully).

Regarding the upcoming MFS Marketplace, my hope is for Microsoft to adopt a very open door policy for available content.  Develop it very similar to how Steam Workshop works for Steam games where pilots can “subscribe” to an addon which automatically downloads, installs, and keeps it up to date.  No directory management or file fussing, the store does it all for us and unsubscribing removes the addon completely.  The key difference for the MFS Marketplace would be for addons to either be free or for sale.  Subscribe to the addons which are free and purchase for addons which are for sale.

On the topic of free addons being available in the MFS Marketplace, I hope Microsoft allows anyone who owns a copy of MFS the ability to develop and upload their own addons to the online store, and to allow said content creators the choice to either offer their addon for free or to sell it for money.  And yeah, that means amateur developers could potentially make some money by selling content they’ve created.  Competition would be good for the consumers and it would help to keep prices for addons reasonable as well.  Plus allowing even low quality free plane addons would give pilots options, and options are always very good with online marketplaces.  The Steam Workshop has both player ratings and player reviews for every mod available on the shop, and features like those in the MFS Marketplace could allow pilots to determine whether an addon is something they’d like to have.

The key here is for Microsoft to not get greedy with their cut of the marketplace sales.  There are many professional content developers for the flight sim genre and the success of the sim truly depends on them, they should still be allowed to make a profitable business by working with the Marketplace.  If Microsoft gets greedy with their cut it could ruin the entire franchise, a conservative balance is needed.

It could work and it could be a very successful feature, as long as Microsoft develops it respectfully and considerately.

1 hour ago, Mengy said:

Regarding the upcoming MFS Marketplace, my hope is for Microsoft to adopt a very open door policy for available content.  Develop it very similar to how Steam Workshop works for Steam games where pilots can “subscribe” to an addon which automatically downloads, installs, and keeps it up to date.  No directory management or file fussing, the store does it all for us and unsubscribing removes the addon completely.  The key difference for the MFS Marketplace would be for addons to either be free or for sale.  Subscribe to the addons which are free and purchase for addons which are for sale.

On the topic of free addons being available in the MFS Marketplace, I hope Microsoft allows anyone who owns a copy of MFS the ability to develop and upload their own addons to the online store, and to allow said content creators the choice to either offer their addon for free or to sell it for money.  And yeah, that means amateur developers could potentially make some money by selling content they’ve created.  Competition would be good for the consumers and it would help to keep prices for addons reasonable as well.  Plus allowing even low quality free plane addons would give pilots options, and options are always very good with online marketplaces.  The Steam Workshop has both player ratings and player reviews for every mod available on the shop, and features like those in the MFS Marketplace could allow pilots to determine whether an addon is something they’d like to have.

The key here is for Microsoft to not get greedy with their cut of the marketplace sales.  There are many professional content developers for the flight sim genre and the success of the sim truly depends on them, they should still be allowed to make a profitable business by working with the Marketplace.  If Microsoft gets greedy with their cut it could ruin the entire franchise, a conservative balance is needed.

It could work and it could be a very successful feature, as long as Microsoft develops it respectfully and considerately.

I agree they should allow people to upload all the freeware they want, but I would prefer to see the payware DLCs being curated by the MS team. Quality control to avoid all the issues we have right now with current sims. 

An option to stay in the middle of both models (mine and yours) would be to allow the developers to sell their products outside the MS Marketplace. The dev doesn't want to be curated or pay the fees? Fine, but MS won't officially support the product/DLC.

I myself wouldn't buy anything outside the official enviroment (MS Marketplace), but I know some people would like to have that option.

Edited August 23, 20196 yr by ca_metal

4 hours ago, simbol said:

sorry for saying this to you, but you are being very naive my friend.

This ^^^ has been my impression of several discussions started by this poster. 

Certainly appreciate his enthusiasm and am not discounting his potential. However, he is obviously very naive, not only about the many, many ways flight simulators are used/played but, more importantly, about the BUSINESS of development for flightsim. 

Undoubtedly, MS has some kind of vision for how their new sim will drive the market. Without making it transparently open to 3rd party development (SDK)  and embracing community talent, that vision will be very near sighted and potentially short lived.  

Our young friend (and MS) would do well to study how Lockheed Martin has driven the market thru 3rd party development and spend less time, at this stage of his development, hitching his wagon to what is, right now, vaporware. 

Just my thoughts.....

Edited August 23, 20196 yr by yurei