Obviously, MS has reached out to some third party developers or vice versa.

I think we can also conclude that porting certain things from the ESP will not be very hard. I doubt PMDG would abandon P3D right now if they had to re-write everything from scratch for MSFS 2020. Maybe there's an option to use legacy flight models from ESP? The complex subsystems on these commercial jets won't have to be re-written right? 

It seems we can also conclude that at the very least Microsoft will have somewhat low fees for third party addon makers to be on stores or the platform itself.

The only thing is... I don't follow PMDG that closely but it seems they take very radical positions at various points. Could these shift back? 

What else do you guys think this means?

 

I think we can infer that some developers likely think MSFS is going to totally take over and be the vast majority of their sales, to the point that some may see fit to go exclusively all in on MSFS. 

Edited November 8, 20196 yr by irrics

1 hour ago, carbonbasedlifeform said:

Obviously, MS has reached out to some third party developers or vice versa.

I think we can also conclude that porting certain things from the ESP will not be very hard. I doubt PMDG would abandon P3D right now if they had to re-write everything from scratch for MSFS 2020. Maybe there's an option to use legacy flight models from ESP? The complex subsystems on these commercial jets won't have to be re-written right? 

It seems we can also conclude that at the very least Microsoft will have somewhat low fees for third party addon makers to be on stores or the platform itself.

I don't think we can reach the conclusion that porting effort is minimal. The amount of porting effort is going to be hugely dependent on how much of the SDK API they use. Given that there isn't a full SDK yet, it is clear that the old SDK is not directly compatible, and that APIs will definitely be changing. Whether or not an aircraft or addon is hard to port will be directly related to how much work is done inside the SDK API as opposed to outside it.

As I mentioned in another thread, most complex aircraft systems are built using external C++ code. Any of that code that doesn't touch the SDK (which for some aircraft is likely to be quite a bit) won't have to be rewritten. PMDG has been externalizing a ton of their systems just due to the complexity and lack of native support for such systems.

1 hour ago, irrics said:

I think we can infer that some developers likely think MSFS is going to totally take over and be the vast majority of their sales, to the point that some may see fit to go exclusively all in on MSFS. 

I believe this is the most accurate take. P3D and XP are niche products and reading the tea leaves MS is definitely trying to position MSFS as less niche. Certainly I think the community tends to overweigh just how big we are following the end of FSX. If MS brings FSX level numbers of customers and perhaps then some (and I think it's likely MS will succeed), developers would be positively silly not to focus efforts there instead of supporting multiple platforms. These developer teams are single digits or low double digits and it is much, much more expensive to try to manage multiple product lines and platforms.

-Matt N

PMDG doesn't make business decisions haphazardly based on some marketing development schedules and screenshots. To announce that their next major project will be for MSFS you can infer that they have enough detailed knowledge of the design of MSFS that they could determine their cost of developing addons for it and what the public interest will be in the platform.

This announcement was a seal of approval from a major developer. That is good news to me. Contrast this with RSR's comments on MS Flight when it was announced.

A lot of developers have gone quiet on MSFS since it was announced. I am looking forward to a similar announcement from FSLabs and I hope it includes good news about the Concorde2020.

Ted 

We can infer that the equivalent PMDG product will cost even more in MFS than in P3D.

1 hour ago, Murmur said:

We can infer that the equivalent PMDG product will cost even more in MFS than in P3D.

Really? Why?

44 minutes ago, richfx said:

Really? Why?

Because.

Just now, Ron Attwood said:

Because.

Hardly a convincing argument. Please do elaborate.

Just now, richfx said:

Hardly a convincing argument. Please do elaborate.

You don't do humour do you.

You're not funny. Anyway, moving back on to topic...

1 hour ago, richfx said:

Really? Why?

Because customers of the P3D version will receive a credit equal to its total price towards the future MFS version.

Thank you Stephen.

4 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Because customers of the P3D version will receive a credit equal to its total price towards the future MFS version.

That doesn't mean it will cost more. However, the fact that the MSFS engine has far more aerodynamic modelling in it than P3D implies that it will be a lot more work and a lot better product than the P3D version. PMDG products are priced highly and to an extent that's justified but a lot of the product is reselling one they've already sold to most of us. It's tricky.

From Robert Randazzo's Post on 08-NOV-2019

Quote

We anticipate NG3 going to market at around $139.99.

 

Do we know if the NG3 for the new MFS will be the same 737-800/737-900/737-900ER combo as NGXu for P3D? I assume that this will be the case.