Starting add-on development for FSX. Is it worth it?

[BushAV8R]

Hi all,

I hope it is OK to ask this question in here. If not, please move the post to the appropriate place.

Last year I wanted to start with aircraft add-on development, but figured that I was lacking 3D modelling experience and learning it via available tutorials seemed to be slow for me. So I decided to do proper 3ds max training and I finished that now. So here I am, wanting to start with a nice aircraft.

I have used MSFS since version 2 and never really used anything else, when it comes to civil flight simulators, but for add-on development I have the choice between FSX and X-Plane. I bought X-Plane a few weeks ago and it is not bad. Actually I like it, but it lacks in a few places.

The reason why I am thinking about X-Plane is the fact, that MS stopped the development of MSFS and the development platform will not change anymore, which is good and also bad.

I would like to ask you about your feeling, how long FSX will serve as a development platform, with a good amount of potential add-on customers. I have the feeling that this is like 3-5 years from now. Just my feeling. X-Plane might catch up in that time or another sim like Aerosoft 2012 will come for example.

Starting with FSX and having to start from scratch again in 2-3 years for another platform seems kinda bad, and therefore I am thinking about X-Plane as a developer platform. I don't want to start a FSX is better than X-Plane conversation. I would just like to hear your opinions, if it is still worth it to start add-on development on FSX or if it is reasonable to consider another platform as well.

I never used the SDK of FSX nor did I use X-Plane. So I have no preference here. Of course I love FSX with all the nice add-on aircraft and scenery, but I am looking for something with a future.

Could you please give an advice to a potential newbie developer. Your thoughts are much appreciated.

Thank you for your time and reading this.

[crashaz]

Go with FSX... still has legs..... and what you learn will still go a ways towards any other sim. Tags may be different... but heck... we have a ton of developers right here who are only too glad to offer advice.

:wavey:

[BushAV8R]

Thanks for your answer.

Did I ask a sensitive question, since nobody else is answering my question except crashaz?

[crashaz]

No I don't think so.... with the holiday and all.... development is always slowest during the summer.

:wavey:

[BushAV8R]

Oh OK, then I will wait for more answers. :)

[full]

Hi Pete, I develop for FSX and FS9 which is still growing even 7 years on from its release ! I have tried to model in X-Plane but found it very difficult using PlaneMaker, I don't know if 3dsMax can be used in X-Plane ? therefore I recommend developing for FSX because you can make models in very high detail without compromise on polygon limits, you will learn a lot from the SDK's and from other Dev's here, just my 2 cents.

[hairyspin]

Hello Pete,


The weather's been much too good for squatting over a monitor these past umpteen weeks, but your concern is for a sim with a future so I'd recommend FSX, oddly enough.
With the disbanding of the ACES studio, FSX's code is now frozen and you have a non-moving set of goalposts to aim at. Nobody has reached the utter limits of what FSX can do yet, nor is that anywhere in sight.
I've never seen payware add-ons for X-Plane on any shop shelf, but add-ons for FSX can still be bought in many shops that have otherwise given up on PC gaming - and they're not cheap!
If FS9 is still going strong - and it is - how much longer do you think FSX will continue? I mean, there are still people around who develop freeware for CFS2, which came out 10 years ago. MSFS titles are like Volvos - everlasting!
X-Plane is a decidedly specialist niche of the sim market which majors on accurate flight modelling. If that's what rocks your boat then carry on, but as a more general flight sim - with the best eye-candy around - FSX has a much wider appeal.

I just hope your version of 3dsMax is no newer than version 2008, or it's gmax for you! ;)

[BushAV8R]

Thank you for sharing your view Craig and hairspin.

You are right, that it is a good thing to have a stable platform like FSX now. We didnt have such a situation for a long time, with new releases every two years or so. X-Plane is basically in the same situation. New releases every 2 years or so and updates in between. So having astable development platform is great.

I havent seen any X-Plane add-ons in stores yet, but don't you think X-Plane will catch up in a few years. Version 10 is supposed to be out beginning of next year and lately I have seen some awesome add-ons like Tom Kylers Falco or MU-2.

If I imagine to be a payware add-on developer one day, I see less competion for X-Plane at the moment and there are not a lot of high quality add-ons for it yet. So that might be an advantage. Most of the aircraft I would love to do are already developed for FSX, but not for X-Plane.

I dont like to sound that I am completely in favor of X-Plane, I am just sharing the thoughts I have and like to hear your opinions on it, since I am a newbie in this area.

For 3D modelling, fortunately, due to my subscription I was able to get Max 2008 32 bit. It should arrive in a few days. So you see, I am of course still considering FSX. :)
For X-Plane I could do the modelling in 3ds Max, but would then have to import the model into AC3D or blender and after doing the animations there, export it to X-Plane. So I guess the modelling pipeline would be easier for FSX.

I saw a poll where people voted to see more first gen jets. Well, one aircraft which has not been developed as a full blown, realistic add-on is the T-38A and I would love to do it. One of my favorites, where I have access to pictures, drawings, manuals, as well as pilots. Do you think such an aicraft would be of interest for the FSX crowd?

Love to hear your opinions since you have experience in this area for so long already.

[bstolle]

Forget x-plane. I used to design planes for x-plane and fs5/95/9. X-plane will never catch up. Even worse, if you design a plane Austin will change basic engine, aerodynamic or graphic things in the next version. So you are back to step one.
Furthermore even if you make a very high quality plane for x-plane it's not rewarding as x-plane and it's plane are still rather sterile.
I'm just starting my first FSX plane as this is the way to go for a flighsim designer IMHO.
Bought FSDS 3.5 a few days ago as I worked with it when designing fs9 planes and just decided to switch to Gmax as it's really more powerful and rather easy to usee once u get the hang of it.

[BushAV8R]

Hi sg38. Thanks for your input.

From my point of view, X-Plane will eventually catch up, but it might still take a few years. X-Plane is still in development and FSX is not, so it is just a matter of time until that is happening.

I heard that X-Plane can be an unstable platform and things working might get screwed up with an update or new realease. Thats not really nice, but from what I heard and read, this situation is improving a little.

I downloaded the demo version a few weeks ago and also bought the full version and I have to say, that X-Plane is not bad at all using some of the high quality add-ons. I had a lot of fun. Of course the scenery is not yet as stunning as FSX and also the ATC and things are really bad, but these are things which might improve with XP 10.

I also like the flight model in the subsonic range. I am flying for real as well and X-Plane is doing a better job simulating all the small corrections you have to do all the time in the real aircraft. It feels more natural in X-Plane, using Tom Kylers Falco add-on for example. The C-172 is not bad either. However, when it comes to transonic or supersonic modelling, X-Plane really falls short. The aerodynamics and flight dynamics in that range are realy really bad. Not surprising for me, since the blade element theory is producing reasonable results for straight wings in the subsonic range. When wing sweep is involved or the speeds get into the transsonic and supersonic range, this method is not that accurate anymore. Actually it can get really bad and that is what I see in X-Plane. You can bypass this behaviour. I think it was done for the F-104 add-on, but I bet you have to manipulate the model in an unrealistic way in order to make it look and feel right. This area of the Flight Model has to be improved big time I think.

3D Modelling is not a problem for me. I use 3ds Max and could use it for FSX and X-Plane. For X-Plane I just need an additional tool for the export, but that is rather cheap. Around $80.

..but back to the main topic. What was the lastest version you used for X-Plane, in order to create an aircraft and what did turn you off the most?

..and I am still looking for more opinions. People with X-Plane experience (good or bad) would be great.

[bstolle]

>I also like the flight model in the subsonic range. I am flying for real as well and X-Plane is doing a better job simulating all the small corrections you have to do all the time in the real aircraft. It feels more natural in X-Plane, using Tom Kylers Falco add-on for example. The C-172 is not bad either...

Haven't tried the Falco, but I've tried the pre-release Mu-2 and it had serious aerodynamic problems.

>Not surprising for me, since the blade element theory is producing reasonable results for straight wings in the subsonic range.

That's exactly the point. It's just reasonable.
I doubt that the blade element theory is superior, you get approximate results rather quick but once you get down to detailed specific plane behaviour you can't do much in x-plane.
There's for sure a reason that the multi million dollar sims are table based.
Initially planes seem to be more responsible in x-plane but just check the amount of Gs you can pull with the default biz jet and the maneuverability of the default 747. I wouldn't consider this realistic at all. With every new full number version Austin says x-plane will leapfrog FS...it never happened, it never will. In fact the gap was growing with each release.
As both are 'only' desktop sims, immersiveness is a big factor and that's the point were x-plane is way behind (as is fs9 with its low rez scenery)
Last plane I built for x-plane was a Hansajet 320m for v 9. Just do a search at x-plane org and you'll find it. But aerodynamic design is so limited in x-plane that I never could get the correct CL for the flaps with the forward swept wing.

[Milton Shupe]

I think what I am reading here is, "which way to go to get more sales and customer satisfaction".

With limited availablility of quality add-ons for x-plane, and likely, an appreciative paying audience when one arrives, and customers who may be less spoiled and expectant of payware add-ons than FSX customers, x-plane may be your best choice for a captive audience.

If that is your rationale, go for it. However, for a world-wide audience and marketing partner availability, FS is trhe way to go. Sheer size of audience should get you in the money.

[BushAV8R]

@sg38:
Yes, that is my point of view as well. Blade element theory is not superior to table models. On both sides I would say garbage in garbage out. It depends on what and how much data you can put into the flight model and I think both Sims (FSX and X-Plane) are limiting the user here. For most add-ons, fidelity is OK, but if you want to model a more complex behaviour, both approaches have their limitations. It would be great if a user could overwrite the forces and moments acting on the aircraft via a plugin, using own tables and calculations. That would give all the freedom to the developer. Of course this could have a hit on the FPS, as more calculations might be involved, but computing power is increasing.

Also I would say that more than 90% of commercial flight simulators are using the table model approach. I am working as a professional in the simulation industry for combat aircraft and we are also using table models for aerodynamics and flight dynamics. Very complex ones though and the Sim flies exactly like the aircraft.

@Milton:
Milton, for me it is not all about sales and money. Number one priority for would be customer satisfaction and absolute attention to detail and high quality. Nothing would be more rewarding for me than seeing other people using my add-on, because they like it. If people are willing to pay for a good product, where somebody invested a lot of his freetime, it is more than fair, I think, but I am for sure not after the quick buck. Actually, it was you who inspired me to start add-on development and to get a proper 3D modelling training after working with your C162 tutorial. When I talked about lower competition for X-Plane, I meant that most of the aircraft I would love to do are already existing for FSX and they do not for X-Plane and I might be able to fill a few gaps.

A development platform with a future is very important for me. As I said, I am about to start add-on development and I try to evaluate, where to invest my time learning the SDK and all things involved creating add-on aircraft. This might be influenced by reading different threads and hearing people from Aerosoft saying that FSX will be dead as a platform in a few years. Of course this is not true, if there is nothing new, but comments like that make me think. I am sure it takes a lot of time learning all the things about aircraft development in FSX, and I am more than willing to invest that time, if it is worth it.

If they wouldn't have closed the Aces studio, this would have never been a question for me, since I am using MSFS for more than 2/3 of my life now.

As a newbie developer, I am just asking for an advice, if you think that FSX is still a valid platform and if it will be like that for years to come. Or if you think that it is also worth looking at other platforms, since they make progress and are still being developed.

Some of you already made their comments in that direction and I appreciate that. It would also be great to hear, why people and add-on developers think X-Plane is not the way to go. Nothing is better than hearing opinions from FSX developers, with years of experience, first hand and I mean that in a very respectful way.

[bstolle]

@sg38:
....Also I would say that more than 90% of commercial flight simulators are using the table model approach. I am working as a professional in the simulation industry for combat aircraft and we are also using table models for aerodynamics and flight dynamics. Very complex ones though and the Sim flies exactly like the aircraft.


That sim must have enormous calculating power! Even our 767 sim is more a procedure trainer than a real 'sim'. Talked to a Boeing engineer quite a while ago and he said that as soon as you are approaching Vs, the simulation isn't exact at all, as it's almost impossible to calculate accurate flow separation etc...

[BushAV8R]

Yeah, it has a lot of caculating power. The aircraft simulation (flight model, systems, engine model, radar etc.) is running on 12 CPUs at the moment.

Stuff like the visual system, synthetic environment etc. are having their own CPUs.

[Milton Shupe]

I do not see x-plane or FSX going away anytime soon. If FS98, FS2000, and FS2002/FS2004 are still alive and kicking, with no serious replacements in site for either if the two, you can have a lot of time developing some serious aircraft for either.

I have been developing for FS2002, and still do, since it came out, ... eight years now. I have not transitioned to FSX because of its version nuances and differences. So, I plan to continue to work toward FS2004 contributions as long as there are customers who still fly it. I do make my gmax source available for FSX native conversions however.

EDIT: Have you checked out the X-Plane thread here: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/forumdisplay.php?f=64

[BushAV8R]

Yes, I agree with you Milton that FSX will be development platform for some years to come and it also makes sense what hairyspin said, that nobody has reached the limits of FSX so far.

Thanks for the link. I saw that area before and was reading through a few posts lately. From what I read, people see the potential of XP9, even if there are still shortcomings. I had the same impression. I enjoy the flying a lot with the high quality add-ons and also the scenery is not bad and very similar to FS2004. However, you can not compare it to FSX yet, from my point of view. Maybe XP10 will make a move in that direction. We will see.

Is it true that Bill (Lionheart) tried to do some development in X-Plane? It would be great if he could hare his opinion and thoughts. From reading a few posts, I had the impression that he likes XP as well.