I wonder if.......?

[b52bob]

I wonder if designers make more if their products are priced under $20 or over. I would think that the volume would make up for the lower price. I'm on a fixed income and would love some new things but have to wait for sales. I am saving for p3d but that darn dc-8 got in the way because of the sale.

Just wondering.

Bob

[Katoun]

Hi,

It's certainly a hope that would work but, quite honestly, I think that most people place a value on a premium price for a premium product.

Kat

[MCDesigns]

I tend to think that with how bad piracy is, they need to make their return on investment for the amount of work quickly as soon as released before their work hits the pirate sites. Sucks for legit buyers, but we have only the pirates to blame. This is such a small niche market, I bet the majority of sales come right after release rather than down the road. Luckily there are sales often for those that can/have to wait.

[andersel]

I'm in a similar circumstance as Bob. I have to wait for the sales and, even then, I need to bee very judicious in my purchasing decisions. A major driver in my continuing preference for FS9 is the simple fact that there is such an active freeware development community there. Similarly, a major reason for my reticence to follow the crowd in to FSX/P3D is the ever increasing cost of those platforms. Sometimes the best answer to a given question is the most simple one.

LA

[glh]

I'm in a similar circumstance as Bob. I have to wait for the sales and, even then, I need to bee very judicious in my purchasing decisions. A major driver in my continuing preference for FS9 is the simple fact that there is such an active freeware development community there. Similarly, a major reason for my reticence to follow the crowd in to FSX/P3D is the ever increasing cost of those platforms. Sometimes the best answer to a given question is the most simple one.

LA

There are five copies of FSX Gold Edition for sale for $30 or less on Ebay right now. One is labeled Good and the others are Brand New or Like New. When you consider the TONS of freeware available for FSX, I can't agree with you that FSX is expensive in terms of the platform.

Now if you need a newer, faster computer to run FSX, that is a different story. But the software platform itself is very inexpensive. I've been running my copy of FSX Acceleration on an old Dell GX260 desktop (Win XP Pro) with a 3 GHz P4 chip, 2 GB RAM and a 512 MB GeForce 6200 video card. I get some stutters because it's not the fastest system and video out there but it is quite livable to me. But I am NOT a purist in terms of the results I expect.

I have been doing this for about 6-7 years. Still running like a champ. My system was also bought on Ebay.

Just my $.02.

[b52bob]

I tend to think that with how bad piracy is, they need to make their return on investment for the amount of work quickly as soon as released before their work hits the pirate sites. Sucks for legit buyers, but we have only the pirates to blame. This is such a small niche market, I bet the majority of sales come right after release rather than down the road. Luckily there are sales often for those that can/have to wait.

I think I have to agree with you. I would guess that the majority of income is gathered on the first few days of sale. I am extremely greatful for sales as I can wait a few months before I get it. I remember the days when I was on the leading edge of computing..the latest and greatest..until I found how much I can save by waiting a few months for the prices to come down.

Bob

[dvj]

I wonder if designers make more if their products are priced under $20 or over. I would think that the volume would make up for the lower price. I'm on a fixed income and would love some new things but have to wait for sales. I am saving for p3d but that darn dc-8 got in the way because of the sale.

Just wondering.

Bob

You can set P3D as a lower priority and simply get Steve's DX10 fixer for FSX. Add a few FTX sceneries and you are good to go. And yes, that DC8 is quite nice.

[ncooper]

simply get Steve's DX10 fixer for FSX.

Unfortunately it is no longer available.

Nick.

[wombat666]

Hi,

It's certainly a hope that would work but, quite honestly, I think that most people place a value on a premium price for a premium product.

Kat

No, 'Gen X' and the 'Must Have it Now' people make up a small percentage of the Flight Sim Community.
The larger part of the Community are older and have family commitments or are retired on fixed incomes.

Developers who insist on the 'Premium Price for a Premium Product' train of thought are (In my opinion) massaging their own egos, obvious given the number of duplications announced or in development.
There is no need of three (3!) 'Premium' McDD Phantoms competing for space in the market, certainly they are different versions but I can't see all three selling to the same clients.
Some lateral thinking and diversification on subject choice is badly need by the high priced end of the vendor community.

If you take the Automotive industry analogy as a comparison, Honda and Toyota sell far more units than Ferrari.
Good quality at a fair price beats overpriced excess every time.
:173go1:

[wombat666]

There are five copies of FSX Gold Edition for sale for $30 or less on Ebay right now. One is labeled Good and the others are Brand New or Like New. Just my $.02.

Just to follow up the above, I can walk into the three local outlets in my area (JB HIFI, EB Games and Harvey Norman) and collect a brand new copy of FSX Gold for A$20.00 to A$25.00 off the shelf, less during a sale.
Good value and useful for a fallback, I now own two backup copies at under A$20.00 each.

:triumphant:

[SkippyBing]

As someone who's add-ons sell for $15 I don't think sales volume is that price sensitive. Certainly I remember seeing the numbers for the T-38 and thinking they'd sold at least twice what our best selling model had done. Ultimately I'd say it's more to do with the aircraft type than the price, after all I don't download much freeware I'm not interested in.

[Dumonceau]

I tend to think that with how bad piracy is, they need to make their return on investment for the amount of work quickly as soon as released before their work hits the pirate sites. Sucks for legit buyers, but we have only the pirates to blame. This is such a small niche market, I bet the majority of sales come right after release rather than down the road. Luckily there are sales often for those that can/have to wait.

Oh, come on! People who indulge in piracy will NEVER buy stuff. Why should they, they can get it for free.

IMHO piracy does not equate to lost sales, the people who simply download would never buy it. Moreover, FS pirates are no real flight sim hobbyists, they are downloaders. Hunter-gatherers if you will. They download what they want, fly it for a couple of minutes and are off to download something else.

Real flight simmers buy the stuff so that they can have the full functionality of the product. Cracked payware almost always loses functionality because of the cracking. Just like other cracked software does. That is a simple fact.

Before anyone gets angry: I am NOT advocating piracy, I'm just stating a humble opinion.

Cheers,

Dumonceau

[Naruto-kun]

No, 'Gen X' and the 'Must Have it Now' people make up a small percentage of the Flight Sim Community.
The larger part of the Community are older and have family commitments or are retired on fixed incomes.

Developers who insist on the 'Premium Price for a Premium Product' train of thought are (In my opinion) massaging their own egos, obvious given the number of duplications announced or in development.
There is no need of three (3!) 'Premium' McDD Phantoms competing for space in the market, certainly they are different versions but I can't see all three selling to the same clients.
Some lateral thinking and diversification on subject choice is badly need by the high priced end of the vendor community.

If you take the Automotive industry analogy as a comparison, Honda and Toyota sell far more units than Ferrari.
Good quality at a fair price beats overpriced excess every time.
:173go1:

You gotta keep in mind the size of the team and licensing expenses....that's why PMDG products don't sell for $35

[wombat666]

You gotta keep in mind the size of the team and licensing expenses....that's why PMDG products don't sell for $35

I do know only too well the costs (Licensing! Try getting one from Ferrari!!!) from experience in a different Sim area, however, my point should east to understood, NOT everyone wants a 'PMDG standard' product.
A common thread running through this discussion is obvious, except for a relatively small percentage of 'First Responders' many people are patient and just wait for sale to come around.

For example over this weekend we have this lot from Just Flight:

747-200/300 HD FSX (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-d/) (for FSX & P3D v1/v2)
£9.99 / €12.45 / $14.99 747-200/300 FS2004 (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-h/) (for FS2004)
£9.99 / €12.45 / $14.99
767-200/300 Series (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-k/) (for FSX)
£9.99 / €12.45 / $14.99
767-200/300 Series Expansion Pack (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-u/) (for FSX)
£2.99 / €3.95 / $4.49
767-200/300 Series Livery Expansion Pack (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-o/) (for FSX & FS2004)
£4.99 / €6.45 / $7.49
767-200/300 Series (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-b/) (for FS2004)
£9.99 / €12.45 / $14.99
767-200/300 Series Expansion Pack (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-n/) (for FS2004)
£2.99 / €3.95 / $4.49
737 Professional (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-p/) (for FSX)
£14.99 / €18.95 / $22.49
737 Professional 737-100 Expansion Pack (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-x/) (for 737 Professional)
£4.99 / €6.45 / $7.49
737 Professional 737-200 & T-43A Expansion Pack (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-m/) (for 737 Professional)
£4.99 / €6.45 / $7.49
737 Professional 737-200 Early Version Expansion Pack (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-c/) (for 737 Professional)
£4.99 / €6.45 / $7.49
757 Jetliner Fremium Combo Pack 1 (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-q/) (for 757 Jetliner Freemium)
£9.99 / €12.45 / $14.99
757 Jetliner Fremium Combo Pack 2 (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-a/) (for 757 Jetliner Freemium)
£3.49 / €4.45 / $5.49
777 Professional (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-f/) (for FS2004)
£9.99 / €12.45 / $14.99
757 Professional (http://www.click-eshot.com/t/r-l-mijtjul-jtklihdljr-z/) (for FS2004)
£9.99 / €12.45 / $14.99
Not 'PMDG Quality' but they will sell a considerable number of items.

[MCDesigns]

Oh, come on! People who indulge in piracy will NEVER buy stuff. Why should they, they can get it for free.

IMHO piracy does not equate to lost sales, the people who simply download would never buy it. Moreover, FS pirates are no real flight sim hobbyists, they are downloaders. Hunter-gatherers if you will. They download what they want, fly it for a couple of minutes and are off to download something else.

Real flight simmers buy the stuff so that they can have the full functionality of the product. Cracked payware almost always loses functionality because of the cracking. Just like other cracked software does. That is a simple fact.

Before anyone gets angry: I am NOT advocating piracy, I'm just stating a humble opinion.

Cheers,

Dumonceau

Not wanting to get into a debate, I hear this lame excuse all the time, usually from users and not developers. There are users on every forum that d/l stolen addons and share with others. There are even forums full of users sharing payware. it really made my day to read at Avsim about a user that installed a patch for FTXGlobal and it deleted his folders because he was updating a stolen product, LOL.

[bazzar]

Pirates will never buy anything. That is why they are pirates.
So, no increase in sales there.

As for volume/price

100 x $36 = $3,600

200 X $18 = $3,600

Development costs are spiralling out of control because of market demand for systems depth, content and features.

Compare a $30 model to one of 5 years ago and see what I mean.

[Katoun]

Yes.

The costs have risen but the prices haven't. So, quite honestly, from a buyers perspective, this is good news.

And sadly, it cannot last.

Kat

[DaveKDEN]

There are many add-ons I've wanted to purchase but have skipped as a result of their high price. For me, once a product crosses that $25.00 - $30.00 threshold (depending on what it is), I feel my money's better spent elsewhere. While I could easily afford numerous add-ons I don't have, I also have a family with it's many financial responsibilities. Therefore, FSX add-ons take a back seat to the cost of life.

[huub vink]

When I read a thread like this I wonder how many still remember the CFS1 and CFS2 day when everybody contributed to his abilities and knowledge. People still regarded flight simmimg and developing for flight simulators a hobby. Netwings and simviation were filled with freeware and you could fly nearly any aircraft you wanted.

Over the years I've seen a lot of freeware designers gong into payware and rapidly becoming frustrated about disappointing sales, unsatisfied paying customers, the product ending up on a pirate site and colleague designers who are ruining the market as this colleague is designing exactly the same model as they are.

Were we just naive or really happier in those day?

Just a thought.............
Huub

[Rudyjo]

No, 'Gen X' and the 'Must Have it Now' people make up a small percentage of the Flight Sim Community.
The larger part of the Community are older and have family commitments or are retired on fixed incomes.

Developers who insist on the 'Premium Price for a Premium Product' train of thought are (In my opinion) massaging their own egos, obvious given the number of duplications announced or in development.
There is no need of three (3!) 'Premium' McDD Phantoms competing for space in the market, certainly they are different versions but I can't see all three selling to the same clients.
Some lateral thinking and diversification on subject choice is badly need by the high priced end of the vendor community.

If you take the Automotive industry analogy as a comparison, Honda and Toyota sell far more units than Ferrari.
Good quality at a fair price beats overpriced excess every time.
:173go1:

As for the developers who charge a premium price for a premium product, the one who comes to mind is A2A. An accusim plane runs about $55. Some products such as Alabeo run about $22.
A2A releases a plane about every 1 1/2 years, alabeo releases a plane every 4 months.
For all the research and quality that goes into an A2A plane, It is very reasonably priced. Along with a first class product, you also get first class support.
Just as a Ferrari costs way more than a Honda or Toyota, you get what you pay for. Your getting a car that takes weeks to build rather than a car that comes off the assembly line at a rate of a thousand a day.

[PHo17]

I think that "FS Ferrari" (what comes to price) doesn't even exist. Speaking of cars a Ferrari costs some ten times the price of an ordinary car (in my country Finland even more because cars are here heavy taxed). In FS world that means "Ferrari" should cost at least $200. I don't see many addons of that kind. Let's call it "FS Mercedes" :biggrin-new:

[Dumonceau]

When I read a thread like this I wonder how many still remember the CFS1 and CFS2 day when everybody contributed to his abilities and knowledge. People still regarded flight simmimg and developing for flight simulators a hobby. Netwings and simviation were filled with freeware and you could fly nearly any aircraft you wanted.

Over the years I've seen a lot of freeware designers gong into payware and rapidly becoming frustrated about disappointing sales, unsatisfied paying customers, the product ending up on a pirate site and colleague designers who are ruining the market as this colleague is designing exactly the same model as they are.

Were we just naive or really happier in those day?

Just a thought.............
Huub

Couldn't agree with you more Huub! I guess that nowadays, we're quite spoilt!

Dumonceau

[bazzar]

Ferarris cost what they do because of what they cost to make. The market for them is very small, comparatively, so they sell fewer.

If people can live without deep systems, multiple complex features and bespoke coding, then the cost of an addon would alter accordingly.

But I don't see that happening any time soon.

"More for less" has always been the traditional demand in any consumer category.

But then, when has a tennis-player ever won an argument with an umpire?

[dhasdell]

But then, when has a tennis-player ever won an argument with an umpire?

John McEnroe?

[huub vink]

Yes.

The costs have risen but the prices haven't. So, quite honestly, from a buyers perspective, this is good news.

And sadly, it cannot last.

Kat

I only a agree partially. In general what payware designers want, is a refund for the costs they make. The more complex a model becomes, the costs for documentation, visits, required software etc. will rise. Also the amount of hours needed to make the model will rise.
As an example: In general a FSX model is much more complex than an FS9 model. Take for instance the textures. In FS9 more or less just a texture and an alpha layer. In FSX a spec map, a bump map and the actual texture an all which their own alpha layers. And textures are just one of the more simple things.

Nevertheless it is remains a balance between the costs made and the refund expected.

I'm currently trying to help Dutchcheeseblend to finish his Fokker D-XXI. He has been working nearly daily on this model for more than a 18 months already. Both he and I made costs. We both bought several books on the subject, traveled to visit museums to do research. But still the model will be released as freeware. Why? Because he did it as hobby and doesn't expect any refunds.
Most payware designers I have worked with, want to have at least the money (real costs) spend on developing the model back. Most freeware designers I've worked with don't really care about the money, because went they don't want to spend money they just don't spend the money. And when they do spend money, they consider it part of their hobby.

For me the main difference between payware and freeware designers is that freeware designers create want they want and payware designers create what they think their customers would buy.

To get back to b52bob's question, I think simple models which can be developed within a reasonable amount of time and with a reasonable amount of money involved will not sell enough. When I fire up one of my 3 FS9 installs an climb into Paul Rebuffat's Bf109s, even I think "wow it still looks nice from the outside, but it really isn't from this age anymore....." :biggrin-new:

Just my 2 cents,
Huub

[Lawman]

Pirates will never buy anything. That is why they are pirates.
So, no increase in sales there.

Sorry bazzar, but I don't believe that is necessarily true. Illegal offerings tend to lower the moral threshold for someone who still might have bought the product legally if there had been no illegal alternative. After all, why spent your money when you can get it for free with (almost) zero chance of getting caught? The true issue regarding piracy and illegal downloading is thus a moral one. Many people even believe they have the right to download illegaly, so you can see how far our society has derailed regarding basic morals and values.

We live in a market which is governed by supply and demand. If I want a product that someone offers me bad enough, it is worth the asking price to me and I am apparently prepared to pay that price. But if I'm not willing to pay the asking price, that doesn't mean I am then allowed to just take it for free. Because that's just plain greed: "Me want!".The same holds true regarding the question of the OP: if you think the asking price is too high, you can either wait and hope it will be on a sale, or simply say "Sorry, this product is not for me" and move on.

[huub vink]

Hi Lawman,

Personally I think Bazz is actually quite right in his opinion that pirates won't buy the products they illegally download. There is nothing really black or completely white, so there surely be exceptions. I can fully understand the frustration from payware designers when their products end up in the illegal circuit, but I think the economical crisis and current price development contribute much more to disappointing sales than piracy does.
In general I don't think people buy more because other people steal less......

Development costs rise because models become much more complex. However for me models have become far too complex already. In my CFS1 and CFS2 day I could jump in an aircraft and immediately chase the enemy. Now I have to study the complete manual before I am even able to start the bl**dy thing! And in some cases (like a very beautiful freeware Mig) I'm not even capable to start the thing even after studying the manual....... and when I finally manage I have forgotten how I did it the next day :banghead:

Based on Rudyjo's post I understand I'm more a Alabeo man than an A2A person. Perhaps to answer Bob's question, we should compare sales numbers of Alabeo and A2A.

Cheers,
Huub

[Lawman]

Hello Huub,

I recognize the feeling:wink:. But it seems this is a niche market where the wishes of the "hardcore simmers" are prevalent because they're the ones who spend/are willing to spend the most and keep returning. And the motto of the FS-franchise is after all "As real as it gets". There are a few developers who cater for customers like yourself (and sometimes me), but the end result can never be the same as a "hardcore" simulation. That's why there are Fords and Ferraris. I personally think most developers have mastered the art of making a beautiful external model. But it is in the VC (with its myriad of different skills required) where there are significant differences.

I agree with you and Bazzar that the true pirates (who merely pirate for the sake of it) do not constituate lost sales. My point is that their activities also entice others to not buy that product legally, but take the illegal offering instead. And that could very well be a lost sale.

[Rudyjo]

One thing I have noticed over the years is that I still use the A2A planes that I bought 5 years ago.
The Alabeo planes tend to get used for a week, and then rarely used again.

If you consider the purchase price and the number of hours that you use it, the A2A planes can be considered to be cheaper.

Another example of "You get what you pay for" is tools.
I have many Milwaukee, Porter Cable, Bosch, Delta, and even Craftsman tools that I have owned for over 30 years that still work as they did when they were new.
I paid about 50% more for them than a Black and Decker would have cost, but if I had bought only Black and Decker tools, they would have been thrown away and replaced many times over the years.
The more expensive tools are cheaper in the long run.

Porter Cable is now owned by Black and Decker, most Craftsman tools are now made in China, Milwaukee sold out to another company years ago. In their quest for higher profits, they no longer have the quality that made them last a lifetime. I'm glad I bought those tools when I did, I have to be very desparate to buy those brands anymore. For the most part, they have lost me as a customer and I'm sure there are many people like me. It's actually cheaper to spend a little more time and money and do it right the first time.

[wombat666]

I suppose this is one of those discussions that is two sides of the same coin.
Huub put it exactly how I feel, 'I'm more a Alabeo man than an A2A person. Perhaps to answer Bob's question, we should compare sales numbers of Alabeo and A2A.'
That aside, 'As Real As It Gets' is not a very clever slogan, as here we are, seated in front of a PC, many with expensive hardware and multiple monitors, 'flying' virtual aeroplanes, which is not exactly 'Real'.
Me, I like to kick the tyres and light the fires, get airborne and enjoy the scenery, others can sit there and run a 30+ minute checklist and startup procedure which they enjoy and that is understandable, but I believe they are a minority.
I rather be 'Flying'.
Perhaps I'm (just me, myself) a simple suck, but my life is complicated enough without spending my limited leisure time adding further complexities to a hobby.
I do have other interests and I prefer to race one of my cars or bikes on days when the weather is fine, provided I'm not overseeing a home building (marathon) project.:banghead:
We are all different but we share an interest in 'Simulated Flight', however, it would be (never going to happen unfortunately) sensible if developers made an attempt to communicate with one another to avoid duplications.
More to the point, certainly release the complex 'Pet Projects' but why not intersperse them with something for simple sucks like me.
I was interested at the number of 'requests' for products that should be 'TacPac'? enabled, given the ridiculous price of that software, why so?
It adds to developer costs, so I believe, and what exactly is the point of dropping pretend munitions in a Civilian Flight Sim?
I'll get 'orf me soapbox and take my medication now.

:a1451:

PS: Let's remember, 'Piracy' is a given, we don't like it, but it is a given, and while I'm at it, we do not bash the Developers, it's their choice and their products.

[SkippyBing]

however, it would be (never going to happen unfortunately) sensible if developers made an attempt to communicate with one another to avoid duplications.

Oddly in most industries that would be considered illegal, imagine if Ford and GM agreed that one of them would make all the compact cars and the other all the SUVs.

[wombat666]

Oddly in most industries that would be considered illegal, imagine if Ford and GM agreed that one of them would make all the compact cars and the other all the SUVs.

I know that very well Skippy, it's known as 'Collusion', and in this case it wouldn't be illegal, it would simply be 'Common Sense'.
And FWIW, it is fairly common throughout manufacturing, even came across it myself.
:encouragement:

[Francois]

As a publisher (AND FS hobbyist) of FS products and having TRIED this scheme of lowering the price beyond regular (for example with our Plum Island title) I can tell you that it doesn't work that way...... unfortunately.

Products sell because people like them and if they do, the price is less important apparently. Of course it has to be in synch with other products and the quality and breadth of what is offered. Most of Simon Smeiman's planes sell for around 17 Euros..... and he works on one for over a year too !

For what it is worth, both Simon and I are WITHOUT a fixed income, and often without any income at all, so we feel the pain of our customers all too well. We are also not the yougest around anymore, unlike some of our esteemed competitors. It is one of the reasons I installed the 65+ discount for some of our products. And it also explains why we sell very nice, complete, multi-verision and interesting aircraft for only 17 Euros.

And yes, we COULD do nicer things...... IF we'd sell more than 300 of any given model at any time ;-) DAMHIK

[SkippyBing]

I know that very well Skippy, it's known as 'Collusion', and in this case it wouldn't be illegal, it would simply be 'Common Sense'.
And FWIW, it is fairly common throughout manufacturing, even came across it myself.
:encouragement:

I'm not sure how the Flight Sim market gets an exemption from collusion. I also don't see how it's common sense, if only one company was going to make a specific aircraft then the customers have no choice, even if the only available model is rubbish. As it is there are two or three Phantoms coming out soon each of which will have to be top notch to get sales.

[Lawman]

I'm not sure how the Flight Sim market gets an exemption from collusion. I also don't see how it's common sense, if only one company was going to make a specific aircraft then the customers have no choice, even if the only available model is rubbish. As it is there are two or three Phantoms coming out soon each of which will have to be top notch to get sales.

Nobody (in any field of business) is obligated to make a competing product. Let's take cars as an example (but you can fill in any product you like, including FS-addons): if Honda markets a car that runs on hydrogen, General Motors isn't required to also make a similar car just so that consumers have a choice. Should the CEO of GM say to the CEO of Honda "We are not gonna make/market a car that runs on hydrogen", they would simply be saying "We have no intention of competing against your product". But the CEO of GM could also make the same statement to the motoring press instead of the CEO of Honda and the end result would be exactly the same. A lot of people wrongly assume that a monopoly is illegal by definition. It is not. It's the abuse of a monopoly that's illegal.

[SkippyBing]

Nobody (in any field of business) is obligated to make a competing product. Let's take cars as an example (but you can fill in any product you like, including FS-addons): if Honda markets a car that runs on hydrogen, General Motors isn't required to also make a similar car just so that consumers have a choice. Should the CEO of GM say to the CEO of Honda "We are not gonna make/market a car that runs on hydrogen", they would simply be saying "We have no intention of competing against your product". But the CEO of GM could also make the same statement to the motoring press instead of the CEO of Honda and the end result would be exactly the same. A lot of people wrongly assume that a monopoly is illegal by definition. It is not. It's the abuse of a monopoly that's illegal.

So the abuse would be say company x agreeing to make an FSX Wonderjet 2000, company y agreeing not to, and then company x charging $100 a copy?

[Lawman]

So the abuse would be say company x agreeing to make an FSX Wonderjet 2000, company y agreeing not to, and then company x charging $100 a copy?

No, that would not be illegal but just the workings of the free market. What would e.g. be illegal would be company X saying they'll make an FSX Wonderjet 2000, company Y agreeing not to compete under the provision that company X charges $100 a copy instead of $90 and give the "extra" $10 to company Y as compensation for not competing.

[Dumonceau]

No, that would not be illegal but just the workings of the free market. What would e.g. be illegal would be company X saying they'll make an FSX Wonderjet 2000, company Y agreeing not to compete under the provision that company X charges $100 a copy instead of $90 and give the "extra" $10 to company Y as compensation for not competing.

So either way, under the rules of the so-called free market, the customer is s-c-r-e-w-e-d.

I for one think that whenever an addon is released at a price that is higher than the whole sim, that this amounts to greed. Pure and simple.

I'll get off me soapbox now...

Dumonceau

[Lawman]

So either way, under the rules of the so-called free market, the customer is s-c-r-e-w-e-d.

I for one think that whenever an addon is released at a price that is higher than the whole sim, that this amounts to greed. Pure and simple.

I'll get off me soapbox now...

Dumonceau

I can understand your POV and it is of course your prerogative. Unfortunately, that's capitalism for you. But more importantly: nobody is forcing you to buy that (non-essential) product.

[SkippyBing]

So either way, under the rules of the so-called free market, the customer is s-c-r-e-w-e-d.

I for one think that whenever an addon is released at a price that is higher than the whole sim, that this amounts to greed. Pure and simple.

I'll get off me soapbox now...

Dumonceau

That's simply not true.

Back of the envelope maths indicates I'm lucky if I make about £1 an hour on the average model we produce. To make the minimum wage, in the UK, we'd have to charge around 8 times more (and still get the same sales) which would mean charging about £100 or $160 an aircraft.

And that assumes we haven't spend anything on references, manuals etc.

[Dumonceau]

Skippybing I never accused you or your firm of greed. If that is the way it came accross, then please accept my most heartfelt appologies.

You are one of the devs that I respect highly! Quality models at an affordable price! RESPECT!

Dumonceau

[Dumonceau]

All of the above leads me to another question: how many devs make a living solely of FS? Are there people out there who do?

I'm very curious about that!

Dumonceau

[Naruto-kun]

1 here plus most of my team mates. Although last year I was still under my parent's roof...

[huub vink]

Its a very small market and it takes an awful lot of time to make a model, therefore I think it is nearly impossible to make a living of it. Perhaps that companies which are specialised in GA aircraft like Alabeo and Carenado can make some profit as I expect GA aircraft are the best selling product

The average time needed to complete a model is more than a year (both freeware as payware) and apart from the person who makes the actual model,you often have somebody for the textures, somebody for the sounds, somebody for the flightmodel and somebody to program the xml files.........

Huub

[Dumonceau]

I can understand your POV and it is of course your prerogative. Unfortunately, that's capitalism for you. But more importantly: nobody is forcing you to buy that (non-essential) product.

Indeed, capitalism. Communism has failed, but - as Jacques Cousteau said - the next system to fail.

The world needs something else. Somthing that doesn't exclude people, something inclusive. A system that regards ALL people's happiness as the "prime directive".... A system that isn't as destructive on our own habitat as this one, a system that doesn't excell at genocide, poverty and mental desease... A system that is there for everybody and everything...

Humanity has a lot of thinking and reworking to do...

Live long and prosper!

Johan

[Bjoern]

I like sales. Be it on Steam or for MSFS products.




Moreover, FS pirates are no real flight sim hobbyists, they are downloaders. Hunter-gatherers if you will. They download what they want, fly it for a couple of minutes and are off to download something else.

Sounds like some of the walking wallets in the community. "Price tag?! I'll buy it!" ;)




When I read a thread like this I wonder how many still remember the CFS1 and CFS2 day when everybody contributed to his abilities and knowledge. People still regarded flight simmimg and developing for flight simulators a hobby. Netwings and simviation were filled with freeware and you could fly nearly any aircraft you wanted.

Over the years I've seen a lot of freeware designers gong into payware and rapidly becoming frustrated about disappointing sales, unsatisfied paying customers, the product ending up on a pirate site and colleague designers who are ruining the market as this colleague is designing exactly the same model as they are.

Were we just naive or really happier in those day?

Times have changed. Bigger, better internet, greater mass appeal, influx of people only in for the short-term kick.




Ferarris cost what they do because of what they cost to make. The market for them is very small, comparatively, so they sell fewer.

A good part of the pricetag must be a "brand image" bonus. Like buying a Mercedes or Porsche.

Consumer car prices have generally gone up due to inflation, shorter development cycles and higher technical demands (iPod connector!). Sounds familiar, huh?




Most payware designers I have worked with, want to have at least the money (real costs) spend on developing the model back.

A kickstarter might help in that case. It works similar to SOH's annual bandwidth drive, but instead of a working forum users get an aircraft model in return.




All of the above leads me to another question: how many devs make a living solely of FS? Are there people out there who do?

I'm very curious about that!

One of my emergency life plans is becoming officially self-employed and doing payware or other 3D stuff. The welfare system here will support such an endeavour for a certain amount of time (two years or so), so you at least get some training wheels before you're all out on your own.




The world needs something else. Somthing that doesn't exclude people, something inclusive. A system that regards ALL people's happiness as the "prime directive".... A system that isn't as destructive on our own habitat as this one, a system that doesn't excell at genocide, poverty and mental desease... A system that is there for everybody and everything...


Death?

[dhasdell]

A good part of the pricetag must be a "brand image" bonus. Like buying a Mercedes or Porsche.

I heard somewhere that £3000 of the pricetag of every BMW sold goes towards advertising. Can anyone confirm this?

[Dumonceau]

I like sales. Be it on Steam or for MSFS products.





Sounds like some of the walking wallets in the community. "Price tag?! I'll buy it!" ;)





Times have changed. Bigger, better internet, greater mass appeal, influx of people only in for the short-term kick.





A good part of the pricetag must be a "brand image" bonus. Like buying a Mercedes or Porsche.

Consumer car prices have generally gone up due to inflation, shorter development cycles and higher technical demands (iPod connector!). Sounds familiar, huh?





A kickstarter might help in that case. It works similar to SOH's annual bandwidth drive, but instead of a working forum users get an aircraft model in return.





One of my emergency life plans is becoming officially self-employed and doing payware or other 3D stuff. The welfare system here will support such an endeavour for a certain amount of time (two years or so), so you at least get some training wheels before you're all out on your own.





Death?
Thank you for that
As "the worst developper ever", mind telling us your age young man?

Especially since your german, the country that it destroying the EU through Angelas's autherity???

maybe because you germans want the world to suffer because you lost two world wars??

[SkippyBing]

Skippybing I never accused you or your firm of greed. If that is the way it came accross, then please accept my most heartfelt appologies.

You are one of the devs that I respect highly! Quality models at an affordable price! RESPECT!

Dumonceau

No apology necessary! I knew it was directed at us.

My point was you can't use the price of FSX to judge whether developers are being greedy. If people are trying to make a living at developing for FSX then the cost of the add-on will have to reflect it and due to the much smaller numbers of models sold vs copies of FSX the price may well be higher. They aren't being greedy they're just reflecting the true cost of developing a model.

We aren't trying to make a living, more recoup some of our costs and pay for the occasional system upgrade or annual type rating exam. Consequently we can write our time off and charge less.

[Bjoern]

I heard somewhere that £3000 of the pricetag of every BMW sold goes towards advertising. Can anyone confirm this?

No time to look that up, but it sounds plausible. Advertising companies usually get paid very handsomely by big companies.




Thank you for that
As "the worst developper ever", mind telling us your age young man?

My mental age is about 12 and a half, just like any other male between the age of twelve and a half and his seventies.


Especially since your german, the country that it destroying the EU through Angelas's autherity???

maybe because you germans want the world to suffer because you lost two world wars??

Seriously?!? :dizzy:

[Lawman]

Thank you for that
As "the worst developper ever", mind telling us your age young man?

Especially since your german, the country that it destroying the EU through Angelas's autherity???

maybe because you germans want the world to suffer because you lost two world wars??

Let's keep it nice and civil, shall we:nature-smiley-003:?

[joe bob]

Setting aside all the time and research costs involved in developing, I am not so sure Flight Simmers appreciate the level of support that has come to be expected, one on one, not only in their support forums but also forums such as these.
That level of contact has to eat up hours in the day.
When you have that level of familiarity you get a huge amount of input on the next project as well. A project hasn't been released yet can be trashed in the community because it does not meet some vocal persons idea of what they think is important and who will make it their mission in life to cry about to the point of being abusive.
I think addons have adapted to what the market will bear but compared to the effort that goes into them I don't see that level as being overpriced.
Being out of my price range does not automatically equate to overpriced in my view.

[Mickey D]

"Back of the envelope maths indicates I'm lucky if I make about £1 an hour on the average model we produce. To make the minimum wage, in the UK, we'd have to charge around 8 times more (and still get the same sales) which would mean charging about £100 or $160 an aircraft."

Wow as much as that Skippy. I must be doing something wrong. ;)

[wombat666]

Thank you for that
As "the worst developper ever", mind telling us your age young man?
Especially since your german, the country that it destroying the EU through Angelas's autherity???
maybe because you germans want the world to suffer because you lost two world wars??

Now that is simply not very civil and is perilously close to collecting an 'Official' rap over the knuckles!
Please keep it civil Dumonceau.
:173go1:

[UnknownGuest12]

Quote
"Development costs are spiralling out of control because of market demand for systems depth, content and features"
Same old question...how many of simmers want a "real" simulation? Know many say so, know it takes months, years to mastera plane. Not to mention having to be pilot, 1 officer, flight engineer, etc...

Really don't have the need for systems depth. Alabeo is fine for me, and always wait for a sale, lower price to buy a plane..

regards

[bazzar]

One of the foremost problems that faces developers these days is trying to make a close to 10 year old game engine (parts of it older) do things it was never intended to do.

As real world aircraft get more complex, so does the specification of an add-on. Modern airliners have amazingly complex computer systems to drive everything. Not add-ons - these have the same computer on which you write a Word document or send some simple emails.

Currently there have been many debates over screen refresh rates. The FS engine runs on what is called Tick18 which is a draw call for anything rendered therein at a rate of 18 frames per second. Any command, texture draw or animation will create such a call. So, with multiple MFDs, PFDs, radars, FMCs, radios and so on on a modern VC the draw call is huge.

Outside we now have wingflex, complex spoiler systems, multiple gear animations and more to add to the mix.

Demand for texture detail is such that 4096 sq texture tiles are now not uncommon.

It's a bit like Mr Creosote from Monty Python. " A wefferrr thin Electronic Flight Bag - perhaps or just a morsel more of forward view 3D terrain following doodads?...."

Original FS models were configured for around 50,000 polygons all up. We now have models flying around of 300,000 polys or more.

Something's going to blow...budgets already have..

[hairyspin]

One of the foremost problems that faces developers these days is trying to make a close to 10 year old game engine (parts of it older) do things it was never intended to do...

I have to gently disagree Baz. When FSX was launched, Moore's Law on computing speeds was assumed and ACES expected we'd be running 7 or 8GHz processors by now, whereas even the maddest overclockers don't quite get to that yet. Multi-core processing has taken over as the development area in CPUs now.

If FSX wasn't meant to do as much as developers have got it to do then I wonder what the pages and pages of the SDK, published close to ten years ago, are documenting. Reams of A4 in my ringbinder list umpteen simulator variables; yet more pages on SimConnect; extraordinary flexibility to code conditions into animation and visibility systems and the scope of C++ coding and other black arts mean developers haven't yet exhausted the potential for development in FSX.

The limits are the 32-bit memory model and I agree something's gonna blow, probably tipped over the edge by 4096 textures and too many of 'em. It's just that we haven't got there yet!

[Naruto-kun]

Currently there have been many debates over screen refresh rates. The FS engine runs on what is called Tick18 which is a draw call for anything rendered therein at a rate of 18 frames per second. Any command, texture draw or animation will create such a call. So, with multiple MFDs, PFDs, radars, FMCs, radios and so on on a modern VC the draw call is huge.


Actually this only applies to XML gauges. In C++ gauges I have timed the PRE_DRAW calls in gauge callbacks and they are pretty close to the actual game framerate.

And proper threading, combined with newer faster graphics libraries, along with proper organization of the textures to keep their count to a minimum, actually allows glass to have no (noticeable)impact on framerates at all.

[PHo17]

I have to gently disagree Baz. When FSX was launched, Moore's Law on computing speeds was assumed and ACES expected we'd be running 7 or 8GHz processors by now, whereas even the maddest overclockers don't quite get to that yet. Multi-core processing has taken over as the development area in CPUs now.
...


I agree with you Tom. MS stopped the FS developement at the worst moment possible. FS2004 has been running fine years in (now) old computers and FSXI (and it's possible succesors) would be running fine if it ever existed. FSX can still be puzzling for modern computers. Like Vista had been and stayed the latest OS of MS. :costumed-smiley-034

[wombat666]

One of the foremost problems that faces developers these days is trying to make a close to 10 year old game engine (parts of it older) do things it was never intended to do.

As real world aircraft get more complex, so does the specification of an add-on. Modern airliners have amazingly complex computer systems to drive everything. Not add-ons - these have the same computer on which you write a Word document or send some simple emails.

Currently there have been many debates over screen refresh rates. The FS engine runs on what is called Tick18 which is a draw call for anything rendered therein at a rate of 18 frames per second. Any command, texture draw or animation will create such a call. So, with multiple MFDs, PFDs, radars, FMCs, radios and so on on a modern VC the draw call is huge.

Outside we now have wingflex, complex spoiler systems, multiple gear animations and more to add to the mix.

Demand for texture detail is such that 4096 sq texture tiles are now not uncommon.

It's a bit like Mr Creosote from Monty Python. " A wefferrr thin Electronic Flight Bag - perhaps or just a morsel more of forward view 3D terrain following doodads?...."

Original FS models were configured for around 50,000 polygons all up. We now have models flying around of 300,000 polys or more.

Something's going to blow...budgets already have..


I find the demands made by the upper echelons of the market odd, 'conflicting' in my opinion.
They demand 'Real Life' procedures and systems, complete in depth immersion, along with external 'Real Life' animations and detail.
As a simple suck I can't see the point, aircrew who are completely occupied with flying a modern complicated aircraft never view the externals, so why do the 'Real as it Gets' lot want all the outside bells and whistles?
I'm happy (as a simple suck) with reasonable systems and graphics, or the option of a 'Light Version' of my chosen aircraft.
The recent McDD DC8 comes to mind, with the 'Light' external textures option, and Carenado's C90 'Light' interior is another example of thinking outside the box, neither aircraft suffers and one gains extra FPS.
Having said that, I'm collecting the basics of a next generation box in a few days, not necessarily with Slight Simming as a priority, but partly so.
I'm always one for ramping up the system, fast is good, faster is better!!!
And I'm a simple suck who really likes speed.
One question Baz, which I 'think' I know the answer to but I'm asking it anyway, FSX/P3D is a resource hog, what with complex aircraft and scenery, that I understand.
However, a brand new and very complex Motor Racing simulation (pCars), complete with dynamic engine, suspension, engine controls and high resolution internal/external textures, 'the whole nine yards', plus active scenery and weather demands far fewer resources.
Answers on a Post Card will do.
Either way, next Saturday will see my budget evaporated.


Budgets? What budgets??

11970

PLUS

11971
PLUS

11972

OR MAYBE

11973

Might be sufficient for another couple of years.

[Daube]

Quote
"Development costs are spiralling out of control because of market demand for systems depth, content and features"
Same old question...how many of simmers want a "real" simulation? Know many say so, know it takes months, years to mastera plane. Not to mention having to be pilot, 1 officer, flight engineer, etc...

Really don't have the need for systems depth. Alabeo is fine for me, and always wait for a sale, lower price to buy a plane..

regards

The simmers who wanted "real" simulation (let's say "as real as possible") are the one who directed the technical evolution of our sims.
If the majority of simmers were not interested in realistic airplanes that attempts to reproduce the real thing (which is the very definition of "simulator"), and they prefered beautiful but boring aircrafts instead, then the FS series would have stopped a long time ago, and would have transformed into some console software instead, like Ace Combat or such... I believe a great part of the simmers are actually using the simulation in order to see how a real aircraft works, flies, sounds, and all these things that people like me have no chance to do in real life.
... and NO, I'm not interested in spending many thousands of Euros to get a licence. I don't have that money to spend, and I don't have the time to fly and maintain that licence.

Concerning the prices, I would agree with the remark made by Francois. The simmers are looking at the addon quality itself, the price is secondary. An Alabeo plane could not sell at 50 dollars. An A2A plane could not either. An A2A plane with Accusim however, can and DOES sell at 50 dollars.... and it could even sell very well at a much higher price. Same goes with other categories of airplanes. PMDG, VRS etc... these planes are expensive, but nevertheless, they sell very well. The fact that an airplane is more expensive than the sim itself is not a problem at all, as long as it justifies that price by its quality.

[Bjoern]

The limits are the 32-bit memory model and I agree something's gonna blow, probably tipped over the edge by 4096 textures and too many of 'em. It's just that we haven't got there yet!

Umm...we're already there as the "out of memory" errors are not a myth, but a direct consequence from using oversized textures, overdetailed objects, overblown detail radii and too much AI traffic without mipmapped textures. Add inefficient gauge design into the mix and you're out of VAS faster than a Mercure is out of fuel.
People are fortunately a bit more aware of this now.




As a simple suck I can't see the point, aircrew who are completely occupied with flying a modern complicated aircraft never view the externals, so why do the 'Real as it Gets' lot want all the outside bells and whistles?

That still remains a mystery to me. :biggrin-new:


However, a brand new and very complex Motor Racing simulation (pCars), complete with dynamic engine, suspension, engine controls and high resolution internal/external textures, 'the whole nine yards', plus active scenery and weather demands far fewer resources.
Answers on a Post Card will do.

No early-2000s graphics engine. That's why.


By the way, what are you throwing out?
Could use a new GPU (>GTX570) and maybe some RAM (>8-9-8-24 @ 2 GHz).

[PRB]

... That still remains a mystery to me. :biggrin-new: ...

I think there is a growing percentage of FSX users who see FSX as more of an "Aviation Art Engine" than a flight simulator...

[Naruto-kun]

However, a brand new and very complex Motor Racing simulation (pCars), complete with dynamic engine, suspension, engine controls and high resolution internal/external textures, 'the whole nine yards', plus active scenery and weather demands far fewer resources.
Answers on a Post Card will do.




No early-2000s graphics engine. That's why.

Not only that but a racing game doesn't cover nearly the same area that a flight sim has to cover. The draw distance isn't nearly as large.

[huub vink]

I think there is a growing percentage of FSX users who see FSX as more of an "Aviation Art Engine" than a flight simulator...

Agree! :encouragement:

Huub

[bazzar]

The original topic of this thread was to ask why developers price product the way they do and if volume sales would reduce the pricing.

The fact remains. Costs are spiralling, I understand the reasoning most have used in this thread so far but C++ programming is expensive to buy in. That cannot be denied. (actually if a C++ programmer can do this stuff cheaply and quickly, I'd be very interested in talking!) The demands made by stretching the capability of this engine are having a direct impact on coding. The results are much longer lead times on projects. In some cases where the product is very sophisticated it can be years.

That cost cannot be absorbed. it would be commercial suicide. And will the market wait that long for the release of a new subject?

Think of it this way. A computer graphics 3D designer can earn $40-60 per hour (some, more) and a model can take thousands of hours to make.Add in the graphics for art, coders, manual writers and sound studio costs...

The fact is that if developers didn't charge what they do, this hobby would not exist to the level we all enjoy today. It is already heavily subsidised through people working for beer money because they love the hobby. Usually they have a day job to support them. Those that don't are disappearing fast.

I know all the arguments for using C programming, texture economies and memory conservation but the knowlege to achieve all that costs money.And why shouldn't it?

Otherwise we are asking somebody to be an expert in aerodynamics, an advanced C++ and XML programmer, a superlative painter and graphic artist, sound technician, historian and experienced 3D modeller.

Oh and we'd like them to work for about $10 per hour Oh and we only want to pay a few dollars for their efforts. Thanks.

Yeah right.

[bazzar]

and to answer your question Wombat...

A racing game or any other comparable game is usually what we call a "sandbox" format.

That is a limited area of play, restricted to a landscape of just a few miles. When you change race venues you are loading in another set of scenery gen to replace the one you were at. Like loading up another separate game.

FSX could have been developed as a sandbox concept but not very useful for those wishing to fly intercontinental distances without needing to load up another "world" every cou0ple of thousand miles. Combat Flight Simulator was a form of sandbox style game because of all the drawcalls required with effects and interactivity. Hence the "theatre of war" concept.

[Daube]

Racing or other modern usual games are done in such a way that the "scenery" is fixed, it doesn't need to be computed/built on the fly while you go forward. The scenery is stored in its final form, the game just needs to read the data and draw it.

On the opposite side, games like FS9, FSX or P3D, have to read the source data and then start interpretating it, to build the mixture between your actual mesh (which can change, based on what addons you installed), your actual landclass (same problem), your actual scenery (same problem) and various libraries, your actual textures, etc.... This cost MUCH MORE processing power, resulting in lower performance.

To simplify: it's easy to draw a scenery when you know what to expect, when they give you the final form of what needs to be drawn. Optimisations are "easy" in such cases.
In our sims, the situation is totally different. Because of that, the performance can absolutely NOT be compared.