Is This The End?
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 51

Thread: Is This The End?

  1. #1

    Is This The End?

    Dovetail Games Flightsim World entered early access about a week ago correct me if im wrong. I have been on FSX SE since later 2015 and I really do love the sim and I have purchased a lot of aircraft scenery etc for it. Bus with FSW in early access and ive read the feedback has been mostly positive. Does this mean that the end of FSX is nigh. I really couldnt imagine getting FSW and end up loosing some of my beloved aircraft.

  2. #2
    SOH Staff txnetcop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Wentzville, MO
    Age
    73
    Posts
    5,242
    Blog Entries
    1
    I am a member of DTG live and I have heard nothing that says Steam will do away with FSX. It takes a lot of computer to play FSW more than I am willing to dish money out for right now. I see potential in FSW but I am not a hard-core fan yet!
    Ted
    Vivat Christus Rex! Ad maiorem Dei gloriam

  3. #3
    That's a really good question. It's really up to DTG's marketing department. Do they want to discontinue FSX-SE once FSW is released in a final form or do they want to keep selling it. If they keep selling it they risk competing against themselves, discontinuing FSX would force everyone to either upgrade or switch, but then they are risking everything on the success of FSW.

    If I were them I would keep selling FSX, but at the same price as FSW so they don't lose market share and keep the revenue coming in.

  4. #4
    Tom,

    I agree with Ted.

    (I too haven't seen any mention of DT pulling FSX from Steam, and think that they would be rather foolish if that were to be the case).

    I decided to take a look at FSW, and whilst it looks promising, it is still very early days yet, and many features are still not present, working, or enabled, so we will have to wait and see what the future holds!

    As it is an 'early access' release, it is of course not a fully polished and finished sim, so FSX SE will be my main sim for now.

    But like you (and many others), I have many hours and money spent on FSX, and I've got to say, with all the enhancements (AS16, DX10 Fixer, DX10 Clouds etc.) it looks fantastic, and generally runs very well on my system.

    One thing Dovetail need to fix are the lighting/shaders, as at present, they cause the environment to look far to washed out, especially when using photo scenery.

    (I'm using all of the UK/Scotland/Wales Horizon/Play Sim VFR Photo Scenery, and it looks stunning in FSX SE in comparison, using DX10 Fixer, DX10 Cloud Shadows, along with AS Cloud Art and Earth Simulations Treescapes).

    I guess the good part about the early access of FSW, is that as longtime and hardcore simmers, we can give them our honest feedback on what's wrong and needs improving to make the sim something special.

    I just hope they are true to their word, and will listen!

    Cheers

    Paul

  5. #5
    Hello,

    The feedback has been mixed but a huge number of the negative posts have been from those who either don't have
    FSW at all, or who have decided after a couple of hours,sometimes less, that it's rubbish.
    To me neither of those opinions are worthwhile.

    I have spent the better part of this afternoon and evening with FSW and I am beginning to sort the good bits from the bad.
    I find that there are plenty of good bits, the scenery can look superb and I find that most of the ORBX regions, Vector and
    OLC work very well indeed.
    The default aircraft look very good, no idea if they fly that way as well, I have no expertise there at all.
    The weather looks acceptable, especially considering that so far there are only presets.

    I find however that none of the FSX addon aircraft that I have tried work as they should in any respect.
    I find also that FSX addon airport scenery does not work as it should either, in particular, flattens and excludes seem not to work at all.
    I find that the spring and summer shaders do nothing at all for the scenery which along with the aircraft, look like an over-exposed photograph
    with oddly bright colours.

    We were not promised backwards compatibility and it seems that in most respects this is the case, which leaves FSX as a viable
    alternative for the often very expensive addons that many of us have bought.
    I do not see an easy transition, such as was the case between Fs9 and FSX aircraft and I cannot forsee a great willingness to buy
    large amounts of DLC to replace FSX versions, only to end up with the same images on the screen.
    I would think that despite the prophets of doom, FSX has years of life left in it, for certain at my house.
    Regards,
    Nick

  6. #6
    My current system is just below minimum specs so for now that precludes me from buying it. However, one of my local friends did and his system specs easily cover it. Overall, I'm not impressed and more inclined to go P3Dv3 to keep my 32bit addons and simply wait for the 64bit P3Dv4 or go with XP-11 (for the future benefit of 64bit addons) and be done with it. Does the wave of negative opinions mean FSW is going to be a flop. no, I don't believe so, it has plenty of room for improvement (much as FSX did) but the one shared concern is the control DTG is placing on addon development. That alone I believe runs the very high risk of killing the platform considering the open payware & freeware following P3D and XP-11 has.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  7. #7
    So are we heading for a 3 way street
    1. P3D 64bit
    2. X Plane 11
    3. FSW

    Divide a relatively small community 3 ways and I don't see how a lot of marginally small developers could cover all 3 platforms and make enough to keep going, maybe PMDG and ORBX who charge like a wounded bull could do it but I don't see any others.

    Then I spose there is the users who keep with FSX, they will be a shrinking base as they either retire from the scene or eventually switch to one of the 3 who I believe will slowly start to gain market share, the one who does will be the one who offers the most user friendly experience and best bang for buck, money is getting more scares as time goes on.

    Will be a interesting journey ahead of us
    You take it easy.. and have a nice day

  8. #8
    SOH Staff txnetcop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Wentzville, MO
    Age
    73
    Posts
    5,242
    Blog Entries
    1
    By the way, I want to add something important about FSW. I have a background as a programmer and moved to the system/hardware side, but I can tell you that what DTG achieved taking 32 bit code and changing it to 64 bit code is nothing less than amazing in a short time. I guess everyone expected them to create something totally new from the ground up in less than a year...NEVER HAPPEN! P3D ver 4 and X-Plane 11 are going to be amazing sims but so will FSW if given time and dedication. We will have to upgrade to run these new 64 bit flight systems, but that is not the end of FSX. We have worked hard to make it awesome but at some time we will want to embrace the new. It has some great entrance screens, and flight planner, new trees, and aircraft. There is a lot to be done, but I hope everyone gives the guys at DTG a chance to show what they can do with the platform they bought from Microsoft, while holding them accountable to finish the job or don't buy it! FSX still has a long life ahead of it because of incredible developers both freeware and payware!
    Ted
    Vivat Christus Rex! Ad maiorem Dei gloriam

  9. #9
    SOH-CM-2019
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Nevada
    Age
    80
    Posts
    1,363
    Blog Entries
    1
    doesn't fsx stuff run pretty well in P3D? I know a lot of my addons do, orbx, etc.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by b52bob View Post
    doesn't fsx stuff run pretty well in P3D? I know a lot of my addons do, orbx, etc.
    Most of it does. Native FSX stuff works pretty well, FS9 stuff, not quite as well, older gauges, forget about it.

  11. #11
    I've been watching their Steam forums with interest and too, noting some add-ons are able to be ported over and sadly, many are not. I too am at a decisive point, pondering the future of FSX-SE versus FSW and it's 64 bit architecture. I have so much invested in FSX in general regarding terrain, mesh, aircraft, weather and traffic that I am really torn about current new offerings and how long they will be relevant. Thankfully, FSX-SE will always be available to download, but as others have stated, how much longer with DTG support it? I love the thought of minimal OOM crashes, especially on longer flights, but really don't relish investing again in all the add-ons. This would also mean that P3Dv3 will only be relevant for how long before LM stops supporting in favor of P3Dv4 and it's 64 bit setup.

    For me, on the one hand, exciting to see 64 bit but at a painful potential cost to my past purchases and some hesitancy on future purchases. Perhaps FSX will now transition to another HDD line many did with FS9 to keep their past purchases relevant. Anyway, I truly love the detail that has emerged both graphically and internally on FSX and P3D aircraft or rather, vessels, not forgetting the beautifully rendered surface ships coming out now too.

    I am fortunate to have gotten FSW for free since I purchased Flight School. I just installed it this weekend and will just keep surfing the forums and tweaking to see where it will go. As TxNetCop stated, I am certain just the migration from a 32 bit to 64 bit architecture is huge, but not so obvious to those less tech savvy such as myself. Therefore, I will refrain from any tech savvy talk but just maintain a curious view to see how it compares to my FSX-SE and also keep my fingers crossed that some FSX add-ons will indeed become port over friendly, otherwise FSX will become my go to simulator for beauty, excellent models and local flying. I will keep the longer flights reserved for the 64 bit set ups.
    ....my other Stryker is a 2019 Challenger Hellcat Redeye.....

    Matt

  12. #12
    Only way I will say its time for a change is if developers stop making add ons for SE or FSX in general. If I was to though I think I would go for P3D as I have heard a lot of good things about it and most of the add ons I have are also compatible with it.

  13. #13
    Like many have expressed here, I am not all that anxious for FSX to go away and I don't think it will go away for at least 5 to 10 years. With the many FSX "add ons" that have been developed, FSX is presently a very capable simulation IF you have those "add ons" AND the hardware "horsepower" to properly drive those "add ons". It seems the horsepower has also been available for a couple years for those that have the means to acquire it. It also seems that horsepower is now becoming available at a lower cost and as more simmers get that horsepower where will they turn.

    My perspective is based on having tried some of the other sims available and not having those sims deliver on the hype. (The exception is P3D, I have not tried it so I am not opining on that sim.) For example, last year (or was it before that), I purchased a DTG Flight School license, flew it a couple times and stopped. I will install the "free" DTG flight sim and evaluate, but it will be years before it beats FSX. (DTG has done a really good job with TS and I've run that for several years. It took DTG some time to get TS "up to snuff". I am sure they will do the same with Flight Sim World in time.)

    For the foreseeable future and since I am fully invested in FSX and many, many FSX "add ons", I will focus on improving the horsepower I have to drive it and tweaking for smoother performance and more "eye candy". I would guess that there are others that will do the same.

    [Edit - My reference point when I think the balance of power has shifted away from FSX will be here at SOH in the number of viewers viewing any particular forum. When the FSX forum starts to see fewer viewers than P3D forum or some other sim forum, you will know that FSX is in decline!]
    Jay
    USNR-Ret; Former Airline Migratory Worker; Builder, Owner, Operator RV-8 N817J
    Comp Spec - ASRock Steel Legend WiFi M/B, Ryzen 7 5800X, RX 6900 XT, 32GB RAM, M2 SSD for DCS, SATA SSD for MSFS2020

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by rvn817j View Post
    For the foreseeable future and since I am fully invested in FSX and many, many FSX "add ons", I will focus on improving the horsepower I have to drive it and tweaking for smoother performance and more "eye candy". I would guess that there are others that will do the same.
    Like you, and for the same reasons, I'm not ready to invest (or develop) yet in other flightsims then FSX.
    But when it gets to "horsepower", people also need to be aware of this:

    Like many, I'd like to stick to good-old Windows7 as platform for FSX, instead of Windows10, to avoid any potential compatibility problems (now, and in future).
    To the extent that for the new PC I'm about to order, running Windows7 would be my first choice.
    No problem if you only use Windows7 off-line, but when using it on-line too there's another thing to consider: Microsoft's policy to update Windows versions.
    Especially wrt. critical and security updates; the recent worldwide WannaCry-ransomware attack has proven why this is important.

    For Windows7, this "extended support" formally ends in 2020; but that doesn't apply to Windows7/8 PC's with the latest Intel CPU's (7th generation, like I5/I7 Core 7***): for those CPU's, security updates stop already in 2018.
    So when investing in more "horsepower" (like new CPU's) when you use Windows7/8, be aware of this.

    Rob

  15. #15
    Ok, been reading about these new simulators and made my decision...bought FSX and Acceleration a long time ago. P3D twice. A lot of add-ons. Today using only P3D last current version. And really don´t need more. Not going to spend more money on a new simulator and be the owner of a lot of useless material or start everything again...
    so, I'll just keep what I have now. Obviously I'm aware I´ll be outdated but this is the way life is. Not going to buy everything again....
    Regards

  16. #16

    Is this the end???




    No it isn't.
    Tom
    __________________________________________________ ___________________________________________
    Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding. Proverbs 4:7



  17. #17
    Given the commonality in the structure of P3D and DTG, I would think it would not be too hard for developers to develop a product and port it to both of those platforms. The same version may not run but it would probably be just compiler options that would be different, that is as long as DTG does not get too strict about which add-ons the allow in FSW. X-Plane is a bit too different for much commonality between it and the other two.
    Joe Cusick
    San Francisco Bay Area, California.

    I am serious, and stop calling me Shirley.

  18. #18
    Didn't quite escape.
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere in the Middle, UK
    Age
    50
    Posts
    2,342
    I think it's fair to say that unfortunately P3D and FSW will not remain comparatively parallel for long and will diverge quite quickly as they develop in their own ways. The focus of the two sims is different; P3D aiming squarely for a professional market and FSW more accessible for an entertainment market.

    Something else that may be interesting is how many people will pay P3D prices for a 64-bit version, now that there are two other 64-bit sims available? I think that'll be one of the big defining factors for this round of sims, as it will define the type of sim that people want to see. Regardless of the FSW/P3D split, XP11 users will always believe they are superior.

    Ian P.

  19. #19
    I don't think P3D and FSW will diverge too far apart (in general) as developers and resources to help develop models & scenery (for both sims) are few and far in between to push too much of a split. Again, performance issues with FSW will get sorted but the single biggest voiced concern is getting developers on board FSW if they insist on controlling development of addons to the point of taking a cut for themselves and Steam. If that ends up the being the case, FSW will die a fairly quick death (much as MS Flight and DTG Flight School did) and FSX/P3D will soldier on and both P3Dv4 and XP-11 will end up being our long term sims. After seeing the new Flight Factor Airbus A320 preview for XP-11. I am convinced completely that XP-11 is going to take over in terms of this type of Full-On Study Level Sims which are capable of being used for entertainment by hard core simmers and on a professional level.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  20. #20
    Didn't quite escape.
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere in the Middle, UK
    Age
    50
    Posts
    2,342
    DTG Flight School was always intended to be as limited as it was. They intended it to be an introductory sim for those entering the hobby, not for those already well embedded within it. That was possibly a mistake, but I, personally, don't think that closing it down was, as they have transferred all the same content into a better platform, which will allow the expansion that FSc didn't.

    Flight, on the other hand, was a commercial decision. Microsoft wanted to get into the "microtransaction" market, whereby people constantly spend a little over a long period of time and, most importantly, they pay it to Microsoft, not to 3rd party stores like FSS or simMarket or even directly to the developers like Aerosoft or Orbx. From what I gather, although this is word of mouth and I have no evidence to support it, MS always planned to expand and expand Flight, by constantly adding little bits to the free platform and you pay for the bits you wanted, so VFR pilots didn't have to pay for FMCs, as an example. The plans were all there, but the massive negative response and blinkered attitude from many in the FS community killed off those plans at a commercial level. This is what many people are currently trying to do with DTG FSW - shooting themselves in the foot repeatedly to show how cool the are. The difference is that MS already wanted to ditch the simulator, because it no longer fitted with their corporate plan (aka "copy Apple, five years too late"!) whereas DTG are putting massive amounts of investment into the platform. It's not going to be Flight, which was absolutely locked down and they were only able to release the absolute bare minimum of DLC before they were shut down.

    Again, personally, I think that the choice of DLC released, the 'cockpitless wonders' which were aimed at MS corporate's intended market of XBox gamers, where the significant improvements in the flight models of the RV-7 and Stearman, for example, were aimed at "us"... But we didn't look at that. We looked at a Mustang with no panel and declared the entire project to be the worst thing ever to have happened. When I asked, no-one believed me that you could actually spin the default aircraft in Flight. Properly spin, not a spiral dive. In a default aircraft. Incidentally, FSW aircraft can't be spun yet. We need to badger them about slipping, stalling and spinning during this Early Access phase.

    The developers will follow the money, ultimately. Not many can afford to develop for an utterly niche sim. If being on Steam, which is a massive marketplace for PC users, brings in more money then they'll develop for FSW. If we as a community trash FSW to the point where very few people use it, then they'll support P3D or move to X-Plane. They have mouths to feed and mortgages to pay as well, but comparing FSW to Flight and Flight School is extremely disingenuous. For the record, again only my opinion, but I've had hints from within DTG that it's pretty much spot on, that they canned FSc for two reasons: Because it was going to cause confusion within the market and because it was basically a technology demonstrator/learning tool - for them, as well as new people coming into the hobby. They were assembling a new team, some of whom have never worked on sims before and you learn to walk before you learn to run... To me, that's sensible, not trying to "dumb down" the sim market, as many have suggested. It also explains why they're trying to get the basics right with FSW, before expanding it.

    Right now, people are installing commercial FSX add-ons into FSW and they are, for the most part, working. As I said over on that forum, product specific applications and add-ons are already being developed, simply by people poking at what works and what doesn't. It's still based on Simconnect, it's still using the same folder structure. What's changed is the addressing - where add-ons have to look for information from the sim - and the way they render 2d graphics. We really need a SDK to get those right, but a surprising amount of add-ons already do work, or can be made to work very easily. Is that the sign of a sim that's going to be locked down and only accessible by an internal store? We already know - from Flight School - that they know how to lock a sim down. They haven't done it... Isn't that worth remembering?

    Sorry about the epic post, I'm making a habit of these around here, right now, but the myths and "alternative facts" going round can't be addressed in a five line post!

    Ian P.

  21. #21
    One thing for sure, time will certainly tell how things are going to go in regards to which sim's survive and which ones bite the dust in this niche and somewhat fragile market. In the end, the telling benchmark will be which developers (out of the current groups) buy into the up and coming platforms as time and information on them progresses. If/when that move is made, the market will be driven more by open ended development (as it has been) than anything else. Pay to Play (pardon the pun) simply won't fly (if the former in fact ends up becoming cemented reality).

    The market as a whole has certainly gone through some incredible changes and forward leaps in quality since I first got into simming back in the 90's (which I did to augment my actual flight training at the time). For me it's going to be interesting to see where things go as my retirement from simming is all but imminent in the not too distant future as my time is going to be largely consumed in a couple of new ventures I'm heavily involved with and in those plans, I'm returning to RW flying after a long absence.

    Fingers crossed!

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  22. #22
    The thing is, just because something new and awesome comes along, it doesn't mean the old stuff will stop working. So even if AeroFly FS 2, P3D, or FSW start really getting momentum and support for the now-ancient FSX wanes, it doesn't mean your FSX investment will go away. Even if you start to build up a new sim, you can keep FSX around. Adding storage is cheap nowadays.

    I kept FS9 around for years after FSX came out because I had a cool install and lots of neat stuff that sadly never made it to FSX. (Like that classic project with all of the 50s airliners and airports.) But eventually, I moved to a new PC and the FS9 stuff just felt too dated to go through the install again. (Still, I just deleted my FS9 downloads folder last month. : )

    I have XP11, P3D, FSW, and AeroFly FS2 all set up on my sim rig now. (P3D doubles for FSX, as there's no FSX stuff that doesn't work in P3D that I found vital.) One may eventually win more of my time, but given the base sims cost only as much as many of you guys will spend on a high-end add-on, there's no reason not to at least try the new stuff. Even if you focus on one sim, there's still fun to be had in the others. (Like VFR flying in VR in AFS2, which is freaking amazing, even if P3D is my main platform right now.)

    I'm just super-pleased to have a choice! I really hope that the market supports these sims enough to keep them going and in further development.

  23. #23
    SOH-CM-2021 BendyFlyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Country New South Wales Australia
    Posts
    1,496
    Interesting discussion but an important topic. I have been involved in flight simulation both as a hobby and as a teaching tool since the first arrived with micro-computers back in the 1990's. WE forget that the original simulator came about as solution to a problem, how to create visually on a computer screen moving objects in more that one apparent dimension (X+Y+Z). MS came to dominate because they were good at two things; they gobbled up any competitors but more importantly they used the sim as a tool to sell computers and Microsoft Windows, it was a fun add-on for your customers to play around with a bit like solitaire. They also had a crack at the gamer market via CFS, Train Simulators etc but eventually gave that away as well. To my mind the last incarnation Flight was an attempt to steer buyers into the pay as you go model, ala Apple and Itunes. But we also ignore two very other important things that happened. The first was mobile phones or hand held PC's and Laptops, both made serious inroads into the traditional PC or Tower Box. MS has also had to deal with the reality that Java and HTML revolutionised information processing and sharing via the WWW. Google stole everybody's lunch there.

    Now, if you look at the two current updated and properly coded sim programs, they are targeted at different markets, P3D is a viable platform because it is being bolted into the world of defence training and simulation otherwise Lockheed Martin would not have bothered, they are probably subsidising it but they will get the return via integrated training and software platforms on military hardware and software. X-Plane is a serious software outcome but they have moved in a different direction providing a tool and system that aeronautical engineers and students can use to design and test ideas, which is why it is well supported across engineering faculties world wide. In the mean time PC gaming and game programs have exploded and are very very popular and good money makers, ala World of War Craft, Pokemon etc. Now lets all remember the elephant in the room, GOOGLE. Google have combined their amazing planetary coverage in pictures (pixels) in real world images, maps etc with the basics of a flight simulator and that includes the 3D object changes needed to give a solid or 3D appearance. Try the Google application you will be amazed because it offers a combined realism with the power of GOOGLE computing to give you the best scenery ever (its real). Now will there be a way to integrate or use simulator models such as FSX or X-Plane in the Google sim? Maybe maybe not but they are not going away.

    From my perspective I am stuck with the hardware and software environment I currently have (a HP Tower and Win 7) but I have no interest in buying a new PC, why? because everyone else in this household uses an I-Phone or Android or I-PAD for their computing and entertainment needs, so I have no need for a new PC. Grandchildren can connect to the internet via the TV or Plasma screen and play very very complex and graphically amazing games that way. And lastly despite a life time in the aviation industry nobody in my family near or far has any interest in aviation what so ever, zilch, other than who has the cheapest ticket to wherever. I saw the same thing happen for real in aviation as the market vanished, light aircraft vanished and the major hull manufacturers consolidated down to a couple, in other words the Golden Age of Aviation is over as well. I have boxes full of disks of long gone flight simulator programs but at least FSX got to the stage where the graphics are great, the models are great and I can with a little work add in models from the past that I know will never be recreated in the future. I can probably keep that going for ten years plus by which stage I will be sufficiently aged to probably not be able to find the PC let alone see it (LOL). What I want is a new paradigm not just an improvement and only GOOGLE at the moment offers that tantalising prospect, they have the money, do they have the interest?

    Now I am a serious simulator user and it is FSX-A. I see no benefit to me to move to P3D but I may consider X-Plane, maybe, as for DTG well good on them but they will find the market is not what they think so unless they can attract gamers it will be game over for them too. But and here is the big but, if I could use the current simulator models I have with Google Sim or there was a way to integrate into that system I would be into it like a shot, why because it makes obsolete scenery design, weather engines etc and the only thing it needs is a good user interface aka a sim model to really explore virtual reality.

  24. #24

    End?

    As I was thinking about this discussion I took a look at the list of "outdated" simulators on this Forum. Many have current discussions going on. Is this the end? Given the evidence right here, I doubt it.

  25. #25
    Didn't quite escape.
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere in the Middle, UK
    Age
    50
    Posts
    2,342
    Exactly. Although there are potential issues with re-activation of FSX DVD installations, no-one is losing anything. It's the beginning of a new phase which people can choose to move forward into or not, it certainly is the end of anything.

    Ian P.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •