Flight Sim World: Closure Announcement

[Desert Rat]

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there wasn't a business deal somewhere at the back of all this. I'm not talking about lack of revenue making the suits at DTG pull the plug on the unsuspecting FSW dev team. More that there is a deal on the table somewhere regarding said recreational license. Say, for pure speculative example, that LM wanted to get hold of FSW features they didn't have, Truesky, PBR, updated airport data, career mode, etc. I wouldn't be surprised. Money talks. LM already has a license for ESP development, all I'm saying.

I only hope we as the community and the FSW dev team come out as winners in the end.

[Mach3DS]

Who knows what LM will do... My gut feeling is that I believe it's doubtful they will get the entertainment option. Their revenue stream is alternative. They needed to fill a training gap and didn't want to create it from scratch. The USAF had been Fielding "off the shelf" Solution proposals for a while now and I believe this fits right into that low risk low cost solution, where you don't have too start from scratch to build a tool that will help USAF, it's partners LM, and any number of civilian training needs via a high Fidelity simulation platform. Plus, let's be honest here, they know as well as the rest of us that it's just Symantecs, they offer something on par to the entertainment package already. There's no need to go that route. This let's then be as flexible as possible and do basically whatever they want with zero expectation of getting sales based on increasing consumer demand. If you think about it for a second it's actually FAR and AWAY better for us as users that it remains as is. Because the developers are basically the original FSX guys. They're getting to make the sim what they wanted FSX to be and more. Motivation is not based on needing to fill a quota. I'm not native enough to know they don't also have internal business goals and objectives. However there are likely Enterprise in nature.

I hope they do have something...I would love for them to incorporate TrueSky and PBR. However P3D had already Incorporated new terrain modeling with bumps and specukar mapping. As well as heat mapping.

[blanston12]

I suspect that DTG is up to something. They probably had targets they needed to meet to satisfy the contract with MS in terms of selling/developing for a certain period of time and once satisfied, they were done.

While the revenue may not compare to a F-35, it would not be insignificant to the manager of the team that runs the simulation division. According to SteamSpy FSX-SE has sold 1,000,000-2,000,000 users and FSW has 50,000 to 100,000 users. So if they could match the low end of FSX-SE did and sold copies for the same prices as the academic version your talking about $60m, thats not insignificant.

[BendyFlyer]

I actually find this an interesting discussion. On one level some contributors have put a 'face' or that little bit of detail about product development and the ebbs and flows of this sector of the computer software industry, flight simulation and/or generically what is called gaming. Gaming as we know is a very active and profitable business but very faddish and fickle. I have followed both sides over the years ever since I first started seriously learning about and using computers as they first began and have now become. Many of us share similar journeys. Shows that a lot of us are also getting older.

Here is some more points that I think are worth considering as to why DTG failed. I am not really interested in the personalities or the obscure chicanery of licensing rights etc of DTG or LM or commenting about it.

I do not develop or make flight simulator products but I have the highest regard for those that do and my only observation is this as far as flight simulation is concerned it morphed from a originally being a way or the means to solve and develop the problem of 3-dimensional pixel management and graphics display on a 2 dimensional television screen. The area of flight was an obviously clever means of doing this because flight takes place in a 3 dimensional realm with lots of multiple vector equations to be solved. The second major issue and they ran side by side was graphical display moving from monochrome to colour then from code line interface to GUI style interfaces. As we all know at the heart of this was the critical issue of operating systems (O/S) for actually managing what the hardware did in response to what the program was coded to do. There was substantial effort and money put into O/S development by a lot of companies and for a while a multiplicity of systems (there still are but that is another story) but to make it work you needed unit sales, the right O/S the right equipment (micro-computers) and some savy marketing and voila Microsoft. MS used flight simulation as a computing problem solving tool and as a marketing tool. The same way they put those little games like solitaire etc as part of the O/S bundle. While sales of all the above held up they achieved a level of market dominance which made MSFS the dominant sim (There were quite a few others about in the late 80's and 90's but they were gaming orientated. As the market grew it also started to mature until it was overtaken by new technology the microcomputer with a flat screen and telephone with digital data connections and www connectivity the size of bar of chocolate or smaller, voila the I-Phone and or Android. That has been a major game changer for lots of folks it brought an end or seriously damaged a number of businesses who had invested heavily into older style telephones, tower computer systems etc. HP, Nokia, Motorola are good examples. MS conquered the business market via Windows and then Networked Windows systems and also were savvy enough to make them work with via communication protocols to heavy hitting systems that required different software and O/S such as produced by IBM and Sun etc. If you run a bank or similar high volume transaction business MS Windows won't do the heavy lifting it is just a pretty interface. Apple was always a niche player until they came up with the IPhone but they had the graphical entertainment industry sector cornered and it was large enough for them to build on those Apple systems and O/S. All I am trying to do is put a perspective on where we are and suggest that DTG is not the first to hit the wall in this sort of computing and electronic environment.

Perhaps more specifically lets us look at Flight Simulation. I am a retired military-civilian pilot, a QFI, a C&T captain, low level, aerobatics etc. I have done a lot of operational flying over my life but I was also a training specialist a teacher if you like. I liked it and still do and that is why I was asked to come out of retirement and do some more for a major international aerospace company that does hardware, software and other stuff for the military all over the world. I have been involved in FS from day one, I could see the potential once the hardware and software progressed and caught up. For example early full motion simulators were hideously complex mechanical electrical simulators but the computing power behind them was actually less than any desktop computer I had at home or the office. The role of a FS styled system for flight training and education was obvious the tools or the equipment though seriously lagged behind what was needed. MSFS has actually been used quite extensively but only as training aid or if you like a procedural tool and reasons were simple, immersion and fidelity. You could use it as a teaching tool but not for serious flight training, that has/had to be done in an aeroplane or for the big stuff in a full motion simulator. That is why LM have P3D not for consumers but for flight training, military and civilian and let us not of course forget the rise of UAV's driven by somebody at a PC nowhere near the UAV itself.

For me MSFS has been a hobby, a past time and very enjoyable but it's standout characteristics were the passion and skills of thousands of like minded people all over the world, taking the time to do aircraft designs, painting, scenery etc. That community is a very rich and valuable resource and lots of people have been good enough to spin it into a business others have preferred to remain committed amateurs. DTG simply failed to see the bigger picture and I think had a gamer-development mentality to the product they had and failed to understand the passion and commitment of people like all of us at SOH and elsewhere who enjoy it, appreciate the hard work of those doing it because they have a passion for aviation and its history in all its facets.

Sure FS will continue and so will some competition but the market is now in what economists call a tertiary phase, the days of exponential growth are over. In this environment, reliability and meeting specific customer demands will keep you afloat, albeit there will be some products that bomb occasionally but that is the way it is. Trying to herd your customers into a particular shute wont do it for you. after all why would I get locked into a license buy system that does not let me fiddle and modify things to either improve them or add value to them? More importantly -Why would I want to support a business that effectively locks out the wonderful work and obvious talent as demonstrated by work of you folk here at SOH? I am not buying that, what we have is too precious. And I would not buy a product that does not do anything better than what I have on the promise that it might. Simple.

[Mach3DS]

I actually find this an interesting discussion. On one level some contributors have put a 'face' or that little bit of detail about product development and the ebbs and flows of this sector of the computer software industry, flight simulation and/or generically what is called gaming. Gaming as we know is a very active and profitable business but very faddish and fickle. I have followed both sides over the years ever since I first started seriously learning about and using computers as they first began and have now become. Many of us share similar journeys. Shows that a lot of us are also getting older.

Here is some more points that I think are worth considering as to why DTG failed. I am not really interested in the personalities or the obscure chicanery of licensing rights etc of DTG or LM or commenting about it.

I do not develop or make flight simulator products but I have the highest regard for those that do and my only observation is this as far as flight simulation is concerned it morphed from a originally being a way or the means to solve and develop the problem of 3-dimensional pixel management and graphics display on a 2 dimensional television screen. The area of flight was an obviously clever means of doing this because flight takes place in a 3 dimensional realm with lots of multiple vector equations to be solved. The second major issue and they ran side by side was graphical display moving from monochrome to colour then from code line interface to GUI style interfaces. As we all know at the heart of this was the critical issue of operating systems (O/S) for actually managing what the hardware did in response to what the program was coded to do. There was substantial effort and money put into O/S development by a lot of companies and for a while a multiplicity of systems (there still are but that is another story) but to make it work you needed unit sales, the right O/S the right equipment (micro-computers) and some savy marketing and voila Microsoft. MS used flight simulation as a computing problem solving tool and as a marketing tool. The same way they put those little games like solitaire etc as part of the O/S bundle. While sales of all the above held up they achieved a level of market dominance which made MSFS the dominant sim (There were quite a few others about in the late 80's and 90's but they were gaming orientated. As the market grew it also started to mature until it was overtaken by new technology the microcomputer with a flat screen and telephone with digital data connections and www connectivity the size of bar of chocolate or smaller, voila the I-Phone and or Android. That has been a major game changer for lots of folks it brought an end or seriously damaged a number of businesses who had invested heavily into older style telephones, tower computer systems etc. HP, Nokia, Motorola are good examples. MS conquered the business market via Windows and then Networked Windows systems and also were savvy enough to make them work with via communication protocols to heavy hitting systems that required different software and O/S such as produced by IBM and Sun etc. If you run a bank or similar high volume transaction business MS Windows won't do the heavy lifting it is just a pretty interface. Apple was always a niche player until they came up with the IPhone but they had the graphical entertainment industry sector cornered and it was large enough for them to build on those Apple systems and O/S. All I am trying to do is put a perspective on where we are and suggest that DTG is not the first to hit the wall in this sort of computing and electronic environment.

Perhaps more specifically lets us look at Flight Simulation. I am a retired military-civilian pilot, a QFI, a C&T captain, low level, aerobatics etc. I have done a lot of operational flying over my life but I was also a training specialist a teacher if you like. I liked it and still do and that is why I was asked to come out of retirement and do some more for a major international aerospace company that does hardware, software and other stuff for the military all over the world. I have been involved in FS from day one, I could see the potential once the hardware and software progressed and caught up. For example early full motion simulators were hideously complex mechanical electrical simulators but the computing power behind them was actually less than any desktop computer I had at home or the office. The role of a FS styled system for flight training and education was obvious the tools or the equipment though seriously lagged behind what was needed. MSFS has actually been used quite extensively but only as training aid or if you like a procedural tool and reasons were simple, immersion and fidelity. You could use it as a teaching tool but not for serious flight training, that has/had to be done in an aeroplane or for the big stuff in a full motion simulator. That is why LM have P3D not for consumers but for flight training, military and civilian and let us not of course forget the rise of UAV's driven by somebody at a PC nowhere near the UAV itself.

For me MSFS has been a hobby, a past time and very enjoyable but it's standout characteristics were the passion and skills of thousands of like minded people all over the world, taking the time to do aircraft designs, painting, scenery etc. That community is a very rich and valuable resource and lots of people have been good enough to spin it into a business others have preferred to remain committed amateurs. DTG simply failed to see the bigger picture and I think had a gamer-development mentality to the product they had and failed to understand the passion and commitment of people like all of us at SOH and elsewhere who enjoy it, appreciate the hard work of those doing it because they have a passion for aviation and its history in all its facets.

Sure FS will continue and so will some competition but the market is now in what economists call a tertiary phase, the days of exponential growth are over. In this environment, reliability and meeting specific customer demands will keep you afloat, albeit there will be some products that bomb occasionally but that is the way it is. Trying to herd your customers into a particular shute wont do it for you. after all why would I get locked into a license buy system that does not let me fiddle and modify things to either improve them or add value to them? More importantly -Why would I want to support a business that effectively locks out the wonderful work and obvious talent as demonstrated by work of you folk here at SOH? I am not buying that, what we have is too precious. And I would not buy a product that does not do anything better than what I have on the promise that it might. Simple.

Where's the flippin "Like" button!!!????

[heywooood]

Trying to herd your customers into a particular shute wont do it for you. after all why would I get locked into a license buy system that does not let me fiddle and modify things to either improve them or add value to them? More importantly -Why would I want to support a business that effectively locks out the wonderful work and obvious talent as demonstrated by work of you folk here at SOH? I am not buying that, what we have is too precious. And I would not buy a product that does not do anything better than what I have on the promise that it might. Simple.

this is the perfect summation - MSFSX/Aces actually got almost everything right...considering the age of the software and the scope of their project as they envisioned it. But the key to this genre more than any other is the open participation and contributions of the community. the community has enhanced everything in the sim from scenery, to weather, to aircraft..everything inside the box was taken from placeholder to first rate, indispensable component by the community of free and payware developers / fans of this simulator. In the case of FSX and now P3D it is the open ended community that have made FSX - P3D what they are today. There is NO OTHER WAY to do this folks. If anyone is thinking of developing a new flight simulator learn this lesson and be successful - or don't - and fold in six months or less.
Let the flight simming community participate with as little restriction or interference as possible. Passion drives this thing - Passion and talent. Thanks to ACES for really creating an almost perfect skeleton of what is now and still the best flight sim money can buy, and thanks to all who develop addons for FSX P3D - you have fleshed it out and made it fly

[zswobbie1]

Quite right.. A tip of the hat to Aces for giving us the basic sim engine onto which the developers has built on.
Have a quick look at FlightGear... this has been totally developed by the community & is actually quite good. (& free)

[Bjoern]

They just finished up two sales back to back.
The results may have just confirmed what they had already decided.

Not a lot of DLC for it at this point anyway.

Was talking more about a "5$/€, grab it while it's still here" sale, not a "-33%" one.

[bazzar]

I see Chevrolet are closing their doors. So all their existing stock should be free or in a flash $5 sale. Yeah, that makes sense.

[fsafranek]

Its not like there is a warehouse of CD's to be cleared out. It's a clump of ones and zeros on a server.
Make a sale, send a copy. The available quantity doesn't change one byte.

All of a sudden folks who didn't support it before want to get a copy of everything on the cheap. Too little too late folks.

Instead of hoping to gain from this you should be thinking about all the employees who probably came
to a weekly company status meeting and learned that their source of income was shutting down in 30 days.

[Bjoern]

I see Chevrolet are closing their doors. So all their existing stock should be free or in a flash $5 sale. Yeah, that makes sense.

Sale - $5 from me.
No sale - $0 from me.

The car-based example doesn't work. If retailers are clearing their stocks for the new model or due to the end of production, there is usually quite a bit of rebate passed on to the customer.
Same for clothing. End of season means low prices before it gets shipped back to the warehouse until the next year.
Heck, even food that's about to expire is thrown out at lower price!

Its not like there is a warehouse of CD's to be cleared out. It's a clump of ones and zeros on a server.
Make a sale, send a copy. The available quantity doesn't change one byte.

All of a sudden folks who didn't support it before want to get a copy of everything on the cheap. Too little too late folks.

Instead of hoping to gain from this you should be thinking about all the employees who probably came to a weekly company status meeting and learned that their source of income was shutting down in 30 days.

I don't think it was a "sudden death" since all companies have regular performance and status reviews.
And I'm pretty sure the devs will get on their feet again. It's not that the entertainment industry is choking on an excess of manpower.

[Alan_A]

I don't think it was a "sudden death" since all companies have regular performance and status reviews.

Yeah, you'd be surprised. At various times I've been asked to blindside staff - and in good karmic fashion, I've been blindsided myself. It's one thing to have the sense that sales aren't running as expected. It's another to be called into a room, told your whole unit is being let go, and then you're given an hour to pack your stuff while the security guards watch you - all without warning. The decision often happens in some other part of the business, and it catches everybody completely off-guard. Sometimes the higher-ups haven't made up their minds 'til the last minute (and I've been part of that dynamic, too, poring over spreadsheets and trying to save at least some of your people while they keep changing the parameters on you). Sometimes they've made the decision well in advance and decided to keep it to themselves. And sometimes something changes suddenly in the business, and it's a bad shock for everyone. In any case, it's usually an ugly scene. I truly hope the team lands well - but in a world where businesses don't like to carry full-time employees with their attendant costs, it's by no means guaranteed. Wishing all of them the best.

[bazzar]

Why is it that when a business fails for whatever the reason, people feel they have an entitlement to expect free or discounted product as a result of that failure. Whatever happened is done and is between the principals of that business and their employees and shareholders. It really is nobody else's business.

Why it happened is also of no import to anyone except creditors and staff. What is the average most people are "down"? $20? you can still play the game, for those that have not yet got the game, you missed the boat. Tough.

We are saying that the true value of the thing should be a few dollars? How does that help or reward all the hard-working people who worked on it? How does that show them any respect?

The fact is that, unfortunately for those involved, it has happened and for all but those unfortunates it is time to move on. Get over it.

[Bjoern]

Yeah, you'd be surprised. At various times I've been asked to blindside staff - and in good karmic fashion, I've been blindsided myself. It's one thing to have the sense that sales aren't running as expected. It's another to be called into a room, told your whole unit is being let go, and then you're given an hour to pack your stuff while the security guards watch you - all without warning. The decision often happens in some other part of the business, and it catches everybody completely off-guard. Sometimes the higher-ups haven't made up their minds 'til the last minute (and I've been part of that dynamic, too, poring over spreadsheets and trying to save at least some of your people while they keep changing the parameters on you). Sometimes they've made the decision well in advance and decided to keep it to themselves. And sometimes something changes suddenly in the business, and it's a bad shock for everyone. In any case, it's usually an ugly scene. I truly hope the team lands well - but in a world where businesses don't like to carry full-time employees with their attendant costs, it's by no means guaranteed. Wishing all of them the best.

Things do seem to be tougher in other parts of the world, but I assume that workers in the UK do enjoy some rudimentary legal protections against all too sudden job termination.

Why is it that when a business fails for whatever the reason, people feel they have an entitlement to expect free or discounted product as a result of that failure. Whatever happened is done and is between the principals of that business and their employees and shareholders. It really is nobody else's business.

Why it happened is also of no import to anyone except creditors and staff. What is the average most people are "down"? $20? you can still play the game, for those that have not yet got the game, you missed the boat. Tough.

We are saying that the true value of the thing should be a few dollars? How does that help or reward all the hard-working people who worked on it? How does that show them any respect?

The fact is that, unfortunately for those involved, it has happened and for all but those unfortunates it is time to move on. Get over it.

Don't worry, I won't lose any sleep over it.

[Alan_A]

Things do seem to be tougher in other parts of the world, but I assume that workers in the UK do enjoy some rudimentary legal protections against all too sudden job termination.

Fair enough. My experiences, as you can probably tell, were with publicly held companies in the U.S. I spent many years in that environment and don't miss it. I have a nice cardiac stent as a souvenir. I hope things are a little better for workers in the UK.

[fsafranek]

I don't think it was a "sudden death" since all companies have regular performance and status reviews.

The employees were told one hour before it went public.

[Naismith]

I see Chevrolet are closing their doors.

Not so amusing today considering what Ford just announced.

[wombat666]

Not so amusing today considering what Ford just announced.

Not to get too far OT but it's the way of the World at this point in time.
Australia doesn't have an automotive manufacturing industry now, we simply have vehicle importers or maybe assemblers.
And despite employees having around 12 months or more 'notice' many remain in difficult circumstances or worse, especially those who have spent their entire working lives with the same company, an object lesson in the Corporate "tough s--t' mentality.
'Their employees were told one hour before it went public.'
One hour or one year, it must feel just as bad for the people caught out by Corporate hypocrisy.
And FTR, I paid for FSW, quite liked it despite the glacial pace of development, and am dissapointed to see a relatively promising concept vanish, so unless the posters in this thread did the same, they do not have a dog in this fight.

PS: Unlike many people I've had a long 'career', never been forced to sack staff, only required to 'terminate' malcontents who attempted to do me harm!

[Alan_A]

The employees were told one hour before it went public.

So things are appalling all over.

PS: Unlike many people I've had a long 'career', never been forced to sack staff, only required to 'terminate' malcontents who attempted to do me harm!

That's fortunate - much better than having the overlords (who come from another industry and have no idea what your work actually involves) show up and say, "Good job hitting the 15 percent profit target we gave you last month. This month we need 17 percent. Who are you going to cut to give us the extra two percent?"

I currently work in a network of solo practitioners and small firms - all of us are refugees from the big firm that got bought by a public company. We live better - no visits from the inquisition - and nobody I know would ever think of going back.

[Bjoern]

Fair enough. My experiences, as you can probably tell, were with publicly held companies in the U.S. I spent many years in that environment and don't miss it. I have a nice cardiac stent as a souvenir. I hope things are a little better for workers in the UK.

Well, the "hire and fire" culture isn't as prevalent on this side of the Atlantic. There's always some degree of social security to at least cushion the fall.

The employees were told one hour before it went public.

Out of the blue?
In that case, I'd set the f'in place on fire on my way out.

[Stefano Zibell]

They could at the VERY least release the beta branch that is now inaccessible. There was a career mode that is now lost.

[simondix]

Very sad, especially for the people who now have to look for new employment. I brought it on offer and although I hardly used it I kept it to see how much progression would be made. There was just something about it that although I could not put my finger on it I did not like. I dipped into it when updates were made and although I liked the aircraft available I was not using it seriously. I thought it might progress to something good given time. The closure has meant really that I can now concentrate on P3D and free up space on my PC. I am still using FSX on planes I cannot use on P3D and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

[stovall]

This thread has run its course, time to close.