We have at this moment problems with e-mails coming to us via Microsoft servers (Outlook, Hotmail, Live, etc). We are in contact with Microsoft to solve this issue.

Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dillon

2010 FS9 still tops freeware downloads on all FS sites...

Recommended Posts

I know where Aerosoft is on this but I find it amazing that FS9 still tops all freeware downloads even on the first day of 2010 on all FS related sites. Those that create for the love of the hobby are in droves still creating for FS9 over FSX. It's an ongoing trend that even I didn't think would sustain itself past 2009 but here we are in 2010 and this is still the case. On all FS sites since FSX's release 3+ years ago it has been very rare (if at all) that daily downloads on all FS related sites hasn't been more in favor FS9 by 2 to 1 margins over FSX. This is not to sway any views at Aerosoft but to point blank look at numbers with amazement. Someone must still use FS9 when on Avsim today of all days (January 1, 2010) FSX only has one download to FS9's 33 options. Aerosoft's going wisdom is FS9 is dead and therefore doesn't deserve future product development and/or consideration. With this kind of underground support for FS9 it's amazing a company from Europe of all places doesn't understand something like this. When you have people that rally around something for nothing more than a passion and love for it you'd do well to capitalize on something like this not abandon it. If people are buying one thing but on the other side staying with something and giving freely to it both time and effort both camps have a strong and valid case for continued consideration from every developer. It's like anything else in life which one do you feel is going to last the longest, those in it for the money or those in it for the love of what they do???

  • Downvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....but here we are in 2010 and this is still the case....

That was a good one! 2009 is really very far behind us :lol:

Seriously, i don´t want to start the FS9/FSX discussion for the 204735-iest time, but you should know

that there are much more freeware products for FS9 than for FSX, because FSX offers much more possibilities

for developers, what makes a development for FSX much more complex on the other hand.

So most of the FS9-freeware-downloads are low-quality in comparison with high-end FSX-products.

(before anybody feels offended: that´s the nature of the beast (amount of polygones, effects, etc..)

and has nothing to do with criticism and i know that there are exceptions like PA-Airbus, ifly 747 etc.)

At the end of the day, everybody who wants high quality comes to FSX sooner or later (but has to pay for it!) - and everybody

who want´s an at most cheap hobby, stays with FS9 and a lot of freeware-downloads...

Just my 2 cents

Happy new year!

Timo

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there are much more freeware products for FS9 than for FSX, because FSX offers much more possibilities

Yes, that's why the largest number of freeware addons keep coming fro FS98... ;)

And a happy new simyear to you, too!

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Respect, not one day, and the optimisum of friendly coexistance of both sims in 2010 was distoryed. Hey guys, there is too much time left for you, that you have time to make such discussions. Start to enjoy the sim you ever prefer and stop this now, it will not bring any addon more, it only needs time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing freeware to a payware publisher is tantamount to deliberate molestation of the truth, or blatant stupidity. Either is foolhardy in a forum such as this as it will only realise a challenge which reveals the original theory to be specious. Or malicious... :ph34r:<_<

It is quite clear to anyone with eyes to see and a brain to process that the gravitation to payware in FSX is a summation of its mid-life development maturity, and the comparative absence of freeware downloads more an indication as to the profit-driven motives of the expert developers who are as affected by the credit crunch as the rest of us. Given the time and effort now required to develop for the more complex simulator, we might well recognise that FS9 WAS the pinnacle of freeware, perhaps because most of the developers of freeware didn't have the skills or the desire to transfer to the greater demands - and reasonable expectations of a payware audience - for an obsolescent product.

Oh, and the fact that most FS9 downloads are simple AI aircraft or repaints which skews the download comparisons markedly. <_<

So what is a true equivalent comparison going to say, I wonder? Were there more PAYWARE products released for FS9 in 2009 than for FSX?

I doubt it...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing freeware to a payware publisher is tantamount to deliberate molestation of the truth, or blatant stupidity. Either is foolhardy in a forum such as this as it will only realise a challenge which reveals the original theory to be specious. Or malicious... :ph34r:<_<

It is quite clear to anyone with eyes to see and a brain to process that the gravitation to payware in FSX is a summation of its mid-life development maturity, and the comparative absence of freeware downloads more an indication as to the profit-driven motives of the expert developers who are as affected by the credit crunch as the rest of us. Given the time and effort now required to develop for the more complex simulator, we might well recognise that FS9 WAS the pinnacle of freeware, perhaps because most of the developers of freeware didn't have the skills or the desire to transfer to the greater demands - and reasonable expectations of a payware audience - for an obsolescent product.

Oh, and the fact that most FS9 downloads are simple AI aircraft or repaints which skews the download comparisons markedly. <_<

So what is a true equivalent comparison going to say, I wonder? Were there more PAYWARE products released for FS9 in 2009 than for FSX?

I doubt it...

Without the budding talent of the FS9 freeware guys today the future of development for FSX would be severly limited (developers creating todays FSX add-ons won't be around forever). We will always need a platform accessible enough for those starting out, FS was always about this... Another thing that's a fact is the new advancements still being accomplished in FS9 is nothing to sneeze at. The big question is how many developers went out of business after the release of FSX? Another question is how big of an impact did the split in the FS market affect the community as a whole and the frequency of new products? There was a time when a week couldn't go buy without some developer having something new on the market. Instead of knocking those who stick with FS9 you should be glade it's still around. The apparent ease at which talent can get into the hobby and grow only adds to the pool of future talent that wishes and has the skill to move on to the more complex stuff. Speaking of the complexity argument, anything outside of the latest eye candy can be had in both sims. There's nothing really special in the avionics department of the Captainsim 767 for FSX over the 757 they created for FS9. The only thing that the 767 brings is more eye candy. Look at Airsimmer's A320 for FS9 or Leonardo's MD-88 (LH being the best hardcore simulation yet created for any version of Flight Simulator) these are top of the line efforts no matter what sim you use... Airsimmer's A320 is the first add-on of it's kind that doesn't need FSUIPC to run (in it's FSX form it most likely won't need SimConnect). Feelthere just released an outstanding ERJ and REX/Flight1's Ground Environment Pro makes FS9's looks rival FSX.

post-572-126249964271_thumb.jpg

post-572-126249965974_thumb.jpg

post-572-126249967201_thumb.jpg

post-572-126249968408_thumb.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So most of the FS9-freeware-downloads are low-quality in comparison with high-end FSX-products.

Timo

Most FSX freeware is lower than that because there's hardly any and none of any significance... FSX is a payware platform from beginning to end.

Comments like 'Timo's' deserve a couple more shots. Like I said add-ons like Leonardo's Maddog, Feelthere's E-Jet Series/ERJv2, and Eaglesoft's Citation X blows comments like this out the water.

Take away those add-ons and just apply REX for FS9 with results like the pics I've attached below ends the discussion. There's reasons people use both sims but when FS9 can look like this for no more than three extra add-ons (Activesky Advanced, Flight1's Ground Environment Pro and REX) dismissing it like 'Timo' is foolish to say the least...

post-572-126250093815_thumb.jpg

post-572-126250094661_thumb.jpg

post-572-126250095874_thumb.jpg

post-572-126250097093_thumb.jpg

post-572-126250098652_thumb.jpg

post-572-12625009969_thumb.jpg

post-572-126250100684_thumb.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are aware that most every one of the products you mention were developed for FSX, or precede the arrival of FSX by a considerable margin, right? And then you regard FS9 as a `simple` step for developers, only to then point out that the payware products you mention have the same systems sophistication in both sims?

So pray tell, where is the validity to your argument?

Why, if your theorising was correct, is there not more product for FS98 than FS9 and FSX? Combined..?

The reason that FS9 is still around is to cater for the many simmers who don't want to change because they have time, money and probably blood invested in a massive package sitting on their hard drive. On a system that lacks the raw horsepower to run FSX. That is the ONLY valid reason for developing for the old platform, save perhaps for the most sophisticated of addons where the systems sophistication overrides any and all needs for visual display.

But FSX is now opening up a platform where much more can be achieved than FS9, even though modules and around-the-houses programming might be required to do so. The FACT that FS9 has more complex air file modelling than FSX would seem to suggest the opposite to what you infer - that it should be easier to develop for the current platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are aware that most every one of the products you mention were developed for FSX, or precede the arrival of FSX by a considerable margin, right?

Here's a break down of the add-ons I mentioned above:

Leonardo's Maddog was not created for FSX originally but it was ported over. The final build of the Maddog for FS9 was released in 2008 which was after FSX's release. After the FS9 final release it was ported over to FSX. Seeing it's an FS9 add-on it runs better in FS9 versus FSX.

The Captainsim 757 concept which eventually turned into the FSX 767. The original 757 was released after FSX hit the market. Little changed outside of eye candy with the FSX 767.

I work for Feelthere so I can tell you the FSX and FS9 versions of the E-Jet Series and ERJv2 were created from scratch with both sims in mind very much after FSX's release.

Eaglesoft's Citation X was originally an FS9 concept. The version 2 option was released last year which now has it's own version for FSX.

Airsimmer's A320 was just released in it's BASIC form back in November 2009 well after the release of FSX

The only add-ons I mentioned above that you have a partial case for is REX and GE Pro (2 out of 7 for the record).

REX's start is irrelevant seeing it totally changed the game for FS9 with a few clicks of the mouse so who cares if the FSX version came out first.

Ground Environment Pro has versions for both FSX and FS9 which does wonders to both sims...

Why, if your theorising was correct, is there not more product for FS98 than FS9 and FSX? Combined..?

You know just as well as I (well you should know if you've been around for any length of time) every version of FS died when the new version hit the market meaning everyone (90%) dropped the old version as soon as the new version hit the store shelves. Every new version up until now was a full replacement for the previous version. All that changed with FSX and if 'YOUR LOGIC' was correct FS9 should be dead now especially seeing FSX is the last version seemingly to be produced by Microsoft. People have moved many times over in the past to a newer version no matter how many add-ons they had because the new option was a full upgrade. This didn't happen with FSX because of it's many problems and it still hasn't happened. Even people with beefy systems aren't moving over to FSX in fact quite the contrary many are moving back to FS9 after seeing examples like what I've shown above. If you don't believe me go read some posts on Avsim especially in the FS9 forum. Ask around on various forums and you'll see people wanting the visuals I posted above with 30+ frames over places like New York and London (with the highest quality scenery/planes available).

I have no doubt FSX will come into it's own as hardware continues to evolve but what I found surprising was it hasn't happened yet and some of you very same people would have shouted down two years ago that FS9 would still have this kind of support crossing over into 2010. I posted this thread because Aerosoft was the biggest nay-sayer FS9 would hang on this long. They made a move exclusively to FSX touting boxed version (even though that's such an old school approach to selling when most product in this genera is sold via download. Examples of successful download releases are 'Rise of Flight' and the brand new sim 'Wings Of Prey' which isn't offered currently in a boxed form) because they felt something like this was impossible. Mathjis even stated in an interview that FSX will never rival FS9 in performance based on how it was programmed. That's the biggest kill factor for many staying with FS9 because they want a fluid experience like one would get in the real world. Hence we have Aerosoft developing a new sim that hopefully will live up to everything missed in FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Les!

You know I'm on your side usually. Long live FS9! Give me a Cray computer and I still will enjoy FS9. I call it the right to choose.

However, I couldn't resist to comment on one thing, concerning one mentioned addon:

Look at Airsimmer's A320 for FS9 or Leonardo's MD-88 (the best hardcore simulation yet created for Flight Simulator) these are top of the line efforts

This sentence struck me as you joined two addons which, for me, represent the opposite ends of the payware class: LH MD82 which could be called all times masterpiece in quality and system depth, and the ASA320 which, I believe, is the greatest disaster. For the first time in my life I went for a refund (Flight1) yesterday after wasting my new year's holiday tryings to tweak this alpha-state bag of bugs to make at least one successful flight. And you know I'm not a newbie in the sim.

Airsimmer's A320 is the first add-on of it's kind that doesn't need FSUIPC to run
And that is one of the main reasons for ASA320 trouble.

Maybe it will be a quality simulation one day, maybe not.

But giving it as an example of how far FS9 can go, with LH Maddog in one line, seems a bad idea to me.

Other than that, I too live on the FS9 side of the wall. Will all comfort and pleasure.

As for the number of downloads, all commenting here could be right in a way.

But taking into consideration how maaaany great addons we already have for FS9, I won't be surprised it if those for FSX will soon be the only ones.

Will that mean this sim became more popular or better? I'll leave you all with your own answers. I have mine. For sure. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Les!

You know I'm on your side usually. Long live FS9! Give me a Cray computer and I still will enjoy FS9. I call it the right to choose.

However, I couldn't resist to comment on one thing, concerning one mentioned addon:

This sentence struck me as you joined two addons which, for me, represent the opposite ends of the payware class: LH MD82 which could be called all times masterpiece in quality and system depth, and the ASA320 which, I believe, is the greatest disaster. For the first time in my life I went for a refund (Flight1) yesterday after wasting my new year's holiday tryings to tweak this alpha-state bag of bugs to make at least one successful flight. And you know I'm not a newbie in the sim.

And that is one of the main reasons for ASA320 trouble.

Maybe it will be a quality simulation one day, maybe not.

But giving it as an example of how far FS9 can go, with LH Maddog in one line, seems a bad idea to me.

Other than that, I too live on the FS9 side of the wall. Will all comfort and pleasure.

As for the number of downloads, all commenting here could be right in a way.

But taking into consideration how maaaany great addons we already have for FS9, I won't be surprised it if those for FSX will soon be the only ones.

Will that mean this sim became more popular or better? I'll leave you all with your own answers. I have mine. For sure. :)

The Airsimmer effort is wishful thinking because I know how far the Leonardo Maddog has come. I owned it's first incarnation called the Lago Maddog which for me was a big disappointment. I bought the various versions of the Maddog over the 5+ years of it's existence without a VC. It wasn't until this last version released little over a year that it finally reached it's full potential. Now I would consider it the greatest hardcore add-on ever released. And again like I said to debunk 'Timo's' claim it beats out anything yet released for FSX (even the PMDG MD11). The FS9 Leonoardo Maddog beats out it's own version for FSX for nothing more than it runs considerably poorer on that platform. So I believe Airsimmer can turn things around with time or at least I'm hopeful of that. I like what I'm seeing so far and it's a whole lot better than what the Leonardo Maddog originally was. So I put them side by side with hope the Airsimmer A320's final incarnation will be on the same level as Leonardo's effort ended up being...

On a side note I see the guys around here aren't hip to 'FS9.75' so I thought I'd spread the word in a round about way. My original intent was to open people's eyes as to a continuing trend until 'Timo' spoke up. Now it's obvious even the customers or forum members of Aerosoft either need educating or at least an honest discussion brought forth... Their still thinking all FS9 add-ons are inferior to FSX efforts (which is crazy as outside of eye candy, like FSX over FS9 little has improved over what's been done for FS9 for years). Either way we have screenshot proof of where FS9.75 is today and the amazing add-ons still being produced for it (in some cases exclusively for it). It's false to say FSX has the high end stuff and FS9 has the low end. Quite the opposite as FS9 is still seeing high end add-ons produced for it plus the years of stuff that's been created for it already pre FSX. You put that on top of the whole freeware community still continues to support it hands down over FSX and you come up with only a few companies by comparison exclusively supporting FSX. Even some of Aerosoft's developers still support FS9 like Simwings. If most developers went to FSX the whole wealth of add-ons produced for FS9 over the years plus the daily freeware allotment being released today daily for FS9 eclipses FSX's output 10 fold. Unless hardware catches up and surpasses what FSX needs to run (which I believe will happen in the next 2 to 3 years) FSX will never be on FS9's level (especially historically as the most influential version). The cult following for FS9 will keep it alive well into the future and/or Microsoft reopens the franchise or Aerosoft smashes the competition with their effort. No matter how this all turns out FSX has eclipsed FS2000 as the worse release in the franchise. It has taken FSX far to long to be accepted by the whole community and that will be the legacy of this program and a lesson learned (I hope) in releasing something that runs well day one and not requiring 5 to 6 years to get off the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honest discussion is what you're getting. Not my fault it isn't in agreement with your own skewed viewpoint.

Your reply to my last post actually bore out exactly what I was saying - successful FS9 products (and several unsuccessful ones) HAVE been ported over from the earlier sim to the latter. That they were not redeveloped expressly for the later sim is a hinge point as it allows for direct measurement of the relative sales performance. As you have your ear to the ground of payware developer FeelThere perhaps you can give us a breakdown of the relative sales of the same product in both sims, their respective release dates and if not actual figures, percentage breakdowns of sales in FS9 versus sales in FSX? That way one doesn't have to include freeware in the discussion. At all.

At that point you nmight have my attention, but right now your transparent attempt to molest figures to suit your own agenda is really rather sad.

As for other successful developers who have preceded or followed the Aerosoft trend some mighty big names spring to mind:

Flight One; A2A; SibWings (who probably have better inside knowledge on FSX than most...); Real Air; Nemeth Designs. To name but a few. Surely if your theory was so clear-cut they would be missing out on the vast sales potential of FS9..?

The problem is that if you support two platforms the support issues are magnified exponentially. Your `FS9.75` is actually likely to cause more problems by introducing variables and alterations that can only make problems emerge, not dissolve. You surely cannot expect developers and publishers to support aftermarket modifications to the base sim AND cope with their product at the same time?

...that would be the FS9.x that is readily found in the bargain buckets at vendors as it is no longer on shelves for sale in High Street retailers, and hasn't been for some considerable time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you have your ear to the ground of payware developer FeelThere perhaps you can give us a breakdown of the relative sales of the same product in both sims

Your `FS9.75` is actually likely to cause more problems by introducing variables and alterations that can only make problems emerge, not dissolve. You surely cannot expect developers and publishers to support aftermarket modifications to the base sim AND cope with their product at the same time?

...that would be the FS9.x that is readily found in the bargain buckets at vendors as it is no longer on shelves for sale in High Street retailers, and hasn't been for some considerable time.

Let's break this down in points:

1. Last I checked (can't give you exact numbers because that's against policy) Feelthere's sales for FS9 beat out FSX sales for the last few projects. There's a few developers I know a little more info on concerning sales and what Aerosoft is reporting is skewed in FSX's favor to say the least... Reminds me of a great quote, "Who cares what anyone thinks? It's what you know that interests" and I know FS9 add-ons are selling more than some are admitting. Now if we are talking GA then FSX sales may surpass FS9 but for Heavy airplanes/scenery it's either neck and neck or FS9 sales beats out FSX's.

The benefits for mis-info is this (Rafal says it best):

- planned marketing (it's easier to concentrate on one platform)

- the number of already existing quality addons for FS9 is way larger than for FSX, so the FSX market is the target to fill

- there are, as always, many new simmers coming - why should they start with an older sim? Many of them actually are once their educated in forums like this one...

2. FS9.75 requires no special attention from developers creating add-ons for FS9. Modifying textures is all that's done to beef up the sim and make its looks comparable to FSX (doesn't take that much to bring it close to what you guys are getting in FSX).

3. FSX is found in bargain buckets as well in fact if you don't get it online like FS9 you won't see it on store shelves these days, your point here is mute...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. FSX is found in bargain buckets as well in fact if you don't get it online like FS9 you won't see it on store shelves these days, your point here is mute...

Quite incorrect, in fact. For instance, my local BestBuy had at least 8 copies of FSX GOLD Edition on the shelves last month and sold every one at $39.95...

But in any case, once again this argument is turning into people stating their perceptions as fact, etc, and I am not just directing this at Dillon.

It's fair to say that both versions of the simulation offer users satisfying experiences, and some developers continue to offer products for one or the other (or both) and if they make money with FS9 versions, then great!

Why is this always a point of contention? Pick your flavor, and enjoy. Each version offers something for every user, and there is no "ultimate sim" that exists today...that is, until Aerosoft releases their version! :D

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite incorrect, in fact. For instance, my local BestBuy had at least 8 copies of FSX GOLD Edition on the shelves last month and sold every one at $39.95...

But in any case, once again this argument is turning into people stating their perceptions as fact, etc, and I am not just directing this at Dillon.

It's fair to say that both versions of the simulation offer users satisfying experiences, and some developers continue to offer products for one or the other (or both) and if they make money with FS9 versions, then great!

Why is this always a point of contention? Pick your flavor, and enjoy. Each version offers something for every user, and there is no "ultimate sim" that exists today...that is, until Aerosoft releases their version! :D

Well in my neck of the woods FSX is not to be found anywhere especially for $39.95. Speaking of the 'bargain Bin' that seems to be the trend with any title more than a year or two old (how old is FSX now?). The purpose is to get the product out of the store to make way for new titles. So it's not a stretch depending on the store to see FSX or FS9 in a bin at reduced prices. FS9 for the record is mostly to be had online these days...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in my neck of the woods FSX is not to be found anywhere especially for $39.95. Speaking of the 'bargain Bin' that seems to be the trend with any title more than a year or two old (how old is FSX now?). The purpose is to get the product out of the store to make way for new titles. So it's not a stretch depending on the store to see FSX or FS9 in a bin at reduced prices. FS9 for the record is mostly to be had online these days...

I've personally seen FSX GOLD (the last incorporated version from MS) on sale for £14.99 and £19.99 in two completely separate retail stores, respectively. I have not seen a copy of FS9 on retail shelves since FSX was released - and if you need me to explain why that is then you don't understand modern retailing and how MS influences shelf allocation and stocking itinerary, so should refrain from comment.

I have not suggested, and would not suggest, that FS9 is a choice for new simmers. I actually understand entirely why sophisticated addons continue to sell well for FS9 - I have already stated the reason and am not inclined to repeat myself. The problems are simply:

1: If you haven't already GOT FS9, good luck finding a copy

2: No matter the arguments, FS9 was obsolescent the day FSX was released in 2006. MS ensured that was the case.

3: FSX represents the de facto latest iteration of the product line and is now fully mature after three years, two patches, one addon - and closing of the developers studio.

4: Hardware has now advanced to a point where a default setup works well on current mid- to high-end systems.

Now, the fact that FS9 will run certain addons is no benefit to a developer who has to consider development cost and support requirements. Already there is a need to support the business across a myriad of system combinations involving differing OS, different hardware setups, software interaction and of course, customer expectation. It remains a simple fact that the real enthusiasts, contrary to popular belief are actually the slowest to change because of the investment in their current sim of choice. Enthusiasts represent only a tiny proportion of the payware market - perhaps as the worryingly continued existence of #####eware vendors like Abacus attests.

Why would a developer working in a recessionary market choose to develop for the antiquated product and add to its development time and support challenges ten or twenty-fold? Unless you could ship your addon WITH a copy of FS9 there is no prospect of expanding the market sufficiently to recoup the investment. Need proof? then simply count the number of support requests for FS9 in this publishers forum... They are there, certainly, but they are no more than a small proportion of the whole, yet those FS9 products remain on sale with equal prominence in the online store.

The migration to FSX is well underway and turning back at this point is futile from a commercial point of view.

Besides, you and I can debate at length but Aerosoft have made the decision and neither you nor I will influence it. Like it or lump it, the future is FSX - or Aerosoft Flight Simulator 2012...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like it or lump it, the future is FSX - or Aerosoft Flight Simulator 2012...

I plan on getting a new machine a year and a half from now exclusivly for FSX now that hardware has caught up (i7 machines). Just the same I really hope Aerosoft can deliver on their simulator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree... :blink:

Two months ago my 4th CD of my FS9 broke... You see I use legal copies not pirated stuff.. I contacted MS but she didn't care if my 4th cd had broken... So I decided that I need to buy the game again... So I went to a computer store and under the game section I found FS9 and bought it again. Full game, 4 CDs, Fresh and clean, smell of factory plastic and in a box! :)

Price: 14,00 euro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know where Aerosoft is on this but I find it amazing that FS9 still tops all freeware downloads even on the first day of 2010 on all FS related sites. Those that create for the love of the hobby are in droves still creating for FS9 over FSX. It's an ongoing trend that even I didn't think would sustain itself past 2009 but here we are in 2010 and this is still the case. On all FS sites since FSX's release 3+ years ago it has been very rare (if at all) that daily downloads on all FS related sites hasn't been more in favor FS9 by 2 to 1 margins over FSX. This is not to sway any views at Aerosoft but to point blank look at numbers with amazement. Someone must still use FS9 when on Avsim today of all days (January 1, 2010) FSX only has one download to FS9's 33 options. Aerosoft's going wisdom is FS9 is dead and therefore doesn't deserve future product development and/or consideration. With this kind of underground support for FS9 it's amazing a company from Europe of all places doesn't understand something like this. When you have people that rally around something for nothing more than a passion and love for it you'd do well to capitalize on something like this not abandon it. If people are buying one thing but on the other side staying with something and giving freely to it both time and effort both camps have a strong and valid case for continued consideration from every developer. It's like anything else in life which one do you feel is going to last the longest, those in it for the money or those in it for the love of what they do???

Well I am not surprised at all. There is simply not a lot of FSX freeware that's seriously good. The reason for this is also rather simple. Pure FSX development is more complex, more time consuming and requires more costly tools (I generalize for sake of argument here). In other words, if I would do freeware at zero investment I would also use FS2004! Commercially I wish the FS2004 would be stronger, but it is simply not the case. In large airports we can still add the FS2004 versions (and there is great demand for this) to the FSX versions for boxed distribution, but I simply have not seen a single pure FS2004 boxed product in a store for a long time. And make no mistake, that's still where the majority of products are sold.

I know Dillon you think I am talking bull, and the moment you guarantee to order 50.000 FS2004 products a year we'll be happy to jump back into that market with a vengeance! We can't find those customers, you say they are there so become a retailer, you'll make loads of money, that is, if you are right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In large airports we can still add the FS2004 versions (and there is great demand for this)

BigThumbs.gif Keep them coming, Mathijs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I am not surprised at all. There is simply not a lot of FSX freeware that's seriously good. The reason for this is also rather simple. Pure FSX development is more complex, more time consuming and requires more costly tools (I generalize for sake of argument here). In other words, if I would do freeware at zero investment I would also use FS2004! Commercially I wish the FS2004 would be stronger, but it is simply not the case. In large airports we can still add the FS2004 versions (and there is great demand for this) to the FSX versions for boxed distribution, but I simply have not seen a single pure FS2004 boxed product in a store for a long time. And make no mistake, that's still where the majority of products are sold.

I know Dillon you think I am talking bull, and the moment you guarantee to order 50.000 FS2004 products a year we'll be happy to jump back into that market with a vengeance! We can't find those customers, you say they are there so become a retailer, you'll make loads of money, that is, if you are right.

I perfectly agree you can't find customers buying boxes but what about downloads, you never talk about that...

Mathijs I don't know for the life of me why you keep touting such an archaic form of distribution to justify FSX and moving away from FS9. Your arguments are valid for the most part but much of the sim world has equally embraced downloads as an alternative to boxed products along time ago. The lack of sales for solid media has nothing to do with FS9 but rather the speed of internet connections. I haven't bought a boxed copy of anything FS related in over 15 years... I can't go into one computer store in America if I wanted to outside of Micro Center (which may be closing down in the near future) and find any type of add-ons being sold for any version of Flight Simulator. In most cases Flight Simulator isn't being sold. I haven't seen an Aerosoft title on the shelves anywhere in over 5 years. I look at programs like the new 'Wings of Prey' being released exclusively via download and hear this coming from you in every interview and shake my head as to why you keep using this as leverage. Sure like 'Rise of Flight' it will eventually get a boxed version but I happen to know most sales are coming in via download for most developers (Airsimmer, Blueprint, Imaginsim, Feelthere, to name a few). So if your guy is sitting in a storeroom somewhere with many boxed copies means nothing more than too much product was made for a declining demand for that type of media not the actual product itself.

I don't know how things are in Europe but it seems boxes are popular there more so than other places. That's not the case in America or I'd see your titles in some of the bigger chain stores. Everywhere from the US to New Zealand I happen to know people aren't going to stores anymore for add-ons like they used to (VOZ a very popular product From Fly Away Simulations for both FS9 and FSX, it's another great example of a successful downloadable product). An internet connection can get you any add-on in the world within 15 minutes depending on your connection speed. So please give me something else as an excuse FSX sales are over FS9. Again I perfectly understand everything your saying outside of this one point because in American where stores like Best Buy (which is headquartered here in Minneapolis) and Walmart aren't selling FS add-ons why keep using this as a focal point for lack of sales? If you can make a valid case of not imbracing FS9 for logical reasons why would you not do this with solid state copies of products? Boxes will always have their place for some but when major stores aren't stocking the media and you come in here stating that's FS9's fault then something's amiss... If Micro Center is your only outlet in American for boxed add-ons then you are really are in trouble. I know your not going to tell me what download sales are doing for both sims for obvious reasons. Actually quiet as it's kept you did mention before in the download arena FS9 wasn't doing so bad but you elected not to embrace that outlet of moving products in the discussion. I will tell you for the developers I work with sales are running neck and neck with FS9 beating out FSX depending on the add-on. Heavy airports and aircraft sell better for FS9 in the download arena versus FSX. This is true for Dreamfleet, Feelthere, and others I need not mention. GA everything sell better for FSX. Boxed products aren't selling well for either sim and if we could get a handle on this pirate situation FS9 sales would be even better. Developers like Blueprint don't even bother going boxed and others if they do decide to do this only go through distributors like yourself, Flight1, or Just Flight. Simmarket last I heard (and this is what I heard) is reporting great download sales for both sim versions. So I hope we can move away from the boxed product argument because that's about on the level of having a pen pal if you remember that. Today we have email that allows us to communicated instantly. This holds true with getting patches and add-ons for products. I am on the other side of this game as well so it would be better moving forward if we compare apples to oranges not rabbits to snales...

Mathijs your a smart guy who has been in the business for years, I remember when you were with Lago and did an outstanding job over there. All of this I'm telling you here you already know and pegging you for proof is a mute point. All I'm asking is don't insult mine or anyone's intelligence with this whole boxed product argument. I know perfectly well boxed anything isn't selling well these days as I work with a few developers myself. You from your experience know what's happening in the more vibrant download market and we should stick with and discuss that... FS9 isn't doing bad at all that's why developers like FSDreamteam continue to make products for that version. Same goes for 'most' everyone else with the exception of those tied to Aerosoft...

Here's one anxious customer waiting for FS9 Schiphol and Luxembourg ;)

Mathijs said it not me so let's see if he delivers especially on these two airports...

  • Downvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most FSX freeware is lower than that because there's hardly any and none of any significance... FSX is a payware platform from beginning to end.

Comments like 'Timo's' deserve a couple more shots. Like I said add-ons like Leonardo's Maddog, Feelthere's E-Jet Series/ERJv2, and Eaglesoft's Citation X blows comments like this out the water.

Take away those add-ons and just apply REX for FS9 with results like the pics I've attached below ends the discussion. There's reasons people use both sims but when FS9 can look like this for no more than three extra add-ons (Activesky Advanced, Flight1's Ground Environment Pro and REX) dismissing it like 'Timo' is foolish to say the least...

Dillon, these are really nice screenshots, but i was talking about FREEWARE-downloads!

No doubt you can improve FS9 with (very expensive) addons like ActiveSky, REX, etc...

All I wanted to say was, that most (please read carefully: M.O.S.T!) freeware addons for FS9 are relatively simple

and don´t meet the standards of FSX-addons. That´s the nature of software-evolution!

FSX-addons become more and more complex and so fewer and fewer freeware-developers have the time and money to create addons.

Because of this fact i agree with you 100%: ...FSX is a payware platform from beginning to end....

Regards,

Timo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Mathijs, but I must make a statement now, because I see the world different and I don't like the form you make your statement regarding the development desitions for FS9 products, but I must reduce it to the sceneries, as I have no know-how in aircraft designer, where your statement are possible correct.

Well I am not surprised at all. There is simply not a lot of FSX freeware that's seriously good. The reason for this is also rather simple. Pure FSX development is more complex, more time consuming and requires more costly tools (I generalize for sake of argument here). In other words, if I would do freeware at zero investment I would also use FS2004!

The freeware market going down allready before the FSX comes on the market, only the speed is faster now. The developement of good quality freeware sceneries is not less time and manpower consuming then payware design and the requestes from the "freeware" user are growing as fast as the quality of payware grows. To get a positiv feedback for a freeware release is very spare today, the discussions about the cons of your product the same as for payware. So, all talented freeware designers must ask themself today, why don't get money for that, then the discussions are minimum payed. The step to FSX with all his problems to handle previous learned workarounds and handlings will give this poeple the rest.

So here you are correct, the freeware for FSX is small and will keep small. No indication for the market at all.

Commercially I wish the FS2004 would be stronger, but it is simply not the case. In large airports we can still add the FS2004 versions (and there is great demand for this) to the FSX versions for boxed distribution, but I simply have not seen a single pure FS2004 boxed product in a store for a long time. And make no mistake, that's still where the majority of products are sold.

That statement is a "nice to have one", as you know, there is no "FS9 Only" Product released for a long time now, and there is no seperate Scenery Product where a FS9 only and a FSX only Version was selled, not by aerosoft and not by the most other distributers. So, not you and nobody else can say exactly, where the desition to buy the product was made by the customes. But you know better then I, that many products are released and selled first for FS9 and they don't keep in the store until the FSX installed is available. No argument for FS9 at all, because even when the customes buy the product when the FS9 version is available, nobody can say if the would buy it, when the FSX version whould not be included already in the price. But, nobody pay money for a product at a state, where he can't use it.

The only possible consequense is: Some, some more, maybe not all of this Customes use FS9 and (maybe) FSX.

I can only see at the moment the situation like this, and this is not only based on a feeling, I also have sales data, maybe not as much as you have, but for the satistic it is enough: FS9 only products are dead, no sense to invest here.

FSX only products (in scenery) make sense, when the technolgy is not able to handle the same qualitiy in FS9 (primary in VFR projects) or a FS9 version is already available in a compareable quality. For all others (and that are 80% of the sceneries in the queue now) are absolute twin products, where you lose a important part of the market, when you make a desition for FSX only. As long as you (as a developer) are able to handle the coexistance of both versions (I invest 100rd of houres the last weeks for exact this qoal), then you are able (and in my opinion only then) to get the sales in a region, where the invest for the development of the project get a refound. FSX only products for airliner oriented customes makes no sense now and maybe not within the next year(s).

So, I don't see any need for this discussions at all, the desition for or against the FS9 is made by the developer, based on the best goals he can reach in all, what is important for him, the customes give him the feedback for that. If he is able to handle the development for both FS, he will reach the best customer response he can have, he can only win.

With AES (and all other addins I made) I make the desition to keep the code compatible for both version, even when I don't be able to support some "nice to have" features from FSX like DX10 (which are not full implemented and defined as preview by MS). On this concept, I am able to handle both FS, keep the desition for the FS used to the customer, and keep my benefit of this as high as possible. I don't see any need to change it, not now, and not for the next 24 Months, and then, we will see if we ever have to discuss the FSX anymore, maybe then we are at a total other platform or we will plant tomatos in the garden, because the Sim community is gone, as all was only discussing the FS9/FSX battle and don't have time to enjoy flying.

So, to state the FS9 is dead is as much wrong as the statement the FSX is the only possible future (when we are fair, he is allready dead too :blush:, maybe he can keep his rest of life longer :D ) I know it is new in the 20 years history of FS, but we have now two platforms and both have there places in the market.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...