Why doesn't MS sell FS?

[Hardy Heinlin]

Good evening,

I'm wondering if there are any plans to sell the FS code and copyright (just curious, I'm not rich). Perhaps they have already tried to, but the price was too high. Or they want to keep it because they want to come back in the near future. Or the technology is nothing special and it's not worth it, but at least the trademark could be sold.


Regards,

|-|ardy

[Will]

Despite the bizarre history of FS, I bet it's a valuable trademark.

[Hardy Heinlin]

On the other hand, the mark "Flight Simulator" might be registrable only in combination with the name "Microsoft" since the words flight simulator alone are a common term and not a name. Imagine, simulator manufacturers like Thales or CAE would not be allowed to call their products flight simulator.

[Will]

My guess is they'll resurrect the franchise at some point.  It's the best selling entertainment title ever, with 10 million copies sold across all versions... and drove many thousands of people to purchase fast computers and expensive add-ons.  It's hard to think they'll say goodbye forever to all that economic power.

That being said, I'm personally happy they've created this (temporary?) vacuum.  Some competition for everyone's simming dollars has been sorely needed.

[Hardy Heinlin]

Let there be light: and there was light. Interesting avatar, Will ...

The ghost is entering the visual dimensions ... :-)

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

Microsoft was never known for abandoning a product overnight because the technology sucked or reached its limits. So I don't think there was any technical reason for killing FS.

Although I am no business analyst and the rumours have largely faded, the most likely explanation I've heard was that MS could want to focus all their games and entertainment power squarely on the Xbox console series. If they are serious about monopolising the living room, kitchen, and teenager's rooms, they must go Xbox and abandon the boring just-for-work PC environment big time. Apple is showing what you can do if you abandon entrenched mind set assumptions about what a phone is, and what a computer is. Microsoft went for the big corporate office desktop and other industrial markets, and won totally. But they are not yet settled comfortably in the entertainment and hip teenager segment.

I think MSFS in its last incarnation was so much tied to the PC platform that they had to completely abandon it, and come up with something new, appealing to bored teenagers who want to be king of the skies in a competitive online environment where you play music over the ATC channel and become the flying DJ of the neighbourhood. You purchase plane skins and scenery segments online via Live! services, integrate with Messenger to broadcast what you're doing, etc.

Microsoft's marketing machine is unrivalled -- except when a company like Google changes the rules. In this case, it may be that Microsoft changed the rules of the flight simming market, and because of their monopoly they can take three or four years of coasting before they come out with the next big hit.


Jeroen

[Will]

I'm sure my thoughts are totally naïve here, but I thought Microsoft coded themselves into an impossible corner with FS, by making it PC dependent, optimized for fast single core performance, and (with FSX) utterly dependent on hardware platforms that were two to five years away from being affordable by their target audience.  If I were the VP of gaming software, I too would have fired the whole FS team and started with a new philosophy.  

Of course, that doesn't mean the brand is dead, far from it.  Just that the latest decisions were destined to alienate much of their core fan base, and prohibit newcomers from joining the hobby.  So I wouldn't be surprised if MS resurrects the brand at some point, but in a way that's totally different from the old FS model.  Meanwhile, they've done the niche a tremendous favor by (1) designing a product so alienating that it practically welcomes competition, and (2) announcing that they're bowing out of the FS design race for at least a few years.  So as a consumer and spectator of the industry, these are great times.

To Hardy: Thanks for the comments on the avatar... I thought it was finally time to make one.

[Richard McDonald Woods]

A group from the Aces team have already started a company to develop gaming software, including flight simulation. I forget their name.

So we are going to see some interesting developments in the coming years from several sources.

Cheers, Richard

[Pierre Theillere]

Hi Richard!

The group of former ACES Studios have founded the Cascade Game Foundry. Anyway, their website http://www.cascadegamefoundry.com/ seems quite dead since october 2009...
Aerosoft also announced they were developing a new sim. Feel free to read http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=29444
Anyway, PSx seems to be the only "standalone" simulator project that's reached such an advanced state... quite a good point for Hardy!

[frumpy]

i think msfs died because there were no more
things to achieve without writing a completely
new sim. i really dont know about fsx, but my
fs2004 flies worse than fs98.
also, microsoft depended on the market, they had
to keep everything compatible with external addons,
or else people would not buy the new sim.

in my mind they should have rather concentrated
on quality then quantity. i saw amazing graphics,
but heck, i would need a new power consuming
pc for that. a freeware 737 cockpit (omr) of fs98 looked
better than the fsx version ten years later.
and who the heck needs unsharp virtual views
on a small monitor? or toy instruments in 2d?
instead i got giraffes running around at 10 fps,
huh!   :|

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

also, microsoft depended on the market, they had
to keep everything compatible with external addons,
or else people would not buy the new sim.

Honest, I think it is the other way around.

Add-ons not compatible with FSX die, and their makers are harrassed to upgrade to FSX.

Hardware not compatible with Windows 7 dies, and ... etc.

You can say whatever you want about MS, but they know how to run a monopoly.


Jeroen

[Hardy Heinlin]

Has the FS development team been fired? If they are now working in the Xbox department I understand it was a financial reason to stop FS. But if they've been fired even though FS was a well-selling product, I don't understand it.


|-|

[Pierre Theillere]

Hi Hardy!

According to what I've understood, Micro$oft completely fired FS development team (the "ACES studio"). M$F$ was a well selling product, but was quite nothing, compared to Windows, Office and their other stuff. And a friend of mine (who's a programmer, and was in close contact with some MSDN members) once told me that Flight Simulator branch wasn't really making profit, but, till then, M$ was keeping it a a "flag ship": Flight Simulator even existed before M$ actually came to life, with SubLogic and BAO for FS1 and FS2. I guess the decision to "kill"  FS was hard to take, like stopping a legend. Whoever, as an aviation fan, can honestly say he never "flew" FS?... Probably no-one on Earth...
I don't really know if M$ plans to resume any flight simulation development in the near future. Maybe they find some more profitable fields, with less complaining (kids?) users base...

[frumpy]

i think it just died because they did everything
they could with the code to make it "perfect",
meaning better graphics every two years. i have
not seen many innovations over time,
to do things better they would need to reprogram
it completely, which would be very, very costly.
so it just reached its final stage and ms decided
to quit it.

[Franco]

Other products  will benefit from this situation.This week end I have been flying X-plane, not bad at all, for small planes it has a good flight model.

[John Davis PC]

Simple ... Microsoft want to move more into producing the games for the x-box ... MSFS might have sold 10 million , but compare that to Grand Theft Auto ! .... they are following the money

Having recently been given an x-box as a christmas present I can see the sense.
The thing I really like is picking up a game, marvelling at the box pictures and actually knowing the game will look like that and run on the system ... no more "what processor do I have, do I have enough RAM , video card etc etc.  I for one didnt really play games on the PC because of this ... now totally hooked LOL

[martin]

... now totally hooked LOL

...nothing to do with the technology, though, PC -- it's simply the onset of old age...

 :mrgreen:

[Martin Fonda]

Re frumpy's fs98: I have been using FS98 since it came out (and FS2 on Comodore 64 before that).  It has a computer (500 mH and Windows 98) all by itself, with everything I can find loaded onto it. It beats Fs2000 and 2004 that I also have on a much faster computer, but except for the eye candy the FS98 beats them all. When it comes to flying and landing a 747 anywhere at all following published approach charts, it can not be beat. Nevertherless I am looking foreward to the coming PSX. I am still using PS1.2c and, for my purpose, it is quite sufficient.

[OKD]

Agreed with Martin.  FS98 was probably one of their best version out of the lots, and as we all know, FS versions win on graphics and audios.  But since I picked up PS 1 and 1.3, I virtually deleted the FS out of my mind and PC.

So as a customer point of view, maybe or perhaps there are lots of other enthusiasts who are feeling like I am, so imagine the impact of the FS sales globally if even 5% of those customers have the same mindset and way of thinking like I do?

[Richard McDonald Woods]

1. The MSFS product contains a great number of valuable features (and a lot of junk). Perhaps work is going on today to rectify this?

2. The add-on scenery and aircraft market is still very active. To junk MSFS would seriously damage these investments by both their developers and users. So perhaps these products could continue to be used in a 'new world'?

3. SimConnect was a good idea but never completed. Perhaps it is still being developed now?

4. The flight simulator community will continue to require ever better improvements to sceneries and flight simulators based on FSX or its successor.

5. The availability of geospatial data has improved out of all recognition since the termination of FSX development.

6. Cascade Game Foundry (CGF) are busy developing software that they are not at liberty to disclose. But they have stated that they will "enable people of all ages and ability levels to explore the world from home, so they can drive a train through the Swiss Alps, dive on the Great Barrier Reef, paddle down the Nile, fly a plane through the Grand Canyon, hike the ruins of Macchu Picchu, and thrill to many other kinds of reality-based adventure." This sounds to me very much like a World Simulator! It may be being developed by CGF under contract to MS?

7. PMDG, for example, have recently invested in rationalising the foundations for their B737NG and forthcoming B777 software to make development of these products quicker. Could such companies be under non-disclosure agreements with MS to ensure that their products have a long life under any changes that may occur with MS simulators?

8. MS Flight could be a glimpse at one aspect of the MS World Simulator.

So, a wild guess is that, within the next year, we shall see the announcement of a MS World Simulator (developed by CGF) that will provide a 3D world scenery of fantastic detail, and a completed SimConnect that will enable vehicle simulators (including flight simulators) and scenery developers to use as the interface to that world.

Now shoot me down with the facts!