LOL . . . . . . . . . I already DID … !!!
How do you think this crucial issue ever got addressed and resolved … ???
I am marking that one up as MINE !!! ( with a lot of help from a lot of others …)
1 Like
I may be off base, but reading between the lines, it looks like Aerosoft are looking to significantly up the ante to show what CAN be done, rather than re-hashing what’s already been done.
I think the Twin Otter will come in time, but to me it sounds like they want to make a BIG splash with their first MSFS entry.
2 Likes
Actually no. You didn’t.
You made a post in the bug section, which is all good and fine and it’s great that it got solved.
But if you want your question answered during the Q&As, there’s a dedicated section with its own voting. Now it’s archived, but it’s not exactly invisible since when it’s active it has a different color.
Reading through the interview triggered two reactions in me.
One, it kind of added to my more and more impression that Asobo is well in over their head when it comes to half-way complex aircraft systems (even the GA planes have bugs every PPL student finds in 15min). On top of the abissmal regression testing of releasing fixes of something that worked previously just to break new stuff.
Second, it gives me hope, that they apparently listen and work with Aerosoft and give priority to their requests. So eventually Aerosoft might fix it for and with them and on top will give a real sim worthy airplane to fly. A plane which you can confidently take to Vatsim etc. without crapping out underneath you or scaring the controllers. For that I am more than willing to pay Aerosoft for their great work and good quality, which doesn’t come for free.
1 Like
Maybe I should not say this, but reading between the lines , which is really not that unreasonable from a BUSINESS Point of view is :-
I may be off base, but reading between the lines, it looks like Aerosoft are looking to significantly up the ante to show what CAN be done, rather than re-hashing what’s already been done.
I think the Twin Otter will come in time, but to me it sounds like they want to make a BIG splash with their first MSFS entry…
.
.
** ------------- and to be the FIRST, so why would they want any other developers getting the information (first, or at the same time as them) that would allow them to do this, at least , until they have had the opportunity to “clean up” with the 1st truly advanced MSFS designed aircraft – designed the way Aerosoft want to design for MSFS, and limited to what Aerosoft feels is important and they need to achieve this… maybe at the expense of what other developers may need for their products.**
Its not Personal , its just Business … and taking advantage of whatever leads you can get, over your competitors.
Once again , its “Business” . Unfortunately, we do not live in a world where everyone is your “Friend” or wants what is best for you … Most are only PRIMARILY concerned with what is best for themselves, and serves the best interest of themselves (and their shareholders).
-
Do I like it … NO.
-
Do I “HATE” Aerosoft… NO … They are in Business to survive, like, most of us.
-
Do I feel sorry for those 3rd part developer who seem to be/are being left our . Most Defiantly.
-
Will I buy the 1st Aerosoft MSFS Plane… Almost certainly, especially if it is GA.
(I really have little interest in being a BUS DRIVER, and a Flight Computer programmer, but I am also very curious as to what Aerosoft can produce that is going to “Up the Anti”) -
Do I take all this too seriously … probably yes – but I am working on that !!!
-
If all this blows up, and MSFS closes down, will I be upset or surprised ? yes .. BUT LIFE WILL GO ON
In the meanwhile – Enjoy the MSFS " Roller Coaster" – and if you fell the need to :“Throw UP” (in the forum) , please do NOT do it close to me … I really do not like that smell !!!
5 Likes
Maybe I’m being too critical but I believe their judgement of MSFS is extremely biased due to their commercial contracts with Asobo/MS.
They have a vested interest in the product with a heavy hand on how the SDK will take shape in the future, so it shouldn’t come as a surprise that they have nothing but praise.
Wether this whole partnership and it’s resulting influence in the SDK development is a good thing or not, only time will tell.
2 Likes
That’s how business works though. You go where the money is. They know that once MSFS fixes its current deficiencies that are currently making it lag behind XP and even FSX, MSFS is the way of the future. They’re hitching their wagon to what they believe is the future of flight sim because that’s where the money will be.
And I don’t think they’re wrong. We don’t have to like it, but that’s the way business works.
1 Like
As you say “It’s Business” 
So many "parallels " === Coincidences ???
ie A “Fleet” of 3rd part developers … 
1 Like
Asobo kind of know they’re in over their heads. They did an incredible job modelling the planet. It has it’s issues and rough spots, but still light years ahead of what anyone else have done.
However, they also have zero experience with flight sim. They quickly realized there was way more to it than just putting planes into their virtual world if they wanted to really create a sim. Who better to turn to for help with their horribly underfeatured SDK than a company that’s been a leader in producing 3rd party flight sim add-ons for the last couple of decades?
Aerosoft are basically putting time and effort as consultants helping Asobo develop the SDK. I’m perfectly fine with them getting a competitive advantage in return.
2 Likes
So am I … but like so many " I want it – I want it NOW" lol
and that just isn’t going to happen, no matter how much I CRY out and FUSS over it.
4 Likes
Yep that is the hard but true reality.
Well, maybe by the time I have matured and "Grown UP’ to face the reality of life, MSFS will also have matured and grown up, and that reality will be better … 
1 Like
I am also working hard on maturing and taking it much less seriously. It feels almost like an AA meeting Not that I have any experience with that (yet). 
Not sure how old you guys are, but I’m a couple of months away from turning 50, and I’m still working hard on that as well… lol
Thanks for the perspective. I’m certainly no expert and don’t know how this really works but I get what your saying. You need some form of “template” I presume for the devs to build from and a Boeing template isn’t going to work for an Airbus.
Any idea how this happened with P3D? I don’t believe there was an Airbus “Template” yet we have one of the most feature-rich, study-level A319/20/21 aircraft on any simulator platform, which I believe was significantly built from custom coding.
I feel no need to hide my age, or anything else much these days.
Whats the point – Google know more about me that I do !!!
I’m not that difficult to “STALK” if that’s what you are into.
N6722C is not a “in hiding” lol I may portray myself as a Monkey, but I “see, hear and talk” , probably more than I should ,
1 Like
There’s no Boeing template or Airbus template; what they’re talking about are functions that the SDK needs in order to be able to develop any system. For example:
A game has a SDK with certain functions. With these functions, a developer can create an aircraft with an autopilot that can read various parameters from the outside world, and based on those generate an output.
Then comes along an addon developer who wants to make an aircraft with an autopilot that is more complex. This autopilot in the real world reads a localizer beacon strength and uses that in its calculation for localizer capture. However, the base game developer didn’t include a simulator variable (called a simvar) which is a figure of how strong the ILS signal is at the user aircraft’s position. With that in mind, this addon developer can either “hack” his way through faking this simvar based on assumptions (e.g., based on DME distance from the airport, and the number of runways this airport has), or they can directly contact the base game developer asking for this simvar to be made available in the SDK.
If the base game developer agrees, the simvar is included in the list of simvars available in the SDK. This addon developer can then go ahead and use that simvar in the autopilot function.
But most importantly, this simvar is available to all addon developers; they’re not a resource that is limited strictly to the addon is was added for.
A more real world example: MSFS’s windshield raindrop effect is defined by the inner window dimensions, so the entire window gets this effect. Aerosoft asked Asobo to allow the windshield to be defined with an “inner” surface and an “outer” surface, so they can assign the raindrops to the outer surface rather than the inner surface. Once this function is implemented, any developer (Aerosoft, PMDG, Carenado, Blackbox, you name it) can all use this feature in the SDK in their addons.
5 Likes
So true !!!
Watch the rain on the Windscreen and it’s inner frame, and then ask yourself “Why are my feet not soaking wet by now ?”
Maybe the $64,000 question is (at this time), What Simvars need to be added, exactly what they should so, the priority for adding them, and how this effect the Pig Picture of the Simvar data set.
Granted, something is better than nothing — but that something, once added, is far more difficult to remove, if it’s existence is being relied upon by a market of existing aircraft so that simvar better be right, and optimum.
Maybe the fear is the realization that determining this, should not just fall on the decisions and input for a very few developer, but rather on a bigger knowledge base, if going forward there will not be regrets to unfortunate lacks of hindsight.
Totally makes sense. Thanks for the detailed explanation. So I presume much of the complex systems simulations and logic is typically done by custom coding? I’m guessing not all of that is reliant on an SDK?
1 Like
All aircraft systems are custom coded, if I understand correctly. There’s no such thing as a default autopilot or default GPS in MSFS, which is its greatest strength (and improvement over sims like FSX and P3D).
What the SDK does is provide a way for these custom coded aircraft systems to better interact with the environment around them.
4 Likes