I think that what they are having here is some sort of powerplay games and politics. That’s all there is to it. RXP doesn’t have as much pull in the market place as PMDG or Aerosoft so they are going to give them a run around until they go away. Even with PMDG and Aerosoft there is something going on between the lines and behind the scenes where those guys are getting shut out, kept in a dark and fed some party lines like mushrooms. I got no dog in the fight since I’m firmly and happily sitting in XP and P3D waiting for the XP next gen while flying perfectly happy planes over perfectly acceptable scenery with my perfectly working RXP GTN that I love. And watching the drama unfold in FS munching on popcorn. But I do feel for the people who are new to the hobby trying to understand and navigate this mess, while paying 75 bucks for GTN that’s not half the feature rich compared to RXP and costs exactly double. We’ll see how FS handles PMDG NGX release it’ll be a go no go point for many people as far as path forward.
Well this is all awful, But here is my stance as a NOT HAPPY user of MSFS but I still think it is is amazing and it really can be but it needs work.
So Matt and Co - ASOBO WT whoever, Please if you are not going to allow RXP (Which I think make amazing products) but that’s a fight I have no control over, so yes, Can you please at least concentrate on the NXI, and not piecemeal it out over the next year or 2 and just get it done please, I dont accept that it is free, Charge then! I am sorry but I just laying it out!! But either way the work you guys have done as Working Title has been amazing, but now you are part of MS, getting paid for it (the NXI) can it please be get done, we need some realism, every thing is just half baked, half done almost there but not quite or busted the awful Flight planner and it really needs fixing, we cant keep on with this stuff…It is horrific!
I am not being ungrateful, but what I am saying is Valid…
Thank You.
I don’t think they are reading /answering this topic anymore
LOL come over to the dark side of XP or P3D or both. Fly perfectly good and awesome planes over plausible enough scenery watch the drama unfold here for another two years and in two years they’ll either get tired of running around and stabilize this fiasco or they’ll shut it down like flight. My bet they’ll stabilize it and they you can come back 
Oh he is already there. 
We talk XP all the time! And I also fly P3D on the regular basis.
See fun. I’m in zibo right now watching drama over here reading PMDG 747 Fcom in the second tab contemplating nagging toliss on exact release date of A340 while looking at new coming up in Dash8 centerfold. Oh yeah forgot Aerosoft forums super dramatic Ton of Jerry Springer TV drama all for a 100 bucks one time fee all from the comfort of my perfectly working high quality virtual cockpit :).
P3D is convoluted monster by the way but you need it for PMDG 747-777. For the rest, XP is a go to platform much better looking much easier to manage.
That’s how I maintain my sanity with MSFS. I am not sure of the correctness of this analogy, but MSFS is like having a great looking date, but at the end of the day you need to go and see people who actually challenge you and make your brain work. So at this point in my “sim relationships”, there is no marriage. I am just dating 3 different sims for different reasons. And they all know it. My actual wife loves it. (Not)
Mine got used to it. It’s either sims or guns for me and ammo is much much much more expensive then few plane addons
This is also why I don’t get that “exclusivity” people speak of. There is nothing wrong with having all 3 sims and enjoying all of them for different aspects. I like seeing where they go in the future, what new developments will come our way, and I appreciate the differences. 95% of my aircraft are completely different between the sims… I have an A350 in XP which you can’t get anywhere else (at least on that level), if I want to fly a 777, why in the world would I stick with the ■■■■■■ Captain Sim one in MSFS when I can do the real deal with a PMDG one in P3D? If I want to fly a Bonanza, I am gonna fire up an A2A one in P3D and enjoy it because it’s a high-fidelity one. So I don’t really need to complain about how the default Bonanza in MSFS isn’t great. I have that choice. Now, if someone (like A2A) comes up with a Bonanza for MSFS, great! I will switch for that aircraft. But I still have my Connie in P3D etc etc.
XP and P3D look like garbage though. It’s like technology from 10 years ago. It’s annoying that I have to buy many add-ons in XP and P3D just to make it look good, and it still looks bad compared to MSFS. It’s also annoying that I have to download GBs to TBs worth of ortho, and I need to buy an extra hard drive to store that ortho.
No thanks, I’d rather save my money and use it on MSFS. P3D is becoming obsolete and droves of 3rd party developers are fleeing it (developers that were targeting the home flight simulation market that is). The 3rd party devs have not fled XP yet, but the writing is on the wall if XP 12 doesn’t deliver.
I think MSFS is the future. I wouldn’t waste a cent on XP or P3D, until they can figure out how to stream the entire world using satelllite & photogrammetry, and have a company like Blackshark AI convert the satellite into 3D buildings, and I don’t have to fork out money on add-ons to make it look good and I don’t have to buy an extra hard drive - the fact that I have to do that for XP and P3D make them legacy simulators for me that haven’t caught up to 2020s technology.
Please keep this conversation on topic. This has nothing to do with which sim is better.
If the only thing that matter to you (it seems) is the look and graphics, yes, you are totally right.
Also money and time. I don’t want to waste time downloading ortho and massaging it. I don’t want to waste money buying a lot of add-ons to make the sim look half decent, I don’t want to waste money on an extra hard drive to store TBs of ortho.
That is so 2010s. No thanks.
Thankfully, MSFS has solved all these problems.
Everyone has is own need, all respectable. it was not a criticize, you have a product done as you wish, it is great, i’ m really happy for you (and a lot, majority ? of customers).
I think too it is a great product. There is not so much things missing for doing it what i want, and to be th ebest sim ever. Just, they don’t seems wanted to do these little things (at least not at the moment).
The possibility for RXP products to work on it is one of these “little” things. This is why this thread is existing and still existing, lot of users share this need to have such high fidelity avionics products (but not only) the sim cannot and will never offering.
I use RXP in P3D and would love to have it in MSFS.
Can someone explain to me please because I think I don’t get the complete picture?
If I want and am able to I can develop an addon for MSFS. It doesn’t matter if this addon is good or bad I can sell it on my own store or through channels. If MS/Asobo agree, it can even be sold on the Marketplace.
Now, why is it a problem for RXP to develop their GNS and GTN addons for MSFS on top of the Garmin trainer?
Because certain functionality needed for complex gauge addons such as the RXP Garmin units simply does not exist in FS2020, and there are no plans for this functionality to exist, as far as I know. But also please remember that this is not just about the RXP Garmin units. Mainly it is about the developers making use of @CptLucky8’s freely given experience and help, and opening up communications with him to the benefit of the community.
why not making a point on evolution of the status of all this requirements ?
We have 6 people working on it full time and we have over 3000 hours in it already. I’m not sure what else you want from us. Charging is not going to make it go faster, we’re already paid.
People need to be a little more realistic about their expectations on development speed. A single avionics stack done to high quality is massive software project.
-Matt | Working Title
@CptLucky8 and I had a number of good talks since and decided to no longer discuss our internal discussions.
However, the MSFS team position remains the same: products requiring external modules will not be approved for Marketplace inclusion. The team obviously doesn’t mind at all if these things are sold elsewhere, but there are no mechanisms for installing external modules from the marketplace and that isn’t the direction the team would like to take it.
There is no change in position on the sandbox. Native code DLL support is not planned.
-Matt | Working Title
Yes i’m agree what is private should stay private
Just, some points may also be of interest to other developers. But I think if some are implemented it will be communicated publicity (In SDK or update changeLog)