Yes we are, it will follow this earlier version.
I am really looking forward to seeing what you guys are making here. This looks like a great project. I am sure it will be a spectacular experience.
Iām surprised that youāre surprised.
You do realise the install base for MSFS is many times larger than that of X-Plane, right? Prices are not (or at least, should not be) set in a vacuum. Throughout many hobbies, the argument for high pricing in niche markets has always been that the break-even point is higher when the audience is small. And I am happy to accept that. But the size of the MSFS audience is probably the highest - by a long shot - flight simming has ever had.
I agree that we should expect high-end products; I donāt agree developers should be blind to the reality of the markets.
Not going to enter into a public argument with you but please believe me weāre most certainly not blind to the reality of the markets. Insinuating that isnāt clever. Weāve released hundreds and hundreds of add-ons over the years here at Just Flight and for each and everyone we have a lengthy and considered discussion about pricing, where we take in all factors.
Will leave it there, thanks.
Waitā¦ huh? You meanā¦ it isnāt the āeenie-meenieā¦ ah hell make it $120!ā method? I am disappointed! Where is your spontaneity? The spirit of āto heck with it, letās pillage!ā entrepreneurial piracy? Tsk, tsk.
I get why people would want to pay less for something - who wouldnāt! I would say though in the sim today, you have the best of both worlds. If you want to pay less for aircraft, there are plenty of choices.
If you want to pay more for a higher quality option, we have that as well with more to come.
Case in point - Iām a huge Twin Otter fan but disappointed to an extent with the AS version simply because it seems corners were cut to make the price point. It isnāt bad, I actually really enjoy it, but I would happily pay extra for a more complete, higher quality aircraft.
Look at the 146 as a package - 3 main pax variants, cargo and RAF/State versions. Very complex systems modelling wrapped up in an aircraft that both looks and sounds fantastic and is great to fly.
I personally would rather have two or three of these aircraft than many more cheaper options that just donāt give the same satisfaction and likely end up gathering dust in the hangar.
Expense and value for money are both subjective based on the individual and circumstances of course and itās great that the user base is diverse enough to support all the developers creating for this platform.
Umā¦you do realise I was responding to someone else, not you, right? As a matter of fact I probably will buy your product.
Quite. Lucky I didnāt do that then, isnāt it? I think you read my post a bit too quickly.
Microsoft can charge whatever Microsoft wants to charge for the sim and the aircraft they sell. They also take a nice cut on any marketplace content. If they want to sell their stuff cheap, great!
But just because Microsoft/Asobo sell their own add-ons cheap and port the sim to an XBox, doesnāt mean developers are in any way obligated to follow them.
New simmers are welcome, but they are jumping into a market they donāt really understand yet. After all, how often have we seen people completely baffled by āthis aircraft costs more than I paid for the sim!ā. They canāt fathom that many of us would buy and fly such a complex aircraft. They just want to do loops in an F18 over their friendās house. They are not the target audience for high-end add-ons.
Developers shouldnāt chase the newcomers with attractive pricing, because I fear the only way they can is by lowering the quality. And as a simmer since the days of FSFWā95, I much prefer quality over a particular price point. If that means some add-ons are out of reach of casual simmersā¦ Iām all for it.
Is that a snobbish attitude? Absolutely. And Iām perfectly fine with it.
Re the Twin Otter Truncated, my understanding is that they didnāt cut corners for the price (itās the same price as the P3D version) but in an attempt to make it workable on the Xbox.
And yes, itās really disappointing, only plane out of hundreds that Iāve asked for a refund on, and I didnāt get itā¦
I have become very excited about this plane in the last few days. I do regional flights all the time, like anything from a hour and a half or less. Since learning how many airlines have operated this plane even in the US, I look forward to doing plenty of flights when itās ready. Sure its an older airliner and out of service for a lot of airlines but it has character. Flying into KORD with this plane is going to be a joy.
I think itās a bit reductionist to assume that all of the new simmers that entered the market with MSFS2020 are casual, or that those who began as casual nearly 2 years ago remained as such. In fact, I doubt thereās that much difference between the percentage of casual/serious simmers between each platform. The entire customer base is much bigger, and with that, so is each category of customers within. When it comes to raw numbers, there is no comparison. Just look at the data. The latest Steam data has MSFS reaching nearly 4x the concurrent players as X-plane, on just a normal Thursday, and 2x X-planeās highest ever recorded concurrent player countā¦every day. Iām not counting X-Box playerbase, because they donāt get this release anyway.
Watch what happens with the Wing42 Boeing in the coming weeks. By all accounts, it is a very serious, highly detailed aircraft that will set your engines on fire if you mishandle it. The target audience is the serious simmer, correct? Yet the price will be around $20, and I suspect the sales will be phenomenal as a result. Everybody has their own budget limitations, no matter how seriously they take their simming.
I can tell you that I have sort ofā¦ evolved my perception of price with MSFS. I donāt have money concerns and have plenty of disposable income. But I do think about how products are priced and what they are worth because there is now a bigger selection of higher quality aircraft. Back in 2020, I would have paid $40 for a NextGen Bandeirante. But now I have MilViz PC-6 that I paid $30 for and FlySimWare priced the Chancellor at $40. Itās ludicrous to think Iād spend $40 on something like NexGen Bandeirante nowadays. Itās just not even close in terms of what it offers.
I am the guy that owns all the FSLabs Airbuses for P3D - thatās whatā¦ $250 or so? The entire PMDG lineup as well (thatās at least $500 or so)ā¦ so I didnāt mind spending that kind of money in THAT market. MSFS does change things and provides a different perspective.
So whereas before I would have held the āyou get what you pay for, so I donāt mind spending moneyā belief when it comes to aircraft, nowadays there are comparisons to high-end releases like PMDG DC-6. That made me revolt against RedWingās Connie pricing (though I bought it Day 1 but it wasnāt without complaints). NOW RedWing has brought their aircraft to the point where itās worth it, but these kinds of comparisons make you think twice.
I do think everyone has a RIGHT to charge what they believe is a strategic price for THEM, but time will show what the market will bear and what it wonāt. This 146 is so far turning out to be the most expensive aircraft announced for MSFS. Will the market bear this BECAUSE it will be a solid product? (And it will be, I have no doubt)ā¦ Or will JustFlight see a serious decrease in comparison with the Arrows and the Hawk? Only time will answer these questions. I do wish them well and will continue to watch this unfold. I am sure I will eventually cover this aircraft on my channel. We shall see. Exciting times for MSFS aircraft market, FOR SURE!
The PMDG DC6 set a bar in my opinion. And I am very happy with that bar. That is also the reason I am not getting the 414 for 40ā¬ās (even more not so compared to the Milviz Porter) and will not be BAeing around either. In retrospect I also think I overpayed on the Arrows, but I do not regret the purchase either. But I will and do look different on future projects. I also look forward very much to the 247D and Aerosoft can keep their Towtter, eventhough I love the plane.
That being said companies can charge what they want. I do not care. I have waited for so long for good planes that I like (mid size regional planes, bigger old timers like a DC-3) that have yet to appear that I do not mind waiting longer. If nothing else the plane drought has taught me patience. If it does not really fit, I will not buy it. And the companies, they do their market research and I vote with my wallet. And if they think a lower market saturation is more desirable (thus reducing support queries and the like) more power to them. For me the internal guideline somewhat has become 50ā¬ max. And only if the thing is sophisticated. Anything else I make up as I go along
Really looking forward to the 247 as well! And yes, it looks to be a steal at that pricepoint. They themselves say itās an experiment, and that they do reserve the right to adjust the price for future projects. Their website statement says that they probably wouldāve sold this for 60 if it was in P3D
I think for this particular aircraft, it makes sense. Because while the quality is probably there to justify the price, the mass appeal is not. This isnāt a āmust haveā like a good 737 or A320. In this case, theyāre clearly hoping to entice buyers who would buy this at a lower price, but arenāt fans enough of this particular type in order to buy it at full 60.
Itāll be interesting to see how that works out. Iām definitely picking up a copy myself. If they can deliver a good quality product, Iām buying it.
I consider neither a must have I get bored to tears flying jetliners. There is a lot of different playstyles out there ;D
Yes very much worth $80 itās a package of different variants.
Instabuy for me!
Please pardon the rookie question, but is that because of the RJās FADEC equipped LF-507 engines and digital flight deck?
Yes, the RJ is much more modern, EICAS, glass cockpit, FMS etc.
You hit on it here with this statement āthe quality is probably there to justify the price, the mass appeal is notā. Just Flight is certainly free to price their products how they see fit, and Iām sure they have data that we donāt have access to that hopefully drives that decision. From my perspective, though, I would think you can really resolve a lot of the mass appeal issue with a lower price. That is what I expected to see, and the reason I expected to see it. Thatās another reason for my Boeing 247D comparison as itās another plane that probably doesnāt have mass appeal, but I guarantee it will have mass sales on account of their price point & quality comparison. Itās low enough that people can say āwhat the hell, letās see what that plane is all aboutā. Now, Iām not suggesting the JF Bae146 be priced at $20, but itās going to be $80 USD for a plane most Americans have never heard of. I wish JF the best on it, as I own every other plane theyāve released, and wish them success, so Iām not approaching this from a ājust wanting to save a buckā perspective.
Yup, some of the concessions do appear related to the Xbox version but things like the poor sound implementation to my mind can only be down to either time or money or perhaps a mixture of both. The good sales for them may have allowed them to revisit this area. All conjecture on my part but as I say, I would rather spend extra for a better product.
As for the 146, I already know how good a product it currently is and itās still being refined. Add in the excellent Just Flight support and I think people who are happy to pay extra for a quality package will be more that satisfied with this aircraft.