Where Flight Simulation is Going is 2023

[Skycat]

MSFS marks 10 million pilots:
https://stormbirds.blog/2022/12/07/msfs ... on-pilots/

It's hard to gage revenue from that but I assume the average MSFS user will spend $50, so $500 million as a starting point. But I think MSFS was always more about showcasing new tech, forming partnerships, selling Windows 11, etc. Even if MSFS development isn't singularly self-sustaining, my understanding has been that Microsoft is reaping benefits across a larger picture. I think MSFS has also been a philanthropic/education outreach project for Microsoft as it has made a public effort to preserve historic aircraft in a digital format. (Billionaires and their money.)

[DHenriques_]

MSFS marks 10 million pilots:
https://stormbirds.blog/2022/12/07/msfs ... on-pilots/

It's hard to gage revenue from that but I assume the average MSFS user will spend $50, so $500 million as a starting point. But I think MSFS was always more about showcasing new tech, forming partnerships, selling Windows 11, etc. Even if MSFS development isn't singularly self-sustaining, my understanding has been that Microsoft is reaping benefits across a larger picture. I think MSFS has also been a philanthropic/education outreach project for Microsoft as it has made a public effort to preserve historic aircraft in a digital format. (Billionaires and their money.)

I believe these reports are correct and that Microsoft has a strong hand on their reentry into the flight simulation market. Their commitment both financially and resource wise would as well indicate a continued bright future for the venue.
Dudley Henriques

[LSEdwards]

"It's hard to gauge revenue from that but I assume the average MSFS user will spend $50, so $500 million as a starting point."

The 10 million players figure is the number of people who apparently have installed MSFS since its release and this is a marketing figure and has to be taken with a pinch of salt. It could for example be the number of times the game has been installed. The huge majority of these, in my estimation, will be game pass holders and casual players who fire it up, go for quick flight (many will not even do that) and then log off. They will not spend anything in the store, they have not paid separately for MSFS and are a drain on server time and licensing costs. If a player spends $50 then MS do not get $50. I believe they take a 30% cut, but you need to deduct taxes, transaction costs (credit card fees etc), server time, developer time for maintaining the store, marketing costs etc.

So as a guess I would say 1,000,000 have spent $50 in store (I think this is generous), of which MS retains approximately 30% as net income. That is only $15m.

You need to add in the revenue from the game pass that gets allocated - I have no idea how much that is, and also stand alone sales. We have no figures about how many stand alone copies they have sold, to estimate this is really difficult. Looking at Steam (the only data we have), the active player numbers is not big, at the moment there are 8,300 in game, compared to 128,600 in COD. Flight sim is and will remain a niche product IMO.

For many games many people buy the game (or get it via game pass) and never actually get beyond the installation and one or two sessions - I know this to be the case from insiders in the game industry, and from common sense, because I have done the same on occasion.

It is possible that this is some kind of 'vanity project' for MS, and regardless of the P&L they will continue to support it. For new simmers it's definitely worth the risk if you can put up with the flight model and the, to me, rather cartoonish appearance of ground operations.

I could be completely wrong about numbers (I doubt it though) since MS refuse to release anything of real use to us financial types - it is exclusively marketing information so far.

[Buffalo Alien]

From a laymans point of view I also see a bright future for MSFS and am very excited for when A2A releases the Commanche. This morning I messed around a bit in FSX to experience the B377 again. Then into P3Dv5 so I could revisit some of my A2A GA aircraft. Tonight I fired up MSFS and just doing the Sight Seeing tour of Naples, Italy in a default MSFS plane was amazing and totally relaxing. I know it's all subjective, but for me personally MSFS is the cats meow. I do see a positive future for this sim in so many ways, just as for others it may be a different sim. Don't fix it if it aint broke.

[Kalnon]

I have also tried many flight simulators available to the public since FS9 including FSX, P3dv5, MSFS, X-Plane 11 and 12 as well as IL-2 Sturmovik Great Battles series and DCS World for some combat flying fun. I have to say that while I cycle through all of them regularly, I play MSFS the least of all of them. That's right, I play even FSX more than MSFS. As beautiful as MSFS is, the way the aircraft feel in flight just feel wrong to me. I'm not entirely sure exactly what it is, if it's the flight model or the way controls interact with the aircraft or something else, flying planes in MSFS feels very arcade like to me compared to every other simulator I've used.

I'm even talking about 3rd party aircraft from reputable developers like Carenado, Just Flight and Aerosoft (the CRJ 550/700) that I've purchased. While some are an improvement over the default planes, the still feel very arcade like compared to the same aircraft from the same developers I have for FSX, P3Dv5 and X-Plane 11. The only times I use MSFS is if I'm in the mood for a very scenic flight and don't care about the physics but most of the time I'm using one of the other ones because it is what matters most to me.

I'm not optimistic either that Asobo will ever fix it. I bought MSFS the day it was released on Steam and after all it's been two years now and it still feels the same, they haven't fixed it so at this point I don't believe they ever will. I have a lot of great scenery including a lot from Orbx, for all my other sims that make the immersion factor plenty good enough for me and that's what I'll be using for probably a long time to come.

[Buffalo Alien]

You are definitely not alone @kalnon in the way you feel about MSFS. It seems many see it as an arcade game and eye candy, etc. I wonder if I don’t notice the same bad flight dynamics as others since I am not an actual pilot, have never flown a real plane. Also my computer setup is really minimal compared to many on the A2A forums that have really amazing almost real life type setups at home. I do also enjoy the other sims I still have installed. Seems a waste to not enjoy them since I’ve invested so much into scenery, addon planes, etc. over the years. They also look great and are visually immersive. I guess I’m just an optimist overall. I do think we are really blessed for lack of a better word with as many options as we have right now in flight simulation. The future is wide open. Anything is possible.

[ryanbatc]

As it stands now P3D is still superior for flying IFR. MSFS2020 flying VFR is no competion though. Looking forward to A2A releasing aircraft for it, as well as the Q400, 747, and others. The only reason to hold onto P3D at that point would be to fly the L049 COTS unless that also get a release.

You must not be aware of the WorkingTitle group (now a first party through Microsoft working on the sim itself). Avionics-wise, the sim is far superior to what FSX or P3D has (even XP11/12). You also have TDS GTN Xi which is similar to the RXP addon of old. Your comment would have been true upon release of MSFS but not anymore.

[Oracle427]

Agree with ryanbatc