A new era for freeware?

[ahuimanu]

One has to be blind to not notice that the community is head over heels with MSFS 2020. I am reminded that in my earlier years of flightsimming (I got back to the 1980s with flightsimming), freeware was a stronger factor. Now, flightsimming is heavily commercialized and I believe the promise of a wider user base is like chum in the water for who have found a way to make a living (or at least some income) with their skills in FS development.

With that said, I hope/wonder if perhaps a renewal of interest in freeware will emerge for the stable/mature (some say outdated) platforms?

There is a maturity in P3D (despite some of its warts, flaws, and legacy encumbrances) that I don't yet see in MSFS and only time will tell on that note. I also think of how XPlane will likely persist as it has been adjacent to Microsoft (and later, LM) products over its entire existence and has not given any sign of quitting.

I have tried the new flightsim and understand its appeal. However, the relative maturity and stability of the two major platforms we have - ESP and XP - has reminded me that jumping on the new shiny isn't always the most prudent move.

I wish for, and I am motivated for, a renewal of freeware focus for these "older" platforms now that the stick with the carrot/dollars attached to it - MSFS2020 - has undoubtedly attracted a significant amount of focus for many experienced developers.

I certainly better understand why so many continued (and continue) to produce for FSX now. I appreciate that FSDeveloper is a resource for learning how to develop for a range of platforms and a variety of vintages. The knowledge and tools associated with this community are indispensable.

 

[Tapen]

We have to be patient! Apparently they working in the background with the help of well-known 3rd party devs on the completion of the SDK and that takes time!

 

[AlpineScenery]

Freeware is good, but a lot of it has been low quality in the past, though a lot of the Xplane airports were done well within the limitations of the gateway. Building airports takes a lot of time, even without the rendering sometimes you spend hours just moving around taxiway signs or finding that one perfect texture. They'll be some freeware trickle in here and there, but it has limitations due to the limited object library MSFS gave us by default. It could be worse I suppose, but they missed a lot of certain categories when it comes to things.

Unless I missed it, I couldn't find train tracks (rendering it isn't that hard, but it's just one more thing), even though I found what looks like a subway / airport train. There were some custom bridges in some of the city models, but the library isn't organized that well. IT's ok since it has a search, but the default buildings only go so far as to conforming to generic hangar designs. Hence, they missed so many designs in the generic hangars as there is too much architectural uniqueness to them without giving enough choices in color.

This means people may need to custom render some buildings even for Freeware, and that is a lot of time to expect someone to spend for a freeware thing, though there are always a few freeware airports like that, but I mean rare in the sense of having massive coverage.

 

[xr219]

Freeware is good, but a lot of it has been low quality in the past, though a lot of the Xplane airports were done well within the limitations of the gateway. Building airports takes a lot of time, even without the rendering sometimes you spend hours just moving around taxiway signs or finding that one perfect texture. They'll be some freeware trickle in here and there, but it has limitations due to the limited object library MSFS gave us by default. It could be worse I suppose, but they missed a lot of certain categories when it comes to things.

Unless I missed it, I couldn't find train tracks (rendering it isn't that hard, but it's just one more thing), even though I found what looks like a subway / airport train. There were some custom bridges in some of the city models, but the library isn't organized that well. IT's ok since it has a search, but the default buildings only go so far as to conforming to generic hangar designs. Hence, they missed so many designs in the generic hangars as there is too much architectural uniqueness to them without giving enough choices in color.

This means people may need to custom render some buildings even for Freeware, and that is a lot of time to expect someone to spend for a freeware thing, though there are always a few freeware airports like that, but I mean rare in the sense of having massive coverage.

I think it depends on the type of flying you do. I would love to spend more time flying in the sim, but there is nothing that really interests me in the aircraft selection at the moment, so I'm playing with doing some scenery (as a hobby - not as anything significant). The question is how much detail do you need in the scenery if you are flying at 100kts or more at 1000ft or more? Some of the sceneries that have come out for P3D are truly amazingly detailed and wonderful, but how much attention am I paying to those small details such as fences etc while flying? For me its approximately none. But there are others who love to fly, position the aircraft and take screen shots. I guess for these people it is important. I think we all take something different from siming, so while you might like these little details, others my not find them necessary. The good thing is that the world environment is now so big, and significantly more accurate than anything before, all of us, regardless of what we like, can find something that we like to add into it.