You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

1
-1

[–] ExpertShitposter [S] 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Hmmm...i was not aware of that this in not all Microsoft. Still, it the situation seems insane. Literally a used car vs several gaming PC-s vs......extra planes?

0
4

[–] MisterWings 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Also FSX:SE is run by Dovetail. But none of this is Microsoft. Paying for DLC is very very common in flight sims because the companies that make the products to a metric ton of work to try and get the planes to act and look as realistic as possible, going so far as to model down to the internal components.

In fact a lot of those DLC are pretty cheap compared to the $80+ stuff you see. The good news is you don't have to buy all the DLC. You just get the planes you want to fly and leave the rest. It is what all flight sim pilots do. I have the Archer and some of the HD terrain upgrades because I am working on my Instrument Rating IRL and I find it useful when I am not in the actual plane.

The paying for Sim DLC is how it is and I doubt that it is going to change anytime soon. The Sim market is just weird like that and has been for a long time now.

1
0

[–] SkepticalMartian 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Not to mention you have to license the planes. You can't just stick a Boeing 747 simulation in a game and then expect that Boeing won't want their cut. Most airplane designs are not in the public domain.

I don't think how the pro sim market operates is weird - I think it's a niche market that has to monetize that way in order to survive. When most gamers see a real flight sim they say "well what do you do it in?" and when you say "well, you spend 4 hours flying from city X to city Y and then you land" it just doesn't appeal to them because there are no real "game" elements in it. Then add the learning curve necessary to fly properly and most of these people lose their desire entirely.