DTG now has the rights to Microsoft Flight Sim X

[artimrj]

Didn't someone start working for DTG a few months ago that was part of the old ACES team that made FSX? Why do I remember something like that? If it wasn't DTG it was someone else that got him.

[Bananarama]

Interesting that this happens just after they announce the new train simulator based on Unreal 4 engine. I wonder if the two moves are related?

Hard to say - one is keen on graphics, while the other has pretty good physics. However, it would make better sense, IMHO, to stick with one or the other if developing a single title, which leads me to believe the two engines may not meet. As buzz stated, time will tell.

I'm not sure this is a good thing. For one, I'm not sure what kind of "support" it will have. Let's face it, DTG is pretty poor at support.

I don't see this as a fair assessment. DTG/RSC/etc. have done a decent job at keeping thing running smoothly. Probably not at the top of the support pile, but who is? Nevertheless, they continue to tweak and grow one of our favorite games. Granted, there hasn't been a major core update in some time. I don't see this as a problem though, as they're obviously looking to the future. In further defense of DTG, and coming from MSTS, I'm used to figuring most on my own anyway. With Microsoft - save for a single update patch combined with Gmax 6-months after release - there was no open community support. At least we have a few DTG employees posting here and I'm glad to have them. They may not be camping-out waiting to answer a support or technical question, but they are among us and do post when they get the chance or feel the need.

What will happen with the premium addons? Will DTG support them?

If you mean will the current add-ons be forward compatible with a new train sim? Doing so would make many happy, but it won't make any difference to me, albeit I may be in minority. DTG (RSC/RSDL/Kuju) coded MSTS, and few if any are complaining that MSTS add-ons aren't working in RW. Two different games with two different backends. I see little difference between that example and with DTG releasing a new title.

Speaking of which, how will DTG update the sim for new graphics, like DX10 or 11 without breaking compatibility?

Models will likely have to follow a new format and be re-exported. DTG could work on putting a conversion tool together, but I don't see this as a real solution. Just like I would never use MSTS converted content in RW, so too that I would probably not convert RW directly to a new simulator - certainly not without tweaking the source files. Straight conversions of existing content to me is akin to squeezing a Ferrari engine in a Pinto. It might go fast, but it will still look like a Pinto and isn't worth the effort.

DTG hasn't exactly been terribly supportive of multiplayer either.

A traffic manager version might be nice (dispatching over a network), but traditional multiplayer (Engineer-A waves to Engineer-B) is a complete waste of my time. What works with war games or flight sims doesn't necessarily translate to train sims. I don't see this as any fault of DTG - perhaps there are limitations on the current RW engine that we're not privy to? In any regard, a very minor point in the grand scheme of things. Either way, I won't lose sleep over it. Better physics, AI and signalling is what I believe is priority over everything else. Anything beyond that is a bonus.

[Shortliner]

So I think I figured out why Microsoft tapped DTG to make it's Flight Simulator instead of well....anyone else.

Despite the many many many many faults of Train Simulator (RailWorks), one thing you cannot argue is that it is a commercial success, and it's done so with a mix of BTP (Buy to Play) and DLC model. You buy the original game, get free updates and then you buy expansions through DLC.

It has been a very successful business model for DTG. Microsoft tried the same thing with Flight, but it was a spectacular failure. However, I don't think Microsoft has abandoned the idea, they just decided to let DTG take a crack at applying their business model to the flight sim world.

Now of course, this sadly means that there isn't that big of a demand for true simulation, as DTG's fisher-price, arcade-y, XP earning Train Game (RailWorks) proved. I think the true simulators will have to come from companies like Lockheed Martin, who probably uses the Microsoft FSX ESP to train pilots to fly their aircraft, Prepar3D is just their way of funding it. The other way is through group effort like OpenRails and FlightGear.

I don't think Microsoft gave DTG, FSX. I think they got Microsoft Flight.

[JohnTrainHead]

I don't think Microsoft gave DTG, FSX. I think they got Microsoft Flight.

DTG clearly mentioned Flight Simulator X. Why would DTG lie to their customer base in the first place?

[buzz456]

Don't you think lie is a bit strong? Anyway he is parsing words when talking the difference between FSX and Flight Simulator. Microsoft flight simulator is a fine training tool for student pilots used the proper way.