Prepar3d... why FSX and not X-Plane?

[Calvin Waterbury]

Note: I am posting this on x-plane.org forum too. Feel free to participate here or there as you see fit.

Prepar3d... why FSX and not X-Plane?

This question has been an itch on the back of my neck for some time. This is not an attempt to knock X-Plane or to suggest Prepar3d is better. I am simply curious in "why?" Lockheed chose to use the old FSX engine? I have seen some instances of the X-Plane engine (judging only by visuals) that never mentioned X-Plane. Also, I have read more than once where Laminar Research/Austin mentioned the X-Plane engine was licensed to concerns with their own branding. Given X-Plane uses the "blade-element" method and has a superior mesh and terrain, I'm puzzled why Lockheed chose the FSX base? I wonder what Lockheed saw in the FSX entity? Was it flexibility? Was it wanting to have the rights to tear it apart and put it back together as they chose and LR would not give Lockheed those rights? Perhaps Lockheed and Microsoft made a deal and that was the motivation for closing Aces? Surely, the head honchos at Microsoft could see FSX had a lot of money to be made with their ACES division. Makes a body wonder?

What is your opinion on the matter Lockheed's choice?

[julio.elizalde]

I'd imagine a couple of things came into play:
- Lockheed didn't intend for Prepar3d to only be used as a flight simulator. It's supposed to help the military simulate environments for vehicles in underwater, off roading, etc.
- Since Microsoft virtually gave up on FSX and created "Flight," I would assume that buying the underlying language was relatively cheap since MS has no intention of developing it further. Lockheed probably saw an opportunity to take a basic language and expand upon it without anyone looking over their shoulder. That would probably happen with Austin and X-Plane - the legal arrangement in itself would be a nightmare since X-Plane is still in full production.
- I still haven't heard what the differences are between the home retail version of Prepar3d and the super expensive commercial license which I would assume really ups the level of realism or environmental reactiveness.

[Tim Krajcar]

X-Plane is already available for commercial license and has a pretty decent of market share - although not always well-known or well-marketed, there's no shortage of commercial sims out there running some flavor of X-Plane. It would make little sense for Laminar to contract to create a directly competitive product - which Lockheed is doing by pursuing not only their core military market but also commercial civilian flight training (integrating into Redbird, Elite, etc), universities, etc.

Keep in mind, too, that P3D started out life as Microsoft ESP and has been around since 2008 under that name targeting the commercial and military markets. It wasn't acquired and rebranded by Lockheed until 2010 and they did a much better job marketing it than MS ever did, which is why nobody's ever heard of ESP

[Ryan Geckler]

which is why nobody's ever heard of ESP

Ooh, I have! Yay ERAU...