Hi guys:
Not a regular here but been lurking for a while now. Heres my take on FSX...
I am an event / live production designer. I design and create shows for the public to be entertained or educated in much the same way as Microsoft (or any other developer for that matter) creates a software product such as FSX.
What we do all starts with a breif, a budget and a deadline. That deadline may be next week or maybe in a year or two. Its the year or two deadlines that we have in common with a games developer. In the case of FSX they received their brief about three years ago. Uncle Bill gave them a budget (based on sales estimates
(bums on seats) product life
(length of show run) development costs
(rehersals, scripting, show designers and technicians) and Profit Margins
(same for my clients))
All of which has been seriously researched. The FSX breif was that the launch was to have been at around the time of Vista. It therefore had to be compatible in order for it to be a viable product.
Now. MS's guys are busting their butts to find out what they need to add, what they can get away with removing, what just didnt work in the first place and what can be easily improved upon.
All of this has to be done bearing in mind the expectations of the Audience and the client (in this case - us and uncle bill). At the same time as doing all of this. can we get a beta of DX10 and Vista to run in parallel with DX9 and XP to ensure that this is all going to work now and in the future or are the OS development guys still miles behind? (and that deadline is still coming)
So. Six months go by and the client is on the phone wanting to know if things are working and whether things are on budget or not (remember - this is a business venture - like it or not, its all about the money)
Here we are at six months. We have a script (realistic software breif for the final product) we have started on acheiving that breif based on the current technology and at the same time are trying to find out if the technology that will be available in TWO AND A HALF YEARS (an incredibly long time in the Show Production business and in the computing world) is going to be able to do what we want it to do. Imagine the phone call.
MS: "Hi is that NVIDIA?. Its Mr. X here from ACES is there any chance that you can tell me the specs on the Cards that you are going to be releasing in 2008? In fact, can we have some to play with?"
NVIDIA: "hahahahahahahahahahahahaha...... No."
New phone call to client
MS: "Hi mr gates sir, not sure if any of this is still going to be possible to run now and nobodies talking from the hardware manufacturers to tell us if it will even work in four years"
BG: "I dont care how you do it - just make it work"
There is then a script re-write to look at how we can now make the show fit the budget and open on Dec 1st 2006 Lets assume that that is two years from now). using the technology that we are not sure will be available that needs to fit into a venue that the new technology might not fit into. Meanwhile the marketing department are hanging onto every word that i say about what is going to be in this "show" to make it a must see for the audience. The marketing department then start selling seats on this basis regardless of the fact that the flaming hoops for the bike jumps live on a 20m wide stage and indoors are probably going to get cut anyway.
Same parallels for the guys at FSX. The marketing department are selling it based on a project that is nowhere near finalised. Things are going to be cut, changed and added.
So now we are two and a half years into the project. We have a working product that (with the bucks) works using current technology. There are a few things that we are waiting on that we might not have for the show opening, but we can get those and add them a few months after the show opens. We have worked the script to cover for that eventuality (ie the software architecture is open enough that with the release of a patch. DX10 and Vista will run this as we had planned all along)
We are now into rehersals (beta testing) and that Dec 1st deadline is still coming. As we rehearse, we are finding that some things are not coming together as we had hoped. So, back to the drawing board. But if we change X it affects Y so do we remove it for now and add it later or leave it as it is and just rework it to a slightly lower standard to ensure that its at least usable? Ok lets go for the slightly lower standard thats more cost effective although not quite what we wanted. And so it goes. At the same time as the ever approaching deadline. The client is wanting to curb the spiraling costs and get the show open as quickly as possible.
How much are we loosing now - 30 million a month. How much do we gain by opening now - 10 million a month. Ok lets open now and reduce the losses to 20 million a month. Its adequate, we can fix it as we go and do a major re-jig in six months based on customer feed-back.
Show's / software, they are what they are and there are always ways to improve. Similarly, a huge pile of creative gets thrown away because
A. It costs too much
B. The technology does not yet exist to make it happen
C. The venue can't handle it (Most PC's just couldnt even run the .exe file if we did that)
Every time a product is developed, there are trade off's and compromises. Usually because of money, but often because of what is even feasable. Be it a Broadway Show, a bit of Software, a Car or even a Food Processor, these compromises are made. Sometimes its to the detriment of the product, sometimes it isnt.
Look at the West End show Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.The technology to make the car fly did not exist when the show was written. The problem was handed over to engineers who devised a solution by using current technology and inventing some new toys to make it work. The show opened to much hype and on several occasions the car failed to fly.
The show gets critically panned but in the meantime, the guys that designed the car have had access to some new developments in engineering that they can use to resolve the issues. The show closed for a few days about six months after it opened, the cars hydraulics and motion control systems were refitted and re-programmed and it worked like a dream with the occasional very very rare breakdown. But even after this, the guys are still working on improvements to the machinery for the broadway version and yet another refit in london when the opportunity arises.
Same goes for FSX. Remember when FS9 was released, boy was there some MS bashing. Don't beleive me? Head to a few of the forums and do a search for the original FS9 posts....
Anyway, what i am trying to say is that if you change your perspective from the user to the creator, then you may understand that even the guys at MS might not be entirely happy with the product. I am sure that they are proud of it (look at the screen shots - i would be) but it might not yet be all that they had hoped.
Given the huge leap in technology that FSX has made to "future proof" it to a certain extent. I am sure that we are going to see several patches released to coincide with
1. Initial fix - Please sort out the london mesh MS
2. Windows Vista Compatibility Fix
3. Direct X 10 Patch
4. Shader 4.0 Patch
5. Patch to fix the screw ups in the previous patches
If the new version of Unreal Tournament required that you went out and bought a new PC, you would be reading EXACTLY the same complaints on the PC Gamers forums as we are seeing from the FS community. My attitude is if i buy the new pc now, its ready for an assortment of games releases next year.
So. Sorry to go on, and i should point out that i dont work for microsoft (in fact i am a firm beleiver that Bill Gates is the son of satan and if you dont beleive me does Bill Hicks as Goat Boy not strike a resemblance)
but i am often faced with the sort of decisions that i know the guys at FS have had to face.
Every time i complete a production i am rarely completely satisfied with it, purely because i know what could have been if the money, time and technology was available. But all it takes is that one customer to say you know what, that was great, to make all of the headaches and the stress to seem kind of worthwhile.
So yes, there is a way for FSX to go and there are going to be fixes, but on behalf of the FS community, and i hope that i speak for a lot of people here.
THANK YOU to all of the development and testing teams at FSX for the hardwork and dedication that you have put into FSX. I know that it may not be all that you had hoped, but i do see the potential. And while not everyone may have the same opinions as i. I look forward to the day that i can run it maxed out.
I bought FSX and have gone back to using FS9 for now because i can run it maxed on my lappy, but the day is coming when we will all wonder how we ever used FS9....
Food for thought.....
Paul
Pages: 1
