Your feelings on Microsoft FLIGHT?

[csefton]

Am surprised Microsoft have avoided this Marketing technique for so long to be honest....LETS FACE IT..the whole franchise has evolved around what?...ADD-ONS!...add on aircraft, scenery, textures etc...

We have the base sim then we have a HUGE surrounding market of payware downloads available, lucrative 3rd parties are making lots of money offering everything from VFR scenery, new texture upgrades to highly authentic aircraft......

Apart from selling the original base units what do Microsoft get in return for supplying the much needed base simulation software ?.....answer NOTHING....yet we see whole new software and hardware add-on industries spring up to capitalise on the lucrative market....even sites like Flightsim com would be non existent if it wasn't for Microsoft....so someone somewhere finally realised...HEY!...why dont WE offer the 3rd party addons...the new planes, the new scenery etc.....and who can blame them....after all its ALL about money...everything is about money....Microsoft as big and as greedy and wealthy as it already is...it is not a charity!....they are thinking instead of offering the cake and let others take a slice of the action and charge extra for it...they are offering their own slices themselves hoping we will all be enthused enough after playing the Hawaii demo to want to go and buy more slices of their cake.....why provide just the basic ingredients for others to embellish when they can provide the filling, the icing etc.....after all Microsoft live was developed for such things...

The really sad part of all this is they will probably fail at achieving their objectives at marketing their new sim hoping for a new market of eager to upgrade and spend customers....i seriously doubt FSX users will be tempted away from their already beautiful and comprehensive sim just to spend their money on upgrading Microsoft Flight....Like Nels said..This product is not FSXI, it's something new and different....yep thats for sure....

In the end i DON'T see a REAL market for FLIGHT..yes we will all download the demo/free island/plane etc...but i seriously doubt many will start shelling out for new scenery...maybe a few will add to the Hawaii island chain but i cant see much further than that....a lot will depend on Price....but also on whether Flight represents a worthwhile invest-able improvement over FSX..like i said most FSX users wont feel the justification to abandon their old sims in favour of Flight.....and i cant see a huge market open up with new casual users on xbox 360's everywhere suddenly springing up.. so i see dark clouds on the horizon for FLIGHT...and with it the true and SAD end of the whole Microsoft flight simulator series....

[HectorD]

Meh, FSX was a disaster at launch, and Flight will probably also be a disaster. Nothing new here. As far as the addon scheme, as long as getting the complete package doesn't cost over $50 I am fine with that.

[Nels_Anderson]

Meh, FSX was a disaster at launch, and Flight will probably also be a disaster. Nothing new here. As far as the addon scheme, as long as getting the complete package doesn't cost over $50 I am fine with that.

Ah ha, someone with a bit of a memory. Anyone who has been around for a while will recall that these same sort of negative comments came along with every new release of Flight Simulator, whether justified or not. FSX was a big problem when it first came out, no one could run it, etc. but now most people have embraced it. The same sort of complaints happened on previous releases. On one previous release (somewhere around FSFW95) Avsim even started a boycott movement which was really a pretty silly thing to do, but they did it. Flight hasn't even been released yet and people are condemning it as a failure. It will be interesting to see what people are saying a year from now.

[xxmikexx]

Folks, kindly see my remarks here (http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?243365-The-Situation-Is-Not-So-Bad).

[fxsttcb]

Apart from selling the original base units what do Microsoft get in return for supplying the much needed base simulation software ?.....answer NOTHINGIt's their fault if they didn't create marketable add-ons for their franchise.

Putting out a new un-improved, dumbed down, flight game, will not improve their standing with flying enthusiasts.
Folks that just wanna fly a game, once in a while, will grab the freebie and that's it. Kinda hard to see any ROI in that.

Just like most of us, the true flyers will start yearning for more and more detail in their flying. FDE, RW Weather, ATC, MS to the rescue? Bull.
Killing freeware availability is not going to endear Flight to the old or new flyers.
Ten minutes on a computer flight forum will inform the newbies that before "Flight" freebie enhancements were available.
Thousands upon thousands of them. How are they gonna feel about that?..."Cheated" comes to mind.

As someone noted before, the folks at Google are probably spending a lot of time reading feedback on "Flight".

Hey Google, give us a planet, with extremely detailed terrain, and an SDK for us freeware hobbyists and developers alike.
There is plenty of room for all. Modularized gaming, trains, cars, boats, planes, 1st person shooters, the sciences, history, anything that can use an accurate environment.
All of those could be fruitful using an accurate base planet. For example; submariners could benefit by oceanography experts adding their findings to the mix. Wanna-be Astronauts would love the input of RW Astronomers(Galaxy add-ons).

Once the base model is sold don't sit on your laurels, keep developing it.
Pay-to-Play updates, undersea exploration, outerspace(the Universe at light speed?) will keep the cash flow going.

The end all, be all, simulator is up for grabs. Whoever does it is gonna make a killing...Don

[ReggieF5421]

Actually I see Flight as a huge win for Microsoft.

Even though sales of Flight Simulator have always depended upon new 'gamer' type folks for success, that has always been the biggest weakness. Most of those folks simply don't know how to handle a world wide simulation without specific targets, goals and points scoring.

However, Flight will not take over the 'Simulator' market. We are small, too small to support development of a world-wide based product. But we want things which they cannot supply with Flight. I don't know where the hobby will go, but I'm sure that FS2004 and FSX will be around, loved and used heavily for a long, long time.

[Razor68]

I think it will be a good flight simulator, i am sure gonna buy it. But fsx will stay on my computer cause i love it and there is not realy that mutch i am missing. I think they will aim for the flightsim market and not the casual "gamer" who don't care about navigation and real flying, they will get bored and drop out of line quit fast. So if it gonna be a success they have to make it a serious flightsim. But we will see when it is finished.

[Jugador]

As far as the addon scheme, as long as getting the complete package doesn't cost over $50 I am fine with that.

Don't count on it. EA has a similar scheme with their "Need for Speed World" game. How does $100 bucks for one stupid car sound?

$100 bucks for one car (http://www.t3.com/news/ea-offer-dollar-100-elite-dlc-car-in-need-for-speed-world)

[benny1]

Hawaii may have been a bad choice to showcase Flight , right away it has to compete with Megascenery X Hawaii , anyone who owns Megascenery probably wont be impressed with Flight . PS , for myself , if i did get Flight i hope they have DVD options without activated on line BS

[benEggleston16]

Meh, FSX was a disaster at launch
I was thinking that too, but i doubt this one will pick itself up the way FSX did.
Now, I'm almost suprised at the way people are saying 'I'll not leave FSX' when six years ago they were probably saying the same about FS9

[raimondo2]

I was one of those that when fsx come out - like it and considered a ms work of art ! Those who where around back than - will probably remember the comments. But the negative comments where not so inflamed as for Flight !

I can not blame hard core simmers to be unhappy and being left out at this stage.

However time will tell ! patiente grasshoppers - patiente

[EGCC]

Just remembering that not all new versions of Flight Sim have been a disaster ; FS5 was fantastic.
I go way back to Sub Logic's FS2 on the Amiga and as I remember only too well , every new version of Flight Sim was designed to run on the latest hardware and brought costly challenges ( hardware upgrades ).
With FSX those hardware challenges went too far ; perhaps in the attempt to find Game Eye Candy within the Sim.

Now my look at Microsoft Flight makes me believe that it will fly well. It looks bland enough.
It may not fly accurately but it will move around the screen prettily and amuse those without real flying experience.
It looks unreal to me and appears not as a simulation but as a Game-based Cash Generator

[jmiranda]

FSX is a gold gem and will live for long. Flight is now more like an Xbox Game...very sad...

[joejam2]

You have to remember the negative comments surrounding FSX was the performance, not because it was a game and something completely different from FS2004. Two service packs later and new hardware pretty much fixed that. I don't see FLIGHT picking itself up like that unless they add to it and make it into a real sim and release it a couple years from now on DVD as FSXI.

[torkermax]

Ah ha, someone with a bit of a memory. Anyone who has been around for a while will recall that these same sort of negative comments came along with every new release of Flight Simulator, whether justified or not. FSX was a big problem when it first came out, no one could run it, etc. but now most people have embraced it. The same sort of complaints happened on previous releases. On one previous release (somewhere around FSFW95) Avsim even started a boycott movement which was really a pretty silly thing to do, but they did it. Flight hasn't even been released yet and people are condemning it as a failure. It will be interesting to see what people are saying a year from now.

Your the only one correct!

[benEggleston16]

Avsim even started a boycott movement which was really a pretty silly thing to do
Avsim seem to have over-reacted with this as well... if you think a storm's brewing here, look at their FLIGHT forum

[laszlozoltan]

I was thinking that too, but i doubt this one will pick itself up the way FSX did.
Now, I'm almost suprised at the way people are saying 'I'll not leave FSX' when six years ago they were probably saying the same about FS9

dont forget the vista experience- just because ms chruns something out and have all thier marketing forces pushing it does not mean it will succeed. A failure is a failure and can be smelled before its release. flight simply stinks.

[benEggleston16]

I think it's interesting the way were all jumping to conclusions about this when none of us have played it. It's clear that it's an arcade game but it's hardly tarnished the FS brand, MS clearly are saying it's a completely separate entity, there is no comparison between the two.
When we say, 'we complained about FSX when it came out and said it was bad; and FS9 also; but this one really is the worst' we almost ceratinly thought that at the time too.
And we'll think it again when FLIGHT 2 comes out, since everyone is saying it's just a money-laundering scheme by Microsoft, we think it will succeed even if it's not popular.

[raimondo2]

It would have been better if:

Microsoft would have had better communication with the hard core simmers - which obviously are not happy to play an arcade type game - and come out clear straight away in a couple of forums state that Flight is an arcade type Flight Game and do not cater for the hard core simmers - which are a completely different category to the small Eddy that play just for fun and spend mummy money!!

that would have avoid all these negativity from the hard core community ! as many where expecting a new simulator with the same open mind of the past.

[torkermax]

Who came up with the notion they or anyone has an obligation to the handful of the "hardcore simmer"? The lack of sales and thus the demise of ACES was do in no small part to the average Joe finding FSX too complicated, having to tweak etc, to use! As with any corporation, the obligation is to profitability and the way to that is in large sales numbers. The hardcore sim market is NOT a large market. Just face it.

[fxsttcb]

...The lack of sales...What lack of sales? MS had to complete another FSX production run not quite 2 years ago, to meet retail demand, and the shelves are already drying up again.
From what I have gathered from folks involved with ACES, their demise was more related to internal personality and team congruity issues rather than FSX's faults.

We hardcore simmers may not be the target audience, but, we are the ones that made flying on a computer what it is. Ignoring your core audience is not good business.
Dedicated payware and freeware developers have driven FS advances, and by locking them out, the variety of enhancements being offered will be minimal at best.
It took 2 years to create what little they have to offer so far. How long will it take the new target audience to get sick of waiting for the next tidbit. Attention span?

Once the new audience finds out that there are tons of freeware and payware available for the old sims, they'll abandon Flight, pick up a used or NOS copy of FS9 or FSX, and never look back. 15 new files in the library here today. Ain't no days MS can accomplish that.

I can hear it now. Gee, my buddy has FSX and he has his own personalized hanger. Got it free too. Go ask in their scenery forum for that customised local airport.
There was nothing stopping MS from becoming a sought after developer for enhancements to their own franchise. Now they want it all to themselves.
Good Luck with that...:D...Don

[jomni]

Once the new audience finds out that there are tons of freeware and payware available for the old sims, they'll abandon Flight, pick up a used or NOS copy of FS9 or FSX, and never look back. 15 new files in the library here today. Ain't no days MS can accomplish that.

That's also a plus for MS. Flight is the marketing tool for them to sell more FSX.

[Leo112]

Ah ha, someone with a bit of a memory. Anyone who has been around for a while will recall that these same sort of negative comments came along with every new release of Flight Simulator, whether justified or not. FSX was a big problem when it first came out, no one could run it, etc. but now most people have embraced it. The same sort of complaints happened on previous releases. On one previous release (somewhere around FSFW95) Avsim even started a boycott movement which was really a pretty silly thing to do, but they did it. Flight hasn't even been released yet and people are condemning it as a failure. It will be interesting to see what people are saying a year from now.

It was interesting to see FS9 last so long when many predicted it's doom after FSX was released. I can all but bet just like so many stuck with FS9 (myself included), even more will stick with the legacy version of Flight Simulator (FSX and FS9). With FSX the days are gone ditching the old for the new when the new is inferior in any kind of way. In this case 'inferior' isn't a strong enough word... It's impossible for an effort like this to topple sims that cover the whole world with limitless possibilities in how to enjoy them. Heck, Flight doesn't even support third party add-ons. Anyone with half a brain could guess where that's going to end up especially considering we have very good options now...

[ricardo_NY1]

It was interesting to see FS9 last so long when many predicted it's doom after FSX was released. I can all but bet just like so many stuck with FS9 (myself included), even more will stick with the legacy version of Flight Simulator (FSX and FS9). With FSX the days are gone ditching the old for the new when the new is inferior in any kind of way. In this case 'inferior' isn't a strong enough word... It's impossible for an effort like this to topple sims that cover the whole world with limitless possibilities in how to enjoy them. Heck, Flight doesn't even support third party add-ons. Anyone with half a brain could guess where that's going to end up especially considering we have very good options now...

I've stuck it out with FS9 since the day it was released because I want a Flight Simulator that can run 200% my machine. I waited five years after FS9 was released to put together a dedicated FS9 machine and I run it maxed out no matter what I throw at it. I'll keep using it until I can get FSX to run that way, and if that never happens, so be it. FSX is not that much better than FS9, and certainly not in vanilla form over a souped up FS9. The future of Flight Simulator is with the developers who develop for either FS9 or FSX.

[kingnorris]

I thought FS9 was my last.....then I got a PC to run FSX, and now I say FSX will be my last. BUT-----this time it'll stick, lol....


Flight doesn't appeal to me at all, and their marketing idea just really made it official for me.

Finito...

[SeanC]

one thing is certain for me now...i have been holding off on purchasing plenty more add-on sceneries for FS9 (not that i don't have a machine that can't handle FSX) waiting for flight to be released...with this new information about flight i will not be converting but I will now unleash the credit cards on more sceneries etc for FS9....i also hope that with the way feedback has been from loyal FS users about their thoughts on flight that developers will re-consider dual releases for both fsx and fs9 for those that have recently been releasing FSX only. i can't be the only one now sticking with FS9...

[ricardo_NY1]

one thing is certain for me now...i have been holding off on purchasing plenty more add-on sceneries for FS9 (not that i don't have a machine that can't handle FSX) waiting for flight to be released...with this new information about flight i will not be converting but I will now unleash the credit cards on more sceneries etc for FS9....i also hope that with the way feedback has been from loyal FS users about their thoughts on flight that developers will re-consider dual releases for both fsx and fs9 for those that have recently been releasing FSX only. i can't be the only one now sticking with FS9...

Don't bring out those credit cards to quickly. Wait to see what happens with Prepar3D down the road. It could be the FSX we need. OrbX is on it.

[SeanC]

Don't bring out those credit cards to quickly. Wait to see what happens with Prepar3D down the road. It could be the FSX we need. OrbX is on it.

well looking into seems worth doing the subscription at first and from there if it really does run better than FSX i may just bite the bullet and pay for the full program...seems promising!

just purchased subscription for prepar3d and am downloading as i type...

[jomni]

They can't grant license to private users. So how do we get hold of this. And are FSX add-ons compatible?

[Traveler]

I for one, don't mind paying extra for planes and scenery - we do that with FS anyway. Problem is, there is no way that Microsoft can do it all by themselves. Locking out 3rd party developers is absolutely fatal to this product IMO. I'll be sticking with FSX for awhile. A very LONG while, I expect.

[SeanC]

They can't grant license to private users. So how do we get hold of this. And are FSX add-ons compatible?

Are u sure? I'm private purchased the subscription and am downloading the 3 program zip files right now. They will sell to anyone as it states in their forums. And yes apparently with minor tweaking to some files all fsx files should be compatible with prepar3d just from reading their forums. In fact even mytrafficx will work with prepar3d.

[jomni]

Are u sure? I'm private purchased the subscription and am downloading the 3 program zip files right now. They will sell to anyone as it states in their forums. And yes apparently with minor tweaking to some files all fsx files should be compatible with prepar3d just from reading their forums. In fact even mytrafficx will work with prepar3d.

Well part of the agreement when Lockheed bought the license is that Prepar3d is "not to be sold for entertainment" because it competes with FSX that way. But I guess that statement has abiguity and loopholes. What exactly is entertainement? With some research, I found out that you are right and they will sell to anyone who can afford it. And if you are able to sink in all that money or subscribe, that means you are doing it for more than entertainment purposes.

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/347769-prepar3d/

Anyway, we are straying away already as this is a MS Flight thread. :)

[torkermax]

I for one, don't mind paying extra for planes and scenery - we do that with FS anyway. Problem is, there is no way that Microsoft can do it all by themselves. Locking out 3rd party developers is absolutely fatal to this product IMO. I'll be sticking with FSX for awhile. A very LONG while, I expect.

Doesnt bother me not having 3rd party developers. for the most part i have had nouthing but grief with them and their not accountable to anyone! Make a shotty product then blame it on the sims limitations. nobody around to defend the sim!

[NSRacer]

i'm just saying my opinion so don't jump on my head. the reason that we don't have FS11 is because as we know microsoft isn't interested anymore to build a platform game...because the add-on producers will earn a lot of money and they won't. so microsoft will do the same thing like the producers of Railworks did. They are the one who made the game and they are the one who make the add-ons for it.

but even so, if microsoft's plan is to release a free base package that contains only an island, and then we will have to wait some years till they eventually make enough add-ons to cover the entire planet, nobody will be interested in it.

so the bottom line is that i understand microsoft that they are in a disadvantage. but that's not what we want from a simulator, what we want is a stable platform that can be improved with the help of add-ons (thats what we are doing with FS9 and FSX so i don't think it will bother anyone)...i don't really care who makes the add-ons. but don't release a game that will force people to buy you're add-ons to make the game enjoyable...because that's what they are doing, a limited game that will force you to buy their add-ons. instead of making a full stock game like FSX and then release add-ons, they are just splitting the game so you buy add-ons just to have a full game

my advice for the fsx add-on producers is to keep up the good work and still produce good stuff because i'm sure people will stick to fsx until they will have a good alternative

this game sounds like a joke to me from microsoft who is extremely desperate to launch a new flight sim and earn money. i thought a flight sim requires a lot of time to develop all the stuff. how much did it took them to make this game? less then 20 months?

[Jugador]

but even so, if microsoft's plan is to release a free base package that contains only an island, and then we will have to wait some years till they eventually make enough add-ons to cover the entire planet, nobody will be interested in it.



Most likely, the game is already mostly finished. It's just that they've decided instead of releasing the full game at once for $50 or $60 bucks, they're going to piecemeal it over time. Doing it that way, that probably get closer to $300 or $400 per game to the people who buy all the dlc.

[n4gix]

Ah ha, someone with a bit of a memory. Anyone who has been around for a while will recall that these same sort of negative comments came along with every new release of Flight Simulator, whether justified or not.

Nels, with respect, year from now Flight will be nothing more than a bitter memory. Unless MS showed an entirely different product that I've seen, the best description I can come up with is to imagine FS1 with current generation graphics...

...and unless they are planning to sell "modules" to add back the features that're not present now, there's no viable path forward, IMHO.

[n4gix]

Well part of the agreement when Lockheed bought the license is that Prepar3d is "not to be sold for entertainment" because it competes with FSX that way.

That's old news. Here is a quote from John Nichol posted today:


Quote - John Nicol - Lead Dev for P3D at LM:

"Just to be clear (and trying not to sound defensive!). Anyone can purchase Prepar3D. We do not sell it as an entertainment product and the EULA talks about that, which means that it will not be appearing on the shelves of Best Buy next to Call of Duty any time soon..... I am not sure where the rumour started that we sell only to certain people, but anyone can buy it. It isn't about consumers, but end-use. If you are a pilot, simulation user, student, whatever and want to use it for familiarization, training, taxiing over bugs then go for it. If you are 10 or 110 it doesn't matter. If you want to use it at an arcade game, then buy something else. You can go to our website and purchase it with a credit card and download it. The commercial license version is $499 and we have added a considerable amount of features and made a lot of bug fixes to the code that we were fortunate enough to procure from Microsoft. A list of features can be found on our website at www.prepar3D.com. We certainly have added in bathymetry data to allow the use of submersibles and we have added in a few features for hard-core users that they should find interesting including true multi-channel (spreads the load of the image generator across multiple PCs), update to DirectInput 8 to allow up to 32 axes and 128 buttons per joystick, sensor views (night vision and infra-red), updated landclasses, GPS upgrades and so on. We have also updated and improved the SDK documentation and added more samples for developers. We are also going to be releasing an update version 1.2 of Prepar3D and the SDK in the next few weeks.

Those that are looking to test, integrate, develop, investigate etc and therefore do not require a full commercial license can subscribe for $9.95 per month and receive 2 copies of the software. That is an option that many people are taking and I would be glad to see more people come on board and see what they can do with the app! There are no restrictions to joining the developer network.

If people are using Prepar3D for commercial activities, then switching to the commercial license is appropriate and required.

[chimps]

I have Windows SP3 so i'm hoping the low graphics won't be a pain in the a**

[ViperPilot2]

I would surmise that Microsoft looks at all of this discussion about Flight as nothing more than slightly distracting noise in the total scheme of things.

If Microsoft was serious about extending the Flight Simulator line, why didn't they actively solicit comment, response and suggestion in these Forums and others like ACES did?

Microsoft's intent all along was to create a product suited to the masses; the GTA, Battlefield 3, Angry Birds and Need For Speed demographic. If it wasn't, why was Joshua Howard
(EP of the Flight team) quoted as saying that the current Flight Simulator family (FS9, FSX) was "... too obtuse, dense, and hard to get into."?

It's because Microsoft looks at the dedicated FS community (us) as too 'cerebral'; just a small, outspoken fringe element in the vast vortex of the Gaming universe. They want participants
and customers who are looking for an easy way to get into the sky... something that offers burps and whistles, clicks and groans without having to learn very much about how to actually FLY.

Stick with what you have... FSX, FS 9, or XP. Improve on it as much as your wallet and imagination will allow. Get as much enjoyment, immersion and satisfaction out of the program as you can.

Leave the 'next generation' of FS to the developers involved in the hobby intimately. Leave LM out of it... their objectives are distinctly different than ours, although it's good to see John Nicol
have an opinion about the issue. Inundating the Preapr3d Forums with begging and pleading will do nothing but alienate our community with another business entity who just so happens to
be as big a fish, if not bigger, than Microsoft is.

By now, all of the 3rd party developers know what the scoop is. It's their decision whether or not to take the next step and create a Simulator of their own.

-- Just an opinion from the wilderness; a nobody who just happened to be following the Flight Forum...

Joshua Howard references:

http://venturebeat.c...into-new-skies/

[buzzbenz]

First of all, let me begin by stating out front, that i just advanced further in Angry Birds yesterday, and have a shiny new XBOX360 controller ready for some GTA on some night in the near future (gotta be at night, cause i don't play that when the kids are up...).

And my enjoyment of those games has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with my flight simming hobby... Flying around finding "aerocaches" or whatnot around JUST HAWAII in a plane i frankly know zip about isn't going to pique my interest all that much. Yeah sure, if it's free, no reason NOT to download it, Hard Drive space ain't a concern for me right now. Having to wait for the "priviledge" to BUY the regions so i can fly the local routes i normally fly? Not gonna happen. Sorry.

Some people here will say things about having remembering the past and such... I remember alright. But each "problem" release was the same thing - performance sucked, program was unstable, etc etc. Each time, most of the glaring issues got fixed by patches, and some beefier hardware would get some good performance. But in each case, even the "crummy" versions since like FS5 or something offered the same basic things - the entire planet to explore, with many, many thousands of airports, and an ok selection of planes to explore it with. Flight will NOT offer that - it will offer you one island with one plane, and to do more, you have to pay more... And sure, the free starting pointing is great for a lark, but i have no doubt that to "reconstruct" what CAME with previous FS versions will cost a couple hundred dollars at the least (based on some other game expansion packs and such). THEN we'll have to still buy higher detailed airports and much better jets and stuff... AND i STILL believe you'll need to throw better hardware at it to get it to run with the settings maxed out anyway.....

What i think MS is doing here is trying to market a civilian flight sim to a crowd that would be better suited to a combat sim. And i'm not sure how well that is going to work... Most people i know either find flying around in a plane incapable of destroying things boring, or they have a passing interest in aviation and with plenty of relatively cheap FSX's running around on store shelves out there, they don't have a lot to lose if it turns out they're not too interested after all. The former folks will want a combat sim, the latter crowd are looking for either what is offered in current flight sims, or will never go past the free download... So while it may seem on the surface to be a better financial decision for MS, i'm not sure that what they hope will happen actually will...

Me personally, i enjoy having the whole world open to me to fly to, so until a point comes where MS sells a version of Flight for $70 or so that offers at least everything that came with FSX, i won't be going past the free download stage either....

[holmese]

You have to remember the negative comments surrounding FSX was the performance, not because it was a game and something completely different from FS2004. Two service packs later and new hardware pretty much fixed that. I don't see FLIGHT picking itself up like that unless they add to it and make it into a real sim and release it a couple years from now on DVD as FSXI.

I heartly agree !!! My sentiments exactly

[torkermax]

They will add to it. To what extent, who knows but what it is now isnt the only thing. Heck who knows. Writing it off may be premature because everything is there to be a full fledged "Sim".

[CTarana]

I voted No and this is why...I'm still using FS2002 and unless there has been a major watershed in Aircraft Design in FS2004 and FSX, I can't think of a single default aircraft that was better than a third party model. This includes Payware and Freeware. I'm going all the way back to FS4 which had 5 default Aircraft, FS98 which had 7 planes and FS2002, which has around 12. I've been a flight simulator all the way back to Xevious BBS! I'm not sure how many aircraft are on Flightsim.com, but I can tell you there are 425 in the FS4 section still, 13,087 in the FS98 section still, and 14,602 in the FS2002 section! When I look at that I can't help thinking that when the choice comes down to 3rd party addons vs Microsoft's output, I choose the third-party addons! :D Cost aside,I think 3rd party suppliers are better equipped at all points than Microsoft's team. :D

ChristopherT

[angels355]

OK, perhaps Flight might be really good, speculating, the best simulator engine available today, reduced demand on hardware, and reduced entry skill level for a wider audience in theory. But as I've said before, no SDK, no freeware, no unlimited independantly produced uncensored payware such as PMDG, Radarcontact, Active Sky, Level D, how does MS expect us to respond? I'm sorry if I've sounded bitter about this but simulated flight is a big deal to me. They want the opinions of experienced flight simmers, they take away the the SDK and third party freeware and payware, they have to expect a negative response, and as paying customers I feel we have the right to express our opinions, especially when money is scarce during these harsh economic times. They're asking us to pay money for this experience, doesn't our opinion count? Of course I haven't tried it out, but the simulator model should be really good, not next level good however, but I'm not going to part with my money for the scheme they are proposing. My objection to FSX was that despite our having to pay for this software we have to put up with big brother activation programming. I thought it was cool how heavy the software was and what high quality it seemed to be. Now we know it was just designed in an out of date manner being only lightly multithreaded, and 32 bit limited to only 2 gb of ram usage, while now many of us (not me yet) have as much as 16 gb of ram installed, 4 to 6 processor cores often overclocked. 1000+ watts of psu power. I finally purchased FSX and the latest PMDG(s) and later Level D's, so that I can have the most advanced and challenging experience possible. I bought three FSX Gold's will probably buy two more eventually, I bought them for the PMDG's. I would like to get Activesky, and radarcontact, for the most advanced experience possible. I can not imagine Flight with no SDK being able to deliver the same experience. They want my opinion, as presented Flight offers a dumbed down experience, with probably expensive dumbed down censored low fideltiy add-ons in which we have no choice in the matter, and PMDG says it's unlikely they will provide add-ons for Flight. The choice is simple I can not spend money on Flight as presented.

[NSRacer]

Correct me if i'm wrong but like someone said, the only thing wrong with FSX is performance. what would mean a new flight simulator for me? just an updated version of FSX...add excellent graphics that will get the most out of today's GPUs and processors, add effects that FSX doesn't feature and that's about it.

[angels355]

Correct me if i'm wrong but like someone said, the only thing wrong with FSX is performance. what would mean a new flight simulator for me? just an updated version of FSX...add excellent graphics that will get the most out of today's GPUs and processors, add effects that FSX doesn't feature and that's about it.

From the sound of it MS tried to lighten Flight up to perform better on lower level computers. I speculate that they took the FSX simulation engine and lightened it up for lower level hardware. I haven't tried it myself I'm just speculating. The biggest difference is that it is a closed community game, they won't allow third party developers including both freeware and payware developers to provide add-ons for it. Either MS will produce the add-ons, such as default scenery or default aircraft, or as discussed a long time ago there might be the possibility that third party developers, excluding freeware developers, could be licensed to produce add-ons for Flight, but they would be sold through MS so MS would get their $$. I'm sure that that would mean that the aircraft would be censored to be less advanced and more politically correct.

The FSX simulator experience has higher resolution default graphics, it's an open community simulator where thrid party developers whether they are freeware or payware are welcome to develop add-ons for fun or profit. The downside to FSX is that it is not multithreaded enough to split up the load to multiple processor cores, so performance is diminished, and it is 32 bit and can only take advantage of 2 gb or ram memory. We are approaching the time where all software will become 64 bit and heavy applications should be fully multithreaded.

By refusing to give us the Flight SDK I believe MS has done us a favor, as that strongly asserts that this is not the more advanced open community simulator we have hoped for, and those of us who need a real cutting edge simulator should stick with FSX, and just wait for the next real simulator that comes out. One with more advanced physics, aerodynamics, environment, etc, and fully multithreaded, 64 bit, an open ended open community simulator with a freely available SDK, and friendly and catering to the flight simulator community. Either from MS if they can accomplish it, or from an independant developer. Aerosoft gave it a try but Skorna says they gave up recently because they could not find a good enough simulator engine.

You might try out Flight, you might like it.

[Razor68]

Now that i heard MS flight is not going to allow third party addons and it look more like a Xbox game they can kiss my **** Keeping FSX witch i am pretty happy with with also thousands of dollars of addons it looks good enough for me. So i am going to buy XP10 on the world release date. I think the third party companys are going to make addons for xp like Carenado do. I like xp and the pretty easy way you can make your own aircraft. It just need addon software to make stunning cockpits and interior. It also need some tweaking to the flight dynamics witch is way to sensitive, when you put some weather in it the planes got thrown around like they are made of paper. So if they fix that it will be perfect.

[fxsttcb]

I speculate that they took the FSX simulation engine and lightened it up for lower level hardware. I haven't tried it myself I'm just speculating.I'm testing that theory in Hawaii as we speak. So far it looks like MS has done a whole lot more to the core engine than just reduce the size of the scenery area(s).

Early results, limiting scenery area loading to just Hawaii, has shown a definite performance improvement, but, not to the extent I expected(it loads really fast though!)
The big problem is, without a true FPS log, and not having the capability of flying the exact same track for each successive test, my testing is purely subjective.

MS has probably went through the entire core detailing efficiency, replacing code snippets that required SP1/2, and reducing redundancies.
As ORBx has noted, even at 32bit the ESP engine is a substantial piece of engineering.

It is going to be tough to improve on such a masterpiece. One of the problems I see, for a future sim, is lazy programming.
With off the shelf computers pushing just under 4GHz, and custom gaming rigs running over 5GHz, programmers are not under pressure to write the absolutely most efficient code. If not written to it's best efficiency before release, service packs/patches will help, but couldn't compete with top notch original code.

From what I understand, it's extremely costly and time consuming, simply because finding and replacing the inefficient code itself is uber difficult.
Can't see the forest for the trees syndrome, I imagine. Especially true when my code affects yours.
Snot one programmer, 'tis a team. All with different coding styles...Don

[magnetite]

I'll stick with FSX. Runs just fine on my system.

[sam_thompson]

I don't see it selling if it only has Hawaii

[angels355]

I don't see it selling if it only has Hawaii

As far as I know it will have everything, but it appears that they will make you pay for each component to get what you want. Maybe they will change their minds and provide the whole world?

[benEggleston16]

I don't see it selling if it only has Hawaii
I do: IT'S FREE

[pmacmaster]

I have bought every version of FS and will not be buying Flight.
Having the whole world to fly around in FSX/9 is still going to be my staple as I am fed up with this pay for view/content business model that is creeping into games.
FS11 should have been a full civilian and military simulation as close to the real world as possible IMO...

[fxsttcb]

I have bought every version of FS and will not be buying Flight.
Ahemmm....Flight is FREE. It's the DL additions that will cost you...Don

[pmacmaster]

Ahemmm....Flight is FREE. It's the DL additions that will cost you...Don

Yeh I know, which part of not buying Flight did you not get :)
As the addons are purchasable that is what I was referring to as they are the only things to be bought from MS...

[apollomaker]

Like many others, I have no interest in playing games. I wanted to see a more advanced OPEN FLIGHT SIMULATOR, not some pay-to-play arcade game that you cannot work with. FSX will remain my focus. The decision to do this to Flight is the worst marketing decision I have seen from MS. Great way to kill a franchise. I wonder if anyone at MS ever wondered why FSX is still selling and for so long? Ever hear of third party support? Fools.

No thanks.

[fxsttcb]

Actually, Flight could be a step in the right direction for us. I certainly don't want MS to fold up it's Flying software shop and quit. Kinda "Catch 22" though.
If it succeeds beyond anyone's expectations, further development of the simulation end may not be deemed necessary at all.
If it flops terribly, the capital may not be available, or deemed viable, for further development of a simulator, or even the marriage of a game with a real sim...Don

[angels355]

FSNext was shut down ironically when it was not that far from completion. That was during basically an ongoing depression, when MS laid off 5,000 people, in addition to firing the entire Aces team due to management arguments about the direction of FS. So what has resulted, Flight, perhaps that is our depression era flight game. In the past sales from Windows and Office were so large that the cost of developing FS was negligible, I'm speculating. However never the less it has always turned a profit. Businesses go out of business if they can't turn a profit. FS however did in fact turn a profit. Unfortunately it seems like the game department wanted to try to mass market it, it appears to have lost all of its' complexity which makes FS worthwhile to experienced flight simmers. Beginners or outsiders may have a hard time understanding the difference, and for the hardcore simmer who knows when to rotate, what the speed limit is at what altitude, watching N numbers, EGT temperatures, crabbing, ILS approach, high speed stall, following precise directions from the ground controller--if you are not familiar with these simple terms then one cannot understand why we are upset about the lacking of Flight.

To simplify our viewpoint, this is how we see Flight, and this is amazingly accurate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_rLhWzZZp8&context=C3b46029ADOEgsToPDskILgiEmNtGUERJcFdkrZmgR

[mgh]

It's interesting that, despite all the sound and fury, only 147 people bothered to respond to the poll.

[alaskancrab]

angels: The part that's rarely discussed is that the it was an entire Entertainment division that was cut. I don't think anyone inside MS actually cared if any of these studios were profitable or not in essense they were all in the red for the past 10 years. They were hired to do a job of building the brand and once that was done they were all cut loose. Even Halo and Forza didn't get spared and are now licensed IPs made by other studios. Still regardless of all that I don't think they ever had the NGX in mind when they were building even FSX. So for PMDG and the likes to complain about it now, they should have read the EULA and understood they weren't an Entertainment product to begin with as no one in the industry would market it as such. and still they act like they have no business selling P3D versions.

[jpc55]

When MICROSOFT FLIGHT becomes available, I will most likely download it being it’s FREE, (free being just another four letter word beginning with F) and if it goes like it is described, that will be the end of it. But it kind of makes me wonder, what are the chances of there being a hidden agenda in the “FREE” program? Loln (laughing out load nervously)

[alaskancrab]

Hidden agenda as in move everyone to Live and then sell the product reducing piracy by 90%?? one can only hope they have the same level of success in that regards as they do with the 360. I always found it odd the original DVD drive was made by Thomson/Reuters. Turns out its not a DVD driver :)

[NSRacer]

Since Microsoft Flight isn't what we expected to be (and that is a new Flight Simulator, Flight Simulator 11) I think we might still have an alternative. From what I saw, X-Plane is a stable platform just like FS9 or FSX and to be honest with you, I wouldn't be surpised to see all FSX add-on producers switch to X-Plane. Carenado already did it (I just saw the 185F available for X-Plane)....I know the switch will be tricky for FS users but I'm sure it doesn't take long to get used to it. So let's wait a bit and see how things will go on with X-Plane, if more and more add-ons will apear (like REX, Ultimate Terrain, Aerosoft Sceneries), I'll switch to it imediatly

[russellbdavis]

I was a beta tester. And in accordance with the NDA, I can't disclose "details" about FLIGHT, but I can voice an opinion. I have been a big fan of FS all the way back to the ATARI 800XL days with the Bruce Artwick original. So, I think I've been a fan for a long time, and I think the majority of the core FS customer base can say the same thing. I will say, FLIGHT is a very beautifully rendered piece of software. It runs very well on my Core Duo Windows 7 Ultimate setup. As a tester I was provided with ALL of the DLC available for the first release. But even with that, I get more excitement and joy from Angry Birds on my cell phone, than FLIGHT. It is a bore and cheesy at best. The head producer of FLIGHT is completely out of touch with reality, and the true customer base of Flight Simulator. If I want a simple flight model with some beautiful graphics, I'll play HEROES OVER EUROPE on my PS3. At least then, there is some real action; like shooting things and getting shot at. I don't expect that from a flight sim, but with FLIGHT lacking all the hardcore sim features of FS2004/FSX, and previous releases, there isn't much of a point to it otherwise. So, if you love realism in a flight sim, and you've invested lots of money in 3rd party addons for FS2004/FSX, etc., I'd say stick with that for the sake of realism. But if you want a casual sim that gets you in the air easily/quickly, without a lot of fuss, then FLIGHT will probably do the trick. I have 4 grandsons ( ages 10-12) who actually love to sit next to me, and watch FSX in action. When I explained the differences between it and the "vision" behind FLIGHT, they even thought it sounded boring; and they haven't even seen it, other than prerelease videos. So, they too see the significance in true-to-life simulation and all that entails.

I believe casual gamers have short attention spans, and very little income. When you can get Angry Birds for $5 on your cellphone with hundreds of levels, even if FLIGHT is a FREE download initially, I doubt the casual gamer will invest anything beyond that. Microsoft is taking a huge gamble on a demographic that does not have the disposable income we "old-timers" do.

I can say since the beta closed, I haven't really cared to even fire it up.
Even with all that DLC that was provided, its still not enough to get me excited.

You guys think the AVSIM forum and others were bad?, the Microsoft Connect beta tester feedback forum was absolutely horrible!
It was one person attacking another relentlessly! Almost nobody could get along. If you voiced an opinion, you were attacked!
Suggestions were "AT YOUR OWN RISK" of complete and total humilation by someone! It was the most childish thing I had ever witnessed.

I don't know where MS got these people, but they were so rude and disrespectful of one another. I know we flight simmers are pretty hardcore about what we expect and want, but this was over the top.

Perhaps, the majority of testers "were" the demographic they are targeting...7th graders or something! LOL
I don't know how much of the feedback was actually useful to MS, we're going to have to wait and see.

[angels355]

Thanks Russel for telling us about it. You're a good man. This was exactly what I expected. I did not participate in the beta testing in any way and didn't want to because I wanted to be able to freely speak my mind, and there were such glaring problems with the Fact Sheet and the interviews with Mr Howard, I've really spoken my mind because I believe that MS has wasted a ton of money on this stupid venture. Casual gamers could have just installed FS and started it up and started flying, nothing daunting about it. However MS FS is so complete like an encyclopaedia that hardcore flight simmers could enjoy it to the nth degree. The minute I saw the Fact Sheet and the interviews I knew that Flight was going in a very wrong direction.

I think the management who made this unbelievably bad choice should be fired. These managers argued with the Aces management and made a bet that their idea was better, they were horribly mistaken, they've lost the bet, they should be fired. And I think that MS FS should be rescued. By now we should have had a 64 bit FS with DX11/12, why? Because the MS FS series has always challenged and been way ahead of the hardware, now it's just the opposite they have been resting on their laurels, and instead of advancing they have been regressing going back to DX9 32 bit. Do they expect us flight simmers to accept Flight as the long term replacement of the FS series? As you said, they have completely lost touch with reality and their customer base.

I think there is a really really big problem. Thank you again for speaking up.

[Ragtopjohnny]

Thanks Russell.

That concludes my opinion, I WILL be sticking with my beloved FSX. Not moving to flight in the slightest bit.

Too bad you had such a forum experience over there, I hate when forms are allowed to be that way.

John Thuot II

[angels355]

Thanks Russell.

That concludes my opinion, I WILL be sticking with my beloved FSX. Not moving to flight in the slightest bit.

Too bad you had such a forum experience over there, I hate when forms are allowed to be that way.

John Thuot II

And thank you also for responding John.

[alaskancrab]

Perhaps, the majority of testers "were" the demographic they are targeting...7th graders or something! LOL
I don't know how much of the feedback was actually useful to MS, we're going to have to wait and see.

The software automatically phones in and tells them all the information they need. Didn't they tell you that, I think it's called CEP ;)

[raimondo2]

The software automatically phones in and tells them all the information they need. Didn't they tell you that, I think it's called CEP ;)

Don you just love that ?? a game that automatically make phone calls for you !!!

[loki]

The software automatically phones in and tells them all the information they need. Didn't they tell you that, I think it's called CEP

The Microsoft Customer Experience Program just tells them which features are used the most, not whether the users actually enjoyed using them. Beta user feedback would give them insite into what people actually like, if they choose to listen that is.

[marith]

I have purchased and owned every Flight Simulator from Microsoft, all starting from version 1. Every release I have been excited about and when available I have pre-ordered to reserve my copy. I have also in most cases booked a days holiday on release day just to try out the new Flight Simulator. In every case I have always been pleased with my new purchase - even with the bugs and performance issues. With some versions (FS2004 and FSX) I have even purchased multiple copies as a backup.

With MS Flight, however, things couldn't be more different. After reading what marketing material has been around, articles in magazines and websites, and the interviews, I am really not interested or excited about MS Flight.

I am curious enough about it to try out the free demo, but to honest I won't be doing that on the day it is released or even for several days. Apart from having a busy week (or weeks) ahead of me, there are some FSX add-ons I plan to purchase which I am more excited about and want to try out instead.

When I have some spare time and I'm bored I might remember to give the Flight demo a try. But in the meantime, reading everyone's comments about MS Flight whilst drinking tea or coffee is more interesting to me than MS Flight, lol.

[Paxx]

... But in the meantime, reading everyone's comments about MS Flight whilst drinking tea or coffee is more interesting to me than MS Flight, lol.

29 year Legacy Community vision for Flight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1PY_7GNfIw&feature=related).

Microsoft vision for Flight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naDKA_j62Io).

Hence the discrepancy.

[angels355]

29 year Legacy Community vision for Flight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1PY_7GNfIw&feature=related).

Microsoft vision for Flight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naDKA_j62Io).

Hence the discrepancy.

The demo of Flight in your second link was daunting, hard to understand, off putting. If only we had someone at Flight with the vision to make the difficult stuff go away. And is it too much to ask that I be able to run it on my Timex watch??

[remind]

MS Flight to me sounds a waist of time to real simmers, some may same FS X was a bad one at launch, I am in the group who says it wasn't and it has come a long way with add ons, as an Aussie Company called Orbx has made FSX great and well even for non aussies as their scenery add ons are for USA and NZ now and they are growing and gorwing, will we see such a dedication from a 3rd party designer for MS flight. no me don't think so, this is more for XBOX console gamers, the big money for game devlopers is in COnsoles, they also hate PC as it is more able to be pirated. Heres an Example for any aussies here or even non aussies who know what Aussies rules is. a company called Big Ant took 2 years to get a AFL game out and ony for PS3 and XBOX, even though from all of their annoucments a PC versions was going to be avaliable, well we are still waiting, their reason for delay, was to stop pirates, oh blimey poor excuse. One wil never stop software being pirated if the pirates want to do it. ANyway back to topic, I am not interested in flying around one part of the earth in a few planes, as I understand it, this sim will not cover even the whole USA, MS wake up and releaise who your true simmer market is!

[alaskancrab]

Yeah but with the xbox it's the Hardware being pirated not the software.. Lot different proposition especially when it comes to famillies. You just can't copy and paste your way to a free game, someone has to perform open heart surgery on the xbox.... is it going to be you? the kids? or some shady character. And what does Mom think about all this?

[shanwick]

LETS FACE IT..the whole franchise has evolved around what?...ADD-ONS!...add on aircraft, scenery, textures etc...


OK. Take FS9 or FSX out of the equation and what are those addons worth then? Nothing, as they would have no base upon which to work.

FS9 and FSX, despite the various bits and pieces that are not quite right, are still incredible feats of programming and I, for one, owe much gratitude to Microsoft for creating them and the wonderful hobby that I now enjoy.

However, I cannot help but notice all the negative comments about Flight and the opportunitues which Microsoft have missed. So there is a great opportunity for someone to create the flight sim that we all would reallly like to see. Any takers, I wonder? No, I didn't think there would be.

David

[angels355]

OK. Take FS9 or FSX out of the equation and what are those addons worth then? Nothing, as they would have no base upon which to work.

FS9 and FSX, despite the various bits and pieces that are not quite right, are still incredible feats of programming and I, for one, owe much gratitude to Microsoft for creating them and the wonderful hobby that I now enjoy.

However, I cannot help but notice all the negative comments about Flight and the opportunitues which Microsoft have missed. So there is a great opportunity for someone to create the flight sim that we all would reallly like to see. Any takers, I wonder? No, I didn't think there would be.

David

Welcome to the forums

[tigisfat]

Ah ha, someone with a bit of a memory. Anyone who has been around for a while will recall that these same sort of negative comments came along with every new release of Flight Simulator, whether justified or not.

I see what you're saying, but I have to disagree in context. There were waves of rage AFTER FSX was released and couldn't be run, but not before. I remember everyone being pretty darn excited about it.

[angels355]

I see what you're saying, but I have to disagree in context. There were waves of rage AFTER FSX was released and couldn't be run, but not before. I remember everyone being pretty darn excited about it.

Myself, I never ever complained about FSX itself or its' heavy graphics, to me that was a plus. I only complained about big brother activation programming.

[alaskancrab]

Really i always complained about the 8 bit physics engine that had no basis in reality.

[lefu]

Don't count on it. EA has a similar scheme with their "Need for Speed World" game. How does $100 bucks for one stupid car sound?

$100 bucks for one car (http://www.t3.com/news/ea-offer-dollar-100-elite-dlc-car-in-need-for-speed-world)

Yes i have NFS world and it became booring this last weeks. Very expensive at every single addon. That how i think MS flight is going to be.
I wonder if its the new way games will be offered to counteract piracy.

[ticosimmer]

Ah ha, someone with a bit of a memory. Anyone who has been around for a while will recall that these same sort of negative comments came along with every new release of Flight Simulator, whether justified or not. FSX was a big problem when it first came out, no one could run it, etc. but now most people have embraced it. The same sort of complaints happened on previous releases. On one previous release (somewhere around FSFW95) Avsim even started a boycott movement which was really a pretty silly thing to do, but they did it. Flight hasn't even been released yet and people are condemning it as a failure. It will be interesting to see what people are saying a year from now.

Mmmm!! I disagree, with the exception of the FS2000 (a betta version of 2002) and FSX, the other versions were a hit, FS98 was stable, and it came with so many changes that were were all pleased to have it. FS2002 was a great simulator, very stable and easy with frame rate.

[gizmosells]

All pay for Angry Bird a game I love, before all download flight for free. Not too worried, others companies will fill the flight simulator void, and FSX and FS9 is great but its requires more time tweaking than non-Microsoft software to get working, but I like to tweak things. Not even having only Hawaii or just 3 planes the problem its about closed shop setup of flight that turns me off not 3rd party payware or freeware. :)

[tigisfat]

Not even having only Hawaii or just 3 planes the problem its about closed shop setup of flight that turns me off not 3rd party payware or freeware. :)

Go ahead man, tell 'em how you're not going to pay because there is only one hawaiian island.:eek:

[raimondo2]

Im very curios to see the reactions of those who will download flight and than come back on various forum - im getting ready for a few days of real fun here !!

Who need the Telly ??? :)

[angels355]

Have you guys seen this Outerra Engine? It looks very promising. Amazingly, it starts out with the whole world, outer space, the whole atmosphere, high resolution terrain and trees, and underwater, seamlessly. Seems like a big risk as MS' market research has found that we really only want one island, and want to become beach combers with an airplane looking for aerocache.

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?245672-Outerra-Tech-Demo-out-now

[magnetite]

I just gave it a shot. Just for old times sake. Sorry MS, gave up after 5 minutes. Back to FSX for me. Better luck next time.

FSX runs better than Flight. At least for me. FPS wise. If that default plane gets 35 FPS on the exterior view, I get around 45 FPS with all my addons put together. And that's in the VC with my 737 NGX.

[gizmosells]

Give me play-doo with flights simulator. No, Microsoft gave us lump of turds.

[Jugador]

I wonder if its the new way games will be offered to counteract piracy.

I don't know...call me naive, but I think it has more to do with control and profits. I know there's jerks out there, but I think the vast majority of people are moral and honest.

[darkstarf16]

My personal view of flight = Just brilliant :) On a single screen its so good. With Eyefinity flying Flight is just MEGA Awesome. I really now need to fit a seatbelt to my chair!

[kmlzhr]

I would 100% agree with magnetite, it is GARBAGE and a scam to get 19.99 non-refundable. AV8R joystick. FSX performs better and am considering X-plane 10 anyone owns it?

AMD FX 8120, 8 core, 16 Gb RAM DDR3 1600, Verix SSD, OS Windows 7 Ultimate x64

[raimondo2]

I would 100% agree with magnetite, it is GARBAGE and a scam to get 19.99 non-refundable. AV8R joystick. FSX performs better and am considering X-plane 10 anyone owns it?

AMD FX 8120, 8 core, 16 Gb RAM DDR3 1600, Verix SSD, OS Windows 7 Ultimate x64

with those pc specifications you show - i would defenetly drop an email to xp10 !! - You need to know that xp10 is a great simulator - and is not as anybody is used in fsx - it is distributed at beginning of versions in rather raw state - and develop as times goes by - with frequent updates to download through a painless updater file.

[ticosimmer]

Sometime has passed by now, and every day I can see less and less people attending the flight forums, the interest is fading, casual gamers are moving on to other games, "hardcore simmers" have kept their intentions not to use Flight, forum moderators have had to ban many conplains and regrets.
My thoughts (hopefully wont be banned) are that as sadly expected, Flight seems to have fail to succeed. I was very hopeful that Flight would eventually evolve in a game that would suit the casual and the hardcore.
What has happen is that Flight has split the market, has split this comunity, has made a polarized comunity, a comunity that I have always be proud of it.
Now be aware if you don't like the software, cause you can be banned. for me it has turned out that if I don't like Flight, please don't say it.
My wish:
MS realize that flight can evolve to a simulator, with AI traffic, online VATSIM and IVAO compatibility, free SDK, airliners etc. And finally we all hardcore and casual gamers will be happily flying
Cheers fellow virtual captains.

[angels355]

Sometime has passed by now, and every day I can see less and less people attending the flight forums, the interest is fading, casual gamers are moving on to other games, "hardcore simmers" have kept their intentions not to use Flight, forum moderators have had to ban many conplains and regrets.
My thoughts (hopefully wont be banned) are that as sadly expected, Flight seems to have fail to succeed. I was very hopeful that Flight would eventually evolve in a game that would suit the casual and the hardcore.
What has happen is that Flight has split the market, has split this comunity, has made a polarized comunity, a comunity that I have always be proud of it.
Now be aware if you don't like the software, cause you can be banned. for me it has turned out that if I don't like Flight, please don't say it.
My wish:
MS realize that flight can evolve to a simulator, with AI traffic, online VATSIM and IVAO compatibility, free SDK, airliners etc. And finally we all hardcore and casual gamers will be happily flying
Cheers fellow virtual captains.

As I've said before, I've flown in excess of 400 flights around the world, and when flying FS98 I flew to several of your airports routinely, you improved FS98 greatly, thank you.

Some people don't realize, it is difficult for mild mannered intellectual people, who base their lives on logic, to understand others who have a short fused mentality.

A high ranked MS manager explained to us carefully how the FS series has always been financially successful. Then our hobby was thrown out the Windows, and replaced with Flight, with everything we did not want. (Pun intended.) Edit: After heated arguments.

[alaskancrab]

I don't think MS split the community... I believe it was Intel and Nvidia/AMD putting more transistors on their chips and MSG taking advantage of those newer components that lead to this...ie Technology got ahead of the sim by decade or so :) Blaming moderators is a bit of an exaggeration.

[mith]

..

[Adam24]

But honestly? I prefer FS2000...

[ricardo_NY1]

I don't think MS split the community... I believe it was Intel and Nvidia/AMD putting more transistors on their chips and MSG taking advantage of those newer components that lead to this...ie Technology got ahead of the sim by decade or so :) Blaming moderators is a bit of an exaggeration.

So you think chips and transistors are responsible for turning a long standing software title and turning it into a DLC experiment which has obviously gone wrong.........or are you going to tell me there are even 10+ viewers on any forum's FLIGHT section at any given time? Do you play FLIGHT BLACK OPS?

[alaskancrab]

Yes I do believe it comes down to technology. And no the DLC experiment obviously hasn't failed if George Lucas is personally releasing Flight aircraft. And lets be clear about something, you guys all made yourselves redundant before the product even came out. So your attempts at being in hospitable have worked, I'll give you that much.