Help me remember.

[tigisfat]

I could swear that when Flight was first announced, the press releases made a point of saying they were committed to simulation fans. At what point did they stop using those words? Are we able to pinpoint either a change in marketing or overall strategy? Am I crazy?

[angels355]

There WAS a specific moment in time when things changed. The Games or other management argued with the management from Aces about the driection of the MS FS franchise. Continue to lead the industry in gaming excellence in a full encyclopedic full simulator that stresses current hardware (as has been the custom from the beginning), or whether to dumb it down like a frozen burrito for mass distrbution. Then they glossed over all the things that were important to us in those early press releases you mentioned, I'm trying to find a better way of saying this, basically they lied to us, with a smile on their faces. In military lingo they were WLSoS.

I just loaded up Combat Flight Simulator 3 for the first time ever because I just want to find a Stearman and shoot it down!!

[tigisfat]

It sure seems to be that way, but what if they weren't lying? Wasn't it about 4-5 months ago that things really changed? It can't take THAT much time once you've got a game already built to ease back on the physics and include coin collecting and some other nonsense. At one point, they stopped telling us they cared. It makes me wonder if there was a last minute change of plans. On the other hand, I've heard information that lines up with what we now know for years. I've PM'd quite a few of you over time with that information.

Also, does anyone remember the survey that came out in the wake of the ACES firing? I do. There were some good ideas in it. I'd rather fly a bird simulation where an eagle must protect it's nest than screw around with a ridiculous carplane collecting coins and looking for caches.

[angels355]

My opinion is, it was the Aces vs the schlock management, and the minute the schlock management took over, they substituted quality and good reputation with PR, and were betting that we were just so desperate to fly that we would love anything they gave us. They were delivering #### from the beginning, as soon as the schlock management took over. Did you read what Russell said about his Beta experience in the thread Your Feelings about Microsoft Flight?

[angels355]

What bothers me is, does MS expect us to accept this as their permanent FS franchise format? They went to great lengths at authenticity over the car plane, it makes me wonder.

[angels355]

I have been flying FSX a lot the past six weeks or so, and put FS9 on my new system also. I feel compelled to say that FS9 is still one of the best simulators ever. I like FSX, but am amazed at how good FS9 is. FS9 excellent, FSX excellent, Flight's format has been an incredible disappointment and the Flight management has been proud of these features. I haven't flown it myself, however, it is stripped, etc etc etc.I think they ignored us while they themselves were trying to grab for the gold. Cheap production, quick bucks. PR is no substitute for quality!!

[aircav1970]

Hi guys,it is my opinion that Flight! will shortly fade into obscurity.The people that are simmers already know that this is not a simulation in any way,shape or form.The customer demographics that Spencer/Howard are aiming at are casual gamers that might download the first free package but will hardly spend any of their games budget on DLC that doesn't include some way to blow something up or shoot something down.How they (MS) think is beyond me as to any long term commitment from a customer base that has the attention span of a 5 year old.No offence to the many 5 year olds that are reading this board,but my grandsons,I have 6 of them,are not very excited about this new flying game.They would rather play Ratchet&Clank or whatever on a console than sit down at a PC and play what appears to be a very slow moving game even it if does have great graphics.It would be a great thing if I were to be proven wrong and we,the FS Community,got a lot of new converts to Flight Simulation but unless the individule already had an interest in real world aviation I doubt that playing Flight! on GFWL would cultivate any interest anyway.As I said,this is just my opinion but time will tell.I have been wrong before......

[fxsttcb]

I could swear that when Flight was first announced, the press releases made a point of saying they were committed to simulation fans. At what point did they stop using those words? Are we able to pinpoint either a change in marketing or overall strategy? Am I crazy?Nope, you are not crazy! I had the same early impression. They probably got so many questions, right off the bat, that they responded with their December 8, 2010 explanations. It seems to me that further News Updates, simply didn't expand on the "simulation" aspects. I figured they were already well versed in creating the simulation, and were focusing on enticing their expanded audience. Only the official release, and first DLC made available, will possibly show us more simulation. Fingers crossed!
As a Beta tester, I could see some possibilities, by wandering thru the install, but, the Beta itself did not impress me...Don

[tigisfat]

As a Beta tester, I could see some possibilities, by wandering thru the install, but, the Beta itself did not impress me...Don

Since it's a rehashed FSX, there are more than likely possibilities. Then again, FSX looks better for that.

[n4gix]

Since it's a rehashed FSX, there are more than likely possibilities. Then again, FSX looks better for that.

But is is NOT "a rehashed FSX" at all. There are going to be a lot of folks with very red cheeks on or soon after the 29th.

[tigisfat]

But is is NOT "a rehashed FSX" at all. There are going to be a lot of folks with very red cheeks on or soon after the 29th.You know Bill, I hope so much that I'm wrong that I welcome the embarassment. If I could actually physically eat my words I would do it in front of everyone on the 30th.

I know you're privy to lots of insider information, but there are quite a few others around who are too, and in the past they said other things. That's just the thing though, I haven't heard anything out of them for a while. I didn't make up this 'rehashed fsx' thing on my own, you know.

For my cheeks to be red, every single person who claims to be a beta tester would have to be lying, and there would've had to have been a drastic change of course 6 months ago.

[vonBobo]

But is is NOT "a rehashed FSX" at all. There are going to be a lot of folks with very red cheeks on or soon after the 29th.

That's good to hear!

So you are still playing Flight regularly?

[mgh]

In answer to the OP Microsoft said on 31 August 2010:


Microsoft announces the development of “Microsoft Flight,” a new LIVE enabled Windows exclusive inspired by the best-selling Flight Simulator Franchise.

Twenty-eight years after the debut of “Microsoft Flight Simulator 1.0,” Microsoft Game Studios announces the internal development of “Microsoft Flight.” “Microsoft Flight” will bring a new perspective to the long-standing genre, welcoming everyone, including long-time fans to experience the magic of flight. For continual updates over time and to view a teaser of the future of Flight on the Windows PC, visit www.microsoft.com/games/flight

“Today, we’re bringing powerful, inventive gaming experiences to the Windows-based PC. Over the years, our PC heritage captured the hearts and minds of millions of players. Reinventing these iconic franchises with social, shared experiences at their core marks the beginning of our return to PC gaming in bold new ways.”

No "committment" there.

[angels355]

But is is NOT "a rehashed FSX" at all. There are going to be a lot of folks with very red cheeks on or soon after the 29th.

Bill you're a pal so don't take anything I say the wrong way.

It's my understanding that the Flight engine was revamped to get rid of past legacy stuff, and to improve performance for example off loading more graphics to the GPU's. However Russell and Tig don't like it, and Tig says the physics are bad.

FSX was stripped purposely to make Flight. Take FS98, it is ridiculously complex, worldwide, open ended, customers were known to lose complete control and install aircraft and scenery whenever they darn well pleased. Now think back to that time and tell me whether FS98 would have had larger broader mass appeal if all that complexity, the whole world all those airports, everything were reduced to two planes and the BIg Island Hawaii? FS98 already is extremely small and compact and fits on one cd-rom disk, not even a dvd-rom. The question is absurd, and in this case we have perfect 20/20 vision. Would it have improved sales? No it would have been a complete joke.

When I repair my computers (I've had about 135), I am very careful to to approach it without too big of a head or ego, and to do things cautiously, carefully, and one small step at a time. Because from experience I've found that if I brazenly tear things apart that I could really mess things up unnecessarily because the problem could be elsewhere. Similar to the Hippocratic Oath from medicine that Mike used to always quote: "First do no harm!" They could have retained FS while still removing legacy software. Instead they tore FS apart like a dog ripping apart your favorite Teddy Bear!

The only other purpose I can see to their actions was their adoption of what appears to be an auto junkyard business strategy. Tear it down like a "breaker" (UK term), polish up the pieces, and sell it for high prices piecemeal. However Tig says the physics are crappy, so this is just schlock all the way around.

MS apologized publicly for Windows Millenium Edition, and by the way a man's life hung in the balance while ME was crashing in the most spectacular way I've ever seen before or after (I overcame the problem and saved the man). I would love to be embarrassed if I am wrong about Flight, so bring it on.

After the SDK is released (not) I'll download and install a POSKY or PMDG, or load up their default 747 and fly from Orly to another airport nearby, which is what I did in FSX recently. Howard says that this is a better simulator experience than ever seen before. So let's go, simple flight from Orly to Charles de Gaulle. Unless of course they want to apologize for making one of the most egregious mistakes ever in gaming history. No no 27,000+ airports are just to much for me I can only comprehend 5 airports at most. People just start up Flight Simulator and simply fly around, all the time without the complexity, and then they put it away and sell me their joy sticks. The hardcore simmiers have been making the FS franchise a profit for three decades. It seems to me that the FS franchise is under new management and that they intend for Flight to be its' replacement, while not marketing to us simmers. Daft.

[JSkorna]

Please wait for the 29th and make up your own mind.

[fxsttcb]

No "committment" there.


...we want to directly address the concern that by dropping the “Simulator” from the name, we’re dumbing down the experience. Quite the contrary! We’ve developed on the “simulation” aspect for many years and have no intention of losing that legacy...

As we said in the introduction, we’re still early in the development cycle, so the fact that you comment on the similarity to FSX is great! This comment alone should ease some of the arcade concerns. Close enough to a promise for me...Don

[mgh]

Close enough to a promise for me...Don

Not to me. "No intention" means no more than "No intention now but that may change."

A promise is definite "We will".

[fxsttcb]

Semantics. To me, making a statement of "no intention", when attempting to alleviate fears, or anxieties, is as good as saying "will not".
Using definitives, is against all that is Holy, in the marketing world anyhow...Don

[angels355]

I could swear that the schools diluted the beef with soy, these ratios seem analogous to me:

PR/ Flight Simulator = soy/beef

[mgh]

Semantics. To me, making a statement of "no intention", when attempting to alleviate fears, or anxieties, is as good as saying "will not".
Using definitives, is against all that is Holy, in the marketing world anyhow...Don
Exactly and Microsoft employs good marketing people (and lawyers) which is why it never made any sort of committment/promise etc.

[Paxx]

Exactly and Microsoft employs good marketing people (and lawyers) which is why it never made any sort of committment/promise etc.

Good marketing and lawyers is debatable.

However they have made a "commitment" as in " ... we remain committed to the Flight Simulator franchise for the long term.", (http://www.microsoft.com/Products/Games/FSInsider/news/Pages/AMessageFromAces.aspx) which was stated previous to your quote. Please don't re-hash our previous argument about semantics again.

So while "a" "commitment" was made, how the "commitment" (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/) is fulfilled remains the matter of discourse. That they say " ... and have no intention of losing that legacy" (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/#news2) is all well and good. Whether it actually happens or not remains to be seen, marketing and lawyers aside.

[angels355]

good marketing and lawyers is debatable.

However they have made a "commitment" as in " ... We remain committed to the flight simulator franchise for the long term.", (http://www.microsoft.com/products/games/fsinsider/news/pages/amessagefromaces.aspx) which was stated previous to your quote. Please don't re-hash our previous argument about semantics again.

So while "a" "commitment" was made, how the "commitment" (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/) is fulfilled remains the matter of discourse. That they say " ... And have no intention of losing that legacy" (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/#news2) is all well and good. Whether it actually happens or not remains to be seen, marketing and lawyers aside.

catch this chocolate!

[JSkorna]

And seeing we are playing the usual word games, with the usual people, and going around in circles chasing tail, this is done. Now only 3 days before release.