Where next for FLIGHT?

[benEggleston16]

In FLIGHT, lots of FLIGHT and real-world flying trivia appears when loading a flight, some indicates interesting direction for FLIGHT and some are genuinely interesting for real-world.

Some of the things mentioned about FLIGHT include 'some aerocaches may require a helicopter', indicating helicopters were in the work. It also mentions you can see aircraft in develpment in the FLIGHT website and suggest aircraft to develop. If averything mentioned is really going to happen, FLIGHT couls be promising with AI, user customisable weather and ATC. Also if you look at the availible achievements, some will require specialise aircraft such as 'fly at 50k feet', 'fly at 80k feet', 'break the sound barrier', achieve mach 2' and so on.

I think it is clear the 'point' of FLIGHT is to communicate the wonder of (real) Flight, I think they make that clear in the interviews with the staff members. The aircraft I thiknk sum that up as well, the Steaman from the Golden Age, the state of the art sportsplane Icon A5, the iconic Mustang and the kit built Vans, a home built bucket0of-bolts flying, mankind's age old dream.

So what planes do you think are in the works? We know you want to see fully functioning jetliners but I don't think that's likely so realistically, in keeping with the 'theme', what do you think will happen?
I think the helicopter will either be a golfish-bowl like the Bell 47 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_47
Or the popular MD500 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MD500
Hopefully though it will be the iconic Huey, a long-time favourite in Military, firefighting and civilian gisuises (I don't think MS will care much for the differences between the 212,412,UH-1 etc) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Huey_family

For planes, I think there will be the Hawk in RAF, Red Arrows, other air forces and Goshawk liveries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Hawk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-45_Goshawk
I think there will be lots of trainers, such as the AlphaJet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault/Dornier_Alpha_Jet or the L-39 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_L-39_Albatros, the sort you might see at Reno.
I think there will be some of the quirky early jet fighters such as the L-5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_F-5 aka, MiG-28!
Or the F-104 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-104
And some of the European early attmepts, the single engined jets such as the Mystere http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Myst%C3%A8re_IV EE Lighning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Electric_Lightning or one of the MiGs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mig_15

For civilian aircraft, I think there will be gliders, mainly small trainers like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schleicher_ASK_21 or motor glider like the Grob 109 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grob_G_109 or a return of the good old SGS 2-32 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schweizer_SGS_2-32

For powered planes, there are so many I couldn't possibly speculate, but I think we haven't seen the ends of kit planes. I'm pretty sure a Beaver will be in the works though, or perhaps a twin otter. We're still a while off jets though. I think the future is bright though, the default planes have fully functioning and easy-to-use systems with tutorials, which makes start-up shut down less tricky for the newcomers who might migrate to FSX

[csefton]

The futures Bright?.........I fail to see much if any light at the end of this tunnel am afraid........i cant see how anyone can be so enthused about Flight especially someone who already has FSX...it offers nothing really new or exciting whatsoever...Flight is aimed more at newcomers to try and stimulate the market in ways that benefit Microsoft and not really for proper flightsimmers....
As for your questions on what planes MAY be available in the future...well that all depends on whether enough interest is shown by enough people in selling the ones already on offer for them to justify further development of new ones..your speculation and links to numerous aircraft serves no purpose at all and most of the aircraft you mention are already available for FSX anyway so why wish them or fantasize about them for flight?

[azzaro]

Were there is life, there is hope. :) — Bob

[raimondo2]

Were there is life, there is hope. :) — Bob

without an sdk and open architecture - there NO hope ! that is the very core on what everysite - file library - third parites addon makers - freeware and payware is built upon.

tell me where is the light brighteness you see without the lifeblood of what this community has been build upon - becouse im one of those who fail to see it - --- regarding Microsoft Flight Simulator. Rest in Peace - Till FSX last good !! than is Dark - unless Ms come out with somenthing. You have to understand that flight simulation communities - sites - developers etc etc are Financially Dependent from What Microsoft deliver on the market. Flight as is now is not going to provide any financial support to anybody other than Ms. How do you expect developers to continue develop ?? How do you expect sites to pay for servers bandwidht and repairs - staff ??

With the released of flight as is - Sites have already missed the opportunity to build some more traffic - developers lost revenue - in return sites will get less ads - online shops with the arriving of flight dlc will loose further sales - and you say that the future is bright ??

I know a country where they see everthing positive and nobody is allowed to express concern or negativity - North Korea !!

My honest opinion - Microsoft is going for the kill / end of third parties addon - they have this in mind since long time - i personally heard back 7 years ago of this intention from very very good sources - and now is becoming reality !! - which inevitably have a catastrophic effect on all those who are financially dependent on that - than offcourse - other platform can be developed - but i remember when some of the formula 1 teams want to start a new league on their own - and Ecclestone answer them - 'You are free to do what you pleased but it will not be Formula 1'.

ray

[ViperPilot2]

raimondo2,

From the tone of your post, I gather your feeling is that Microsoft is 'obligated' to provide a product to the 'hardcore' FS market.

My question is... What is it that you expect Microsoft to provide to the 'hard core' Flight Simulation enthusiast?

Just curious...

[raimondo2]

raimondo2,

From the tone of your post, I gather your feeling is that Microsoft is 'obligated' to provide a product to the 'hardcore' FS market.

My question is... What is it that you expect Microsoft to provide to the 'hard core' Flight Simulation enthusiast?

Just curious...

For me is not a problem - and offcourse Ms is not obliged to provide FS11 - with sdk etc etc

Your question is complex - more than it look like -

but here - there are establishments like indeed flightsim.com - that have supported a Microsoft product for many many years - deliver lots to its fans - note the file library is for free - and now have in one way told by ms - good bye - - and tx very much.

I do not think that is fear - after all those years of great support offered to the franchise.

Remember that flight is the product of many years of research - that it was also supported by indeed sites life flightsim.com - and others trhough their hard work in keeping the Franchise fans happy with the delivery of freeware - article etc etc - - and i strongly believed all this who work to make flight simulator better through many many years of hard work deserve better than be completely kicked in the a..e.

In my opinion if Ms would have been Fear to all of us - out here - They would have released flight as is - but with an sdk - and the ability to add addons - for those who want a more complete simulator.

[ViperPilot2]

raimondo2,

I understand and appreciate the fact that many companies, individuals, and places like FlightSim.com have supported and provided many add ons and enhancements to MSFS, all to the delight of FS enthusiasts worldwide.

What I'm trying to say is that Microsoft really has only one 'obligation'... that's to their Shareholders and Investors; to provide the best return on their financial investment. If Microsoft decided that the FS genre needed
to go in another direction, well it's their right to feel that way and to do what's needed to achieve that goal.

I know it's not fair to the thousands of FS enthusiasts around the globe, but that's just how it is. The sooner we realize that fact, accept it and move on with our lives will be better off for the FS Community as a whole.

Look... I love the F-14 Tomcat. As a US taxpayer I had a stake in the success of the airplane, and it was in Top Gun, to boot! When the US Navy replaced the Tomcat with the Super Hornet sure I was disappointed! But, what can you do?
The Navy's calling the shots; I may not like it, but those are the facts.

[raimondo2]

yes;

i fully agree - that is how it is - and i would add - unfortunately !

[benEggleston16]

The futures Bright?.........I fail to see much if any light at the end of this tunnel am afraid........i cant see how anyone can be so enthused about Flight especially someone who already has FSX...it offers nothing really new or exciting whatsoever...Flight is aimed more at newcomers to try and stimulate the market in ways that benefit Microsoft and not really for proper flightsimmers....
As for your questions on what planes MAY be available in the future...well that all depends on whether enough interest is shown by enough people in selling the ones already on offer for them to justify further development of new ones..your speculation and links to numerous aircraft serves no purpose at all and most of the aircraft you mention are already available for FSX anyway so why wish them or fantasize about them for flight?

When i said the future's bright, I meant the quality of the game was not as bad as you might expect for a GAME, the scenery and performance are better than FSX. As for my speculation, that was what this thread is for, I asked people to say where they thought FLIGHT would go, not critcise ohers opinions or MS. MS's mind is made up, this is the path they're going, i don't think a boycott of DLC affecting perhaps 200 simmers is going to change their mind much or indeed anything else the angry memebers of the forums can do.


without an sdk and open architecture - there NO hope ! that is the very core on what everysite - file library - third parites addon makers - freeware and payware is built upon.

There is still a chance for that, though it is unlikely. When i said the future was bright, I meant the game indicated there would be more realistic content in development (like AI and ATC), which was better than some had feared, obviously I didn't mean it would be FS11

[Capt_Flappers]

in response to the question in the thread title: "Where next for FLIGHT?" ..... easy answer for me... recycle bin.... perhaps in the future if they make it more of a simulator and less of a game I may try it again, but in it's current form it is definitely a game and not a simulator, at least not a simulator on par with fs9/fsx. when they add things that make a simulator more realistic, such as atc, ai traffic, etc I may give it another shot, but for now it is in the recycle bin

[torkermax]

I meant the game indicated there would be more realistic content in development (like AI and ATC)

Not sure where the game indicated this? If you are referring to the pak/cfg, files its not proofing anything. Flight was going to be a different animal at one time and I suspect those ar legacy items. There is no indication ai,atc will if ever be implemented. I suspect whats next will be more , small DLC's. Perhaps another small scenery and maybe a simple aircraft. (Glider)

[benEggleston16]

I meant the game indicated there would be more realistic content in development (like AI and ATC)

Not sure where the game indicated this? If you are referring to the pak/cfg, files its not proofing anything. Flight was going to be a different animal at one time and I suspect those ar legacy items. There is no indication ai,atc will if ever be implemented.

The text in the middle of the loading screen. It changes constantly, so you might not have seen the particular ones YET

[kevhead]

in response to the question in the thread title: "Where next for FLIGHT?" ..... easy answer for me... recycle bin.... perhaps in the future if they make it more of a simulator and less of a game I may try it again, but in it's current form it is definitely a game and not a simulator, at least not a simulator on par with fs9/fsx. when they add things that make a simulator more realistic, such as atc, ai traffic, etc I may give it another shot, but for now it is in the recycle bin

I bet if people just hold on to their pants for a minute you might get what you want. Have faith you must my padiwan. :D

[raimondo2]

According to some major developers - at aerosoft - :

I am surprised so many people call FLIGHT a free demo. That is not at all as I understand it. And I certainly did not get that impression from the discussions with Microsoft we had over the last month. What you see is what you get. There will not be a 'bigger' version, there will only be DLC that expands the game. Some of the DLC might have new options but adding stuff like AI traffic or real time weather is very hard to add later on without serious rewriting.

Flight is what it is and that is what you will get. Dreaming of a full blow flight simulator is not going to happen. It is real fun to read Flight is very good but i would like to see Atc - boeings - full world coverage - or - add my pmdg to flight etc etc. That is what exactly those who are against exactly say and what exactly is missing - therefore lose interest and call it a game and not a simulator - becouse main ingredients to simulate a live realistic flight are missing - like real weather - Vatsim Atc - real world flight plans - etc etc - Flight do not simulate all these things.

[Paxx]

I bet if people just hold on to their pants for a minute you might get what you want. Have faith you must my padiwan. :D

Faith in Microsoft comes with a diminishing return lately.

[ViperPilot2]

Have faith you must my padawan. :D

Master Yoda says,

"DLC for Flight shall be, you will see. Have patience, and the distant path it will, shine bright."

[csefton]

When i said the future's bright, I meant the quality of the game was not as bad as you might expect for a GAME, the scenery and performance are better than FSX. As for my speculation, that was what this thread is for, I asked people to say where they thought FLIGHT would go, not critcise ohers opinions or MS. MS's mind is made up, this is the path they're going, i don't think a boycott of DLC affecting perhaps 200 simmers is going to change their mind much or indeed anything else the angry memebers of the forums can do.




If you cant take any criticism then Dont post daft threads on 'Flight' asking pointless questions if you dont like honest answers from other members!..and you should learn to say what you mean...how can you say '''When i said the future's bright, I meant the quality of the game was not as bad'''..and still expect other members to be able to interpret your confused statements and unravel what you really meant????.......'where will flight go?'..what's next?...seriously who cares? ...apart from a few hopefuls that still cling to desperate hope most of us can already see where its going!..and the vast majority of us wont be following it!...

...this is a kiddies game pure and simple..its not a real simulation and i seriously doubt MS will be doing any u-turns any time soon or releasing a sdk either a free one or commercial 3dr party licensed one......you say the future is Bright when in reality you are now saying what you really meant this game wasnt as bad as we expected!...lmao!...they are two different statements entirely talk about confusion. :rolleyes:

[CaptainMidnight]

There is myth and there is reality. The myth is what we want Flight to be (and it isn't) and the reality is this is it so just accept it for what it is and move on or back whatever. Stop the hand-ringing.

The problem is there are two issues here. There are two breed of cats on this forum. A-the guy who wants a simulator. Flight is not this and never will be. B-the guy who wants to go and fly and have some fun and doesn't care much about the technical or practical aspects of flying. Flight is for guy B not A.

I mean, if ever MS was telling you something, when you start the program the first thing you have is being behind an aircraft and told to "fly" with no instruction or familiarization. If that doesn't shout game I don't know what does.

Everybody, just say to yourselves over and over again MS created a nice game to make a lot of money for themselves. Once you accept that you will all be happier and those who just enjoy flight for what it is can have this forum back to discuss it in the proper frame.

[ViperPilot2]

There is myth and there is reality. The myth is what we want Flight to be (and it isn't) and the reality is this is it so just accept it for what it is and move on or back whatever. Stop the hand-ringing.

The problem is there are two issues here. There are two breed of cats on this forum. A-the guy who wants a simulator. Flight is not this and never will be. B-the guy who wants to go and fly and have some fun and doesn't care much about the technical or practical aspects of flying. Flight is for guy B not A.

I mean, if ever MS was telling you something, when you start the program the first thing you have is being behind an aircraft and told to "fly" with no instruction or familiarization. If that doesn't shout game I don't know what does.

Everybody, just say to yourselves over and over again MS created a nice game to make a lot of money for themselves. Once you accept that you will all be happier and those who just enjoy flight for what it is can have this forum back to discuss it in the proper frame.

If only more people would listen to the points you make... it would be a much calmer place. :D

[azzaro]

Maybe I just prefer to see the potential instead of the gloom. (although, my wife would tell you otherwise).
Any high-profile flight product is good for the hobby. Just look at the stir it's caused around here.
Maybe another developer will see this outpouring of emotion as a siren call to profit. (I'm talking to you Orbx.)
The hardcore simulation market may be too scant for Microsoft, but plenty of others have reaped it's rewards.
I see renewed, interest and increased opportunity. To quote Martha Stewart, "That's a good thing!" — Bob

[ronzo155]

[adding "AI" or "Real Weather" is very hard without serious rewriting]???

How many "AI", and "Real Weather" addons are there for FSX?

Apparently; some people didn't think it was that hard.

I think the developers that created the software, would be capable of adding these things.

RB

[ricardo_NY1]

I think we will be seeing a lot more if they do well with their DLC sales, however......I'll point out that for some, it's still not going to be considered a shift towards investing in FLIGHT. I personally do not like the idea of having to depend on requests (Begging for that matter depending on who you're asking to produce a product), or one entity for everything. Neither does the eat what we feed you thing go well with me. I'd rather deal with a product like WOAI as opposed to anything else, not because of the price of it (Free), but because it gives you more control to customize it. I have good reason to believe that the major developers would systematically cover everything from airports to aircraft that I could care for without having to say a word...........I don't have that faith in the team over there.

[fxsttcb]

Not sure where the game indicated this? If you are referring to the pak/cfg, files its not proofing anything. Flight was going to be a different animal at one time and I suspect those ar legacy items.Those original FSX files were not written in *.xml.
The software giant that MS is, would possibly allow them to write tools for translations from Hex, C, C++, to xml, but, what I have seen does not comply with any pre-existing xml tool/sdk I'm aware of.
Those entries do not follow the FSX SDK syntax/terminology and have been rewritten to accomodate Flight's verbage. My impression is it is fresh, new code...Don

[benEggleston16]

If you cant take any criticism then Dont post daft threads on 'Flight' asking pointless questions if you dont like honest answers from other members!..and you should learn to say what you mean...how can you say '''When i said the future's bright, I meant the quality of the game was not as bad'''..and still expect other members to be able to interpret your confused statements and unravel what you really meant????.......'where will flight go?'..what's next?...seriously who cares? ...apart from a few hopefuls that still cling to desperate hope most of us can already see where its going!..and the vast majority of us wont be following it!...

...this is a kiddies game pure and simple..its not a real simulation and i seriously doubt MS will be doing any u-turns any time soon or releasing a sdk either a free one or commercial 3dr party licensed one......you say the future is Bright when in reality you are now saying what you really meant this game wasnt as bad as we expected!...lmao!...they are two different statements entirely talk about confusion. :rolleyes:

If the thread is so daft why are you replying to it? You will clearly be at loggerheads with everything I say so can you let others try and voice their opinion rather than get the whole thing locked. If you just wanted to point out how daft the thread was, and how bad Flight is, youve done that, thank you, your opinion is appreciated, you need say No more. As for who cares where Flight is going, the fact that anyone replied shows some do, so let them speak

[benEggleston16]

Maybe I just prefer to see the potential instead of the gloom. (although, my wife would tell you otherwise).
Any high-profile flight product is good for the hobby. Just look at the stir it's caused around here.
Maybe another developer will see this outpouring of emotion as a siren call to profit. (I'm talking to you Orbx.)
The hardcore simulation market may be too scant for Microsoft, but plenty of others have reaped it's rewards.
I see renewed, interest and increased opportunity. To quote Martha Stewart, "That's a good thing!" — Bob
That's the right mindset...not all optimism is misplaced