Lets stop bashing something we all want

[Paxx]

Lets lighten up guys. Flight's flaws with version 1.0 are being recalculated. The community has spoken, and with the MS expected newbs being absent, they have listened. Now we are experiencing what is called a reprieve while they collectively realign reality with certain corporate goals. It's pretty obvious they need us more than we need them. While it is sad that such partnerships (the 29 year legacy/MS) have digressed upon an unwanted tangent, they'll learn, they'll adapt and provide. They have too. It is after all, the only way they can get some cash out of us and the new market. It is really that simple.

We, with the privilege of having FSX/FS9, and the wisdom that comes from familiarity with the old, have very little to fear from the present lack of leadership that has failed the Flight Team. Microsoft support can yell "that title is no longer supported" all they want, wizened Flightsim.com members will provide what Microsoft lacks for those interested in freedom (FSX support). Plenty of "content" is still being provided by the 3rd party devs for the old titles, I seriously doubt in the long run Microsoft will be foolish enough to ignore the basic reason we all have enjoyed an almost 30 year ride/flight. I say we because without us, Bruce Artwick's vision of fun in the sky would never have happened (no disrespect to Bruce implied). Bruce launched an enduring niche that a present corporate board room has trouble dealing with because his vision was all about freedom. A very American construct that will continue to prove Bruce's vision correct. Our attitude will not change, sim aviators demand we respect ourselves and others in the context of that freedom. Welcoming newbs, when they show up, is all part of that brotherhood. Appreciating a slapped together "something new" - not so much.

They'll get it right because, once again, they have to in order to be successful, and at this point for the Microsoft Flight Team failure is not an option.

Personally I'm looking forward to version 2. I expect it soon. For their sake, and ours.

[Nels_Anderson]

Flight's flaws with version 1.0 are being recalculated.

Has Microsoft announced some change in policy related to Flight? If so, where was this announced?

[Paxx]

Supposition and a few PMs/emails on my part, nothing more.

[azzaro]

OK, one final attempt at quelling the rebellion, then I'll just shut up and enjoy myself. Let the ravening hoards do their worst!

I have used Flight for 15 hours now, bought all the addons (except the P-51) and tried out most of its aspects, from the gameier portions to full unassisted, uncluttered simulaton. I have to say my appreciation for this simulator grows by the minute. It is proving to be a solid, well conceived, and exremely immersive experience. Of course, there is room for improvement, and it will never be everything everyone wants (what is?), but what I see so far is a massive jump in realism, as far as the basics of simulation go. It feels far more real. (yes, I am a RW pilot) The mesh stays put, objects are solid, collision areas conform to the visual model, the physics have much more subtlety. Textures conform to the mesh infinitely better then FSX default. Roads and rivers do not run randomly over landscape. No floating houses and buildings sticking out of hillsides. The basic sim is sound and well designed. Like FSX and FS9 before that, it will continue to grow and improve. For the price of a single ORBX airport (on sale) I have the entire state of Hawaii at a level of realism and detail previously unavailable, (no, photoscenery doesn't count, it only looks real from 10,000ft) four very well modeled aircraft, with multiple paints, and many hours of missions, challenges and goals to keep me interested and exploring. And, even better! I still have FSX, with all it's add-ons and improvements, to enjoy for years to come! So, what's not to like! For any of you who haven't given Flight a fair shake — try it! With an open mind. You've nothing to loose but your preconceptions. — Bob

[aircav1970]

Personally,I find it to be much the same on all the forums I visit including other game forums that I peruse.There always seems to be that "this one is better than the new one" mentality on everything. I play games from Bethesda called The Elder Scrolls,I started playing Oblivion before Skyrim came out and it was the same over there, one clique perfered Morrowind,one was sure that Oblivion was better,the Oblivion guys were sure that Oblivion was better than Skyrim and so on....same with the Sony forums dealing with Gran Turismo vs M$'s Forza....now here we are.... FSX is better...no Flight is better......I say you can enjoy them all, each is different and have their pros and cons. Keep flying whatever makes you smile and just enjoy the fact that we keep on getting new things to keep us interested.Life is too short to worry about trivial stuff like "mine's better than your's" :)

[torkermax]

"getting new things"

Should this not say "selling new things" ?

[mgh]

Supposition and a few PMs/emails on my part, nothing more.

Wishful thinking then?

[alaskancrab]

I think the freedom aspect is relative.. depends where you are coming from. As a GTA fan I like the freedom to be able to get out of an aircraft and walk around the hangers, see the reflection in the glass. As an FS fan certainly hawaii is like being a whale in a swimming pool.

Technically, folks should know that FSX was never meant for the "connected" world of the internet. And I feel if we've lost the freedom to create it's important to realize there is no model in the connected arena that doesn't have a firewall between the user and the application. Losing that "homebrew" aspect is a big lost. And there are people even with the Xbox who can't believe that MS would sell them essentially a computer but never give you the password to login. So some comprimise has to be reached, as sometimes the homebrew crowd is the last bunch of folks you want to deal with. You see it from day one people jumping to decompile the .pak. At some point the novelty of buying an aircraft instantly is going to wear off and they'll need to open up.

[ScatterbrainKid]

I'm an FSX player and haven't got Flight.
What's the design philosophy behind Flight?
I mean, why did they bring it out? What does it offer that other sims don't? Shall i buy it?

[loki]

Shall i buy it?

It's free, so you can download it and try it out.

[angels355]

I'm an FSX player and haven't got Flight.
What's the design philosophy behind Flight?
I mean, why did they bring it out? What does it offer that other sims don't? Shall i buy it?

Games Studio mgrs I understand or other MS managers, argued w/ Aces Studio managers about the direction of the FS franchise. Since the Games Studio was so much more successful it appears they won the argument and the entire Aces dept was fired, and work stopped on FS11 and TS2. MSGS basically took FSX, stripped out EVERYTHING except the missions idea, and expanded on the missions. So basically it's all about adventures and missions. Joshua Howard the mgr of Flight doesn't believe in the whole world, and vast empty spaces like deserts and oceans, and being a game person wants to make Flight simplified and short term fun. No jets or 26 hour nonstop IFR flights, or 68 hour nonstop RTW flights. No atc. He wants to have only small regions to explore and have missions and adventures, because that is more fun for the masses. The free base Flight is intended for mass distribution in the hope that people will like it and buy more, and make more money for MS, it's a new marketing strategy. It comes w/ Hawaii the big Island and one plane, w/ Live account you get a 2nd plane. All other scenery and planes are to be purchased exclusively through MS, no SDK no 3rd party addons from freeware or payware developers, and that's the way it's going to be for two years. Now the state of HI is available for purchase plus a couple of planes. Next will be the state of AK and presumably more planes. The format is similar to "Pilot Wings" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_rLhWzZZp8&feature=player_embedded

You can try it for free and see how you like it.

I was thinking it would be nice if FSX got an SP3.

[alaskancrab]

or it's built to the standards of the Japanese video game industry... either or take your pick. No big secret that it's simply not a buggy windows application. :)

[raimondo2]

Games Studio mgrs I understand or other MS managers, argued w/ Aces Studio managers about the direction of the FS franchise. Since the Games Studio was so much more successful it appears they won the argument and the entire Aces dept was fired, and work stopped on FS11 and TS2. MSGS basically took FSX, stripped out EVERYTHING except the missions idea, and expanded on the missions. So basically it's all about adventures and missions. Joshua Howard the mgr of Flight doesn't believe in the whole world, and vast empty spaces like deserts and oceans, and being a game person wants to make Flight simplified and short term fun. No jets or 26 hour nonstop IFR flights, or 68 hour nonstop RTW flights. No atc. He wants to have only small regions to explore and have missions and adventures, because that is more fun for the masses. The free base Flight is intended for mass distribution in the hope that people will like it and buy more, and make more money for MS, it's a new marketing strategy. It comes w/ Hawaii the big Island and one plane, w/ Live account you get a 2nd plane. All other scenery and planes are to be purchased exclusively through MS, no SDK no 3rd party addons from freeware or payware developers, and that's the way it's going to be for two years. Now the state of HI is available for purchase plus a couple of planes. Next will be the state of AK and presumably more planes. The format is similar to "Pilot Wings" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_rLhWzZZp8&feature=player_embedded

You can try it for free and see how you like it.

I was thinking it would be nice if FSX got an SP3.



And that is exactly why the majority of Simmers say NO to Flight !

However the only way Microsoft can come out of this Flight Fiasco is to release an sdk and allow modelling of existing areas and addons to be added - only than - simmers will become more interested - and in return More cash will be generated as Many will buy the DLC on which the game is builded upon.

[jomni]

Introducing uncontrolled 3rd party may result into instability that they worked hard to get rid of. :P
But it's only a matter of helping 3rd party developers cope with the SDK and having a strict add-on approval process.

[fxsttcb]

No big secret that it's simply not a buggy windows application.Kinda confused at that. Not a Windows Application? Or not Buggy?
It works on Windows 7 so the prior is moot. For the 2nd, it's Buggy as a day is long for me. Others can't even install it without a myriad of errors. Care to clarify?


Introducing uncontrolled 3rd party may result into instability that they worked hard to get rid of. :PGlad you didn't say "successfully got rid of"...Don

BTW I am impressed with what I see, so far, just struggling with lag, stutters, and hangs. Something that isn't present, any longer, in FS9 or FSX.

[raimondo2]

Introducing uncontrolled 3rd party may result into instability that they worked hard to get rid of. :P
But it's only a matter of helping 3rd party developers cope with the SDK and having a strict add-on approval process.

No Public Sdk - with an open directory where simmers can add their own creation or a creation by their favorite authors without restriction = Lost Sales for Flight !! the ball is on Ms garden now.

[n4gix]

And that is exactly why the majority of Simmers say NO to Flight !

How do you "know" that it is in fact "the majority?" Is that a "gut feeling" or do you have some verifiable statistics no one else is privy to?

Microsoft Flight comes in 2nd as most played GFWL this past week...

...check it out! http://majornelson.com/2012/03/07/live-activity-for-week-of-february-27/

[shanwick]

This thread, like so many others elsewhere on the web, reminds me of my office days before I retired. Everyone would complain to each other about the poor salary raise they had received as if their colleagues could do anything about it. The only person who could do anything was the boss but they never complained to him.

Likewise, everybody moans about Flight to everyone else in forums instead of making their complains to the people who CAN do something about it - Microsoft.

And, just in case you want to know, I am not a Flight user because it does not have the features that I would like in a flight simulator - but I don't bash the living daylights out of Flight either.

David

[raimondo2]

How do you "know" that it is in fact "the majority?" Is that a "gut feeling" or do you have some verifiable statistics no one else is privy to?

Microsoft Flight comes in 2nd as most played GFWL this past week...

...check it out! http://majornelson.com/2012/03/07/live-activity-for-week-of-february-27/

That does not mean much as it does not reflect the number of dlc they sold - up to now - and also flight is a new game - it is obvious that xboxers try it out - is free - but for how long it is a completely different story - time will tell - this explain mjornelson surge of users to flight.
Also im refering to simmers and not xbox gamers - a complete different category of users.

Files libraries across the web - do not show a decrease in downloads - that mean exactly what i meant - that the majority of simmers are still downloading and indeed using others simulators.

[rhumbaflappy]

You are stating that 3rd party developers are the cause of perceived or real instabilities in FSX? In what possible way? The software was developed completely by Microsoft. They own all the responsibility for instabilities.

Joshua Howard also has stated that Flight is closed to 3rd party developers as Microsoft wishes to avoid the "mess" that developed with FSX. I would also ask him... in what possible way did 3rd party developers cause any "mess". All 3rd party addons are optional. How could that be leading to a mess, when you can simply uninstall any addons?

If you are meaning "instability" or "mess" is equivalent to "complicated", then yes... FSX and preceding sims did become more complex as 3rd party developers added increasingly more detailed content. To simulate a 737 long distance flight with great detail, it's going to be complicated... but not necessarily unstable or messy.

Microsoft has already stated in their xbox addon guidelines (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/Community/Developer/Rules) that they may simply take your idea and incorporate it into their game without your permission:


If you add to the game universe or expand on the story told in the game with “lost chapters” or back story or anything like that, distribution of your Item in any form constitutes a grant by you of a royalty-free, non-exclusive, transferable, worldwide, license to Microsoft and any of Microsoft’s partners to use and distribute that Item (and derivatives of that Item) for any purpose and without obligation to pay you anything or credit you. This means that your story or idea may appear in a future game without any compensation to you. (Sorry, but our lawyers tell us we need to do this in order to avoid frivolous lawsuits getting in the way of making more great games.)

This leads to the truth concerning Microsoft's new attitude concerning 3rd party addons. It's not about controlling instability or mess. It's about controlling all content to the point that any addons become the sole property of Microsoft "without any compensation to you. (Sorry". They can, and probably will, profit by this reverse piracy, should they release any SDK.

There are no instabilities caused by 3rd party developers in former sims. There is only a lack of profit for Microsoft in 3rd party addons in former sims.

Sorry about what may be seen as a rant. And I don't mean any disrespect to anyone. But there is a truth here. Microsoft has a new marketing stategy concerning Flight. And they do intend to protect their new turf. Essentially, they have become the 3rd party developer... the sole commercial addon developer for a free game.

Incidentally, Flight runs great on my older computer, and is fun for me to play.

Dick

[ScatterbrainKid]

.......So basically it's all about adventures and missions...........You can try it for free and see how you like it...


Ach soooo...'Adventures and missions', thanks, now i know.
Their marketing and advertising isn't so hot or i'd have known that already instead of having to ask in this forum.
Also the name 'Microsoft Flight' is pretty mundane and doesn't exactly make it stand out (yawn).
I downloaded the free demo a couple of weeks ago, maybe they hope that'll do its talking for it, but it did nothing for me, I was made to fly a slalom course betwwen a row of balloons and got bored, and the graphics were nothing to write home about so i uninstalled.
Good luck to it though, as a mission-based sim with a whole new bunch of missions sounds a nice 'fun' concept and will be a good selling point for those who want sims with mission objectives to aim for, rather than just stooging aimlessly around (like in FSX), but as i'm a lazy stooger I'm happy to stick with FSX..:)

[alaskancrab]

rhumba: Interesting questions... maybe the community should have had this discussion a year ago when it actually mattered.

[Bartbear]

Just to inform: a review of Flight in eurogamer.net:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-08-microsoft-flight-review

[ScatterbrainKid]

Just to inform: a review of Flight in eurogamer.net:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-08-microsoft-flight-review

Yeah, the reviewer puts it in a nutshell when he says "it's a game, not a flight sim", and that they avoided having the dreaded word 'Sim ' in the title to underline the fact.
Incidentally he says proper flight sims are so complicated that they put people off, that's an urban myth i'd dispute, because sims can be as simple or as complicated as you like.
For example i jump into the FSX cockpit, slam open the throttle and i'm away, getting along just fine by waggling the joystick and using a few memorised keys without having to look at the manual.

[angels355]

Introducing uncontrolled 3rd party may result into instability that they worked hard to get rid of. :P
But it's only a matter of helping 3rd party developers cope with the SDK and having a strict add-on approval process.

No offense amigo but that is just PR, no truth to it, the reason is they want to take all of the money from the addons that they exclusively offer. And it is just a Game Studio game, it is not a full complete simulator, and so for producing much less, they are hoping to charge us five or more times the price of FS. As Mr Howard has said, paraphrasing, "the fan base is willing to do anything to support this hobby". They are counting on us to lose our minds like aviators normally do and mindlessly by a lesser product for much more.

[angels355]

No Public Sdk - with an open directory where simmers can add their own creation or a creation by their favorite authors without restriction = Lost Sales for Flight !! the ball is on Ms garden now.

Yes, and that is a CLOSED garden. I hope that they have constructed a round spherical world so a real world could be constructed on top of it later.

[alaskancrab]

even if it was public.. they'd just turn the NGX into a game... right?

[angels355]

This thread, like so many others elsewhere on the web, reminds me of my office days before I retired. Everyone would complain to each other about the poor salary raise they had received as if their colleagues could do anything about it. The only person who could do anything was the boss but they never complained to him.

Likewise, everybody moans about Flight to everyone else in forums instead of making their complains to the people who CAN do something about it - Microsoft.

And, just in case you want to know, I am not a Flight user because it does not have the features that I would like in a flight simulator - but I don't bash the living daylights out of Flight either.

David

Thanks for the post David. I had employers who bashed the living daylights out of me! They were unbending, antagonistic, and chewed us out for asking for salary advances (needed them because they paid us so little). To win in that situation I had to get a second full time job plus overtime where I was paid twice as much base, plus regular overtime, plus bonuses, and commissions, and the food was grilled salmon instead of the deli platter, at least in the beginning. The managers were hostile, and the man who was hired and then promoted over me despite my seniority, trampled over me to his new position, and he was hostile too. Could not even speak to them in a normal manner. I said to him "I've been looking at Porsches, I was thinking of buying one. What do you think?" Without hesitating he turned and YELLED at me, "I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE MAKING AND YOU CAN'T AFFORD A PORSCHE!!" Then spun around and stomped out. At that time I was making thee times his pay. I wasn't able to buy that beautiful black Porsche however because not long after they fired me disrupting my efforts on the Porsche. It was all my fault, firstly I had boosted classical music sales, but because I was only a classical pianist I was not really a classical musician and not qualified to do the job I had been doing for four years, they replaced me with someone much more PC and inept. I was sent to the magazine department, my hard work boosted sales by 40%, however I stopped one of their favorites from stealing a magazine, I even bought it for her with a bag and receipt. She was so angry she had me fired just like that. Sales in magazines plummeted as I had told my good exec boss in CA they would. The manager got in trouble also several times with the law in her pricing methods. She was fired not long after, and the head of security came to me at my 2nd job and told me all about it.

Just saying, management is not always approachable, and often doesn't listen at all. Mr Howard knows very well all about our desires and wishes, but he and they rejected that direction with great zeal and the Aces Studio where the full Flight Simulator was produced were fired. They know what we want, they are not listening.

In my opinion, FSX is 2.0 now with Orbx, Rex, perhaps also the new ATC addons, and weather addons. It may progress further to 3.0. I still like FS9, it's a masterpiece.


To possibly win in this situation, analogous to my above story, I may have to get my own twin engine plane. After all that is as real as it gets! MS knows what we want, and they are not listening at all. The reason is that they feel that they can make more money packaging this as a game, and selling addons and expansions piece by piece at high prices, not to mention excluding 3rd party freeware and payware developers. They hold their position despite the loud opposition from us and 3rd party developers because they feel they can make more money this way, therefore our wants and desires don't enter the picture.

[angels355]

"If you add to the game universe or expand on the story told in the game with “lost chapters” or back story or anything like that, distribution of your Item in any form constitutes a grant by you of a royalty-free, non-exclusive, transferable, worldwide, license to Microsoft and any of Microsoft’s partners to use and distribute that Item (and derivatives of that Item) for any purpose and without obligation to pay you anything or credit you. This means that your story or idea may appear in a future game without any compensation to you. (Sorry, but our lawyers tell us we need to do this in order to avoid frivolous lawsuits getting in the way of making more great games.)"



This leads to the truth concerning Microsoft's new attitude concerning 3rd party addons. It's not about controlling instability or mess. It's about controlling all content to the point that any addons become the sole property of Microsoft "without any compensation to you. (Sorry". They can, and probably will, profit by this reverse piracy, should they release any SDK.
Dick

Stunning post. Is that in the Flight EULA? Just when you think it can't get any worse it does. Peeeeuuuuuuu! It stinks in Redmond. I don't think Flight is worth a single farthing. If they have that in their EULA, or part of the xbox EULA system, I don't even think it is worth playing. How legal is it for MS to have minors signing major contracts with wide sweeping consequences? Many of their users are minors, is it legal for them to be signing such heavy contracts?

I'm glad I didn't sign up for an xbox membership. I was just about to then stopped because all the "Minority Report" advertising and intrusive security was really offputting. I went to sleep that night worried that Minority Report robot spiders might pry open my eyelids and scan my retina! I'm getting really turned off by the whole thing. It seems like MS simply can't play friendly. Their videos about the making of Flight and interviews are extremely friendly everyone is wearing a smile. However, this is the real world, yes it does matter that their EULAS are shockingly unfriendly. One reads a contract then decides whether to sign it or not. I can't uninstall Flight fast enough, and I'm really turned off by MS in general.

[angels355]

Is this what we all want? In my opinion, Flight is no good.


"If you add to the game universe or expand on the story told in the game with “lost chapters” or back story or anything like that, distribution of your Item in any form constitutes a grant by you of a royalty-free, non-exclusive, transferable, worldwide, license to Microsoft and any of Microsoft’s partners to use and distribute that Item (and derivatives of that Item) for any purpose and without obligation to pay you anything or credit you. This means that your story or idea may appear in a future game without any compensation to you. (Sorry, but our lawyers tell us we need to do this in order to avoid frivolous lawsuits getting in the way of making more great games.)"

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by rhumbaflappy http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?p=1663914#post1663914)
This leads to the truth concerning Microsoft's new attitude concerning 3rd party addons. It's not about controlling instability or mess. It's about controlling all content to the point that any addons become the sole property of Microsoft "without any compensation to you. (Sorry". They can, and probably will, profit by this reverse piracy, should they release any SDK.
Dick







Compare that with this, X-Plane 10 rocks even if it needs a lot of work, take a look at this XP10 video, it is the exact opposite of Flight. And XP's EULA's have always been friendly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhjUjw3pUkk

[JSkorna]

You need to step back and relax. Use the sims that you enjoy and leave the rest alone. You views have been well documented in the last 2 weeks, so now just let it go.

[gilby]

I agree with the below response.... Flight is not very good, but I love FSX.. I feel it would be hard to top FSX, just like anything in life, new is not always better.

[Capt_Flappers]

For any of you who haven't given Flight a fair shake — try it! With an open mind. You've nothing to loose but your preconceptions. — Bob

I have given Flight a fair shake, I did not have any preconceptions, I was eagerly awaiting its arrival. I did not read any forum posts about it before I tried it. I was very let down. I did not find the flight dynamics very realistic. The Stearman can get airborn in under 5 seconds, is that real world? I tried to find out but have been unable to so far. I know there is a FS9 Stearman with fde's made by real world current Stearman owners, it takes about 10 seconds with no payload and less than 30% fuel. I also found the aircraft movements arcade like, not smooth as in real world. I really really really wanted to like Flight, I have given it several chances, but it just doesn't win me over. What's not to like you ask? Well aside from what I already mentioned, things that have been mentioned numerous times... no ai, no atc, no ground vehicles. It's like flying around after the apocalypse and you're the sole survivor. The cruise ship doesn't move or show any wake that I could see. I am glad you enjoy it, but you are very much in the minority based on everything that I can see on the web about Flight.

[ricardo_NY1]

I've stopped bashing it.............I'm pretty convinced the future of desktop flight simulation lays with X-Plane. They're probably a release or two away.

[Trev]

I have given Flight a fair shake, I did not have any preconceptions, I was eagerly awaiting its arrival. I did not read any forum posts about it before I tried it. I was very let down. I did not find the flight dynamics very realistic. The Stearman can get airborn in under 5 seconds, is that real world? I tried to find out but have been unable to so far. I know there is a FS9 Stearman with fde's made by real world current Stearman owners, it takes about 10 seconds with no payload and less than 30% fuel. I also found the aircraft movements arcade like, not smooth as in real world. I really really really wanted to like Flight, I have given it several chances, but it just doesn't win me over. What's not to like you ask? Well aside from what I already mentioned, things that have been mentioned numerous times... no ai, no atc, no ground vehicles. It's like flying around after the apocalypse and you're the sole survivor. The cruise ship doesn't move or show any wake that I could see. I am glad you enjoy it, but you are very much in the minority based on everything that I can see on the web about Flight.
I enjoy it also enjoy FSX, FS9 etc etc.
:)

[mgh]

There are no instabilities caused by 3rd party developers in former sims.

Have you missed all the posts on these and other forums about 3PDs' products that won't download, will download but won't install, will download and install but won't run, or, will download, install, run but then adversely affect FS or other add-ons?



Microsoft has already stated in their xbox addon guidelines (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/Community/Developer/Rules) that they may simply take your idea and incorporate it into their game without your permission:


If you add to the game universe or expand on the story told in the game with “lost chapters” or back story or anything like that, distribution of your Item in any form constitutes a grant by you of a royalty-free, non-exclusive, transferable, worldwide, license to Microsoft and any of Microsoft’s partners to use and distribute that Item (and derivatives of that Item) for any purpose and without obligation to pay you anything or credit you. This means that your story or idea may appear in a future game without any compensation to you. (Sorry, but our lawyers tell us we need to do this in order to avoid frivolous lawsuits getting in the way of making more great games.)

You should have pointed out that applies only "strictly for noncommercial and personal use" and for obvious reasons Microsoft. Without it Microsoft could be faced by demands for royalties by others claiming prior rights whenever it released a new aircraft.

The link you selectively quoted goes on to state:


There’s still a way to do some of these things we’ve excluded, but you have to contact us for a commercial license. If you’re interested in doing that, send a mail to gamevids*at*microsoft.com.

Do you recall the furore on another site when it was suggested that commercial developers might need a commercial licence?

[remilton]

I think it is time to move on. Until Flight becomes something much more than it is currently, I still many more places to fly in FSX and more add-on's to install.

I will keep my radar on, still looking for improvements, but for now will focus on the best of what we have.

[weejam]

Well, I'm not going to bash but can tell you where I wish MS would shove flight and what they can do with the horse they rode in on. I like jetliners and clearly I am not their target customer so.... It just has nothing for me and I will not be "simming" with flight. Already romoved it and deleted it from the recycle bin. Maybe my 14 year old nephew will enjoy it. Good luck keeping their interest Microsoft and really do they have that much money to invest in the world or are there eventually going to be time warps?

[azzaro]

Well, I'm not going to bash but can tell you where I wish MS would shove flight and what they can do with the horse they rode in on. I like jetliners and clearly I am not their target customer so.... It just has nothing for me and I will not be "simming" with flight. Already romoved it and deleted it from the recycle bin. Maybe my 14 year old nephew will enjoy it. Good luck keeping their interest Microsoft and really do they have that much money to invest in the world or are there eventually going to be time warps? Hey how about Flight2, Grand Theft Aircraft Honolulu? Maybe chasing hookers around the airport sawin' them in half with the props.

Of course. You are entitled to express your opinion, and I fully support your right to do so.
Since you are obviousy not interested in Flight, I assume you will no longer be posting to this forum.
I hope you will continue to make such valuable contributions to other groups. :) — Bob

[ricardo_NY1]

There are no instabilities caused by 3rd party developers in former sims.

I'm pretty sure some 3PD software out there has caused issues or instabilities in former and current sims, but to that effect, I go about life and things with this quote...

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." — Thomas Jefferson

And as I said in another thread, thank god Joshua Howard is only a MS employee and not an elected politician.

[rhumbaflappy]

Do you recall the furore on another site when it was suggested that commercial developers might need a commercial licence?

I do recall it well. A few posters wanted your scalp when you suggested Flight would fall under a new set of xbox rules. You were right.

There is no info on what a commercial license would entail. I don't know if licensing is standardized or if each contract is negotiated separately. Brave new world.

Dick

[alaskancrab]

Thomas Jefferson, america's first great software engineer. Seriously maybe we should ask Al Gore what he thinks of Flight. :)

[alaskancrab]

I do recall it well. A few posters wanted your scalp when you suggested Flight would fall under a new set of xbox rules. You were right.

There is no info on what a commercial license would entail. I don't know if licensing is standardized or if each contract is negotiated separately. Brave new world.

Dick

Uhmm no it's under the GFWL rules, and Flight is the third party.... not "FSX 3PD developers".

[fxsttcb]

Uhmm no it's under the GFWL rules, and Flight is the third party.... not "FSX 3PD developers".You seem to know an awful lot about MS inner workings. Which Division does the released Flight fall under?
My Shareholders Statement shows "Windows & Windows Live Division", "Online Services Division", and "Entertainment and Devices Division". I always assumed that Games for Windows fell under the latter's umbrella, but, with "Live" in the mix, and it being available only online for download, I wonder.

Third party developers were invited. We know of a few that declined contracts. What do you know of the the other contractors that did sign up?
FSX and P3D are two different animals that are based on MS ESP. One for consumer entertainment, the other for commercial purposes only. So any development for one may work in the other. LM doesn't guarantee FSX functionality and, unless specifically stated to the contrary, FSX developers don't warrant their wares for P3D use.

As we can see, Flight is a lot more capable than myself and others first thought. What we need are critical reviews of what functionality the DLC available actually does provide. We know the Maule AP is fictional, but, do the Com/Nav radios work. VOR/HSI? The Van's? Navaids in the Hawaian Adventure pack?
MS obviously isn't prepared to spill, so, we will have to rely on each other...Don

[alaskancrab]

You do realize you don't have to be a share holder to get a statement, it's a publically traded company. Find most of that on finance.yahoo.com

[fxsttcb]

You do realize you don't have to be a share holder to get a statement, it's a publically traded company. Find most of that on finance.yahoo.comHuh? I certainly didn't go out and purchase MS just to get financial info! Nor, Intel, Google, Apple etc. My best pick was Chrysler @4-1/8. Lee Iacoca is my hero.
What about my Flight questions? Any info there? That is the forum we're in...Don

[mgh]

e
I do recall it well. A few posters wanted your scalp when you suggested Flight would fall under a new set of xbox rules. You were right.

There is no info on what a commercial license would entail. I don't know if licensing is standardized or if each contract is negotiated separately. Brave new world.

Dick

I also pointed out that Microsoft states in the link you posted that Flight Simulator (all versions) is also covered by those rules Following a challenge, I contacted Microsoft via the email address in that link (gamevids*at*microsoft.com.) and got an unquivocal reply that FSX commercial developers needed a commercial licence.

[StringBean]

Here ya go...


We know the Maule AP is fictional,... For now... but, do the Com/Nav radios work...COMs no for ATC/ATIS yes for multiplayer, NAVs yes...VOR/HSI? The Van's? ...VOR yes, don't know about any HSI...Navaids in the Hawaian Adventure pack?...yes...

peace,
the Bean

[fxsttcb]

Thank you, Sir!
I've gone through all of these threads trying to figure out what does work on what.
With that, I'm probably gonna grab the rest of Hawaii, and hope Alaska has something in the long range category.

Still getting Hangs, but, after another uninstall re-install it is better than it was. Not even close to giving up on Flight, yet! I see potential...Don

[StringBean]

...I see potential...Don

Me too, "top-end, unlimited"-Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry

peace,
the Bean

[rhumbaflappy]

I'm not surprised the reply stated that FSX needed a commercial license. But with the cow already out of the barn for FSX, it would be a bit hard to enforce.

One thing is sure, with the internal management changes at Microsoft, one department may not be aware what another department has already allowed. The Aces controlled the initial distribution of FSX, the SDK, and relations with developers. We had a defacto green light to produce addons, freeware or commercial. Statements of the contrary by Microsoft are either due to their current ignorance, or trying to change the rules after the fact. Bill Leaming, a commercial FS developer, even wrote an article for FSInsider. Seems unlikely they would ask him for that if they were demanding a commercial license from him. At any rate, FSX developers could now claim to be making addons for P3d, and completely bypass any Microsoft BS. Not the developers fault if the addon also works in FSX.

I do think Microsoft might take issue if someone were to alter the code of FSX enough to produce a whole new sim... like a sailing sim, or a train sim. Microsoft may well step in and claim a violation of their rights for something that dramatic.

With Flight, they seem to have closed ranks much better. I would not be surprised if a future SDK for Flight would require a license for commercial 3rd party development. And I would not be surprised if Microsoft controlled the distribution of freeware addons as well... we'll see in a couple of years, apparently.

At any rate, sorry for wandering so far from the intent of the original poster.

Dick

[mgh]

FSX developers sheltering behind P3D is not without risk. John Nicol of Lockheed Martin said in the P3D forums:


"Bottom line, don't use it as a replacement for a game, it needs to be used for non-entertainment purposes"

[KCD]

You want us to lighten up? Well, after trying Flight, I quickly uninstalled it with comments on this board that it was garbage. After reading several positive reviews from trusted names here, I tried to re-install it. I've tried everything and it will not re-install. You can see what I've tried by reading the specific thread, but I'm closing on the point of view that if MS wrote a program that confining in the install capability area, I doubt that it will ever gain the kind of support it needs to become viable like FS9 and FSX. I'm willing to give it a second chance, but it doesn't seem to want it.

KCD

[andyjohnston]

Incidentally he says proper flight sims are so complicated that they put people off, that's an urban myth i'd dispute, because sims can be as simple or as complicated as you like.
For example i jump into the FSX cockpit, slam open the throttle and i'm away, getting along just fine by waggling the joystick and using a few memorised keys without having to look at the manual.

Ummm...Isn't that exactly what Flight is? Jump in and go without having to look at a complicated manual?

[alaskancrab]

Ummm...Isn't that exactly what Flight is? Jump in and go without having to look at a complicated manual?

I've always felt there is some academic learning with PMDG products especially. Kind of no pressure, learn at your own pace, that people seem to enjoy. As much merit there is though you are right it doesn't belong in a game at least in printed format. Then again there is a lot missing from the manuals as they just assume you already know the fundamentals.

[crezipp]

Flight is absolutely divided in 2 camps: believers and disbelievers. believers tell you flight will improve far beyond FSX, disbelivers tell you it will never be a sim. Believers tell you the next thing comming is heavy metal flyingg to Alaska [prove?] i guess im a simmer.
I believe MS does everything in it's power to gain control over the internet and tries to catch up with the ipads ipods and what have you not that starts with i amd has games. It al commes down to a business model costumers are milking cows.
Today you can have FSX for say 30 dollars, fly with friends on the net, fly freeware missions, fly beautyfuly modeled freeware addon planes [Rick Piper for one]beautiful freeware airports [EDDL by Thom Ruth for 1] azzaro stated water in Flight flows normal, i've seen it running uphill! i've seen the photo texture "pop"just like in FSX on it's mesh layer.
it's very realistic huh? How about overspeeding with the Icon and not have your wings breaking off? I'think I was doing 200+ racing down the hoops.
The only thing i was impressed about was waving trees. for the rest, it doesn't look that better then X. A barren landscape, with nothing moving but clouds, waves and trees. a couple of square miles of lava landscape- how intreesting [actualy that was my biggest dissapointment, i thougt Hawaii / the big island was a very beautyfull place, but apperently it isn't to my lijking. Give me the Alps and i'm happy. So I guess i willoccasionaly fly in Flight and spebd the good times in X.

[Thaellar243]

Ummm...Isn't that exactly what Flight is? Jump in and go without having to look at a complicated manual?

Yes...but that's ALL it is. Nothing more. Therein lies the failure.

[alaskancrab]

they're competing against GTAV not a book.

[angels355]

they're competing against GTAV not a book.

I believe I am 36 hours 19 minutes into my completely uncomplicated RTW flight, Honolulu to Honolulu, nonstop.

Here's the GTA V trailer, looks really good. Are the streets of LA really like that? Wurd!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjZ5tgjPVfU

[vonBobo]

they're competing against GTAV

Oof!

That's not going to happen.

[mith]

Quit bashing something we all want? ALL want? how presumptuous.... As for me... I'm enjoying the game so far, but it still can't (at this point) hold a candle to FSX... heh