About Microsoft Flight

[Doods]

I say NO backward compatibility start fresh......

[shadowfaxcrx]

This article might change your mind:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articl...000000069.html

Throwing away code that's taken years to get right means that now you have to take years to get the new stuff right. It's kind of pointless.

[djhddnb]

Yeah thanks a bunch Microsoft. An incomplete GAME. NOT a simulator!

Just another attempt by microsoft to make you pay again and again for a program you've already bought.

As stated on thier site - "Those looking to deepen their experience can purchase and download additional content that adds new aircraft, regions and customization options."

Thanks but no thanks.

[fxsttcb]

Throwing away code that's taken years to get right means that now you have to take years to get the new stuff right. It's kind of pointless.

Yeah, but rewriting it to accomodate expansion seems to be the direction MS went.


For us that wanna know things about Flight, and maybe a hint of what it's capabilities are, I took another gander into the workings of it.

Just a few items I found interesting in CorePropDefs.pak:
propflightplan.xml
propRadioSystem.xml
propworldbase.xml

Unpak it and peruse some of the *.xml.
a single element if propflightplan.xml for example;

        <PropertyDef
            id          = "{D0EFA29E-6DCA-4f2f-A984-0BA8A5018965}"
            name        = "FPType"
   type  = "ENUM"
            descr       = "IFR or VFR flight plan"
            default  = "None">
            <EnumDef symbolprefix="SIMPROP_FLIGHTPLAN_TYPE">
                <EnumVal 
                    name = "NONE" 
                    xml_name = "None"/>
                <EnumVal 
                    name = "VFR" 
                    xml_name = "VFR"/>
                <EnumVal 
                    name = "IFR" 
                    xml_name = "IFR"/>
            </EnumDef>
        </PropertyDef>

is just a hint of the variables available.

Flight's future could be quite bright IF MS follows up an the ground work that has been laid...Don

[lefu]

Yeah thanks a bunch Microsoft. An incomplete GAME. NOT a simulator!

Just another attempt by microsoft to make you pay again and again for a program you've already bought.

As stated on thier site - "Those looking to deepen their experience can purchase and download additional content that adds new aircraft, regions and customization options."

Thanks but no thanks.

Even though MSflight appears to barely please most of its new users, i think we are gonna need to put some or "many moneys"
on it if we want to have some airplanes in there and the rest of the world airports ( if there is..)

P51 is something like 15$ hawai is like 25$ . am i wrong ?
imagine what it will be when extended..

[alaskancrab]

Depends where you are coming from.. I guess as a GTA fan this is a dream come true I think to get a better idea of what's in store you should check out the awards. Quite a bucket list , and some of them certainly impossible with the given aircraft. Can any of those aricraft actually do Mach 3, i think you need auto rudder for that? Or carry 100,000 or whatever passengers? That's going to take awhile in the two seaters...

[flighthilli]

time to switch to x plane or stay with MSX!!!!!!!!

[JSkorna]

Hi,

What is MSX?

[gwillmot]

..

[fxsttcb]

Even though MSflight appears to barely please most of its new users, i think we are gonna need to put some or "many moneys"
on it if we want to have some airplanes in there and the rest of the world airports ( if there is..)

P51 is something like 15$ hawai is like 25$ . am i wrong ?
imagine what it will be when extended..

I think you are right on target.
Even with all of the investigating of flight's core files I have done, it is not, I believe, to be capable of being a competitor to FSX. Even a 1,000 DLCs later.
My tweaked FSX Hawaii, totally freeware except the mesh, is as much fun to fly, low and slow, as Flight is.
Unless I'm really hugging the deck, or sitting still watching Flight's trees sway(neat feature!), there really isn't a lot of visible difference between the two.
For me it's more about the challenges of flying rather than sightseeing anyway.

MS pricing is way out of whack, considering that thier P-51, for example, is nowhere near 1/4 as capable as a $30 A2A Spitfire is even without the Accusim treatment.
The Hawaiian Adventure Pack at $25 is miniscule(with the Vans RV-6A, though) in comparison to the FTX Australia SP4 with an MSRP of $99.95.

I've been trying to devote at least an hour a day to "Free Flight"(pun intended), but, there just isn't enough "area" to keep my interest.

PNW, CRM, NRM, PF, NZSI all afford large areas of detailed terrain. Aerosoft's Antartica X is another fine example of excellent scenery that will provide great flying.
Those are just the tip of the iceberg when we talk scenery enhancements. I'm talking hundreds of thousands of square miles of detailed terrain with good autogen and shorelines, enhancing the thousands of airports to visit. All available now.
I fear that MS Flight developers won't be able to compete on such a grand scale, know it, and not even try.

Future DLC may address the lack of Nav/Comm Radios, ATC, and ILS capable aircraft for those IFR only conditions, but, I'm already getting impatient...Don