Question for Flightsim.Com Staff

[andyjohnston]

Just wondering, when this was shown to you a few weeks back, was there any mention made to Microsoft that this product was unlikely to be of much interest to the users they were attempting to interest by contacting your site?

I just have to wonder if they thought this was something the dedicated user base would really enjoy after they previous family of products.

[Nels_Anderson]

Yes, this was something we were all wondering about. One major goal of this product, and it's really kind of a good one, is to attract totally new people to aviation and computer flying. Note the quote from today's press release:

“Aviation can be incredibly technical, but we’ve taken great care to build an experience that makes taking to the skies thrilling and accessible for everyone.”

In the past I've often said that the greatest strength, and at the same time the greatest weakness of Flight Simulator is that you can jump in and fly anywhere. This is a great strength for those of us hard core simmers since we know what we want to do and the sim gives us unlimited possibilities. But for someone with no experience it's a great weakness since when the sim comes up their first thought it likely to be "now what do I do?". Microsoft Flight is trying to address this by being more goal oriented while still be usable as a true sim.

Flight is different. It's not FSXI like so many people seemed to think it would be. To appreciate it requires a different mind set. And it's certainly not going to replace FS2004 or FSX, it's something new to be used in addition.

[andyjohnston]

Was there any suggestion as to what might come? Might we get the whole world? Other types of aircraft?

[n4gix]

Yes, this was something we were all wondering about. One major goal of this product, and it's really kind of a good one, is to attract totally new people to aviation and computer flying.

Nels, during earnest discussions during the two DevCons that MS hosted "we" together developed a sound proposal and road-map for the future that would have kept the entire franchise on the same track, yet provided MS a way to capture a reasonable share of the after-market addon sales as well.

Instead however, MS has decided they want the whole pie. I very strongly suspect that it will backfire on them, simply because there's nothrng but glitter, but nothing of substance to Flight.

Seriously, when is the last time PacMan has been available for sale anywhere? Flying around and collecting gold coins or finding geocaches isn't going to hold any self-respecting "game palyer's" interest for more than an hour or two...

[angels355]

I guess I'm unique as a flight sim user, I started flying when I was seven in a RW plane, while at the same time learning aerodynamics/aeronautical engineering, and a little mechanical engineering. I flew about 50 hours cross country. Later I went to college and studied difficult bio, physics, and astro sciences to be brief, and had hoped to go to medical school. When I picked up my first flight simulator, Fly! 2K around 2003, the first plane I learned to fly was the King Air B200, having previous flight experience and knowledge it was easy. Then started flying the biz jet the Ratheon Hawker 800, and almost immediately started flying around the world with complex flight plans and navigation. I downloaded and installed all of the aircraft add-ons I could to expand the experience. In other words I was already very skilled when I started. I then got FS98, and when I got better computers got FS2000, 2002, 2004, and just now completed an FSX capable computer. Can't seem to find my VIsta license however, I hope I didn't accidentally vacuum it up. Any way, I can't relate to the idea of a dumbed down flight game, I have seen young children at computer stores simply take the controls of FSX and just start flying, they might not be very good, but they're having a good time. I can see where MS management and marketing might have much less flight skills than children, but I don't see where that is a problem among anyone else. I've seen a rank beginner construction guy take to the air in FS2004 with no problem at all, and was flying regular flights from destination to destination, until his wife put him to work on household tasks....

MS really doesn't have the resources to produce the quantity and quality of add-ons that we enjoy today from independent developers. Seriously, the MS FS 747 is boring, and is in fact poor quality, we don't complain because in only minutes we can replace it with a Project Opensky 747 for free, or get the ultimate 747, the PMDG, or a Level D 767. The only way they can get the quantity and quality needed to be a serious provider is something I heard discussed in the past as a possibility, that MS would have developers submit their products for approval and licensing to be allowed to fly in Flight. MS would thereby make money on all approved add-ons. And that would mean no freeware by the way. However to be politically correct I'm sure that these licensed add-ons would be dumbed down for a general audience, I suspect that having a flight simulator that is too realistic and capable would be politically incorrect. Is this the Versaille Treaty Part II where we are not allowed to fly the most detailed cutting edge flight simulators possible?

In the Radio Controlled (RC) aircraft world there are people who derrive a great deal of enjoyment simply designing and building highly detailed RC aircraft, from the very small, to the absolutely huge. It's true that you can buy ready made RC aircraft of varying quality, but many do nothing but build their own as part of the way they enjoy their hobby. MS is denying us the SDK that would allow us to build our own planes for fun, or in the case of pro developers, planes of exacting detail and complexity. If MS add-ons are so great, then why do they have to have a "closed community" to be able to do it? Why can't they produce such brilliant add-ons in an open community that people would desire and pay for these add-ons? The 100+ year old designed cast iron bathtub survived and flourished in the closed commuinity of E Germany, however when Germany was reunited in a free marketplace, the cast iron bathtub manufacturer was out of business almost immediately, they could not compete in an open society. Let's face it, MS aircraft are crummy! We have never had a problem with them because we could immediatel;y install better add-on aircraft in only minutes. In a closed community however they would like to force us to use only their synergistically produced MS aircraft, and other features and add-ons.

If MS Synergies are so great then why don't they have the guts to prove it and compete in an open community? Why are their add-ons only viable in a closed community? "Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" --Ronald Reagan

[Nels_Anderson]

Well, be that as it may, Microsoft has made their decision on how they are going to do things. If you're going to be mad at them, be mad for firing the ACES team and ending the Microsoft Flight Simulator line. That was a quite separate event from the development of Flight. I think one big problem is that flightsimmers have been thinking that Flight was really FSXI when that never was true and now are upset when that reality is unavoidably thrust upon us.

In the short time I got to try Flight I thought the planes worked pretty good and underlying everything is a real simulator. So, in Flight there is a core that could be made into just about anything, the unanswered question is how far the world and the aircraft hangar will get developed and whether enough people will give it a chance.

I can actually see myself having some fun with Flight, but it won't replace FSX or really fill my aviation needs but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy it for what it is. And it will grow and become more with time, and that's going to be very interesting to watch. And maybe I shouldn't mention it, but I actually enjoy collecting geocaches, the concent that the aircaches are based on. I actually spent a good part of today out geocaching and getting some exercise and fresh air at the same time. For anyone who cares, one of my recent blog entries was about combining geocaching and flying.

[ricardo_NY1]

I think one big problem is that flightsimmers have been thinking that Flight was really FSXI when that never was true and now are upset when that reality is unavoidably thrust upon us.

You hit it on the nail Nels. I think MS should have made it clearer as opposed to releasing screenshots and stirring the community's interest pot. I also think the revelations of developers who interacted with MS give most the impression that there is an element of greed, monopolization and an unwillingness to compromise on MS' part. I believe them.

[Paxx]

I think one big problem is that flightsimmers have been thinking that Flight was really FSXI when that never was true and now are upset when that reality is unavoidably thrust upon us.

Agreed. It is my personal opinion that FSX on better and better hardware with 3rd party add-on development and support as usual is the coveted "FSXI" for the foreseeable future. MSFlight may or may not develop as planned. And as pointed out above, a MSFlight version comparable to the quantitative whole that FSX is will take awhile to materialize if it ever does. The market, not marketing, will decide.

[bm1]

Hello Nels. I disagree with what you are saying about new people getting into flight simulation.
I first got a computer back in 2005, and in a week, found a copy of Flight Sim 2004, walking through best buy one day. Looked pretty good, always had an interest in airplanes, bought it, installed it, and Ive been hooked ever since.
Biggest thing I liked about FS9, I could fly anywhere in the world with several different aircraft.

[jomni]

May people/gamers find civilian flying boring. And with Flight, stripping out a lot of content and complex stuff... it becomes even more boring. The game will focus on specific missions in certain locales. But I never play missions in FSX when I started. tsk tsk tsk.

And keeping it stuck to an island in Hawaii is not helping. Most flyers would like fly around their home country.
With MS not looking at 3rd party development, I wonder how long will it take for them to cover the world if they ever will do it. How many airplanes can they develop? I don't want that flying car.

Flight may have some value if I want a quick flying fix. But it will not replace FS2004 or FSX.