Look on the bright side, guys.....You won't have to worry about paying for a brand new version of flight simulator for a while.You won't have to buy an entirely new set of addons to get you back to where you were with the last version.Addon developers can concentrate on creating stuff for FSX without having to start preparing for FS11.When you upgrade to a new PC in the future, you'll be able to run everything at maximum detail levels.

Due to lack of support for multi-core processors nor for multi-GPUs, FSX will never realize its originally intended potential. For this reason, it is doubtful that future PCs will run it any better than it is run now on current systems. FSX does not and will not have enough headroom for 3rd party developers to continue developing for it "for years". This fact will make demise of FS11 much more painful than people here realize. From what I understand, next version of FS was supposed to have a new engine that would have taken advantage of new hardware that emphasizes multicore processors and multi GPUs (SLI & Crossfire). In other words, it would have been a better performing simulator than FSX. Finally, there are a lot of short comings that were supposed to be fixed in FSNext that 3rd party developers will not be able to overcome; examples of some which are: Autogen pop due to lack of Alpha fade, Javeline like snow, HDR lighting etc. The decision to drop the franchise could not have come at the worse possible time for our hobby.

I am fine with this news, as this will likely spur development of innovative new flight simulators, with code bases built around modern hardware, without concerns for legacy support. Lack of an ACES label isn't a liability in my view; in fact what has made FSX enjoyable for me has largely been the add-ons (planes, activesky, FEX, tileproxy) rather than the product out of the box. I think the development of flight simulators will be at least as interesting in the near future as it is now. Thankyou ACES for taking us to this point.

Due to lack of support for multi-core processors nor for multi-GPUs, FSX will never realize its originally intended potential. For this reason, it is doubtful that future PCs will run it any better than it is run now on current systems. FSX does not and will not have enough headroom for 3rd party developers to continue developing for it "for years". This fact will make demise of FS11 much more painful than people here realize. From what I understand, next version of FS was supposed to have a new engine that would have taken advantage of new hardware that emphasizes multicore processors and multi GPUs (SLI & Crossfire). In other words, it would have been a better performing simulator than FSX. Finally, there are a lot of short comings that were supposed to be fixed in FSNext that 3rd party developers will not be able to overcome; examples of some which are: Autogen pop due to lack of Alpha fade, Javeline like snow, HDR lighting etc. The decision to drop the franchise could not have come at the worse possible time for our hobby.

I agree with you 100%. We were not able to see what could've been.But for now, let's focus on what's ABOUT to happen and let's wait for more news.

Well I personally am not disappointed by this news. Yes it's sad to hear of others getting laid off but unfortunately that is today's economy. What pleases me is the FSX can now stay mainstream for that much longer and allow for developers to continue to build addons for FSX. FSX is a beautiful sim if only the hardware was available to run it. Which is slowly beginning to happen. I was very much upset when FSX was released, prematurely, and suddenly FS9 was over. Until developers began to find that FS9 had a larger user base than FSX and continued to roll out addons. But again you can see that many new releases are going FSX only and this is in part is due to the catch up of hardware that we are beginning to see.I'm sure if FS11 were to be released it would be even more of a dog on today's hardware than FSX. I'm glad FS11 will be delayed, or scuttled. Focus on FSX now, we can begin to buy hardware soon to run FSX like FS9 runs today. In the meantime who knows what will happen, perhaps a new publisher will buy the FS franchise, a new developer can re-write the code, and release a sim that is the greatest ever. One that runs fluid on hardware of the day, looks beautiful, and allows for greater expandability. I do not think ACES could have accomplished this, not that they don't have the talent but perhaps that Microsoft limits such resources and time to make that happen. I'm willing to wait for that while I can take comfort that FSX will be able to run like it was intended to in perhaps a year or 2 chock full of great addons.I think this is great news!!

Considering FS11 was going to be (based on info from ACES) a complete rebuild of the engine with more focus on multi core utilization etc, I couldn't disagree with your post more.The hardware will not catch up with FSX as FSX was and is a relic from a previous age.FS11 was going to be FSX with all the mistakes fixed and improved performance. Flight Sim seems to follow the 'Tick Tock' development path. One good version then one bad version. FSX was bad.....FS11 would hopefully have been good. Now we will likely never find out.

Flight Sim seems to follow the 'Tick Tock' development path. One good version then one bad version. FSX was bad.....FS11 would hopefully have been good.

I've never agreed with that. Many have thought that FS98 was good, and FS2000 was bad. I didn't care for FS98 at all, and much preferred the vast improvements in FS2000; because it gave us VC cockpits, much improved clouds, real life terrain elevations, more airports, and a far better navigation data-base. Yet, it had problems, such as morphing. FS2002 & FS2004 were just farther improvements on FS2000. I feel the same about FSX. For me, there are many very noticeable improvements.................mostly with graphics. But then I'm an "eye candy" person while using the sim, or flying over real terrain.L.Adamson

I've never agreed with that. Many have thought that FS98 was good, and FS2000 was bad. I didn't care for FS98 at all, and much preferred the vast improvements in FS2000; because it gave us VC cockpits, much improved clouds, real life terrain elevations, more airports, and a far better navigation data-base. Yet, it had problems, such as morphing. FS2002 & FS2004 were just farther improvements on FS2000. I feel the same about FSX. For me, there are many very noticeable improvements.................mostly with graphics. But then I'm an "eye candy" person while using the sim, or flying over real terrain.L.Adamson

If I recall correctly (I have had so many versions) Fs98 had clouds that looked like giant ice cubes-at the same time the competition like Pro Pilot and Fly had clouds similar we see today in the sim. Fs98 also had vector hand drawn mountains missing mountains ranges like the entire rockies when Pro Pilot had similar to what we see today.Fs2000 corrected these deficiencies and also added the first real weather download (something I had been hoping for-requesting since 1998) and very smooth instrumentation. The complaints were stutters on the outside view -and a patch was issued that made the instruments stutter and the outside view smoother-seems "eye candy" is more important to most-I was ticked-the smooth instruments suited me fine.So yes I agree-they have each been an incremental improvement-the "bad version" thing is bunk.There was a post about this from one of the programmers a few years ago-can't remember where it was.

I am afraid frankinla and gjharrall are right - FSX in 5 years will run like FSX today. Chip designers are hitting more and more a clock speed wall which will lead to more CPU cores. Have a look at the game development the last 5 years - how f.e. the graphics advanced. I can't imagine to be satisfied flying FS8 today. Hopefully there might be others filling the gap, or MS restructures the team around it's flagship.Very disappointing.

While I agree that addon developers will be able to keep FSX breathing for several years still, I don't share the overly positive views some people post in various forums.Firstly, to say that this situation is somehow a good thing, a new start, and will make all the bad in the future go away. This is total BS in my opinion. If/when FS11 was already in the makes, I am quite sure that ACES learnt their lesson with FSX. They most likely already were making bigger changes to the core and making the new sim different in those most crucial key parts of the platform. The overly positive feedback around suggests that only now that the ACES has been axed will it be possible to start out a new era of flightsim, an era that right from the start does everything right. I think people need to grasp the fact that the core platform is owned by Microsoft. They are not planning on selling it to anyone. The people who have been involved in the action at ACES can not do it all again just like that from scratch even if they all gathered up at a motel and made code for 5 years in row. MS is planning on (most likely) using the core to make the entertainment flightsim titles to their console. Or something even whackier. God knows what they meant with "LIVE experiences". Whatever it is, you cannot dress a cake before you have the cake to dress. Providing some online-environments over some puffy XBox games means nothing to me.Unless this decision is reverted (it isn't), we will be seeing really gloomy times ahead when it comes to FS and flightsim franchise in general. As someone else stated, hell will freeze over before anyone invests millions of dollars to start out from scratch, to fill the gap. If anyone, it should be MS who does that, and now they have given up. FSX addon market can and will be extended some 3-5 years from now, but beyond that... I don't think so. As time goes on, part of the user base drops out, and no new users are added due to lack of FSnext. Us long-time users are only a small portion of the economical base of addon developers. Most of the sales come from the masses. When the masses go, there will be no new addons, and in time, no addon companies anymore.Sounds rather depressing, but given the economical situation right now, I just don't see it happening that within 3-5 years we would have a new sim base going strong and near release. If there will be, it surely cannot surpass all MSFS efforts until now just like that. If I am wrong, we're all lucky. But I don't share the positives on this one.Tero

W O W!I feel numb.

That's exactly how I feel. It still hasn't completely sunk in yet with me. A part of me is still hoping that it's all a bad dream, and that we'll all wake up tomorrow to hear ACES announce the latest new and improved FS to be released for this year's holiday season.But alas, it's not to be. FS11 will not show up this year, or the next, or perhaps the year after that. Who really knows when, and even "if". Will we ever see a new FS with a new revamped and efficient engine, one that delivers FPS as smooth as butter, its scenery and flight dynamics ever inching closer to realism. I wish I knew that there was still some hope that this amazing and much loved hobby of ours will still continue with the support, talent, and dedication of a great studio like ACES. I know I am hoping for the impossible. The terrible news has been really hard to swallow.A warm thank you to Phil Taylor, and the rest of the ACES staff for giving us so many hours of fun and enjoyment. I wish you all the very best. Maybe one day in the future, in some way, directly or indirectly, we will somehow be able to give this wonderful franchise a rebirth. Regards,Tim H.

While I agree that addon developers will be able to keep FSX breathing for several years still, I don't share the overly positive views some people post in various forums.

I don't feel very positive, either. The gravity of the situation is beginning to dawn on me.

Firstly, to say that this situation is somehow a good thing, a new start, and will make all the bad in the future go away. This is total BS in my opinion. If/when FS11 was already in the makes, I am quite sure that ACES learnt their lesson with FSX. They most likely already were making bigger changes to the core and making the new sim different in those most crucial key parts of the platform. The overly positive feedback around suggests that only now that the ACES has been axed will it be possible to start out a new era of flightsim, an era that right from the start does everything right. I think people need to grasp the fact that the core platform is owned by Microsoft. They are not planning on selling it to anyone. The people who have been involved in the action at ACES can not do it all again just like that from scratch even if they all gathered up at a motel and made code for 5 years in row. MS is planning on (most likely) using the core to make the entertainment flightsim titles to their console. Or something even whackier. God knows what they meant with "LIVE experiences". Whatever it is, you cannot dress a cake before you have the cake to dress. Providing some online-environments over some puffy XBox games means nothing to me.Tero

Good points, Tero. Even if "the group formerly known as ACES" wanted to create a new sim, they would have to start from scratch, and it could take several years! Where would the funding come from? As for the "LIVE experiences" ... :(Earlier this morning I thought about the parallels between MSFS and Falcon 4.0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_4.0. Falcon 4.0 was created by Microprose, who were made redundant in c1999. Atari bought the rights to "Falcon", and a group of freeware artists purchased a license to modify and sell the software. The software is called Falcon 4.0: Allied Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_4.0:_Allied_Force)! Sadly, I can't see this happening with MSFS ... MS ain't finished with the franchise, and they don't want to help their competitors!!

Due to lack of support for multi-core processors nor for multi-GPUs, FSX will never realize its originally intended potential. For this reason, it is doubtful that future PCs will run it any better than it is run now on current systems. FSX does not and will not have enough headroom for 3rd party developers to continue developing for it "for years". This fact will make demise of FS11 much more painful than people here realize.

I couldnt agree more. The simple fact that 5 years from now even the best hardware will not be able to run FSX with sliders full right, complex addons, etc... at 50FPS. The archaic code is not capable of taking advantage of todays technology much less tomorrows. The demise of FS11 is truly a sad sad day in the life of this armchair pilot.

IMO, every version of Microsoft Flight Simulator from FS5 to FS2002 was a huge disappointment. FSX is the first half decent version since FS4, but even so it is only the wide range of impressive addons available for it that has persuaded me to return.

Earlier this morning I thought about the parallels between MSFS and Falcon 4.0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_4.0. Falcon 4.0 was created by Microprose, who were made redundant in c1999. Atari bought the rights to "Falcon", and a group of freeware artists purchased a license to modify and sell the software. The software is called Falcon 4.0: Allied Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_4.0:_Allied_Force)! Sadly, I can't see this happening with MSFS ... MS ain't finished with the franchise, and they don't want to help their competitors!!

Sadly I don't see Microsoft doing anything cooperatively on MSFS. Even worse, I see them using the unfinished FS11 code as a weapon: as VAPORWARE. Vaporware is software that never gets produced or coded. Vaporware's purpose is to keep other (smaller) developers from spending the money and effort to create a new product. The threat of Microsoft putting out a new version of FS (with no intention of actually doing it) is enough to halt develpment by any other software development company given the massive financial costs. In fact, they have already started with the vaporware concept. I see their press releases saying stuff like "we remain committed to the Flight Simulator franchise for the long term." etc etc. as a shot across the bow to anyone thinking about building a competing product -- while they are not actually "committed" at all.So things are even worse than they seem. Not only have they pulled the plug on MSFS, they can effectively shut down development of any other sim product by mearly the threat of reincarnating FS11 and vaguely worded press releases. Joe

So things are even worse than they seem. Not only have they pulled the plug on MSFS, they can effectively shut down development of any other sim product by mearly the threat of reincarnating FS11 and vaguely worded press releases.

That's what they wish or may hope for but that shouldn't stop a new effort along the lines I briefly described in the following post:http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=242086This is an opportunity for Google/X-plane/Flight Gear/ACES combined or independently, if they so choose. Are they going to step up to the challenge? Stay tuned!

I think that this would make a good base for a new FS platform.FlightGear, the open-source flight simulator.