Hi All,I have no wish to steal Elrond's thunder in his excellent recent thread but this is a subject about which I and, I suspect, many others feel very strongly about and may wish to comment further.What many folk seem to be overlooking is the fact that, at the end of the day, the Microsoft name is just that, only a name. The organization, whether it be the Game Studios or any other branch, is composed of men and women just like ourselves. These individuals, like the rest of us, all have strengths, failings, pride and sensitivities, but their somewhat aloof and distant behaviour has certainly been moulded and dictated by ever recurring targets and deadlines. Sounds familiar?! Many of us on this forum have had similar experiences in our lives. Some survive and, indeed, relish the challenges and ongoing pressure, but, sadly, a significant number become victims of this contemporary scourge that constantly tries to blot the lives of innocent people in our modern society.Clearly, their policies have produced impressive results, not least being the sense of omnipotence Microsoft currently enjoys around the world. The downside, of course, has been the evolution of feelings of resentment by their competitors for this company's assumed monopoly and financial successes.I doubt whether there are significant numbers within the organization who would not wish for a more open and, indeed, friendly contact with their huge customer base but are prevented from making such a huge ideological change because it is simply not the 'Microsoft way'. Is this something that has evolved over time or can the finger of blame be pointed at one particular individual? Most other companies have a well-defined point where the buck of responsibility comes to rest and blame assumed. In the case of Microsoft I imagine this particular mantle belongs to Mr William Gates.Perhaps it is now too late. Microsoft has become, in a sense, a victim of its own success and any radical policy changes are probably preceived as potential threats to that success. However, the premiss on which all this is based infers that changes can still be brought about, but only if we, in sufficient numbers, approach the right people and persuade them that any changes in policy direction would be to their advantage in the longer term.Is this likely to happen? Probably not, and that is a great shame. I've no doubt Microsoft will survive for many more years to come, but at what cost? I purchased FS2004 and, yes, am currently enjoying the experience very much. However, despite all the worthwhile out-of-the-box additions to the sim I do not feel as enthusiastic about customizing it to the extent I did with FS2002. FS2002 was and still is a great sim in its own right, but such a lot of effort was expended over a two year period to bring it up to scratch with all the great 3rd. party addons, etc. To go through all that again after such a relatively short time just doesn't appeal very much right now when I already have a highly customized sim in FS2002 that offers a great deal and, in many respects, considerably more than its successor. The other additional problem for us all, of course, is the current tendency of many 3rd part developers to now profit on the back of their previous successes and who really can blame them? Sadly, the consequence is for those who would have been interested are having to make decisions to draw lines under their expenditure limits and will not be able to enjoy these updated offerings.While FS2004 is undoubtedly a wonderful milestone in the history of the series, the one thing that is lacking for me, is the persistent apparent stubborn refusal of the Microsoft Flight Simulator development team to become more involved with their loyal and enthusiastic customer base. I have tolerated this for several years but my patience is now wearing thin with the result that it is threatening to erode those feelings of excitement and anticipation I have long since held for the sim. Were it not for Avsim I think I would have chucked it in a long time ago.I can see a time not too far ahead when I may make a conscious decision to stick with what I have since, in the main, it provides me with what I want in terms of pleasure and satisfaction with the hobby. If others feel as I do then this could well be bad news for further development. I know, I know we are told repeatedly that our numbers are too small to be significant and that the 'game' is aimed more at the masses, many of whom buy and tire with equal rapidity. Yet the development team clearly are showing great pride in their work and achievements and, we are told, monitor forums such as these regularly for feedback. I very much doubt that they concern themselves much about the mass commercial response to their creation since the vast majority probably buy on a whim in any case. No, I am sure our opinions and experiences are far more important to them and help to ensure their continued enthusiasm for the work. If our input and enthusiasm starts to falter simply for the lack of a two way exchange with the development team, then, tragically, we could soon be witnessing the beginning of the end for our simulator.It would be interesting to hear the views of others.Mike :-wave

Rarely, do I not have much to say, but in this case, I can add very little to your post that differs from the way I feel about it.

Your comment "The organization, whether it be the Game Studios or any other branch, is composed of men and women just like ourselves. These individuals, like the rest of us, all have strengths, failings, pride and sensitivities".I think is the answer to your question. I think it is less about deadlines and more about human interaction and weaknesses...Look at all the flight sim boards and especially the support boards of add in products. At a certain point, often baseless complaints or downright rudeness ends up getting the ire of real people-those who put a lot of hard work into making their product, and even between those who just use the product. These skirmishes often end up having the ultimate result of bringing discredit to the company itself.I have only seen one individual who seemed great enough (and yes even saintly) to deal with this, and that was Richard Harvey. No matter how rude, baseless, or sometimes right or wrong a comment or complaint was-he always rose above the situation, kept his cool, politeness, and honesty, and integrity. Some of his co workers had a harder time-often rightfully so.Why is Microsoft aloof? I am sure the individuals who programmed it are not. I am sure they are personally hurt when they read a complaint which is not accurate, or wrong, and personally beam with pride when a marvel of the program is spoken of, and are personally upset when a bug which perhaps they wanted to fix but could not do so do to a production time limit is pointed out. Microsoft probably has made the decision as a corporation that it is better that individuals stay out of it-after all one employee with one thin skin could make the whole company look bad. In my business it has been deemed much the same-it is preferred that my organization speaks with one carefully considered voice that represents all, rather than one individual spouting off with an opinion which might not represent all, give a bad impression of the company as a whole, and thus damage the company.I often wish that there was interaction directly with the programers of fs, and I bet a lot of them wish that sometimes too. But when I look at the typical fare that goes on in the flight simming world I can certainly understand the decision to do things as they are now. I would probably chose the same course of action if I was in charge.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

Hello Mike,I would like to say that I think you could have indeed posted this in Elrond's thread.With that said, I read your post with great interest and I agree in that I have a feeling of distance and alienation by not seeing any kind of interaction with the developers at all. The fact that they are kept in the closet by Mr. Gates does steal away some of the excitment that could be had imo. Although I haven't been there in a while, I had a good time, some excitement, and learned a lot hanging out in the PMDG forum for instance.Jim

You've hit my sentiments right on! Wish I could have said it as well as you did.Knowing that the MS developers do read, and sometimes take part in these forums (without letting on to us), I think posts such as this could have an effect. While they may not change the policies of MS, they do provide an insight to the attitudes of this devout community. This could reach the inner santums of the company through various formal and informal meetings.From my own experiences as a computer software engineer of some 38 years, now retired, I do know that feedback from users, especially that of a positive nature, does make for a better product (not necessarily an interim patch) on the next go-around. IMHO and $0.02Larry S.

Hi Mike,No thunder of *mine* to steal, quite the opposite. The more this is discussed (and the more threads it appears in), the sooner we can come together as a community to demand changes to the model MS Game Studios currently uses.A little bit of unity and voice we can generate on this topic will go a long way towards influencing changes where change is required. Indeed, the argument that this particular "hard core" community is small is true: but as AVSIM polls have shown, the vast majority of participants here are successful business people that command a huge amount of influence on others. Thats what gives this somewhat small community such a powerful voice - if its used with respect and in a successful manner.Grass roots *always* start with a small, but vocal community. This years Dean surge for the Democrats has to be the best example of that I've ever seen. Granted, we're not talking about anything near as important here, but the process and results work exactly the same.Thanks for using your voice in a positive manner,Elrond

Hi Geof,I appreciate your thoughts, but I think a misunderstanding of what is being asked might be pervasive here (when it comes to developer interaction).I don't think anyone who spends a few minutes really thinking about this issue expects Microsoft Game Studio employees to come in here and start slugging it out with their detractors in this particular or similar forums. That would indeed be foolhardy and a worthless exercise.What I think is really being called for is parity with other game design studios: direct developer interaction for inside information and questions relating to the innards of FS design - in a place such as the FS Scenery Design Forum here at AVSIM. Believe me, in an appropriate forum such as that, the dire predictions here on the public reaction would not happen... Why?Because I can assure you, interaction with insiders like this takes place in appropriate forums all over the net today for just about every popular game available - it wasn't just a Fly! fluke, so to speak. Community building (specifically on the end-user designers end) has become a massive part of a games release and success today: it isn't enough to release a game and forget about it anymore. Simple parity with this proven and successful practice is really all thats being asked - from me at least. Microsoft changes its practices all the time, as MS history buffs (like myself) can attest. Its time for the independent division of MS Game Studios to do so as well.Take care,Elrond

Indeed, the argument that this particular "hard>core" community is small is true: but as AVSIM polls have>shown, the vast majority of participants here are successful>business people that command a huge amount of influence on>others. Thats what gives this somewhat small community such a>powerful voice - if its used with respect and in a successful>manner.>dammit...so i am again part of the minority? ;-)food for thought:are successful business people into simming because there they do have the veto right so to speak?(you know->ms atc says:ami566 enter right downwind for 36l...and the successful business man mumbles: oh no i don't,i'm continuing my approach!you #@#$%$#@!!you always do that!!!! as they surely must grow a tad frustrated when the underdog tells 'em "no cantdo miztur,my union says no"?...taking this thought even further:are we simmers controlfreaks..and might that be why we think it is sooo dumb of microsoft to choose not to interact with "end users" or developers alike?as we,as simmers,would very much like to "control" the game,and everything in it...sheesh....i'm really good in writing crap aint i? ;-)

No matter how eloquently it is expressed by the members in good standing of this or any site, I don't believe MS will or can, alter their perception of aloofness.It is quite incredible to suggest that the current edition of the sim was released with the bridge situation, to quote just one example of a blatant flaw, without anyone being aware. It is also quite incredible to consider that all of the Beta testers missed the bridges too. This same observation apparently can be made for the whole autogen issue.Remember the PEI debacle with FS2002. MS never did 'fix' it; yet a third party came up with a patch which could have been released much sooner if we were a bit more privy to the inner workings. If a customer can come up with a patch _without_ particular knowledge, how long would it have taken the production crew responsible for scenery?? In my estimation that particular faux pas could have been corrected and given out by MS the first week after release of the sim.The above faults are merely representative; there are certainly more than enough others that could be used. We have to face facts, folks: MS is in the business of selling a product. As long as that sells, they're happy. They are very much aware that it is impossible to please 100% of the population. What if the only reason they monitor these fora is to brainstorm? Perhaps we're being just a tad arrogant in thinking they're really concerned about the same things we are concerned with. Perhaps its just a coincidence when a particular improvement is made in one edition of the sim.While we can all wish for this or that to happen, I personally don't think it makes a wit of sense to comment here or anywhere else...MS is interested in sales.

>While we can all wish for this or that to happen, I personally>don't think it makes a wit of sense to comment here or>anywhere else...MS is interested in sales.From first hand experience, I know that MS developers are more interested in the simulation, than just sales, but then I can't go any farther than that.....L.Adamson

> The more>this is discussed (and the more threads it appears in), the>sooner we can come together as a community to demand changes>to the model MS Game Studios currently uses.Even though Richard Harvey's interaction with the simming community got us through the original FLY, with the "major" help of add-ons such as TerraScene, the V88's, Sky, & Ground................FLYII out of the box is a major disapppointment that requires massive fixes, file changes, etc. to get it running decently. If Richard had more time, I'm not even sure the product could have been released without major bug's considering it was such a drastic programming change from FLY/FLY2K.And then we have the "one man" show for X-Plane who does interact, but then many think he needs more help. And of course there was also interaction from Looking Glass, but the sim didn't survive; and same with Pro-Pilot.So what I see here, is a call for a simming community "lynching" party to make demands on MS, which has actually released a simulation that doesn't have "near" the problems of the four sims mentioned above.And with such a large simmer community, such that MSFS has, the complaints & request's would simply be never ending. Everything from gradual season changes, to perfection in the most complicated flight models. NO............. I don't agree with the concept of these postings. I know from Beta testing that MS has a great interest in this simulation & of what people think. But they also realize the limitations, because the sim has become so large in scope. That's where the 3rd parties come in, IMO----- to fill the gap for the hard core users. I simply don't agree with demands on MS to make the sim, into what every one wants, nor full time representives to deal with everyones gripes & want list's.L.Adamson

Sorry, but I think you are way off base hear calling me and other posters in here a "lynching party". :-boom Please, get real. That is not what this thread is about at all. You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to disagree with your concept of trying to rain down pessimism. This thread is nothing more than about how it would be nice if the MSFS developers would be allowed to come out of the closet. It probably won't happen, but we'll talk about how it would be nice anyway, regardless of your opinion. :-rollJim"Variable, this is EasyRhino. Do you copy? Over." Loud and clear EasyRhino. "Do we have a gig? Over." That's a Roger, we have a gig. Target is painted, start the music. "Roger that Variable. Into attack. Pickling target. Target is acquired and lit. LGB comin' down!" EasyRhino, circular error probability zero. Impact with High Order Detonation. Thank You, have a nice day.

Hi Barney,>While we can all wish for this or that to happen, I personally don't think it makes a wit of sense to comment here or anywhere else...MS is interested in sales.<'Microsoft' is as interested in sales as any who have invested the time and effort to produce a fine product and offer it for sale. Of course they are preoccupied with sales, but if it stopped there without further desire to develop and expand their product line the organization would surely wither and die. To date the existence of that desire is, thankfully, all too evident and our example, FS2004, bears rich testament to that fact. What I am suggesting is that the people who really matter, those at the sharp end on the shop floor, are the breath of life to the company we call Microsoft. Without their enthusiasm and preparedness to graft away on our behalf there would be no product line worth purchasing. We the consumers are not stupid. We may buy a product believing it to be worth the expenditure but if it doesn't measure up we will feel let down and it will be quickly abandoned. Oh but, you say, if these people are paid enough and offered enough security they will do anything out of loyalty to the company. That may be true in the shorter term but, let's not forget, these people are human beings who are striving to better themselves and enjoy a feeling of pride in what they do. In that sense they are no different than the rest of us. If an awareness starts to grow that the flight sim community are showing evidence of disenchantment, and this is demonstrated by a reduction of activity and enthusiasm on various sites such as this, then those on the development team may start to wonder why they are continuing to do what they do. There certainly can't be much job satisfaction from the knowledge that the greater majority of sales of the sim end up on the shelf, or worse the bin, simply because most casual purchasers have neither the patience or desire to explore all that it has to offer. No, they continue to do what they do in the knowledge and belief that there are certainly thousands of end users, such as ourselves, who are ready and able to appreciate and exploit every facet of their superbly crafted creation. That's the secret to securing this sim's longevity. Sales volumes are the icing on the cake.Without the current level of ongoing support and encouragement from our community, skilled staff will gradually drift away only to be replaced by those whose visions, aims and aspirations for the sim may prove to be somewhat wanting. As the word gets around this will soon be reflected in a reduction of sales and, inevitably, the shelving of further development. No one, of course, wants this to happen, least of all those at Microsoft who continue to support this undeniably worthwhile endeavour.This prediction is a worst case scenario but, quite conceivably, could occur simply because many of us are now growing tired of the lack of input from Microsoft. Surely even the sceptics within Microsoft's corporate heirarchy can appreciate the real dangers that do exist from their continued policy of silence and non-involvement. Deciding to do nothing could soon threaten to disenfranchise many of their bona fide supporters without whom this sim would have no real value, except to those who created it.I continue to hope that this policy will change but, like many of you, remain less than optimistic.Mike

>Sorry, but I think you are way off base hear calling me and>other posters in here a "lynching party". Can't help it; it's just a visual picture in my head............A bunch of simmers holding knotted ropes & M$ banners marching down the street as in the "old west"! :)L.Adamson

Well, sorry. But that's not how I see these people coming across here. ;)Jim