I quote: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.AdamsonI have to assume you have priveledged information, probably garnered from face-to-face talks. But when I speak of "MS", I'm speaking of the generic corporation and nowhere did I zero in on a particular department such as the developers. I also quoted from first-hand experience; that is, the experience of just about every other person who has tried the sim and the proof is in the pudding. If those who oversee the developers did indeed care, they wouldn't release the sim in the state that it is currently. And to cite those who profess that time is a factor, then that is indicative of sales being at the fore and no amount of discussion here or elsewhere will alter that.But in any case, this is all shouting into the wind. The sim will continue to be released as MS sees fit, whether including hints, etc., from the caring syncophants or not, and we will continue to buy it and learn to accept it in whatever condition it arrives and attempt to re-create it in the image we think it should be with our own fixes, patches, workarounds or whatever it takes to accomodate our ideas. And this will be done in spite of the good intentions of the MS developers.

A "generic corporation"? That is a new term for me-all corporations I know made up of real, usually hard working people the last I looked.. By the way-when I was in Oshkosh I happened to talk to one of the programers and asked about another programer I happened to be knowledgeable about on the Ms team.He mentioned that the programer (male) was on maternity leave. It seems the "generic" corporation Microsoft gives its male employees maternity leave when their wives have babies. Not bad for a "generic" corporation-it almost sounds like a "caring" corporation but that would be conjecture on my part. I sure wish the corporation I work for (not generic) gave the same benefits! :-)As far as the sim not being released as is-I would strongly disagree.I also second very strongly what Larry stated about the people that made this sim.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

Geofa...Corporations, like other groups of people, end up with strange rules of play. Many of these rules are for good reason, and others are all about protecting power and turf. And the highly paid public relations departments, who's individuals are paid megabucks to say absolutely nothing are just beyond belief in a lot of cases. Many times well-connected people with very limited ability end up in this "do nothing" department. And believe me... I know what I'm talking about here. When I worked at XXXXXX XXXXXX, they were so paranoid about individuals speaking out, that on a corporate wide basis they subscribed to a service that scanned every periodical, magazine, newapaper, etc., that they could get their hands on for XXXXXXX XXXXXX related "quotes". Then they notified XXXXXXX XXXXXX of all the details, and the speaking individual was tracked down within the corporation, by corporate public relations, and made to answer for the remark that was made, all the way back up the chain. In most cases, this was done without penalties, except for the shear embarrassment of the track down, and required answer (that evey one would know about back up that chain including one's whole tree of bosses). It doesn't take very many of these for even a dumb person to know that this is not a way to maintain job security.I once mentioned in a telephone interview to PC Week Magazine, about where I saw the future in PC development, based on corporate use. I payed the price on that totally worthless opinion.I expect this is also the MS culture and situation.I sometimes wonder how I survived to retirement !!! Bob (Lecanto, Fl)

>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. FLY would have never stood on it's own, without "major" contributions from 3rd parties. Off the shelf, the panels were it's special nitch, but flight modeling & scenery greatly lacked. Imagine FLY with no 3rd party V88's, TerraScene, & SKY. FLY "REQUIRED" interaction to survive! MS doesn't! MSFS is a stand alone product that's useful for 90% of it's customer base with NO outside additions. Therefor I see little use in comparing the two products.I'd also like to see what benefit MS would have in giving up it's trade secrets for the benefit of outside developers. In reality, at some point, these developers "may" become competition to future releases of MSFS. It's a case of, what will MS do, when it's already been done by someone else.L.Adamson

You would be correct. Microsoft does have infant care leave for women and men employees.It's so funny to see these kinds of threads. There are so many people out there who claim some kind of "inside" knowledge of Microsoft and try to be so secretive about it as if Microsoft were the NSA or something. In fact, Microsoft is just a company, and those folks who work for Microsoft are just people working for a company just like everyone else. For those who are Microsoft employees, it's not such a big deal. Everyone has a job to do.Jim

>>I also second very strongly what Larry stated about the people>that made this sim.I second your statements very strongly, Geof, and third Larry's statements. At least this only happens every two years.Don S.

Giving away trade secrets? Now I am beginning to understand how a culture of aloofness can be fostered with no problems at all.Dedicated simmers who wish to interact and gain more knowledge about their beloved sim, TO MAKE IT EVEN BETTER, called a lynching mob?Cripes!

Eko's reaction above is the same as mine concerning a few of the posts I just read. They read like they are blowing way out of proportion a very civil and extremely reasonable discourse that simply asks for parity with the rest of the most successful game studios in the world... They are not flamebait in the least here, but it seems they are misinterpreting reasonable arguments into unreasonable assertions. No disrespect to those few posters here who *I* perceive to have done that, but it just boggles my mind - specially coming from a few of the long time fans of this game.We're *all* fans of this game and genre - and of Microsoft Game Studio developers in particular. We wouldn't *be here* otherwise. Again, this series of threads isn't asking anything extraordinary: its asking for parity from the FS developers, to change policies in accordance with the best of other game development studios out there... Not to out-do other studios or provide anything more than they do, but simply step up to the set standard and realities of game development that exists today!That a few fans of this game don't understand the benefits so clearly realized by so many other games on the market - specially when its being asked for a game they so love - is really puzzling me. Specially when the benefits come to both themselves *and* Microsoft in the form of a stronger developer community (which leads to much better addons released in a much faster time frame, which leads to *much* more loyalty to the game and MS Game Studio employees, which leads to even more sales!).--Why does this very unique reluctance exist here to some extent (when it absolutely doesn't in other game communities)? The reasons stated so far, it seems, are:1) A corporate culture exists already within Microsoft that forbids such change - and there's no way they are going to alter that.2) Its preposterous to give away "trade secrets" of a game to the end-users since it already has a successful addon market.3) We're an insignificant part of the customers for Flight Sim and our voices don't or won't matter.4) MS Game Studios consist of a bunch of selfish people who only care about sales - and they already have those in large numbers, so why would they bother changing (this, it seems, being touted by some of those who are actually *defending* Microsoft ??).5) Bill Gates is directly controlling everything behind the scenes and we all know he's evil - thus, he would never allow such successful and industry standard practices to happen within HIS evil empire (this is a variation of number 1, I believe - just stated differently and in a much more negative fashion).These seem to be the main reasons give so far in opposition here.--Ok, let me try to tackle these in specifics:1) Nonsense. As any Microsoft follower can attest, if MS can be anything, they can be nimble. As the industry changes, they change to fit within it better than most companies out there - exactly why they've been so successful for so long. I won't list the changes Microsoft has implemented here (both great and small), but I can assure you: they do what they have to stay competitive - all the time. Yes, they are getting bigger and slower as time goes on, but they still do this on a regular basis today. Beyond that, MS Game Studio's is an independent arm of Microsoft to a great degree... They have much more latitude than anyone here is giving them credit for. Simply go read up on their history (and the gaming houses Microsoft has bought over the years that makes up MS Game Studios) to prove this to yourself.2) "Trade Secrets"? Who's asking for that? It'd be silly for them to give away their source code to the public (as a proprietary development house) - and I know of no proprietary game company that has ever (willingly) done so. What we're talking about is answering much needed questions on how to use *existing* functionality within Flight Sim that is poorly documented, poorly understood or mistakenly unexposed (you'd think - no way to tell until a discourse with them exists). It is *not* requiring some bizarre trade secret flood. This argument *must* be made, I'd think, by people who have never designed end-user addons in a thriving game setting, because it doesn't jive with reality. TONS of gaming houses provide access to their developers today because thats exactly whats needed to take full advantage of the tools and game *they* release - and build a strongly loyal developer community. Nobody expects perfection from these game developers, but thats what is seemingly argued here. No end-user developer I've ever worked with has ever expected that the inside programmers read the future before release and know exactly what end-user developers need to be productive. This is *exactly* why access to those developers is so extremely important once a game *is* released.3) I've covered this already in these threads, but quickly: we're not an insignificant community here. We're the most valuable to the game designers because many of us know and love the game so much. Our word counts: I promise. If you've ever talked to game developers, you know how much influence a dedicated "hard core" community has on its decisions - even thought they are *not* the vast majority of buyers. Heck, the same thing applies to hardware developers (such as video card companies). Its universal.4) This is where things turn silly. Nobody (who isn't flamebaiting) is accusing the developers at MS Game Studio's of anything, outside this: they rock and we need to talk to them. They produce our favorite game - and it rocks. They did such an excellent job that they've taken us out of the niche market and made us mainstream gamers with all the influence that entails. They're lifting up the simulation genre to heights its rarely seen. We love them. We need access to them. They are human beings who would thrive in the praise and professional respect and discourse they would receive in the right setting (and no, thats not in any "general" forum).5) This is just *too* silly and we all know the vast reasons why. If you in particular don't, then there's no point arguing with you anyway. :-)--Have I covered everything? I don't know. Have I argued valid counter points to some of the objections raised in these threads? I don't know that either. What I do know is this: personally, and I mean only me here, I haven't seen any argument for Microsoft Game Studio's acting different than the other successful game house in the market yet. It simply makes no sense - for them or for us - to continue doing so. Again, IMHO.Take care,Elrond

Hi Larry,That argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny. As you must know, Fly! wasn't alone in its open support policies - it seemingly just started the trend years ago (from my perspective - I have no firm data to prove that). Here are just a few examples of other games that enjoy such open support by its developers, just off the top of my head (and one's I've been involved with to some extent or another):Dungeon SiegeIL2Neverwinter NightsWheel of TimeUnreal Tournament (and a many of the games based upon the engine)Quake (and many of the games based upon the engine)DOOM3Fly!etc, etc, etc.(I highly recommend you visit some of the above end-user communities and see how they work - and compare them to the Flight Sim developer communities)I can assure you, all of the games above would have stood on their own without major contributions from the internal developers. All of the above games are "stand alone product(s) that (are) useful for 90% of it's customer base with NO outside additions", to use your quote.Whats different about the above games is: they THRIVED in end-user developer addons in an EXTREMELY quick timeframe post release. The frustration and angst thats visible at times in this developer community is LARGELY ABSENT in the above: because they get the answers to questions that the internal developers couldn't have foreseen (since they're not psychic!). Believe me, it makes a MASSIVE difference.As for "trade secrets", I have no idea where that came from since it doesn't make any sense. There are no "trade secrets" in SDK's and tools released by Microsoft - and its clarification and expansion of the data in these documents and tools (on a timely basis) that is most needed. This of course, can only be obtained with direct developer interaction. Since you bring up Fly!, believe me, the developers there gave up no "trade secrets" with their interaction! And most certainly, neither does any developer of the all the other games where that type of support is given. Almost all game houses would have a heart attack if any such thing was done... Its not being requested and it wouldn't matter if it was, because it wouldn't be given.Take care,Elrond

>>I haven't seen any argument for Microsoft Game Studio's acting different than the other successful game house in the market yet<

I normally keep quiet around here as I'm not an add-on developer nor a FS Expert.However, after reading both Elrond's and now this thread I do have something to add.Having worked for a large publicly trade software manufacturer and working for a number of years in the same building as Microsoft in Germany I feel Geofa in respond #2 is on the right track.The company I worked for had a similar 'Communication Policy' which stated we were unable to post in Newsgroup, Forums, Guestbooks where our statements could be interpreted as an official company statement... not because our management were control freaks or they didn't respect our freedom of speech. It is simply that publically traded companies base their company value on public opinion and only slightly on product sucess or profit (although these factors influence the public opinion greatly. ;) )The one question that arrises in both these thread for me is; Is the FS development/support team unable/unwilling to communicate with us? or If the FS development/support team unable/unwilling to communicate with us here?One way our company got around the public opinion issue is we hosted dedicated forums for developers which were moderated by PR representatives.Does Microsoft not have forums on MSN for flight sim?I do know that Microsoft has dedicated forums for developers under the MSDN organisation. Would it not be possible for an additional MSDN subgroup for Studio Games to be created?And lastly, although I'm sure the many add-on developer have tried, does the FS dev/support team not respond to direct email inquires? I'm sure I've read that a mail address exists for contact.I'm sure everyone here would agree that we'd love to have the FS team as part of our online community but if that is not possible what alternatives exist?Cheers,-Todd[table][tr][td]http://www.avsim.com/other/usaribbon.gif[/td][td]Todd IngallsMember of [link:www.grid.org/services/teams/team.htm?id=5E79C613-0A60-4A3B-BDC1-F9EE49F2D4FE]Join the AVSIM Team Fight Against Cancer!][/td][/tr][/table.----BEGIN FS CODE BLOCK----G:EDDM(DE) a R- FS+++ F+ P U+ X C+ H+>++ O+ V-- A+(++) SP?>+++-----END FS CODE BLOCK-----;)

news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.simulatorsThere is plenty of BS in the group, but it is the official Microsoft group for all of their simulators. Jim