@ Highmike and jahman, your presents have satisfied me.

One questions I would like to have answered is: Will Microsoft Flight be as customizable as FSX and FS9? Will users be able to make their own airplanes, paint schemes, add on programs such as FS Recorder etc.? The recorder and the huge variety of add on planes and ability to modify these planes is what has kept me interested in Flight Simulator for seven years.

Well, if you can't, then it will be in the bargain bins within a matter of weeks, so I suspect you will be able to do all that stuff.Al

One questions I would like to have answered is: Will Microsoft Flight be as customizable as FSX and FS9? Will users be able to make their own airplanes, paint schemes, add on programs such as FS Recorder etc.? The recorder and the huge variety of add on planes and ability to modify these planes is what has kept me interested in Flight Simulator for seven years.

If it isn't on the Flight website, no one knows the answer. MS hasn't given out any details on Flight.

If it isn't on the Flight website, no one knows the answer. MS hasn't given out any details on Flight.

From the MS Flight News Release:

MS-Flight[/b] DEVELOPMENT TEAM on December 8, 2010)' − Welcome to News from the Development Team!]We’ve developed on the “simulation” aspect for many years and have no intension of losing that legacy. What we’re doing now is improving the total experience while building on this legacy, enhancing the enjoyment for all who share a passion for flight.

Everything MS says points to a continuation of FSX with MS Flight adding to the FSX experience ("improving", "building", "enhancing"), rather than subtracting. The entire news release is peppered with these positive adverbs that "add".Consider that as a large corporation MS can't give specifics because if for whatever reason they can't deliver on a particular item they can and will be sued. For example if in the news release MS explicitly promise backward-compatibility for FSX add-on aircraft and they do deliver on their promise, but there is just that "one" aircraft that turns out to not be compatible but is the "one and only" aircraft that you want to fly and you bought your high-end rig specifically to fly that aircraft based on what this MS news release promised and MS didn't deliver, well, you could have a basis to sue. People have sued large deep-pocket corporations for less in the past, and won.So I do read and ACK what MS is saying in this news release and I do have confidence that this time they will deliver a great "FSX+" sim experience (FSX + better multi-player, better hardware use, etc.) that will run add-ons, will be compatible with FSX add-ons (for the most part, especially scenery but perhaps excluding complex aircraft that might require the vendor to release an update but not a total redesign).So I do think MS have given plenty of detail regarding what drives their vision for MS Flight in this news release, although without giving specifics.Cheers,- jahman.PS: Recall what MS said about FSX, how certain simmer expectations were mishandled and what ended-up happening to that development team. I really doubt MS would make that same mistake twice.

I really doubt MS would make that same mistake twice.

Unless you count Windows 2000 and Vista.Al

We’ve developed on the “simulation” aspect for many years and have no intension of losing that legacy. What we’re doing now is improving the total experience while building on this legacy, enhancing the enjoyment for all who share a passion for flight.

That is pure PR speak. It would apply if all Microsoft did was to add "gaming" features to FSX and changed the GUI.

That is pure PR speak. It would apply if all Microsoft did was to add "gaming" features to FSX and changed the GUI.

Maybe not, we will see...In their shoes i would create source code from scratch taking the good aspects of FSX and droping out all the problems...You cant do that with a poroven-defective source code...You will never succeed and you will only loose time and money..Overall i am very positive with the latest news...It shows many things..It shows for example that MS probably dropped the idea of creating an arcade because there are many out there ...Also there is no product out there that is an Excellent Arcade AND an excellent Simulator....If they can combine these then its a win-win situation imho....BUT no word about multiplayer ability and ability for VATSIM/IVAO e.t.c. to exist in this new product..And since i fly 99% online its a great deal to me at least....

Jahman: what planet are you from? Sue microsoft for promising something in the press release? They can lie all they want a press release is not a binding contract... not that Microsoft offers ANY binding contracts of suitability for any purpose. I suggest you read the Microsoft EULA.

That is pure PR speak. It would apply if all Microsoft did was to add "gaming" features to FSX and changed the GUI.

PR-speak indeed! May I remind you that in a PR statement all you ever get is... PR-speak? :-)Cheers,- jahman.

Jahman: what planet are you from? Sue microsoft for promising something in the press release? They can lie all they want a press release is not a binding contract... not that Microsoft offers ANY binding contracts of suitability for any purpose. I suggest you read the Microsoft EULA.

For starters I'm from a planet where people address each other with respect.You can not only be sued for what you say in a PR-statement, you can even go to jail. In a publicly-listed company, try putting out a PR statement with misleading or false earnings projections and see how long 'til you join the chorus at Sing-Sing. And you can even be sued for less (no PR statement, only a handshake and in private) and lose $10.5 billion.So now you know why PR-speak is "cagey". But this diesn't mean you cannot read between the lines, with prudence, when the PR statement comes from a serious party. That's how the whole PR game "works": Learn the language, use it to your benefit.Cheers,- jahman.

that's right a publically listed coimpany has never lied before.... so naive. Dude they couldn't even sue Moody's who's job it is to give accurate assessments...and doesn't. ANd people pay large for that false info.

For starters I'm from a planet where people address each other with respect.You can not only be sued for what you say in a PR-statement, you can even go to jail. In a publicly-listed company, try putting out a PR statement with misleading or false earnings projections and see how long 'til you join the chorus at Sing-Sing. And you can even be sued for less (no PR statement, only a handshake and in private) and lose $10.5 billion.So now you know why PR-speak is "cagey". But this diesn't mean you cannot read between the lines, with prudence, when the PR statement comes from a serious party. That's how the whole PR game "works": Learn the language, use it to your benefit.Cheers,- jahman.

That's kinda over the top don't you think?Yes, a publically traded company must be very careful in what is included in a press release especially when it involves "forward looking statements" because in the case of a company's core product it can skew the stock price. However, you're missing some very important points:Microsoft "Flight Simulator", "Flight" is not a major source of revenue for MS. Neither is it a product that investors watch for success / failure when determining whether to buy or sell MS stock. As a matter of fact the revenue generated by the MS product line doesn't amount to much more than a rounding error to Microsoft's global revenue from Windows, Windows Server and Office Products. However, MS does see MSF(s) as a venue to steer more people to their MS LIVE! suite and that's were the value of resurrecting "Flight" comes into play.Remember the "magic screenies" from FSX? That was an epic failure and an outright lie. Remember the press releases on fully DX10 support? That too was a fiasco since only a half-***ed DX10 "preview" was delivered. Did anyone care except for us in the FS community? No. Did MS stock prices suffer? No. Did an outcry lead to a class action law suit? No.We've got to come to grips that outside of this community, nobody really cares about "Flight" and the millions of hard core "games" that bring in the real revenue buy products like "Halo" that brings in far more to MS than does "MS Flight". So no, nobody's gonna get sued and no one's going to jail.

that's right a publically listed coimpany has never lied before.... so naive. Dude they couldn't even sue Moody's who's job it is to give accurate assessments...and doesn't. ANd people pay large for that false info.

The reason you cant and never will be able to sue rating agencies is because rating agencies emit opinions, they are certainly *not* a source of original financial data. Further, if rating agencies were not bullet-proofed against lawsuits they would be sued and lose the shirts off their backs the very first time a security they rated defaulted. So comparing a corporate press release to the rating agencies game doesn't seem to work. (Rating agencies don't seem to work either, but that belongs in a different forum :-)Cheers,- jahman.

That's kinda over the top don't you think?

Not at all: The other poster said you couldn't be sued for what you said in a PR release (and asked me what planet I was from :-) So all I had to do to prove him wrong was provide one counter-example, which I did. The going to jail bit was a free added bonus.

Yes, a publically traded company must be very careful in what is included in a press release especially when it involves "forward looking statements" because in the case of a company's core product it can skew the stock price. However, you're missing some very important points:Microsoft "Flight Simulator", "Flight" is not a major source of revenue for MS. Neither is it a product that investors watch for success / failure when determining whether to buy or sell MS stock. As a matter of fact the revenue generated by the MS product line doesn't amount to much more than a rounding error to Microsoft's global revenue from Windows, Windows Server and Office Products. However, MS does see MSF(s) as a venue to steer more people to their MS LIVE! suite and that's were the value of resurrecting "Flight" comes into play.

I agree completely, but the fact that "less money is involved" doesn't safeguard you from getting sued (e.g. penny stocks, where the amount of money in play can be a lot less than FSX sales revenue).

Remember the "magic screenies" from FSX? That was an epic failure and an outright lie. Remember the press releases on fully DX10 support? That too was a fiasco since only a half-***ed DX10 "preview" was delivered. Did anyone care except for us in the FS community? No. Did MS stock prices suffer? No. Did an outcry lead to a class action law suit? No.

Indeed, I wake-up in the middle of the night bathed in a cold sweat thanks to FSX-DX10-induced nightmares of flickering runways while flaring to land! But show me where Microsoft put it in unambiguous writing that FSX would sport a full-blown implementation of DX10. You won't find it. Why not? Because if they did all of us that bought FSX could mount a class-action lawsuit. Sure the money would be small for each one of us and even in the aggregate for Microsoft as well. But perhaps the Judge would have been kind to us simmers and forced Microsoft to offer remedies (i.e. fix the dang DX10 implementation!) instead of money, as often happens with product recalls. Imagine a World where a judge could force Microsoft to fix all the bugs in FSX: You would have FSX, FSX Acceleration and FSX "The Final Judgement". Weeee!!! (it might come out a decade late, though, right after FSXIV). Note that software is perhaps a special case where the vendor forces you to sign-off so many of your rights in the EULA that even if the product doesn't work as advertised it might be difficult to sue and win.

We've got to come to grips that outside of this community, nobody really cares about "Flight" and the millions of hard core "games" that bring in the real revenue buy products like "Halo" that brings in far more to MS than does "MS Flight". So no, nobody's gonna get sued and no one's going to jail.

Even though Flight is small for Microsoft, Microsoft is a very, very large corporation, therefore *all* PR statements Microsoft puts out have to be vetted by their legal department in order to mitigate unnecessary legal risks. Therefore the PR language will necessarily be "cagey". Other corporations work the same way. So does this mean PR statments are useless? No, not if understand PR-speak. Note that even tough PR-statements are cagey, the FSX team got fired in good measure for mismangaging customer expectations. Given that fiasco, I can just about guarantee Microsoft won't make *that* same mistake twice (in a row!) and this time will be (is being) extremely precise, almost scientific, in what it says in the MS Flight PR-statements, in what it implies, and in what it leaves out, to make sure our expectations are managed correctly to all parties satisfaction.Cheers,- jahman.