the ONLY thing we want to see in ms FLIGHT

[epza 0]

everyone is posting wishlitsts and all kinds of crap, but to be honest, fsx is good, besides its limitations.the game itself has many flaws, but 3rd party add ons make it a lot better.so the only thing we need, is more ground for the add on developers to work. we currently have MANY limitations on the add on creation, specially when it comes to military aircraft (its incredible what vrs been doing). we only need it to be more and more customizable. we need it to support more interaction, lets say, one aircraft with another, so we could see other aircrafts custom animations, interact with them, etc. or even interatcion with everything, like ground crew. so we could animate other objects from inside our aircraft, or even see custom animations on other aircrafts in a multiplayer section, lets say.i honestly dont think microsoft is gonna improve anything, besides graphics (and probably just a little amount. i remember very well fs9 fsx comparison shots, and they meant almost nothing in the end) so open space for 3rd party to do the improvements!now, if we really need something that does come from microsoft, is Frames per second! its ridiculous that a i7 960x +6gb ram + gtx470 cant run fsx at 30fps smoothly with graphics all set to full (autogen, radius, mesh resolution, etc)speaking in general, fsx graphics are terrible, because you need to display tons of information, so you cant make detailed graphics like 1st person shooters. so with low poly objects, how can fsx frame rate be so poor?since they closed their msfs studio, i was expeting msflight to be made from grund up, so they could fix everything that was wrong, but i guess they'll just improve the latest msfs version again, and change the name.my 2 cents

You're right, i7 960x 6 + gb ram gtx470 cannot run fsx at 30fps Smoothly with all graphics set to full (AutoGen, radius, mesh resolution, etc. Together with Microsoft Flight will be released for the 125 dollars software called” How to repair the frame rates in the Microsoft Flight Sim “for those who do not fly just like to fix itWith full support “Tweaking on Twitter”Follow me on Tweaking on Twitter :)Happy Landings

[Kilo7 0]

I'm with you. If Microsoft flight did northing more than allow me to have all sliders to the right..full traffics, animation, addons like eaglesoft , PMDG, ORBX.. etc..I would buy it, and I would pay more for it. It would be nice if it was programmed for #D as well.

[simmerhead 885]

I surely don't want Microsoft to limit the graphics to suit mid range computers. They can sell a light version with "fake" sliders that can be moved to the right so all those who can't afford top of the line computers and don't understand basic computing truths doesn't have to pull their hair out. I just don't get it. Would you folks buy a Toyota and ###### when it doesn't run like a Lamborghini?

[FlyAndFight 37]

I would like more tea missions.And flights across the Serengeti to take part in that oldest of pastimes dung spotting (The steamiest pile spotted wins a trip to Norwood junction to count the feral cat population and wrestle the early morning mist.cheers Time for tea!!!Andy

With FSX allowing one to go into orbit, I would like for FLIGHT to include a starship, preferrably the Enterprise from ST-TNG, and allow me to pretend to be Captain Jean-Luc Picard and utter his immortal words:

[spen2 1]

LOL!!! Actually, I'm not. It just doesn't make any sense why he brings up tea in every post he makes about Flight. Please explain what tea has to to with flight simulation.

There are two T's in 'Flight simulation'. That's the only link i can see!:(

[mmann 72]

There are two T's in 'Flight simulation'. That's the only link i can see!:(

Except that Microsoft eliminated the word "Simulator" from Flight leaving just the one T (actually t) now.Regards, Mike Mann

[Mike T 220]

Great. Now that we know what we should be thinking I'll send out an immediate email to Tom A. requesting that he close down this forum and we'll just call you whenever we have any questions about FS Flight. No sense in wasting time posting here when it is quite apparent that you have all the answers.

[HoratioWondersocks 4]

Andy loves tea.....don't you Andy?

Absolutely SirJust trying to remind our cousins across the water what they are missing after they committed the terrible sin of dumping it all in Boston Harbour. And all because you wouldn't pay poor old King (something or rather, George possibly they usually are ) his tax AND for having the front to want representation.CHEEK OF IT!!Forum posters i am just trying to inject a bit of fun/stupidity-eccentricity into the forum.Lighten it up perhaps. cheers to alldrink that cuppa with pride.Andy

[Tierborn 201]

I surely don't want Microsoft to limit the graphics to suit mid range computers. They can sell a light version with "fake" sliders that can be moved to the right so all those who can't afford top of the line computers and don't understand basic computing truths doesn't have to pull their hair out. I just don't get it. Would you folks buy a Toyota and ###### when it doesn't run like a Lamborghini?

I like this .. a second version with fake sliders.  Very funny!Not quite as funny as my suggestion to release a Flight "tweak" simulator.   No actual planes to fly .. just sliders to move with a "frame rate" indicator.  This version would be targeted at those the tweak more than they fly, and for those that aren't happy until the frame rate is 100.

[Sharrow 0]

its ridiculous that a i7 960x +6gb ram + gtx470 cant run fsx at 30fps smoothly with graphics all set to full (autogen, radius, mesh resolution, etc)

I'm with you. If Microsoft flight did northing more than allow me to have all sliders to the right..full traffics, animation, addons like eaglesoft , PMDG, ORBX.. etc..I would buy it, and I would pay more for it.

It goes without saying that MSFlight needs to be much more "mulitcore capable" than FSX ever was whilst at the same time using as many modern gpu's as you may have. How achievable this actually is remains to be seen.Having said that I do not want MSFlight to be able to run at "full sliders" with high AA & AF settings, 4096 equivalent textures, and at HD resolutions on even high-end 2011 generation hardware as I feel that this will severley limit its longevity. In my opinion there needs to be some extra headroom built in that scales well with newer generation hardware going into 2013/14. Gives the simmer something to look forward to and the addon developer the incentive to innovate...

[bsmfinegan 12]

It goes without saying that MSFlight needs to be much more "mulitcore capable" than FSX ever was whilst at the same time using as many modern gpu's as you may have. How achievable this actually is remains to be seen.Having said that I do not want MSFlight to be able to run at "full sliders" with high AA & AF settings, 4096 equivalent textures, and at HD resolutions on even high-end 2011 generation hardware as I feel that this will severley limit its longevity. In my opinion there needs to be some extra headroom built in that scales well with newer generation hardware going into 2013/14. Gives the simmer something to look forward to and the addon developer the incentive to innovate...

Don't agree with this idea of longevity, lets have something we can use fully from day one and let the future take care of itself which it will do if sales for Microsoft go well.Bryan.

[shaanxi1 0]

+1 here! A fully optimized and perfected FSX would be just fine with me!! No more popping, flashing, jerking, shimmering, stuttering etc etc! (no more go a rounds either)

And what about wings of pray game engine?

[simmerhead 885]

Don't agree with this idea of longevity, lets have something we can use fully from day one and let the future take care of itself which it will do if sales for Microsoft go well.Bryan.

I would like a $5000 PC to run Flight better than a $1000 PC at the time of its release. Otherwise I agree that the future should take care of itself, hopefully with MIcrosoft continuing to develop and upgrade Flight for many years to come, instead of just throwing in the towel after its initial release.

[Tierborn 201]

I would like a $5000 PC to run Flight better than a $1000 PC at the time of its release. Otherwise I agree that the future should take care of itself, hopefully with MIcrosoft continuing to develop and upgrade Flight for many years to come, instead of just throwing in the towel after its initial release.

What throwing in the towel ... sp1 and sp2, remember?

[simmerhead 885]

What throwing in the towel ... sp1 and sp2, remember?

I remember, but two updates since 2006 isn't all that impressive... Look at software like Rise of Flight or Adobe Photoshop Lightroom, or web browsers like Firefox and Opera for that matter. Made by people with a passion and interest in their users. I'm not saying that Microsoft is all bad, I've been a happy flight simulator, office, windows and DOS user since 8MHz PCs were the hottest and fastest on the market.