But how many people (especially newcomers) would have been confused about FS11. Is it  FS Eleven or FS Two? Remember FS9 was actually called FS2004 ( or Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 A Century of Flight to give it it's full title). And nobody calls FSX "Flight Simulator Ten" do they?

Actually, those that would have confused FS11 with FS two .. probably cant manage to turn on a computer.

No, they didn't blow it, and the name is fine. The fact is "Simulator" in the name makes many people walk right by it on the shelf. "Simulator" in the name gives the impression of high complexity and dryness of a title only aimed at a certain audience.Microsoft "Flight" attempts to signify a break from the old and a fresh start aimed at a wider audience. "Flight" alludes to it being an entertainment title rather than JUST a simulation title. They are rebranding the title to appeal and put the emphasis on FLIGHT rather than SIMULATION. This move ensures that hardcore users of the title can take it to the simulation level while the casual user can enjoy the sensation of FLIGHT without having to buy a Cessna 172 handbook to figure it out.This move is not unlike the FAA "Be A Pilot" program. The program tries to show the general public that being a pilot is not so complex that it is out of reach therefore flying can be enjoyed by anyone of average intelligence.The parallel becomes more critical when you realize that both virtual and real flight is driven by new people coming in. If only the hardcore set bought flight, the franchise would die out. In the real world, the lack of new pilots coming in have forced dozens of airports to close at the cost of thousands of jobs. In the end I could give a rat's behind if they changed the name to "Supersonic Death Match Realm of Winged Revenge." If it keeps the franchise going and brings in new users - and the platform remains open addons by the likes of PMDG, LDS, Dreamteam, etc then good for Microsoft. New users can shoot each other down, while the rest of us can fully simulate a 747-400 in all its glory and the name becomes meaningless.

Yes, it's pretty obvious why they dropped the "Simulator" tag. However, I feel like the title, "Microsoft Flight" is not such a great alternative. We've been so acclimated to the extensive "Microsoft Flight Simulator (x)" title that once you remove the "Simulator" and the year, it actually sounds like there's something missing. Also, the name is more vague. Because there are many relevant possibilities with "Microsoft Flight," it's a serious pain to search the new game title anywhere and expect accurate results. Not to mention the name is not exactly a charmer; in my opinion, it's dull and screams 'lack of creativity.' It's almost like they grew tired, eventually gave up, and settled with just removing "Simulator." I refuse to believe that "Microsoft Flight" was the best they could have come up with. But who really cares about the name? As long as the game is great and runs efficiently (unlike the last one..).

No, they didn't blow it, and the name is fine. The fact is "Simulator" in the name makes many people walk right by it on the shelf. "Simulator" in the name gives the impression of high complexity and dryness of a title only aimed at a certain audience.Microsoft "Flight" attempts to signify a break from the old and a fresh start aimed at a wider audience. "Flight" alludes to it being an entertainment title rather than JUST a simulation title. They are rebranding the title to appeal and put the emphasis on FLIGHT rather than SIMULATION. This move ensures that hardcore users of the title can take it to the simulation level while the casual user can enjoy the sensation of FLIGHT without having to buy a Cessna 172 handbook to figure it out.This move is not unlike the FAA "Be A Pilot" program. The program tries to show the general public that being a pilot is not so complex that it is out of reach therefore flying can be enjoyed by anyone of average intelligence.The parallel becomes more critical when you realize that both virtual and real flight is driven by new people coming in. If only the hardcore set bought flight, the franchise would die out. In the real world, the lack of new pilots coming in have forced dozens of airports to close at the cost of thousands of jobs. In the end I could give a rat's behind if they changed the name to "Supersonic Death Match Realm of Winged Revenge." If it keeps the franchise going and brings in new users - and the platform remains open addons by the likes of PMDG, LDS, Dreamteam, etc then good for Microsoft. New users can shoot each other down, while the rest of us can fully simulate a 747-400 in all its glory and the name becomes meaningless.

Congratulations on a particularly lucid post! The easier Microsoft makes it for newbie "enthusiasts" to participate and shoot each other down for fun and sport, the better Microsoft's cashlow will be, thus the more R&D for the next version. Microsoft is well aware, as most of us hardcore simmers are, that once you master the basics of flighing you get bored and naturally want to learn more about flying for real, so you gradually move to more complex aircraft, ILS, long distance flying, VATSIM, etc. and become a harcore simmer. There is no reason at all why MS Flight can't be an easy-to-fly shoot 'em down for beginners and at the same time offer high-quality sim experience for the hard core simmer. The strategy of low barriers-to-entry for the newbie (until they are hooked) as a feeder to continually and progressively grow and develop a community of hardcore simmers is an excellent business strategy. Cheers,- jahman.

Then there is the possibility that Lockheed Martin specified that the term "Simulator" could only be used by themselves - since in fact, they sell Prepare3D as a "real" simulator for professional use.Anyone want to bet that LM will be selling "Flight" as a new version of Prepare- and describing it as a simulator?(Or in FAA speak- a "Flight Training Device.)Having exclusive rights to the term "Simulator", probably means the commercial version can be sold at a higher price!AR

It would be difficult to have exclusive legal rights on the word "simulator". Same goes for "flight" and for the combination of both terms. There are just too many "flight simulators" both hardware and software out there for someone to claim exclusive rights.Cheers,- jahman.

It would be difficult to have exclusive legal rights on the word "simulator". Same goes for "flight" and for their combination of both terms. There are just too many "flight simulators" both hardware and software out there for someone to claim exclusive rights.Cheers,- jahman.

But suppose simply, that MS agreed to not use the word "Simulator" in connection with any future aviation oriented product developed by MS - as part of the agreement with LM. Hence the title FLIGHT for a new product from MS.For MS to agree to this, the contract with LM must have been quite valuable!And LM may have believed that FAA certification for their product would be more readily obtained if MS no longer applied the title "simulator" to a "game".Suppose even further, that MS agreed to develop certain enhacements requested by LM. That would explain the sudden reversal by MS and rehiring much of the FS talent.AR

But suppose simply, that MS agreed to not use the word "Simulator" in connection with any future aviation oriented product developed by MS - as part of the agreement with LM.

They didn't.

They didn't.

At last- an insider! AR

I think that dropping simulator from the title has two effects:1. It signifies a break from the past as in don't expect backwards compatability, this is a new release.2. It may appeal more to the casual gamer who has an interest in aviation

They didn't.

How do you know?

But suppose simply, that MS agreed to not use the word "Simulator" in connection with any future aviation oriented product developed by MS - as part of the agreement with LM. Hence the title FLIGHT for a new product from MS.For MS to agree to this, the contract with LM must have been quite valuable!And LM may have believed that FAA certification for their product would be more readily obtained if MS no longer applied the title "simulator" to a "game".Suppose even further, that MS agreed to develop certain enhacements requested by LM. That would explain the sudden reversal by MS and rehiring much of the FS talent.AR

No offence but how does your argument hold water? Consumers will never see Prepar3d on shelves at your local electronics store so there is absolutely no confusion that could occur even if both titles used the word "Simulator" in the name. Second, Prepar3d doesn't even use the word "simulator" in its trade name...as a matter of fact the title "Prepar3d" doesn't even hint to the fact that it is a "flight simulator". Your supposition would only make real sense if LM were selling a title named "Flight Simulator" and Micrsoft was selling a title named "Flight Simulator" both based on the same MSFS engine. Furthermore, Microsoft has no other contract with LM besides the licensing agreement that accompanies the EULA in the ESP version of FSX. Anyone can license ESP and name it whatever they want as long as it is not named "Flight Simulator" which is a registered trademark of Microsoft. If you sell a million copies after paying the licensing fees MS sees none of that. And to that end most gamers have no clue that ESP or Prepar3d exist. LM is not mass marketing Prepar3d to consumers, and ,Microsoft is not marketing "Flight" or Flight Simulator X" to the commercial community..again there is simply no chance of confusion nor is there a value add to be placed on dropping "simulator" from the "Flight" name to conform to some mytical marketing agreement...there simply is no relation.At the end of the day, the removal of "Simulator" from "Flight Simulator" is far more strategic in hopes of attracting more casual consumers to the title. This is especially relevant to the perception of the title. Many gamers have heard of "Microsoft Flight Simulator" and may have even tried it and dumped it in the past. If that same gamer walks into an electronics store and sees version Flight Simulator "11", they will simply assume that it is more of the same that they weren't interested in many versions ago. Changing the name to keep it familiar but subtly different tries to change the perception of the title. Shoppers don't roll their eyes and say "oh no, not another version of boring Flight Simulator." Changing the name to "Flight" freshens the title which is in-line with the new features of the sim and asks the consumer to take another look at the franchise to realize that MS is taking it in a different direction. At the same time it ties in the tradition of "Flight Simulator" to those who are love the franchise. The hope is that instead of dismissing just "another" version of the same old stuff, that a second look will be taken and the person who dismissed the title in the past will at least pick up the box, read the new specs and features and maybe even give it another try. At the same time, it ensures that the hundreds of thousands of users who are NOT here on Avsim, Flightsim, etc still recognize the title that they know and love when it arrives on store shelves. In essence it is the same title...only different!

Mike- Suppose your company had a successful entertainment software product called Surgery Simulator. It had started as a game years ago but with new versions and skilled software add ons (including by professionals), it was now being used by medical students and even professional surgeons for proficiency maintenance & experimentation.Along comes Johnson & Johnson with a lucrative offer to purchase rights to the software which they will sell to professionals. You would retain rights to the entertainment market.But J&J says they want exclusive rights to use the term "Simulator" in their marketing. They say that at some time in the future when the AMA and the College of Surgeons has approved the software for professional training and experimentation, they wish to rename their version as "Surgical Simulator".However you are free to continue marketing the same product as entertainment under the shortened name "Surgery".Given the right price from J&J, would you accept their offer?ARPS read FAA for AMA in the context of "Flight".And imagine a yoke replaced by a "scalpel" tracing an opening cut on a tablet! Or tieing off a bleeder using Wii.

I agree with dropping the Simulator bit from the name: It's too geeky!As for Flight, they could drop that too, just put an airplane on the box.And we all know who Microsoft is, so why be repetitive?Just name the new version > ! <! stands for excitement, makes message in the name crystal-clear: no confusion, no controversy.Cheers,- jahman.

I agree with dropping the Simulator bit from the name: It's too geeky!As for Flight, they could drop that too, just put an airplane on the box.And we all know who Microsoft is, so why be repetitive?Just name the new version > ! <! stands for excitement, makes message in the name crystal-clear: no confusion, no controversy.Cheers,- jahman.

If your dog agrees with ! then no argument from me!AR

Anyone can license ESP and name it whatever they want as long as it is not named "Flight Simulator" which is a registered trademark of Microsoft.

Hello Mike,I've read this a couple of times recently on these forums where people have claimed the "Flight Simulator" is a registered trademark of Microsoft. I would be interested if someone could tell me if this is true or not and where they get their information from. I've just read the FSX manual, it tells me that Microsoft, the MS Game Studios Logo and Windows are registered trademarks but it doesn't mention "Flight Simulator". I've also checked the credits and eula documents in the FSX folder, no mention of it and I've even checked out the Microsoft Trademarks page (http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/IntellectualProperty/Trademarks/EN-US.aspx) and it doesn't mention "Flight Simulator" being a trademark either (although they do have Forza Motorsport, Halo and other games titles listed).