My Four Cents

[Virtual Reality 0]

Hey Guys,Seeing as "My Two Cents" was already taken, I thought I would go with what was trending and continue with what I thought about 'Flight' and my opinions towards it.Right where to begin,Performance

• Firstly I feel that if Microsoft want to regain that former glory that Flight Simulator once had, (not a two way split between two simulator platforms, such as FS2004 users and FSX users) that they really need to address the performance of the new simulator/game head on. My thought towards this is that they will make use of better hyper-threading technology, offput a decent about of performance onto the GPU and allow users a greater degree of advanced options within the simulator itself. (So much so that users can tweak how much they want the CPU/GPU to run at, what part of the Simulator they wish to be loaded from. Scenery: CPU / Aircraft: GPU / AI: CPU / Weather:GPU) while i'm no tech expert, I think if this was possible, it would allow a greater degree of the user being able to fine print his simulator as to how he or she wants it. I think this would address the situation between different computers. Some people have two graphics cards in their system, therefore they will want the GPU to do more of the output rather than the CPU, while others who have the lastest Intel i7 Processor's will want to use the CPU more for resource loading. I mean this would be expert stuff and not for the average simmer (the simulator would already determine your basis settings already). I think this idea would just allow a greater open of freedom and if this simulator is to be of anything like FSX and is out for a good few years, who knows how techonology will change! The more options and freedom you present towards a person the more he/she can play around and get the most out of it. I'm not sure whether this would work, and it doesn't have to be spot on perfect. What I am merely trying to get across is that the user should have more access towards customizing his simulator to better suit his/her's own machines.
• Following on from performance, I feel that looking at systems of today, most machines brought "new" are now using Intel's i3/5/7 processor's. I feel that Microsoft should uses these as a basis towards 'Flight'. The Intel i3 should be able to run the simulator at medium settings, Intel i5's at high and Intel i7's at extreme, and I know there are a lot of variables towards this, people will have different graphics cards and RAM. What I want to see is a simulator built for today's machines, (I know many of you disagree towards this, and I understand this) but I just feel that if your going to launch something it should be launched for when it can be used and be played on with good settings and acceptable frames.

Website Updates

• Video's In the Office: One thing I thought which was lacking towards FSX was that there was no video's of ACES employee's talking about FSX, giving their opinion on things. When I look at video's on YouTube of reviews with people in them, I feel much more connected with them as in, I feel like I have a better sense of trust, because I can see who it is coming from. If Microsoft did video interviews with Content/Graphics/Game Testers/Management etc.. I would feel that I was more connected with the development of 'Flight' than any previous Flight Simulator before. I mean they should go to the Content Developers and they give an interview on what they have brought towards 'Flight', how it is going to be different for the player and then another video interview from Game Testers telling how the performance was, what to expect and any tips on how to get the most out of Flight. I feel doing a video interview would really show Flight Simmer's that this is a community and a passion than just a company wanting to launch a game sorely for profit and no commitment or sense of trust towards the fanbase that has made Flight Simulator it what it is today.

Content

• Career Mode: A great feature which I think would really help 'Flight' reach to new simmer's (as well as old ones!) is a Career mode. I find it annoying that you take off, fly and land and have no great sense of achievement afterwards. It would be very similar to that of the great addon's FSPassengers and Air Hauler, although a Lite version (don't want addon developers being pushed out now!). You build up ranks, get to pilot new aircraft, earn money, have a Lite version where you feel a sense that their is cargo or passengers on board, the list can go on and on...
• Jet Blast: One thing that annoys me is the fact that I can takeoff in the default Cessna straight after a 747 has and feel no effect what so ever on my aircraft. Jet Blast's are a major safety hazard in aviation and should be included in 'Flight' (And if you want to go one step further ATC will go "G-BTLT cleared for takeoff, runaway 27, advisory jet blast probable, due to 747 taking off ahead" - - - Jet Blast's can be turned on/off in the Weather settings

Addon's

• I've heard a lot towards the future of addon's in 'Flight' and how they will be sold and presented. My opinion is that addon's will be sold via the Microsoft Marketplace and developers that sell their addons through the Marketplace will have the title - Microsoft's Official Addon Partner, this gives the customer trust that his/her details are secure and that every addon is verified by Microsoft. - My hope is that, by having this, it will allow new flight simmer's to expand their hobby in ease through an official resource, rather than going to this place and putting his/her details in, then to another, then another and so forth...

That's what I have so far, and I am very welcome to criticism, different opinions and views. But please, be polite. You don't need to be rude in order to get your message across.What do you think, is there anything you like, or would change, or disapprove of? I would love to hear your views.Thank you for reading,Virtual RealityP.S. Sorry about how it's been presented, it looked much clearer in the 'editor' and I didn't expect it to be cluttered as it is.

[FlyAndFight 37]

I like your four cents!

[fcerven 0]

I agree with most of the things the OP hopes we'll see. There is one thing that I would like to add because it is talked about way too little - Freeware.FSX has been my FS simulator now for about 4 years as is the core 2 duo computer I thought would run it well. In that time I have spent only around $100 in addons. These consist of Flying Club X, UTX USA and two ORBX regions (PNW and Northern Rockies). The rest of the addons are selected freeware addons for weater, water, airports, guages, traffic, repaints and aircraft. This has given me the experience I look for and don't feel the need to do more. I must say that there are some real freeware gems out there. My concern is that we may loose them if Microsoft requires, be it for speed or other reason, expensive programs in order to develop for Flight, we may loose these gems. A path for freeware must be left available. If Flight is to be the program that brings us all together, the SDK must be simple and inexpensive enough so that all developers can participate, not just payware.Terrain (scenery), although not addressed by the OP, is another thing I would like to bring up. Up to this point all posters on the subject seem to think in terms of tiles. Microsoft has Bing Maps. why not use it rather than tiles. Flying above 3000 ft AGL, no autogen except for tall buildings should be necessary. Below that, gradually phased in autogen should be available to add depth. The seasons can be derived from the Bing Map summer textures. Having just one texture layer should streamline it's generation significantly.Well, that's my four cents. Just as for FSX, after spending $1000 for the Flight computer, I would like to have my Flight addons cost me around $100. Hope Microsoft keeps casual users in mind.Thanks for listening.

[simmerhead 885]

Your point about market strategy and website updates is a good one. Larger software companies have a hard time understanding user interaction and community building. Some of the companies that understand this have been rewarded greatly by loyal users. Adboe comes to mind as a company that value user input and keeps in touch with its customers.

[Virtual Reality 0]

Thanks guys for the positive and thoughtful replies back!I totally agree with you fcerven about Freeware. Freeware IS the backbone of Flight Simulator. 'Flight' simply wouldn't work without this, I was just thinking more towards the payware market when talking about Microsoft's Official Addon Partner. There are so many FlightSim addon website's now, that it's hard to tell what's what and although I have heard no reports of this currently happening, it would be very easy for a good hacker to make a false "addon" market website, and be able to scam people. Now i'm not saying this will happen. More to the point I am trying to say is, the payware area of Flight Sim is unmonitored and it's more than just one addon market, meaning I have to place my card details in to more than just one website. This is frightening stuff to the new flight simmer (as was I, when I first started).Having payware addons in one place - especially if it was from the Microsoft Marketplace, would assure people that they are buying from a secure, official, realiable place. This is just my opinion of course.---To simmerhead: I totally agree as well with your view. I woud like Microsoft to make more effort towards bringing the people who make 'Flight' with the community who will be investing money in it, especially from the Flight Simulator community. By doing the odd video, or webcast, it builds a sense of trust and passion. There was no link when ACES was making FSX with the Flight Simulator community and this is why I don't think FSX turned out the way it did. Had of ACES talked to fellow hardcore Flight Simulator users, did polls/questionnaires and research with the community it would of learnt of the computer's in which people were using. What they would like to see etc.. etc..Having a strong relationship with the people who play the game, will only give benefits than negatives. After all it will be the customers who will be the first ones to fully test 'Flight' when it is launched and make an opinion on it. If people arn't happy, word of mouth travels very fast indeed!----And lastly cheers FlyAndFight, two cents is gone already! now four cents... what next someone will post a "My Six Cents" :biggrin:Thanks all for the replies, Virtual Reality

[alainneedle1 97]

Market place.....about if after buying Flight the only way to buy addons is by going to the market store.....what will be the reason for that....let say after buying Flight you want an airport made from an MS approved dev. selling is stuff at the store (after MS take a cut of course) so using your Flight customer number you enter your info. and you buy Miami airport ....approved....so you start Flight enter Miami airport as your starting point (with online connection) and guess what it's there...already installed.....safe, easy, and no piracy.....Naaa that could not happen could it?

[douglas6B 0]

great stuff. NOW. we are taking bids at 6 cents. lovely threads going at just 6 cents. any further bids at 6 cents.going once...me personally, i do not have 2 cents to rub together on this issue. all this new MS FLIGHT SIMUullaaa...*(sorry force of habit) has got me completely befuddled, which pleases me immensely. however if you guys keep putting ideas in my head this might all change. i can already feel the stress building.

[ryanbatc 13,103]

I don't know... the more options the more users will want to increase the sliders etc. For instance, I wish I could run more autogen in FSX, but I just can't. Having the damn slider just makes me want to bump it up to max.I'm not saying sliders (or more options) is a bad thing just that it can make it even more difficult or frustrating to obtain that perfect result.

[Guest veeray]

I don't seem to have that problem....I"ll take complex scenery over autogen anyday. I use a very low setting unless I'm in orbx country.

[Guest SpeedStar]

Now what I think is that market place is there for is to get FS-live a cut of the cake on the add-on market. As it is now they only get income when the game is sold, a one time payment, so from their point of perspective why wouldn't they atleast try to milk the market.I could even imagine them to launch their own applications, like planningtools, airac updates, weather services and make full use of the fact that they control which companies are in the marketplace. They could even charge non-free application with fee or a percentage of the sales price on non MS product.I smell a money making machine here.

[Guest veeray]

You think a company worth 237 billion (as of this week) really cares about a market that probably isn't worth even 2 million annually. Trust me they're better off developing Windows smartphone apps which is exactly where they've laid some of their DirectX eggs instead of "traditional" windows application. Need some perspective here, the market is a good idea but I don't think the experience will revolve around selling 3rd party goods they get a small cut of, but selling more copies of the title by making it more "user friendly".

[Virtual Reality 0]

You think a company worth 237 billion (as of this week) really cares about a market that probably isn't worth even 2 million annually. Trust me they're better off developing Windows smartphone apps which is exactly where they've laid some of their DirectX eggs instead of "traditional" windows application. Need some perspective here, the market is a good idea but I don't think the experience will revolve around selling 3rd party goods they get a small cut of, but selling more copies of the title by making it more "user friendly".

If Microsoft didn't care as you suggest, why bother even making 'Flight' seeing as to how you put it, it only produces "2 million" annually. Why not use those resources (staff, software, time) instead on another game or software which could make twice the amount? If your going to do something, make it well and put the effort into it, those extra little bits like "marketing" can make a big difference. Maybe not in the short term, but in the long term, yes.A person is more likely going to invest their money into a company which they consider "good" than that of "bad" (Example: BP). Microsoft has a reputation of being "bad" (common sign around the internet as: M$) if they were to connect better with their customers, through the use of video's and interviews, it would make out they actually gave a damn, rather than just wanting my money.Sorry for the straight to the point tone, I just wanted to get a firm point across how sometimes, some of the most "silly" ideas can actually have a great affect, and it doesn't matter whether through the use of video interviews/better marketing etc.. they just make $100,000 extra profit from 'Flight', for the sake of time they have already paided a person's salary, or used that money to resource more funding for an addon pack or sequel . Thank you for reading.Virtual Reality

[january 19]

------------------A person is more likely going to invest their money into a company which they consider "good" than that of "bad" (Example: BP). Microsoft has a reputation of being "bad" (common sign around the internet as: M$) if they were to connect better with their customers, through the use of video's and interviews, it would make out they actually gave a damn, rather than just wanting my money.

To an investor, the definition of a "good" company is that it makes money. Since MS had a very profitable year, that makes it a "good" company- especially when you take into account the GOOD things being accomplished by the dividends being paid into the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation!(Do a bit of research if you haven't heard of it.)The last I heard was that BP was also making money for the many pension plans that invest in their stock- AND very likely YOU may have gas in your tank produced by- guess who! Or perhaps you prefer walking.AR

[Virtual Reality 0]

To an investor, the definition of a "good" company is that it makes money. Since MS had a very profitable year, that makes it a "good" company- especially when you take into account the GOOD things being accomplished by the dividends being paid into the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation!(Do a bit of research if you haven't heard of it.)The last I heard was that BP was also making money for the many pension plans that invest in their stock- AND very likely YOU may have gas in your tank produced by- guess who! Or perhaps you prefer walking.AR

I am not sure whether you are just big headed or stupid.BP Reports $5 Billion Loss after Gulf Oil Spill (Tuesday 1st of February 2011):http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/01/bp-loss-gulf-oil-spill-resumes-dividendHave you never done anything about media? Especially towards the "Public Image" sector of it? A company invest millions into good public branding, why on earth do you think BP launched a multi-million pound advert after the Gulf Oil Spill?

Money wasted in your opinion then, as by taking your termonology: A good company is that it makes money. - MS had a very profitable year, that makes it a "good" company.If a company has a bad public image, then you would have to be stupid "as an investor" to invest money in it. I mean, seeing as your the amazingly smart one here, tell me then why BP's stock market crashed after the Oil Spill? It was still making it money? (They had $50 Billion in savings, if I remember correctly.) Therefore surely it's still a "good" company to invest into? Right?Wrong. Investor's knew the backlash which was going to happen because of it, and how the public image of BP was going to be of a bad one. Companies invest money into research against Global Warming, Charities, because it makes the company look good and people are more likely going to invest there money in a "good" company than a "bad" one. If a company does good, investor's are far more likely going to invest their money into it. Why do you think at this current time, especially Libya at the moment, the UK government is distancing itself from the weapon's trade it did with Libya? Seeing as you were so eager to blast me, you forgot to see what I had put: It doesn't matter whether you make just $100,000 for good marketing/public image. That extra $100,000 is still money in the bank, which can be used.A "good" company is one which makes money AND has a good public image.Now blast me all you want, but as far as i'm concerned, i'm going to stick with what i've been told in school, than some person on the AVSIM forums, who think's that by being rude, it makes him superior. Good day Sir,Virtual Reality

[Guest veeray]

and the company with the worst public image in america the one actually blamed for the spill....Halliburton