As long as Flight isn't released, i don't care that much about it. Once it is released you have to look if it performs better then FSX or not. Thats the main point at all Just my 2 cents

Flight is not the same ACES team that made FSX...

Perhaps not but according to Microsoft it would appear many of them have simply switched departments from ACES to Microsoft.Microsoft Flight is being developed internally at Microsoft by a team that includes many of the same creative minds that helped deliver countless entries in the “Flight Simulator” franchise

In my honest opinion, FSX is the way it is because ACES didn't get time to finish optimizing their engine to run on this generations hardware. I saw one of the last interviews they did showcasing multi-core utilization and they had big plans. Imagine how much life FSX potentially had left in it if it was updated to be scalable and make full use of multi-core systems. Who knows what they could have done to improve FSX in an SP3?? Here's to hoping that "Flight" is the FSX we all hoped it could be. I have to toss this out there. Microsoft is a machine for making profit as they are a business like any other. Wouldn't they try and get a large chunk of the add-on market with "Flight"? Why you may ask, because it just makes sense. Isn't it safe to say that FSX add-on sales could easily crush actual game sales? Maybe I think there are more add-on consumers than there are, does anyone have any idea? Here's how I see it. I have easily spent $500+ for FSX add-ons. If FSX sold 1Million copies then that's $30-40Million? so then it would take < 90,000 FSX add-on consumers spending on average $500 each. I don't think this is far fetched, not to mention there are those who have probably spent $1,000's.I'd really like to hear others opinions.

Someday, I would love to see someone totally smash and spill an NDA.

Someday, I would love to see someone totally smash and spill an NDA.

Highly unlikely considering that's legally binding and could end the smasher in question with a ton of legal problems/fines.

Here's how I see it. I have easily spent $500+ for FSX add-ons. If FSX sold 1Million copies then that's $30-40Million? so then it would take < 90,000 FSX add-on consumers spending on average $500 each. I don't think this is far fetched, not to mention there are those who have probably spent $1,000's.

The addon market is a LOT smaller than you think - if we sell 90,000 copies of the NGX you're going to find me on a beach in the south pacific somewhere permanently haha...

Highly unlikely considering that's legally binding and could end the smasher in question with a ton of legal problems/fines.The addon market is a LOT smaller than you think - if we sell 90,000 copies of the NGX you're going to find me on a beach in the south pacific somewhere permanently haha...

Considering all the available add-ons out there, I thought it could be possible but I suppose I was imagining the market to be bigger than it is. That's why I think it's impossible to even guess how many people are buying add-ons due to the large numbers of them.Interesting to think about.

Considering all the available add-ons out there, I thought it could be possible but I suppose I was imagining the market to be bigger than it is. That's why I think it's impossible to even guess how many people are buying add-ons due to the large numbers of them.Interesting to think about.

I think it's quite possible 90,000 people have purchased an add-on at one time or another, but I'd be shocked if that many people came close to spending $500 on them. I suspect most people don't even realize the add-on market exists. A family member picked up FSX about two years ago and I'm helping him build a new-er PC. I asked him if he was planning on using any add-ons and he just looked at me like I was stupid. I'm a decent example of this. I've been using MSFS since about 1983 or so when I sat on my dad's lap and giggled like the little kid I was, and I had no idea the payware market existed until late 2005.

Highly unlikely considering that's legally binding and could end the smasher in question with a ton of legal problems/fines.

True, still you gotta love the idea of breaking a legal construct used to force the same problem to be solved numerous more times than necessary

Every time the same topic is reposted at least twice, I'm posting this.

Every time the same topic is reposted at least twice, I'm posting this.

LMAO, that is a classic!!! Where'd you find that? :(

Photoshop.