May FSX and Flight Comparison Screenshots

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

So you dont think this part of Hawaii that they seem to keep featuring in the preview shots is just going to be one of the default "detailed areas" in the same manner FSX had a few "detailed areas" like Rio, Oshkosh, St. Marteen and Las Vegas (speaking of regular non-Accel FSX)?I agree that the whole world for obvious reasons wont be as detailed as what they have shown, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few more of these "detailed areas" are included with Flight as they had been with FS9 and FSX. Perhaps more detailed areas will be available for purchase in the "market" if you so choose to buy them, similar to the way Accel added a detailed Edwards, Red Bull race course(s), the F-18, etc.I would be surprised if they left the rest of the world stripped and void of any detail for it to be purchased piece by piece. In other words, I imagine that major cities with still have the main buildings and landmarks like they do in FSX without having to purchase a NYC or L.A. area to get those items. Does that mean that they will be as detailed as what has been shown as Hawaii? Probably not, but I doubt it will be bare bones either.I guess we really wont know until MS reveals all the product details, but I dont think the default version will be a whole lot different that FSX was. We will most likely still need to buy better land class products, better mesh, and so fourth, be it from the MS Market or other 3rd parties like we do now.

That's about the most level-headed take on Flight I have ever read. Nice one!Only thing I would venture to add is that I hope MS will not be short-sighted and do something stupid like prevent installations of addons NOT bought from the MS store. By all means have a Flight user interface based addons store to which any developer (or non) can make submissions but under no circumstanes should MS attempt to make this a closed eco-system. That, in my opinion, would be fatal for the MS Flight franchise in the long term. Perhaps it would even be reason enough for Aerosoft to actually develop their proposed flight sim as opposed to just threaten to do it...

Thanks. I just dont think Flight as far as it's detailed areas and what is default terrain and/or landmarks will be all that different than how FSX is. We will proabably still get a few nicely detailed areas and some detailed airports and the rest will just be how FSX is.On addons, besides the online "MS Addon Store" or whatever it will be called, I dont doubt that it will be much different than how FSX/FS9 are either. Developers will probably still be able to write installers and sell their products outside of the "MS Addon Store". Perhaps the could also sell them inside the "MS Addon Store" if they wish and MS will either collect a one time fee or a commision on those products, but I sincerely doubt that participation in selling thru it will be mandatory. I agree that if Flight is a "closed eco-system" as you put it and the "MS Addon Store" is mandatory, then it could potentially hurt the franshise in the long temr, BUT, I doubt that will be the case.As far as Aerosoft saying they will skip it, I wouldn't take too much into that either since we have no inside info on how they came to that decision. Not only that, but just like any company, they could change their decision at anytime and decide they will support and developer for it.Im a nutshell, I think Flight will be much like how FSX and all the MS sims operated in the past, with the exception that they will have some type of market place to sell their addons or the addons of others, and encourage more online flying by making it easier to get connected or more inviting to try it. I'm not going to pound my fist over the same points like Alain does because for one its not that important to me to be right and its not that important to me to make predictions and piece together clues. I just think a lot of the suggestions and or fears of how Flight will be or operate in regards to addons is really exagerated at this point. I'd perfer more concrete info from MS before jumping to conclusions on what it will be or how it will operate.

[mgh 89]

On addons, besides the online "MS Addon Store" or whatever it will be called, I dont doubt that it will be much different than how FSX/FS9 are either. Developers will probably still be able to write installers and sell their products outside of the "MS Addon Store". Perhaps the could also sell them inside the "MS Addon Store" if they wish and MS will either collect a one time fee or a commision on those products, but I sincerely doubt that participation in selling thru it will be mandatory. I agree that if Flight is a "closed eco-system" as you put it and the "MS Addon Store" is mandatory, then it could potentially hurt the franshise in the long temr, BUT, I doubt that will be the case.

Apple takes 30% of the selling price of applications sold through its store. Assuming Microsoft intends something similar, why should it allow developers to sell outside the store and lose that revenue?

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

Apple takes 30% of the selling price of applications sold through its store. Assuming Microsoft intends something similar, why should it allow developers to sell outside the store and lose that revenue?

I doubt that it will be a requirement, but if it is and they take 30% like Apple does and compresses what are already probably pretty slim margins considering the amount of time and man power it takes to put out a good addon plane or scenery, then a lot of devs are not going to work on Flight addons and just continue to support FSX/FP9, or it will put them out of business. If Flight did that could you imagine how it would hurt big publishing houses like Flight1? I seriously doubt that Flight will be "closed" to sales outside the store. The only way we will know is when MS say's so. If it ends up that way and not even freeware is available, then it will be the slow death of Flight and the franchise imho.

[Sharrow 0]

What always struck me as rather odd about the retail FSX packaging was not a single mention, anywhere, of the vast number of addons that are (or at that stage would be) available for FSX - just like they were for FS9. It is almost as if MS shunned the addon community and purposely did not mention it. Why would they I guess, they make nothing off any sales of addons...However, fast forward to 2012 and you can now bet that MS will make lots of noise about the addon store and it will be in EVERY users face when they launch Flight. No doubt it will be prominently mentioned on the back of the box. That will surely be enough for MS - they really do not have any need to force a very dedicated and a very set-in-their-ways community (i.e. all of us) to start doing their purchases through a MS addon store. Why give people excuses to stick with FSX, or even FS9? Not only that but MS would also need to overcome the natural hesitation that most publishers will have in submitting their wares for MS approval. I concede that this perhaps sounds a touch too altruistic but at some point the crunch question of a closed or open Flight addon ecosystem will come up and and I believe that MS will do the appropriate thing and leave it open.They also have to consider the significant drain it will be on their resources to be the SOLE distributor of such a (hopefully) large library of addons. Most people will not care who develops the product - they bought it from the MS store so that is where they will go for support.

[mgh 89]

If Flight did that could you imagine how it would hurt big publishing houses like Flight1?

Why should Microsoft would care about Flight1?

[JSkorna 137]

Apple takes 30% of the selling price of applications sold through its store. Assuming Microsoft intends something similar, why should it allow developers to sell outside the store and lose that revenue?

Misunderstood the post.

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

My opinion is that publishers like Flight1 will be able to offer add-ons for Flight, but it comes at a cost. Microsoft's store will likely be accessible from the main menu or something. Add-ons published there will get more buyers because more people will visit that store than Flight1 and others. Companies that have their add-ons published in the Flight store have the advantage of more buyers, but that, say, 30% of sales goes to Microsoft. If the companies hosted their own add-ons, they wouldn't get as many sales and in the end, hosting on the Flight store would end up making more money. Just my two cents.

[xXArch_AngelXx 0]

My opinion is that publishers like Flight1 will be able to offer add-ons for Flight, but it comes at a cost. Microsoft's store will likely be accessible from the main menu or something. Add-ons published there will get more buyers because more people will visit that store than Flight1 and others. Companies that have their add-ons published in the Flight store have the advantage of more buyers, but that, say, 30% of sales goes to Microsoft. If the companies hosted their own add-ons, they wouldn't get as many sales and in the end, hosting on the Flight store would end up making more money. Just my two cents.

+1, totally agree... but it will be awesome anyway, because if there is a bigger customer base, the prices may go down :) so that means I wont have to spend $70 on the likes of a PMDG aircraft. :)Jamie ♥

[JSkorna 137]

What always struck me as rather odd about the retail FSX packaging was not a single mention, anywhere, of the vast number of addons that are (or at that stage would be) available for FSX - just like they were for FS9. It is almost as if MS shunned the addon community and purposely did not mention it. Why would they I guess, they make nothing off any sales of addons...However, fast forward to 2012 and you can now bet that MS will make lots of noise about the addon store and it will be in EVERY users face when they launch Flight. No doubt it will be prominently mentioned on the back of the box. That will surely be enough for MS - they really do not have any need to force a very dedicated and a very set-in-their-ways community (i.e. all of us) to start doing their purchases through a MS addon store. Why give people excuses to stick with FSX, or even FS9? Not only that but MS would also need to overcome the natural hesitation that most publishers will have in submitting their wares for MS approval. I concede that this perhaps sounds a touch too altruistic but at some point the crunch question of a closed or open Flight addon ecosystem will come up and and I believe that MS will do the appropriate thing and leave it open.They also have to consider the significant drain it will be on their resources to be the SOLE distributor of such a (hopefully) large library of addons. Most people will not care who develops the product - they bought it from the MS store so that is where they will go for support.

For FSX there was a plan, but it never got worked out.

+1, totally agree... but it will be awesome anyway, because if there is a bigger customer base, the prices may go down :) so that means I wont have to spend $70 on the likes of a PMDG aircraft. :)Jamie ♥

Sorry, number of potential sales and price are not related. This have been discussed a million and one times in the past!

[Sharrow 0]

so that means I wont have to spend $70 on the likes of a PMDG aircraft.

Such high fidelity will always be expensive. If nothing else the licencing fees paid to Boeing would make sure of that. And that is as it should be given the significant prosumer/professional user base.

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

Why should Microsoft would care about Flight1?

Hard to say since in a way companies like Flight1 haven't been a direct competator of theirs and have only help to grow the franchise. However if they want to be a "closed" sim then of course it will hurt Flight1 a lot.They start putting the 3PD's and/or publishers out of business and it will end up hurting their chances of continueing the franchise. One of the reasons all the version of FS have been successful through the years is due to the 3rd party content available for it, be it freeware or paid. They start punishing those who provide the content or put them out of business, then there goes the success of the franshise. There is no way that MS can match the amount of content put out by 3PD's doing it by themselves. The only way is if they make it profitable enough for the 3PDs to work with MS and use the "store" if the sim is "closed". Now, if all the well know players continue to develope the same stuff and we can get it via the "store" then I have no problem with since we will still get the same stuff, just not directly from the developer or publisher that we normally use.Plus they take freeware out and its just another negative toward the whole deal.Think of it like this. Suppoese Flight comes out and it turns out it closed. Then we go visit FSDT, PMDG, FlyTampa, and all the other good devs and they say "game over, going OOB" or "we will only support and develope for FSX/FS9", how many of us here are going to jump on Flight if we know that the main players will never develope for it? Probably not many, of course we maybe a small majority of the overall Flight sales universe, but they will still be cutting a good part of sales out, especially as fast as word spreads in the community.Anyways, that's about all I have to say on it since we wont know for sometime, but my guess is that it will still be an open sim.

[alainneedle1 97]

I am repeating myself but here it is,MS store will allow approved vevelopers to sale in it, approved developers selling in the store will have the SDK (you don't sell in the store you don't get the SDK), add-ons for Flight will be sold in the store only = % of the sale for MS, also = more exposure for the developers = more sales.MS is not targeting us as new customers, MS is targeting the one who don't have a flight simulator with missions, online gaming (flying), the old way is over for the developers as they were loosing a good chunk of money from piracy, been under MS's umbrella will help them keeping more of their hard earned money, one stop shop, MS will give a lot more exposure to the developers for the general public.The bottom line is and will always be how much money they can make.

[dmaher 0]

The bottom line is and will always be how much money they can make.

No one would dispute that, but I still have to ask would your plans actually earn MS more money?I know your answer…and that’s where the dispute is. :biggrin:This will be big news when we finally learn it; the opinions have been so strongly split. :(

[Attila 2]

I am repeating myself but here it is,MS store will allow approved vevelopers to sale in it, approved developers selling in the store will have the SDK (you don't sell in the store you don't get the SDK), add-ons for Flight will be sold in the store only = % of the sale for MS, also = more exposure for the developers = more sales.

This is a pretty strong statement - and repeated many times - and entirely baseless.MS has been supporting the add-on community for a long time. There is no reason to think that this will change now, just because MS will have some sort of on-line store where some things may be available. We don't know anything about this store, but we do know that MS has made the SDK available to everyone before. This means the freeware community as well.For all we know, MS may want to sell a few planes to the people they consider their main audience. They could allow 3PDs to sell their wares there as well, but that has its own headaches and MS may just want to leave that part alone, given the small amount of money that would generate from them. How many PMDG aircraft would be sold to the people who are not reading this board or others like it?Another game that I play, Civ 5, has DLCs for $ and a released SDK for everyone to use. The game comes with tools to publish any mods and these mods can be installed right through the game interface. I don't see why MS would want to squander all its goodwill with its most vocal users by forcing 3PDs into a situation where they might not want to be and kill off any hobbyist developers in the process.There have been many people who have stated that MS is likely to leave things as they were and add a store to the mix, but the voice of reason seems to be drowned out by some posts that appear to repeat the same things once too often.

[alainneedle1 97]

some posts that appear to repeat the same things once too often.

and answered the same way....Anyway, lets just wait and see. :(