Microsoft itsself doesn't think so.We don’t need to create an arcade game to welcome a wider audience. But we do need to improve the total user experience if we’re to be successful in welcoming new audiences iinto the experience of Flight. The passion and fascination of flight is powerful, with so many different aspects to aviation and different levels of enjoyment to experience.

As they say themselves there are so many different aspects to aviation and that undoubtedly includes the complexity that we enjoy now with our many add-ons.They talk about the fascination of flight, well just flying a stearman around some water will wear old pretty quick thats for certain.And as for MS admitting that they need to improve the total user experience what could be more disspointing than to find you need a computer that has not yet been designed, yet alone built, to to run your newly built sim with all the eye candy that your avergage gamer will undoubtedly expect.People can read into MS's comments all they want but the truth is they know they need to take as many people as they can with them on this journey they call "Flight"

Surely that's the problem from Microsoft's point of view - it isn't earning its keep in comparison with its other games?

Well FSX with the advent of new hardware seems to doing pretty well, considering they had to start a new production run.

What exactly is a "casual user"? Flight sims have always been niche products.

At what point does a niche product become a mainstream one?Bryan.

Surely that's the problem from Microsoft's point of view - it isn't earning its keep in comparison with its other games?

That is the problem. For the same effort they can crank out a much simpler game that more people will buy.It is hard to believe that a flight simulator could ever really appeal to "casual" gamers. The amount of time needed to do the simplest of things in FSX is many times more than casual gamers have or are willing to invest.MS should concentrate on getting the FS9, FSX and X-Plane crowd into Flight with irresistible features and then charge a premium for it, which all of us would be willing to pay, considering what we spend on hardware and add-ons.

Thank you all for an entertaining read. I love the mixture of irony comedy and good natured banter and I try to learn by reverse engineering it all.To get back to the sliders I wish the perf bucket had done it automatically after scanning a new installation. I still struggle to understand the 2 mesh sliders let alone the necessity to have so many others. I kept a file on each slider and added notes from the forums and PC Pilot to learn from but it was a bit like an O level student trying to keep up with a brain surgeon. I don't know what goes on under the bonnet. It would have been better at my level of knowledge to have had less complex choice but then perhaps you experts need the flexibility.Someone suggested labeling the sliders better and having a manual to look up the details would have helped. The level of detail and time and effort required in experimenting daunted me - so many variables - it seemed more like a monkey at a typewriter producing a Shakespearian sonnet.Anyone know any good FSX jokes while we waitfor mor flighty news?

Knock.... knock.....

What many people are forgetting is that FSX is still selling very well today because it's the only Flight Simulator that has a wide public appeal. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a very well known brand and anyone who likes anything to do with aircraft is surely going to pick a copy up, as it's in their general interest.I think were still seeing a great demand for FSX, not because hardware has caught up, but simply because generation after generation are buying it. I remember picking up my first copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator at the age of 13 and haven't looked back since. Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of those games / simulator's which will never have a "out of date" label placed on it. I could see myself still using FSX in 10-15 years time, if it was not for Microsoft developing a new flight sim.I think the problem FSX had at the end of the day, is not because FSX was a bad sim, but because it was a simulator that was meant to be worked on for the 2-4 years it was meant to be played on (until ACES made the next Flight Sim), as an example, ACES launched a "base" FSX and then carried on fixing and tweaking FSX through service packs until they decided on making the "next" flight sim. The problem came when ACES was scrapped, you had FSX (a simulator which was mean to be worked on throughout it's entire game-shelf life) stopped mid-way before ACES could see the problems users where having and getting the chance to fix those problems, or see how the hardware market turned and then applying service packs to apply settings which worked with new hardware.I stick by the decision still that Microsoft should just launch a good-healthy Flight Sim, able to run with great graphics on mid to high end computers (so the new sim reaches as much target audience as possible) and let the Scenery developers put the eye-popping graphics through the use of Scenery addons for the people with high-end computers to enjoy. I think that's fair for everyone.That's my opinion, sorry if some parts aren't in proper English, I'm writing this at 1:45am at night, so I may be a little dozy with spelling/grammar.I hope many others share my opinion.Virtual Reality

What many people are forgetting is that FSX is still selling very well today because it's the only Flight Simulator that has a wide public appeal. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a very well known brand and anyone who likes anything to do with aircraft is surely going to pick a copy up, as it's in their general interest.I think were still seeing a great demand for FSX, not because hardware has caught up, but simply because generation after generation are buying it. I remember picking up my first copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator at the age of 13 and haven't looked back since. Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of those games / simulator's which will never have a "out of date" label placed on it. I could see myself still using FSX in 10-15 years time, if it was not for Microsoft developing a new flight sim.I think the problem FSX had at the end of the day, is not because FSX was a bad sim, but because it was a simulator that was meant to be worked on for the 2-4 years it was meant to be played on (until ACES made the next Flight Sim), as an example, ACES launched a "base" FSX and then carried on fixing and tweaking FSX through service packs until they decided on making the "next" flight sim. The problem came when ACES was scrapped, you had FSX (a simulator which was mean to be worked on throughout it's entire game-shelf life) stopped mid-way before ACES could see the problems users where having and getting the chance to fix those problems, or see how the hardware market turned and then applying service packs to apply settings which worked with new hardware.I stick by the decision still that Microsoft should just launch a good-healthy Flight Sim, able to run with great graphics on mid to high end computers (so the new sim reaches as much target audience as possible) and let the Scenery developers put the eye-popping graphics through the use of Scenery addons for the people with high-end computers to enjoy. I think that's fair for everyone.That's my opinion, sorry if some parts aren't in proper English, I'm writing this at 1:45am at night, so I may be a little dozy with spelling/grammar.I hope many others share my opinion.Virtual Reality

Go to bed young man. :( But seriously I agree!

If your application development model involves releasing an unfinished product and then taking several years to fix the issues - YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!

If your application development model involves releasing an unfinished product and then taking several years to fix the issues - YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!

Sounds about right, that's why I'm not day 1 with Flight.They shafted people 1st time around, what's to stop them doing it again?Bryan

Sounds about right, that's why I'm not day 1 with Flight.Bryan

You'll be with us on day 2 though! :(

You'll be with us on day 2 though! :(

You reckon, nah once bitten twice shy. Bryan.

You reckon, nah once bitten twice shy. Bryan.

Dude stop pretending, ...you will buy flight  (60$) either on the first day or day 100.  So use whatever makes you feel good .. but the 60$ will be spent

Yeah, some people will buy anything without doing research first. :( :( Bryan.

What percentage do you think "the majority of people on this forum" is of the total sales for FSX?

I'd say about 3% of MS FSX sales are from users on this forum... most people on avsim are power users - they buy all the third party software, they get into the guts of the sim. There's probably millions of users that don't even know avsim, flightsim, simouthouse, etc exist.

There's probably millions of users that don't even know avsim, flightsim, simouthouse, etc exist.

Ding, ding, ding!Now if Microsoft clues those people into the previously unknown world of "serious simming" through their portal/store/what ever, then the community grows. What's the benefit to MS? Repeat customers, as I'd bet the majority of buyers put it away on a shelf to collect dust, just like I did with an unnamed 9.x version of ... Well, you know.

Yeah, some people will buy anything without doing research first.  :( :(  Bryan.

Not me . i research my purchases, especially, the large ones.   MSFS has provided me a flight sim experience for decades.... they have credibility with me.... they should also have it with you!