Microsoft never has had any interest in using flight sim,ulator for PCATD, and I can't see that changing. There's no money in it for Microsoft.

I assume MS made some nice pocket change when they sold FS to Lockheed. If I recall it was after that sale, that MS decided to get back into flight simming with the annoncement of FLIGHT.AR

You can have so much more detail now in 3D cockpits, hard to see the need for 2D cockpits anymore ... I guess its only the pre FSX crowd that want them? then again X Plane 10 seems to want to keep some of them.

Reversing your comment- hard to see the need for VIRTUAL now that large or multiple monitors setups are commonplace.Virtual was a solution to the problem of tiny 13-15 inch monitors many years ago. When every switch or instrument is always in a different location with panning, and the view/distance perception out of the cockpit windows is constantly being distorted by zooming (to see more than a 45º perspective)- no wonder the FAA does not approve pan/zoom for FTDs.Here are two screenshots to illustrate-One shows how the cockpit gauges/switches can be displayed- ALWAYS in the same location.The other shows the 146º visual perspective- compare it with a real cockpit.So long VIRTUAL- it's been nice knowing you!!!!! AR

If I recall it was after that sale, that MS decided to get back into flight simming with the annoncement of FLIGHT.

In fact - that's not accurate :)Their intension has always been to keep making flight sim games..."We are committed to the Flight Simulator franchise which has proven to be a successful PC based game for the last 27 years. You should expect us to continue to invest in enabling great LIVE experiences on Windows, including flying games, but we have nothing specific to announce at this time."

In fact - that's not accurate :)Their intension has always been to keep making flight sim games..."We are committed to the Flight Simulator franchise which has proven to be a successful PC based game for the last 27 years. You should expect us to continue to invest in enabling great LIVE experiences on Windows, including flying games, but we have nothing specific to announce at this time."

Rephrasing then for accuracy- "If I recall, it was after that sale that MS announced FLIGHT."Presumably, the sale to Lockheed was a motivator in the MS announcement.AR

Yeah, IMO, I think that's better put...I don't think we'll ever know how those events are connected.But to me the facts suggest MS never had an issue with the FS franchise and its direction.In fact it's the one ACES product that remains.And so far I have not seen a change in the game design...but, yes, that remains to be seen.What products didn’t meet the new standard?…TS, ESP, Core....and ACES Studio as a distinct component inside the MS structure.

Core wasn't really ever an ACES product, it was just the group within ACES that worked on the parts of the sim that were common between FS, TS, and ESP (graphics engine, terrain engine, etc).Tim

Core wasn't really ever an ACES product, it was just the group within ACES that worked on the parts of the sim that were common between FS, TS, and ESP (graphics engine, terrain engine, etc).Tim

Sorry, it wasn't a product...more like a strategy...which made good economic sense while there were several products using common elements. And I don't really mean to imply the strategy was questioned. Just that there are things that changed and things that didn't. We don't know how much FS design has changed yet. It appears to me it's direction hasn't changed much at all - good. But we do know TS, ESP, and core did change. Or at least MS has made no further mention of them. The conspiracy theory suggests MS Games wasn’t happy with ACES design for FS…but there’s actually little evidence for that…the evidence points to the contrary. IMO, for FS users this was mostly a business structural change - not a big deal.

2d or not to.Yes and Yes!A.

I hope they keep it in, I need it!!

I think if they improved the way you are able to navigate around the 3D cockpit to make it more intuitive (without third party soft/hardware such as face tracking) then 2D cockpits would become largely unessicary. The biggest problem I find in some aircraft that the 3D space is not represented in a way that mimics reality due to the fact that the viewpoint is largely static, for example vital switches hidden under the yoke or behind the throttle, in reality these switches would be easily accessable by reaching under or around the obstacle. Changing cameras is one way of getting around this yet I find it a clumsy afterthought, much easier in these cases to pull up a 2D panel with all instruments easily accessible.

So long VIRTUAL- it's been nice knowing you!!!!! AR

HelloThe target market does not have three monitors Alex.All the young folks nowadays are used to gaming in 3D environments, to them 2D is old.Do you really think the trend is back towards 2D panels and 2D gaming?.2D is from the past, if MS put a shot of a 2D panel on the box artwork the target market will not pick it up off the shelf.The VC is the way forward, MS and just about every developer knows this, hence the effort they put in to produce them, If PMDG released the NGX with a 2D panel only do you really think this would outsell the same product that had a VC only.

At the end of the day, if this poll here is any indication? it shows that 2D panels are on their way out, for those that like them ... enjoy ... I'll not miss them.

HelloThe target market does not have three monitors Alex.All the young folks nowadays are used to gaming in 3D environments, to them 2D is old.Do you really think the trend is back towards 2D panels and 2D gaming?.2D is from the past, if MS put a shot of a 2D panel on the box artwork the target market will not pick it up off the shelf.The VC is the way forward, MS and just about every developer knows this, hence the effort they put in to produce them, If PMDG released the NGX with a 2D panel only do you really think this would outsell the same product that had a VC only.

md- I suspect there may be more multi monitor FS setups than you think. And it is probably the case that gamers are not interested in accuracy and how things actually appear & function in the real world.Then there is the point that the FAA will not accept virtual presentation in FTDs- Panning & Zooming not permitted.But the trend certainly is toward very large monitors. To that end, a few years ago I experimented with what FS might be capable of displaying if I had a single large display. Using a single 19" CRT on my setup, I was able to display and fly a quite remarkable looking & functioning cockpit. And that on my ancient 1.8 GHZ AMD CPU! The pics speak for themselves and the need for good 2D panels. (Black rectangles are unused mons 2 & 3 in this experiment. First pic is "Aloft near CYVR"- The dual windscreen posts are due to also displaying the 1st Officer panel! That's a good example of the need for better 2D artistry!)AR

January is so right.Just see my youtube crap to have an idea. Today I made some adjustments to the setup, and indeed having a wide horizon, and a 2d panel always in view is the best possible.Only look to the homebuilded cockpits, they also have always the panel in view.I use now 6 screens, so getting even more than January, and its awesome, and gives one an even better feel of height and judgement.FS9 will do it easilly, using an old E8650 dual core, there is no impact at all. I only need to re-checkride to get used to the real look up for outside, en headsdown for panel view.

added a touchscreen as overhead, thats why I need 2 D badly!damn, I need a copilot!!