The Pressure is Now On Microsoft for a Realease Date!

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

MS is using the same engine (rebuilt from the ground up keeping what they see fit from FSX... ) I'll say it's not impossible.

You never give up, do you?

[Spindrift 0]

No hard feelings I hope.

No no no! none at all! And I wasn't crying over any comments, I meant sobbing over performance issues! I'm just trying to stay enthusiastic about Flight, especially the anticipation of improved performance. No worries!

[mmann 72]

Oh yeah, M$ is under huge pressure, right? They don't care they will just do their thing, end of story.Mark.

As little as Microsoft cares about the likes of X-Plane; they care a whole lot less about what us members of AVSIM think!

[speedbird2001 0]

You never give up, do you?

That's why Alain is an expert angler !!

[alainneedle1 97]

No fishing stories here, the proof was in the pudding....I mean the boat....

[Sherv_CLS 0]

All I can say is that competition is GOOD! I have never purchased an X plane series but will seriously consider buying X plane 10 and developing aircraft for it. I applaud the X plane team and hope they continue to develop new versions for years to come along side Microsoft. And of course once Flight comes out, I'll order it asap. Sherv

[abandoned account 171]

I can already ear some of you saying "MS will not release anything to improve FSX, FSX is a done deal" and maybe you are right, as for me knowing that MS is using the same engine (rebuilt from the ground up keeping what they see fit from FSX... ) I'll say it's not impossible.

I know that this is your latest favorite quote from MS and every time I visit this forum you have somehow been able to squeeze it into some random thread. I'm still puzzled how you could interpret "built from the ground up" as being "using the same engine". If you think that "keeping what they see fit from FSX" is a bad idea, you have obviously never developed software. Throwing years of research and experience away is the worst thing you could do. Yes, FSX has lots of flaws, but I can assure you that the developers at MS are much better than you and I at deciding which parts of the FSX engine to keep. In fact, "keeping what they see fit" really shows that they're well aware of their previous mistakes and that they're willing to learn from them. I can't possibly see why you're repeating that like it's a bad thing.

[ManuelL 0]

I still remember the time when I had 3 or 4 different flight sims on my computer and was very happy with each one of them (anyone still remember Flight Unlimited or Pro Pilot). Some of these sims were at the time a very good match for MSFS. From the little information I could see Flight and X-Plane seem to be aiming at a slightly different customer base. So far I always prefered MSFS, but at the moment it looks like X-Plane is moving more towards what I am interested in while Flight is moving in a slightly different direction. I guess I will probably get them both and see which one suits me best - and maybe both turn out to be a keeper.

[alainneedle1 97]

I know that this is your latest favorite quote from MS and every time I visit this forum you have somehow been able to squeeze it into some random thread. I'm still puzzled how you could interpret "built from the ground up" as being "using the same engine". If you think that "keeping what they see fit from FSX" is a bad idea, you have obviously never developed software. Throwing years of research and experience away is the worst thing you could do. Yes, FSX has lots of flaws, but I can assure you that the developers at MS are much better than you and I at deciding which parts of the FSX engine to keep. In fact, "keeping what they see fit" really shows that they're well aware of their previous mistakes and that they're willing to learn from them. I can't possibly see why you're repeating that like it's a bad thing.

I think you are getting confused here, what ever improvement MS will make is a good thing and not a bad one. First, let me say that you are entitle to your opinion and I will respect it. Throwing years of research and experience away is the worst thing you could do. Exactly my point, so you are telling me that they should throw away FSX's engine and only keep bits and pieces of years of research and experience...is it not easyer to keep all these years of research and fix the flaws? Imagine if MS had said that they will fix FSX repackaging it, calling it Flight and at the same time adding some good enhancement like HD sceneries....everybody here will call this a sacrilege, so if that was the case do you really thing that MS will say something like that?? I showed some testing I did before with FSX DX10, no shimmerings, excellent performance (FPS) with add-ons scenery from OrbX with all sliders maxed out but car traffic at 30% and water at 2x high, strong wind +++, I pushed the plane to the max, fraps only no editing, was it perfect...naaaaa...but a lot better compare to DX9, you would not beleive what you can do with a fixed DX10 in FSX, day and night....here in case you did not see it...

Again, as of 2011 a new engine is DX11, using multicore, SLI and hyperthreading, we'll see the day of the release, I may have to eat my words.

[Tierborn 188]

As little as Microsoft cares about the likes of X-Plane; they care a whole lot less about what us members of AVSIM think!

Every good company keeps an eye on its competitors ... so yes, MS knows what Xplane is doing.

[Rocky_53 1,579]

Howard old friend how are you? We may (pure speculation here.... ) for us FSX simmers receive a little something from MS to make FSX better.....just think about this for a sec...not only you or me but a lot of developers have invested a lot of $$$ into FSX as far as sceneries, planes and more and they still have a lot of project on the table, lets just take Canberra as describe here in post # 50, http://forum.avsim.n...es/page__st__25 2 years of work and it's done at 75% so it's only fair to assume that this will take close to another year to complete....and future projects from other developers are announced all the time...take Aerosoft for examples, they have a section just for Previews of Unreleased Products....here.... http://forum.aerosof...eased-products/ will these projects get discarded because Flight is released.... Since (as we all know) developers are in the loop with MS it is "kinda" clear to me that they don't want to shoot themself in the foot by having everybody going Flight when a lot of good project are still in the making for FSX, so what can make us FSX users with a lot of money invested in FSX not jumping into Flight right away at release and keep buying FSX add-ons....better perf. for FSX will do it IMHO... I can already ear some of you saying "MS will not release anything to improve FSX, FSX is a done deal" and maybe you are right, as for me knowing that MS is using the same engine (rebuilt from the ground up keeping what they see fit from FSX... ) I'll say it's not impossible.

Hi matey, keeping OK thanks. Since getting my paws on the PMDG I'm now spending more time around this forum, so see you around more I hope! Your take on my concerns are what I was hoping to hear and to be honest I think any logical decision from MS would, hopefully, include a cross compatibility with previous software. Although, as was said earlier, maybe they couldn't give a toss about other developers and consumers. IMO this latter decision would likely be unthinkable in a smaller company, but with a large corporation like MS, who knows...

[777 340]

I think you are getting confused here, what ever improvement MS will make is a good thing and not a bad one. First, let me say that you are entitle to your opinion and I will respect it. Throwing years of research and experience away is the worst thing you could do. Exactly my point, so you are telling me that they should throw away FSX's engine and only keep bits and pieces of years of research and experience...is it not easyer to keep all these years of research and fix the flaws? Imagine if MS had said that they will fix FSX repackaging it, calling it Flight and at the same time adding some good enhancement like HD sceneries....everybody here will call this a sacrilege, so if that was the case do you really thing that MS will say something like that?? I showed some testing I did before with FSX DX10, no shimmerings, excellent performance (FPS) with add-ons scenery from OrbX with all sliders maxed out but car traffic at 30% and water at 2x high, strong wind +++, I pushed the plane to the max, fraps only no editing, was it perfect...naaaaa...but a lot better compare to DX9, you would not beleive what you can do with a fixed DX10 in FSX, day and night....here in case you did not see it...

Again, as of 2011 a new engine is DX11, using multicore, SLI and hyperthreading, we'll see the day of the release, I may have to eat my words.

Dont forget DX11 Tessellation dont think that could be any use in a flightsim??? could be used like bumpmapping in FSX perhaps, again only time will tell....... totally unrelated You play C2 MP Alain whats ur ingame name ?

[alainneedle1 97]

Dont forget DX11 Tessellation dont think that could be any use in a flightsim??? could be used like bumpmapping in FSX perhaps, again only time will tell....... totally unrelated You play C2 MP Alain whats ur ingame name ?

I know, that's why I said that a new engine will use Dx11, do you see anything remotlely looking like DX11 in the vid. or picture released from MS? I play C2, I have not start playing online yet as I am short on time but I will soon.

[777 340]

Maybe they should use Cryengine 3 to make a flightsim lol, - Judging ONLY by the pics and vids that has been released thus far - Not many DX11 features look like thy are implemented. FSX only incorporated DX10 in preview - go figure. Having said that Flight is visually a lot more pleasing than FSX (DX10 preview anybody ?) but whether MS incorporate the latest tech in Flight is anbodys guess. I enjoy FSX as it is and will spend money on addons/hardware - but if Flight turns out to be another FSX,.....well I'll stick to what I already have....FSX!

[Robert McDonald 167]

Well- I encourage competition in the flight sim world - we are all better off with it than without it. I think Microsoft is trying to build a better mousetrap, and let's be honest, the weak spot in FSX is that it cries out for payware add-ons, both aircraft and then scenery and textures and AI.I guess the honest truth is that the task of making it "as real as it gets" is monumentally difficult. Think about the kazillions of lines of CODE that it takes to make everything happen on screen all at the same time.Yes, FLIGHT will benefit from the multi-core PC's that most folks have in hand, and that's what is driving the relentless bantering for the "new guy" to be released (as FSX is VERY long in the tooth). I have high hopes for FLIGHT and hope that it meets or beats my expectations. I also am quite sure that a host of add-ons will also be available for FLIGHT as they were for FS9 and FSX and the prior products.Microsoft has a great hope that FLIGHT will be a cloud-based or "cloud-centric" gaming platform, which one might specultate, puts pressure on the Internet pipeline and relieves a bit on the individual PC platforms, but we won't know "how well it all works" until FLIGHT becomes more than a marketing dream.I probably will buy XPlane 10 - because the ground effects, while not "true to life" look pretty stunning in some of the promo videos I've seen, particularly the freeways. I also admire the work and products of ORBX, and fly almost exclusively in the PNW world of Orbx, even though my 'best' payware airport is KSFO. ORBX is an innovative company that has commanded my loyalty, respect, and admiration. I can only hope that ORBX will take FLIGHT to new levels as it has FSX.XPlane10 is eye-candy - but FLIGHT is where my real dreams and hopes are centered. At the heart of simming is sight-seeing, and if the 'virtual world' being offered isn't modeled after the REAL world, well, that kind of puts the KIBOSH on sight-seeing, yeah?