NDA's appear to have been broken, speculation without fact, etc. Am shutting this down as it does violate our Terms of Use.

90% of this forum is speculation...am I missing something?

90% of this forum is speculation...am I missing something?

I was wondering the same thing!

90% of this forum is speculation...am I missing something?

Your speculating...

Hi peeps.. it's been a while since i said anything here.. there is indeed a lot of speculation going on, and a lot of confusion as well. Here are a few quick observations i made as far as the scope of Flight: is it just Hawaii or the entire world? I think it will cover the entire world.. my reasons are: 1: If you take a look at the 'Flight' logo, it's background shows a globe, not just Hawaii2: If Flight covers just Hawaii, then why not use a nice photo texture of hawaii? Hawaii isn't that big, and it can be easily covered by orthophotographic textures. Actually there's already a scenery (megascenery i think) out that does just that.3: Flight still uses landclass. Why use generic technology which was developed so FSX/Flight can more or less represent the entire world if all it's going to display is Hawaii? I don't think i'll be able to fix the confirmation bias some people on this forum seem to be suffering from (the noisy negativists: you know who you are), but hopefully this will put things in perspective a bit.

Given that FSX was such a huge cash cow for MS, why would this even be in question?

It may have been profitable, but I don't think it was ever a cash cow.

I think it will cover the entire world.. my reasons are: 2: If Flight covers just Hawaii, then why not use a nice photo texture of hawaii? Hawaii isn't that big, and it can be easily covered by orthophotographic textures. Actually there's already a scenery (megascenery i think) out that does just that. 3: Flight still uses landclass. Why use generic technology which was developed so FSX/Flight can more or less represent the entire world if all it's going to display is Hawaii?

2 and 3 are good points indeed.

It may have been profitable, but I don't think it was ever a cash cow.

Keep in mind the cancelled the successor to FSX at first because sales were not good enough. I actually doubt MS broke even on FSX. What we know of sales data for Germany for example does not lead to the conclusion they could have been very happy. And Germany most likely outsold the USA in sales. The decline of boxed sales of PC games (sorry for that term) in the US and in Asia is what cause MS to reconsider. They closed Aces, they shut down Transim projects. and only when they found ways to do it different, new people etc, did they restart. But FGSX most certainly was not a cash cow. Even FS2004 wasn't and that sold a lot better. The version before that were 'gefundenes fressen' for MS however. Those made serious money. Even when seen next to Office etc.

Oh HI Mathijs.. while you're here, how are things looking for the Aerosoft flightsim? I still think you guys could do a helluva job on a flightsim, given some serious dedication. Maybe you could knock on Bohemia Interactive's door for an engine, since apparently they've got one up and running, and it looks amazing.

Maybe you could knock on Bohemia Interactive's door for an engine, since apparently they've got one up and running, and it looks amazing.

Payt I wouldn't rely on BI. See my review of their latest flightmodel here:http://xsimreviews.wordpress.com/2011/09/10/take-on-helicopters-latest-community-preview/It still 'looks' pretty good, although being a relative newcomer to fsx but having used xplane and Arma extensively, I can say that FSX on a good pc beats Arma or Take on Helicopters any day. FSX is in its prime now! As Mathijs has said, they won't be releasing any version of AFS any time soon, and if we can help spread the word, he won't have to! I've already spent ALOT of money on fsx addons in WEEKS. I am gobsmacked at how good things run and look. Don't ask me about the planes though! - an article coming soon..Great times for simmers everywhere.

I think you have to bear in mind that Take On Helicopters is a game with simulation elements, it's going to be a relatively realistic one, but it is definitely a game rather than a sim. Personally I like stuff like that such as all those search and rescue chopper games there have been, and I think Flashpoint and Arma's helicopter handling was pretty good considering it was not really the be all and end all of the game's purpose. I'm looking forward to TOH myself, it should be good fun. If I want ultra-realism, I'll fire up the Cera or Dodosim choppers in FSX, if I want to whizz around blowing stuff up, I'll fire up Whirlwind of Vietnam or Apache Air Assault - horses for courses, and TOH will expand my options for whirlybird fun. I expect Flight may do the same too; I don't always want to spend an hour doing a pre-flight. Al

Payt I wouldn't rely on BI. See my review of their latest flightmodel here:http://xsimreviews.w...munity-preview/ It still 'looks' pretty good, although being a relative newcomer to fsx but having used xplane and Arma extensively, I can say that FSX on a good pc beats Arma or Take on Helicopters any day. FSX is in its prime now! As Mathijs has said, they won't be releasing any version of AFS any time soon, and if we can help spread the word, he won't have to! I've already spent ALOT of money on fsx addons in WEEKS. I am gobsmacked at how good things run and look. Don't ask me about the planes though! - an article coming soon.. Great times for simmers everywhere.

Well yeah FSX does look pretty good with the right addons.. i like how Orbx looks, and some of the megascenery products.. but the thing is that it's an ageing engine, which doesn't make use of all the video hardware and shaders that are available now. I think the TOH engine is probably better in that respect.. i love those volumatric clouds, the shadows inside the choppers and the way the water looks, for instance. I'm not sure if the engine is able to handle an entire world though, and i haven't seen any moving traffic on the roads either, so there seem to be limitations, but maybe those are easy to overcome. Anyway, looking forward to your article :)

I think you have to bear in mind that Take On Helicopters is a game with simulation elements, it's going to be a relatively realistic one, but it is definitely a game rather than a sim. Personally I like stuff like that such as all those search and rescue chopper games there have been, and I think Flashpoint and Arma's helicopter handling was pretty good considering it was not really the be all and end all of the game's purpose. I'm looking forward to TOH myself, it should be good fun. If I want ultra-realism, I'll fire up the Cera or Dodosim choppers in FSX, if I want to whizz around blowing stuff up, I'll fire up Whirlwind of Vietnam or Apache Air Assault - horses for courses, and TOH will expand my options for whirlybird fun. I expect Flight may do the same too; I don't always want to spend an hour doing a pre-flight. Al

Well i'm mentioning TOH purely in the context of it's graphics capabilities.. I guess Aerosoft would have to make their own physics engine.. or maybe see if they can get the guys who did Condor (soaring sim) to write something for them, for instance.. or develop it in-house, if possible. Anyway, it looks like the Aerosoft sim isn't going to take off anytime soon, so i'm happy to see that Xplane 10 seems to be making big strides towards being the flightsim thathas it all, and i still have high hopes for Flight as well.. at least the graphics look great. As far as the choppers in FSX, i've yet to find one that actually feels real. They all seem to be dumbed down, and too easy to fly compared to the real thing, even the Nemeth Design ones. FS9 was better in that respect, if i remember correctly, and then all of a sudden in FSX i felt like i was an expert in flying choppers, since it felt so easy.. lol. I'll have a look at those dodosim and Cera ones and see if they are any better :)

Be good if they could get the ones who did Condor to do something, that's got a great flight modeling system and it gets blistering FPS. Graphics are a bit cartoonish colours-wise in Condor (no, they really are in Condor, go have a look LOL), but it's a brilliant flight sim with fantastic multiplayer options. Al

Keep in mind the cancelled the successor to FSX at first because sales were not good enough. I actually doubt MS broke even on FSX. What we know of sales data for Germany for example does not lead to the conclusion they could have been very happy. And Germany most likely outsold the USA in sales. The decline of boxed sales of PC games (sorry for that term) in the US and in Asia is what cause MS to reconsider. They closed Aces, they shut down Transim projects. and only when they found ways to do it different, new people etc, did they restart. But FGSX most certainly was not a cash cow. Even FS2004 wasn't and that sold a lot better. The version before that were 'gefundenes fressen' for MS however. Those made serious money. Even when seen next to Office etc.

no way Germany had better sales of FSX vs. US (80MM population vs. 300MM). Additionally, the US sales have historically been the strongest for this franchise.

Yep, looks strange to me as well.