Looking into my Crystal Ball (had to find it first & dust it off)Lets see, connecting, connecting - OK here we go;No real MS info passed out, requires SliverLight to preview what little info is released,Pro Developers not talkingForum treads closedEnter Lockheed Martin's Prepar3DThe Chrystal Ball predicts Microsoft Flight will be a dummied down Ipod version of Windows Live Games genre requiring a live connect to MS Virtual Earth,heavily Dependant on SilverLight, no open SDK, official addon portal, not compatible with FSX addons.HEY, what the .... SilverLight is automatically downloading and installing now on the Chrystal Ball.WOW - here's a new update from MS, Flight will be like the greatest experience ever and like everyone will love it and they will finish it like really soon.Whew, I feel much better now.my 2 cents worth_w-b

So far what's true.What may happen.Big time wrong.

I was heart broken when I heard that Microsoft canned the ACES team back during the last recession / crash of 2008.

Trust me. It broke my heart a LOT more then it broke yours! (I lost my job that day!)Ultimatly nobody can really tell what Flight will be like from the handfull of promo video's and screenshots, but I have faith. If you read the postings from the MS news and FAQ they state over and over and OVER that the removal of the word "simulator" was just a removal of the word, and not a removal of the FEATURE. I have faith in that crew, and will look forward to trying the demo. Till then, everything is just rampant speculation.

Trust me. It broke my heart a LOT more then it broke yours! (I lost my job that day!)Ultimatly nobody can really tell what Flight will be like from the handfull of promo video's and screenshots, but I have faith. If you read the postings from the MS news and FAQ they state over and over and OVER that the removal of the word "simulator" was just a removal of the word, and not a removal of the FEATURE. I have faith in that crew, and will look forward to trying the demo. Till then, everything is just rampant speculation.

True Dat Mate....Well truth is it is a product in development. What it will end up being may actually be changing day by day as they develop it. They may add more to it...They may take away from it.Maybe it will be this or that....No one on here knows.I just worry it will be something like Flight Unlimited was.....A very good simulator limited to one, or a few different regions.Remember when MSFS 1.0 had only 4 scenery areas and 20 airports....Maybe they do something like that but in much higher quality compared to trying to create the entire world again.A few regions at release and Future regions released as expansion packs..... That was how it used to be. Maybe they revive that model again. Time will tellCheers

I doubt they will only release a few regions. I think they will either release an entire world which looks like the pictures we have so far, or will release a world similar to FSX with a few select better areas (like Hawaii). Microsoft must realize that a very large chunk of Flight Simming (long haul) will be gone if they do not release the whole world.

One thing I think a lot of people here are missing is this. Microsoft Flight Simulator has been in production for 29 years. FSX is a culmination of 29 years of development. Each version since 1.0 added something new to the previous version till we got to the point we are at today. This has both good points and bad points. Good points is you have a really big game for not a lot of work. Bad point is, you have a TON of old code clogging up the works. This was FSX. Really big game, but a LOT of old code clogging things up. There really wasent much more you can do with it! LM has been working on Prepar3d for years and its not advanced a great deal. The best thing to do is to start from scratch. Im not saying this is what MS has done with Flight, but if it is, dont expect everything right out of the box that FSX had. Simply put, you can compress 29 years of development into a few years!!! I would rather have a fresh start, with a new game then just a re-hashed copy of FSX with a few features. This means the future of Flight can be shaped much better then trying to shoe horn it into old code, even if it means a few less aircraft or airports from the start. Im also looking at this from a 3rd party developer perspective. If MS gives you everything, looking THIS good, what can OrbX sell you? Ultimatly, no matter what happens, MS cant please everyone no matter what they try. People still fly 2002/2004! Even if it was the perfect sim, had every aircraft, every feature, and ran great on all hardware, there would still be people who wont like it, and lord knows we will hear from those people over and over and over.

I doubt they will only release a few regions. I think they will either release an entire world which looks like the pictures we have so far, or will release a world similar to FSX with a few select better areas (like Hawaii). Microsoft must realize that a very large chunk of Flight Simming (long haul) will be gone if they do not release the whole world.

I think you underestimate the resources it would take to do the entire world in the detail they have been showing. To do the entire world in that level of detail would be a monster undertaking.Even FSX today is no where near that level of global detail after 5 years of third party development. Look how long it takes ORBX to cover just one region in FSX....It is a Painstakingly slow process.This is the main consideration that they are going in the direction of regional based, so they can focus on smaller regions in greater detail.Cheers

Yes JSkorna you've expressed your POV many times on here. This was just my POVWhat is seriously flawed about FSX is that they've released a product that sells for about $80 or $90, and that only makes up for a fraction of its end user spending. Consider I've invested well over $2000 in FSX Third Party Development software since it's release, therefore Microsoft has only received a small percentage of my total spending.Compare that to the business model of XBox and no wonder the execs at Microsoft pulled the plug on the franchise. Why would they continue with it the way it was.JSkorna I don't believe for a second you have any inside information on what MS Flight will be however I can speculate that your days as third party development just might end with FSX...Unless MS Flight is on the Games For Windows Live and you have to sell your products on their network and give them a percentage.....But that is a big 'IF'- they would have to create some sort of partnership with guys like you. Maybe that is coming...Maybe not.But the freedom of the Third party Developer for MSFS is most likely over.I've used other Flight Sims over the years and what always brought me back to MSFS and now FSX is that it is global and no shortage of additional products from guys like you.....This is why users like me are expressing frustration on forums like this. We just like it they way things have been and would like to see the franchise improved and not overhauled....OH WELLRemember what EA did to our beloved Sim City Franchise....That is what happens when you re-invent the wheelCheers.

LMAOTTFN

One thing I think a lot of people here are missing is this. Microsoft Flight Simulator has been in production for 29 years. FSX is a culmination of 29 years of development. Each version since 1.0 added something new to the previous version till we got to the point we are at today. This has both good points and bad points. Good points is you have a really big game for not a lot of work. Bad point is, you have a TON of old code clogging up the works. This was FSX. Really big game, but a LOT of old code clogging things up. There really wasent much more you can do with it! LM has been working on Prepar3d for years and its not advanced a great deal. The best thing to do is to start from scratch. Im not saying this is what MS has done with Flight, but if it is, dont expect everything right out of the box that FSX had. Simply put, you can compress 29 years of development into a few years!!!

If this were actually true Lockheed Martin would not have bought 'FSX'...they would have built their own sim.Software is not like house construction. Components and revised and modernized as you go...I've worked on many 'new' games, and they were always built on the engine of the previous game.Game software is organic- it evolves. Even the radically new is being built on established foundations.The only issue here is how much time and money they invest and how far they go.You have to be pretty green to see decades of development as a liability.And you have no idea what sort of challenges that would introduce into the development.

Simply put, you can compress 29 years of development into a few years!!!

you can'** would take far too long…and in that time an established engine would outdo you..

I think you underestimate the resources it would take to do the entire world in the detail they have been showing. To do the entire world in that level of detail would be a monster undertaking.Even FSX today is no where near that level of global detail after 5 years of third party development. Look how long it takes ORBX to cover just one region in FSX....It is a Painstakingly slow process.This is the main consideration that they are going in the direction of regional based, so they can focus on smaller regions in greater detail.Cheers

99.9% of default FSX scenery is entierly procedurally generated.I see no indication that's changed for Flight.

Trust me. FSX is hamstrung by old code and backwards compatibility. Things like poorly coded 2D panel routines kill performance and they cant be fixed or they would brake backwards compatibility. Just fly something with a default GPS and see for yourself! The engine is FILLED with this sort of thing! The ammount of code behind the visuals is staggering. Everything from how a compass works, to how a jet engine starts is all in there. Some of that code is over 10 years old and cant be removed due to compatibility. Its a house of cards, with 1 wrong move will collapse the entire game. Thats why working on the FSX base is so hard and slow. You know why LM bought ESP? (They have the rights to ESP, NOT FSX) Because it would of taken them 10+ years just to get to were FSX was! Name one really massive feature P3D added in 3 years? I havent seen anything new from P3D that ESP didnt already have with the exception of 2 things, the ability to go under water, and easy transitions form land to water. After 3 years thats about it. Still looks like ESP. Im just saying that the reason P3D hasent advanced much is becuase the old code is preventing any rapid advancement. In the same timeframe, look at the visual advancements in Flight.

Things like poorly coded 2D panel routines kill performance and they cant be fixed or they would brake backwards compatibility.

That's just one little component.And if you recall a former Aces member was compelled to post here that it was the one component they hadn't moved to the GPU. This is a baby and the bath water problem here. Upgrade...or spend another five years to start over....and get no further ahead - just behind.Backwards compatibility wouldn't survive a re-write either, it'll just take so long no one will care There’s a reality TV show on cable about making cup-cakes…it’s high-time they shed some like on making games.

Yes, there was a lot of things they could not do that modern games could due to old code. Your proving my point. The problem is your using 3rd hard information to base your openion from, im using first had experience as a 3rd party developer. FSX was a dead end in many ways, and a reboot is dearly needed. If they do just rehash FSX, it will be a massive handycap.

Me too, I have firsthand experience too - on both fronts.FSX is not a dead end.Flight is a sequel and that’s the absolute best development situation you can ask for.If you’re a scenery builder you have some reason to be frustrated, but keep in mind so-called ‘modern games’ worlds are built using entirely different requirements and a different philosophy.The methods and the content are not exchangeable.So you can say it’s the worst except for all alternatives.That won't ever change it's the reality of being at the edge of the spectrum (with a 100 mile draw distance).

1st hand hay? So, on the last day at the Aces office, who took the group photograph?

Firsthand as in working in a game development as well as in add-ons....they are not the same thing.