More ridiculous assumptions based on ignorance.

Read post # 102 http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php/topic/49291-x-plane-10-preview/page__st__80-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Well I am not at liberty to write down all we know, but Flight is most likely heading towards a rather closed simulator that will only accept add-ons that are solved via MS Store. That's something that we as publisher got major problems with. Then look at what they have shown, Hawaii, Hawaii and a bit more Hawaii. In pretty good detail, but if you want this detail for the world you are looking for a few additional harddisks. And have you seen any large aircraft? Any info if existing products are compatible? If it will even cover Europe?But as we always said we'll look at Flight when it is released. For now we have no SDK, no good information, no nothing.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------If this is not from a reliable source I don't know what is a reliable source....So before you tell somebody that they make assumptions based on ignorance, again, just ask them where they get their info.....take a close look at all the Flight's pics released by MS and tell me if you see something remotly looking like DX10 or DX11...18 months of development and you can't tell if Flight is more than FSX on steroids ....News Flash....here is a game that support DX 11 and NOT DX9, I'm sure I missed a Flight's pics looking like anything in this game....point me out to it please.http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=v-4msZsoe18

Read post # 102 http://forum.aerosof...ew/page__st__80-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Well I am not at liberty to write down all we know, but Flight is most likely heading towards a rather closed simulator that will only accept add-ons that are solved via MS Store. That's something that we as publisher got major problems with. Then look at what they have shown, Hawaii, Hawaii and a bit more Hawaii. In pretty good detail, but if you want this detail for the world you are looking for a few additional harddisks. And have you seen any large aircraft? Any info if existing products are compatible? If it will even cover Europe?But as we always said we'll look at Flight when it is released. For now we have no SDK, no good information, no nothing.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------If this is not from a reliable source I don't know what is a reliable source....

I've never had any respect for Aerosoft, so to me, that is just another random person making pointless speculation.

So before you tell somebody that they make assumptions based on ignorance, again, just ask them where they get their info.....take a close look at all the Flight's pics released by MS and tell me if you see something remotly looking like DX10 or DX11...18 months of development and you can't tell if Flight is more than FSX on steroids ....News Flash....here is a game that support DX 11 and NOT DX9, I'm sure I missed a Flight's pics looking like anything in this game....point me out to it please.http://www.youtube.c...d&v=v-4msZsoe18

Why do you always insist on comparing a flight simulator to some game that doesn't even cover much area of land? It's a completely unfair and unrealistic comparison. There is nothing to suggest that Flight uses DX10 or DX11, yes. But what would? Pretty much nothing. I'm guessing it at least has support for DX10. A game can use an older version of DX if needed, but if the user's computer supports it, then DX10 can be used, or even 11. (assuming the engine supports it)

I've never had any respect for Aerosoft, so to me, that is just another random person making pointless speculation.Why do you always insist on comparing a flight simulator to some game that doesn't even cover much area of land? It's a completely unfair and unrealistic comparison. There is nothing to suggest that Flight uses DX10 or DX11, yes. But what would? Pretty much nothing. I'm guessing it at least has support for DX10. A game can use an older version of DX if needed, but if the user's computer supports it, then DX10 can be used, or even 11. (assuming the engine supports it)

You got to be kidding right... I'm showing you what is DX11 and how different it is from what we see in Flight's pics. that's all.The other point I'm making is that all we see is Hawaii so far so it's fair to compare Flight with another game since Hawaii does not cover much area of land....Drumcode can see thru the fog....

You got to be kidding right...

I gotta agree with you Alain. Leaders from both Aerosoft and Orbx have made similar statements, and I respect their conjecture as this is their area of expertise, so even if they do not have facts, their intuition and reasoning is of value.

You got to be kidding right...I'm showing you what is DX11 and how different it is from what we see in Flight's pics. that's all.The other point I'm making is that all we see is Hawaii so far so it's fair to compare Flight with another game since Hawaii does not cover much area of land....Drumcode can see thru the fog....

Or simply look at Flight's minimal specs ...from their website: http://www.microsoft...rmance_hardware

• CPU: Dual Core 2.0 GHz
• GPU: 256 MB card capable of shader 3.0 (DX 9.0c compliant)
• HD: 10 GB Hard Drive space
• OS: WinXP SP3
• RAM: 2.0GB

Windows XP does not support anything higher than DX9.0cSo at least it has a render path for DX9 ... this is all this says. Effects like HDR are too costly for DX9 and will most likely be available in DX10/11 renderer.

For now we have no SDK, no good information, no nothing.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------If this is not from a reliable source I don't know what is a reliable source....So before you tell somebody that they make assumptions based on ignorance, again, just ask them where they get their info.....take a close look at all the Flight's pics released by MS and tell me if you see something remotly looking like DX10 or DX11...18 months of development and you can't tell if Flight is more than FSX on steroids ....News Flash....here is a game that support DX 11 and NOT DX9, I'm sure I missed a Flight's pics looking like anything in this game....point me out to it please.http://www.youtube.c...d&v=v-4msZsoe18

I've already pointed this out to you once. Or do you always take people's opinions for fact when they end by saying they have no good information, no nothing?As for making comparisons to NFS

I posted the complete thread, you picked what you wanted....so let me do the sameWell I am not at liberty to write down all we know, but Flight is most likely heading towards a rather closed simulatorWhat you want and what will happen is two different things.

Well I am not at liberty to write down all we know...

That is a prime example of a vacuuous statement. It implies something, but actually says nothing at all. It only hints or suggests that the writer has some definitive knowledge, without actually making a definite claim to do so.Logically, it has a value of absolute zero...

More ridiculous assumptions based on ignorance.

I've already pointed this out to you once. Or do you always take people's opinions for fact when they end by saying they have no good information, no nothing?As for making comparisons to NFS

;)

That is a prime example of a vacuuous statement. It implies something, but actually says nothing at all. It only hints or suggests that the writer has some definitive knowledge, without actually making a definite claim to do so.Logically, it has a value of absolute zero...

You are absolutly right, that is why I can't see them been under any NDA with MS, that does not mean they don't know nothing, BUT big name developers talk between themself...

Flight looks like it is shaping up to be FSX's poorer cousin.Serious flight simulation will no longer have anything to do with Microsoft.Thank god !!

By the way, there's new screenshots and system specs. Doesn't seem like you are aware of that...

By the way, there's new screenshots and system specs. Doesn't seem like you are aware of that...

LOLI've never seen so many clueless "sheep" who have such extreme pessimism for our hobby.It seriously gets under my skin that everyone still criticizes Flight even though the have released 50+screenshots and 3 ingame videos.Also, the have released even more info in the news section......

You are absolutly right, that is why I can't see them been under any NDA with MS, that does not mean they don't know nothing,

If they were under an NDA, they would have access to information. No NDA = no access. What ever they may want to think is their perogative. It's another matter of what they know. If they know, they can't say. See the loop that access and an NDA entails. Mathis' posting at his forum shows that he knows how to read the Avsim forum threads, nothing more. He spits out the same warped logic of it being GA only and only in Hawai'i, because he has seen nothing else to disprove it. Wow, if only writing some of my little programs could include such logic, I'd have a lot more done than what I have finished.

BUT big name developers talk between themself...

It probably starts with "Has Microsoft contacted you?" and once the response is given (No!) then the chatter begins. If there is posturing amongst the development community it's probably a result of the egos involved. Those that have had kind words grace their every posting want to position themselves in such a manner as to avoid any questions of them not being in the Microsoft Flight development loop. I would really, really be surprised if there was much that the development team at Microsoft could learn from third-party add on makers. Yes, I know some have enlightened the dev. team in the past (Fr. Bill!), but to think some great advance on autogen or clouds or flap deployment is going to come from an add on maker is not a realistic scenario, IMO.

@ meshman, I understand your logic but trust me, leaks happen.

Mathijs over at Aerosoft is pretty bitter towards Microsoft as are developers from ORBX. This is vastly opposed to all the Microsoft butt kissing that went on prior to the release of FSX. Something is obviously up and developers are not happy about it. Even being under NDA notice that there is absolutely NO excitement by anyone regarding Flight. Even being under NDA developers can still express many things about what their plans are and how Flight will allow them to deliver enhanced products without breaking NDA. Remember that even before FSX was released and developers were still under NDA there was a lot of buzz and many developers had already expressed that they will be dropping dev for FSX! None of it came true, but hey, at least there was some excitement. With Flight, nothing, not a peep, just crickets chirping and sickening repetitive screenshots of Hawaii. Another thing to bear in mind is that XP10 which will have much less object texture diversity than FSX, no buildings at any airports outside Seattle, sparce AI, no airport vehicles, etc is STILL going to be 80 GIGABYTES to display the whole world. Microsoft is saying that you need 10 GIGABYTES for Flight and that includes all the different ground textures no longer needed in XP10 as well as all the regional building textures that will not be included in XP10 out of the box, to say nothing of 25,000 airports with buildings, AI traffic, airport vehicles, etc? Sorry that's impossible that XP10 will be 8 times larger to display less scenery objects than Flight if Flight covered the same geographical area as XP10 (i.e. the whole world). You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see the writing on the wall. I'm not sure what's up with Redmond Washington now-a-days, maybe they are trying to bankrupt the company? Purchase Skype for $8 Billion = Fail. FSX DX10= Fail. Windows Phone 7 = Fail. Microsoft-Nokia Alliance = Fail. Windows Vista = Fail. Microsoft Hawaii Simulator = Impending Failure. Microsoft has released new screenshots for November. The screenshots look STUNNING! However, here we go with pictures of Hawaii. I am no longer the least bit excited or interested in seeing screen shots of Hawaii. How can anyone doubt that there is nothing interesting to show outside of Hawaii? At this point if Austin over at Laminar Research puts his ego aside, listens to the community, and works with all the developers to deliver a full rich simulator that can handle more than 20 AI aircraft, has proper ATC, airport buildings, and real landclass and terrain mesh, he is in a very unique position to kill off the Microsoft franchise once and for all. With the poor job than Microsoft did on FSX, Flight just might be the nail in Microsoft's own coffin when it comes to the MSFS franchise.It's pretty sad.