Considering "Flight" is not a continuation of the Flight Simulator series the argument of removing features from previous versions is moot.

Yes, it is. Don't be fooled that "simulator" has been removed.

I disagree. Sure the innards are the same but the "spirit" (for lack of a better word) is different. Besides, I wasn't agreeing/disagreeing with the "omg omg Hawaii only" crowd (so what if it is anyways). Just making a point that from a marketing standpoint they're trying to head in a different direction. Kind of like Sim City 4 vs. Sim City Societies. Sure they are part of the same series, but Societies is a vastly different experience compared to its predecessors.

In my layman's terms, anything less than a previous version is walking backwards and essentially cheating the established, dedicated user base that made the MS Flight Simulator what it is, I don't care what the buisness model is.You can increase the unit price, enhance some areas more than others - hopefully to make them better than the prior version, increase the minimum hardware requirements, offer more features, tools, SDK's, etc. BUT YOU CAN'T OFFER LESS or remove what was offered as base in prior versions!"New and improved" must mean NEW or IMPROVED or BOTH.Time for my medicine now.

If, as it seems, Flight is being targeted at a different, bigger market Microsoft can (and will) make whatever changes that will be attractive to that market. There's no question of "cheating " anyone - we all got what we paid for when we bought FS.

I disagree. Sure the innards are the same but the "spirit" (for lack of a better word) is different. Besides, I wasn't agreeing/disagreeing with the "omg omg Hawaii only" crowd (so what if it is anyways). Just making a point that from a marketing standpoint they're trying to head in a different direction. Kind of like Sim City 4 vs. Sim City Societies. Sure they are part of the same series, but Societies is a vastly different experience compared to its predecessors.

The marketing direction has not changed either. The casual simmer/gamer has always been the target market.

"Considering "Flight" is not a continuation of the Flight Simulator series the argument of removing features from previous versions is moot."Debatable. The ONLY reason most of us are here is BECAUSE MS HAS/HAD A FRANCHISE called MS Flight Simulator. It is their choice to call it whatever they want but, correct me if I am wrong, they are banking on the dedicated established base to continue their "franchise", not to mention widen the user base.If deviating and walking back from a three decade old franchise and offering a lesser product, whether limited in area, scope or functionality from known prior versions is not cheating, it can atleast be called misleading to the established base. Yes, MS has the right to do whatever it wants just as Netflix did, but you will wind up pissing off and eroding your user base henceforth.And yes, I have been a casual user of flight sims, particularly of MS Flight Sim ever since it was first introduced for the PC and for the past decade or so of X-plane.

The marketing direction has not changed either. The casual simmer/gamer has always been the target market.

Except Microsoft admitted ACES lost sight if it:

Many of you are concerned that because we want to appeal to a wider audience, we must be building an arcade game.We don’t need to create an arcade game to welcome a wider audience. But we do need to improve the total user experience if we’re to be successful in welcoming new audiences into the experience of Flight. The passion and fascination of flight is powerful, with so many different aspects to aviation and different levels of enjoyment to experience. There is distinct value and strength to be gained by welcoming a wider audience, and we can’t claim to have done the best job of it in the past.

Microsoft Flight News Wednesday, December 8, 2010http://www.microsoft...s/flight/#news2

Unless what you remove is unnecessary and/or detracts from the product. They could remove a lot of junk that was floating around in FSX and still come out with something which is offering more to the end user in a smaller package. Bigger is not always better.

That's a good point. Consider how much of the "bloat" in FSX was present only because backwards compatibility with FS9 was retained? Now, with "Flight" they are able to eliminate the obsolete data that would be required to keep FS9/FSX backwards compatibility...That alone could easily account for 5GBs of unnecessary data eliminated!

That's a good point. Consider how much of the "bloat" in FSX was present only because backwards compatibility with FS9 was retained? Now, with "Flight" they are able to eliminate the obsolete data that would be required to keep FS9/FSX backwards compatibility...That alone could easily account for 5GBs of unnecessary data eliminated!

Maybe there's not much bloat in the code.Virtual Memory Map (VMMAP) from SysInternals for that for a fairly "vanilla" FSX the .exe and its .dlls require 144,828 Kb of VM. That's only 144 Mb or 0.15 Gb. The tota requirement with UK photographic scenery on the default C172 is 1,617,680K or 1.617 Mb or 1.6 Gb.

Except Microsoft admitted ACES lost sight if it:

Where do they admit this?

Personally the wider audience goal doesn't concern me, as it does for some.It's a goal that's applied to every version of FS so far.In fact it's a goal in most all designs, from software to VCR clocks ;)Gameplay is about learning skills...in FS the gameplay is learning to fly.I'm all for a wider audience. The bigger the audience the bigger the investment.

It is incomprehensible to me that Flight would not have a code base that would run on the XBox. After all that is the primo gaming platform for MS at this point and would assure a BIG monetary boost for the FS franchise as sales could be increased by 2-3x IMO.Cheersjja

It is incomprehensible to me that Flight would not have a code base that would run on the XBox. After all that is the primo gaming platform for MS at this point and would assure a BIG monetary boost for the FS franchise as sales could be increased by 2-3x IMO.Cheersjja

The engine is clearly a reincarnation of FSX's engine IMO, so I highly doubt it's going to run on Xbox.

Sticking out my head and putting money on my speculation, but I guarantee (?) Flight will be a global sim, with different areas purchased as addons, just like Orbx. So, purchase flight, you'll get included a high resolution scenery of Hawaii, and of course the rest of the globe in pretty average resolution. Extra scenery will be able to be purchased separately, similar as with current scenery addons. Anyone for a bet?

The engine is clearly a reincarnation of FSX's engine IMO, so I highly doubt it's going to run on Xbox.

Shouldn't be a factor IMO as the base API is still DX.Cheersjja