Raining on the Parade

[Captain Dudley 0]

Wow! Lots of speculation on the next version of Flight Simulator!It is just speculation, of course. Tenuous evidence to back up most of this lively debate. But everyone's mostly hopeful that Microsoft's decision to dump the franchise was merely a strategic reassesment. So just to throw it out there, yet another opinion: There will be no next version of Flight Simulator, there's a reason the upcoming title has a new name. Reason also that the Aces team, with their decades of experience and expertise, were disbanded. MSFS was structured from the beginning as a stand-alone sandbox environment; connectivity only came later, long after third-party solutions. It morphed into a 'base build' for add-ons that worked by itself for casual users, but allowed everyone to personalize their setup in every minute detail. Development stopped because this model was no longer sufficiently profitable.To see the future, you need merely look at what IS profitable now for the industry. I predict:Pay-as-you-go. Cloud modeling now means something differentTerrific graphicsGame-level flight dynamics: MS is not selling to this Forum. They've had their fill of we forever-dissatisfied whiners, and we're insignificant to the overall gaming market.Shoot stuff. Blow up stuff. Crash and burn. Win rewards!Fabulous graphicsRPG elements, like the new Take On Helicopters gameMore MS add-on involvement: why give it away to third parties?Fully interactive. Like Rise of Flight-Iron Cross, stand-alone play is a feature, not a foundation."It's a Simulator, not a game." Not anymore. Did I mention the incredible graphics?Get your copy of the Microsoft Happy Fun Flying Game as soon as it's released! I hope I'm wrong.

[xplanery 250]

Yeah I think that its going to be cool flying game for mainstream gamers.

[Mountain Man 142]

You make some good points. Microsoft traditionally has released a new Flight Simulator every two years or so, but third-party add-ons started extending the life of the product, and consumers who had invested money in a previous version (hundreds of dollars or more in some cases) were more reluctant to trade-up to the next version which meant decreasing revenues for Microsoft. With Microsoft's Flight shop, it looks like they're trying to siphon profits away from third-party developers by making it harder and more expensive for them to compete (Microsoft has a long history of providing third-party developers with inaccurate and/or incomplete documentation making it harder for them to match the features and functionality of Microsoft's own products, and they'll be taking first cut of anything sold through their shop).

[alainneedle1 97]

Wow! Lots of speculation on the next version of Flight Simulator!It is just speculation, of course. Tenuous evidence to back up most of this lively debate. But everyone's mostly hopeful that Microsoft's decision to dump the franchise was merely a strategic reassesment. So just to throw it out there, yet another opinion: There will be no next version of Flight Simulator, there's a reason the upcoming title has a new name. Reason also that the Aces team, with their decades of experience and expertise, were disbanded. MSFS was structured from the beginning as a stand-alone sandbox environment; connectivity only came later, long after third-party solutions. It morphed into a 'base build' for add-ons that worked by itself for casual users, but allowed everyone to personalize their setup in every minute detail. Development stopped because this model was no longer sufficiently profitable.To see the future, you need merely look at what IS profitable now for the industry. I predict:Pay-as-you-go. Cloud modeling now means something differentTerrific graphicsGame-level flight dynamics: MS is not selling to this Forum. They've had their fill of we forever-dissatisfied whiners, and we're insignificant to the overall gaming market.Shoot stuff. Blow up stuff. Crash and burn. Win rewards!Fabulous graphicsRPG elements, like the new Take On Helicopters gameMore MS add-on involvement: why give it away to third parties?Fully interactive. Like Rise of Flight-Iron Cross, stand-alone play is a feature, not a foundation."It's a Simulator, not a game." Not anymore. Did I mention the incredible graphics?Get your copy of the Microsoft Happy Fun Flying Game as soon as it's released! I hope I'm wrong.

I saw that somewhere before, look like old news to me, not sure??About third party add-ond developers been involved, as I said before some were (maybe still are) talking with MS about Flight before it was announced to the public (NO, no link no nothing, just take my word for it), MS was impressed with what was done regarding the quality of 3RD party add-ons for FSX, I may be wrong but I suspect that MS put the screw to them.....By the way, not bad for a first post.

[speedbird2001 0]

Good post mstreilbig. Depressing, but pretty perceptive. I just hope you are wrong.

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

We know much of it is wrong already, anyway.

[speedbird2001 0]

We know much of it is wrong already, anyway.

Possibly, but if you don't mind me saying, a good contribution to the grand debate.

[Jacoba 55]

I've been pushing the money angle for months now... all one has to do is look at why ACES was dissolved... money!If FS was so profitable and such a money maker then ACES would still be here today, but its not... all one has to do is look over MS quarterly financial reports which are available to anyone on their website. And see just how much of their profits come from X-Box and such, while PC gaming has fallen to near record low for them.The cloud computing idea is interesting along with some type of MS add on store or pay as you go SIM, or regional SIM, such as you get Hawaii in the box, then you can buy add on regions from MS thru a tightly control online store front.

[Tierborn 188]

You make some good points. Microsoft traditionally has released a new Flight Simulator every two years or so, but third-party add-ons started extending the life of the product, and consumers who had invested money in a previous version (hundreds of dollars or more in some cases) were more reluctant to trade-up to the next version which meant decreasing revenues for Microsoft. With Microsoft's Flight shop, it looks like they're trying to siphon profits away from third-party developers by making it harder and more expensive for them to compete (Microsoft has a long history of providing third-party developers with inaccurate and/or incomplete documentation making it harder for them to match the features and functionality of Microsoft's own products, and they'll be taking first cut of anything sold through their shop).

purchasers of 3rd party addon are a small segment of the sales .. confident that segment did not play into the decision to extend new release timing. The mostly likely reason the timing was extended was because of dwindling sales for the larger target audience of MSFS. Consequently, we all see MS using a different business for model for the Flight release.

[andyjohnston.net 617]

This is getting repetitive.

Wow! Lots of speculation on the next version of Flight Simulator!It is just speculation, of course. Tenuous evidence to back up most of this lively debate. But everyone's mostly hopeful that Microsoft's decision to dump the franchise was merely a strategic reassesment. So just to throw it out there, yet another opinion: There will be no next version of Flight Simulator, there's a reason the upcoming title has a new name. Reason also that the Aces team, with their decades of experience and expertise, were disbanded. MSFS was structured from the beginning as a stand-alone sandbox environment; connectivity only came later, long after third-party solutions. It morphed into a 'base build' for add-ons that worked by itself for casual users, but allowed everyone to personalize their setup in every minute detail. Development stopped because this model was no longer sufficiently profitable.To see the future, you need merely look at what IS profitable now for the industry. I predict:Pay-as-you-go. Cloud modeling now means something differentTerrific graphicsGame-level flight dynamics: MS is not selling to this Forum. They've had their fill of we forever-dissatisfied whiners, and we're insignificant to the overall gaming market.Shoot stuff. Blow up stuff. Crash and burn. Win rewards!Fabulous graphicsRPG elements, like the new Take On Helicopters gameMore MS add-on involvement: why give it away to third parties?Fully interactive. Like Rise of Flight-Iron Cross, stand-alone play is a feature, not a foundation."It's a Simulator, not a game." Not anymore. Did I mention the incredible graphics?Get your copy of the Microsoft Happy Fun Flying Game as soon as it's released! I hope I'm wrong.

How long was ACES involved with FlightSim? I know they did FSX, and I believe FS-2004. Did they do anything before that? I know that until about FS98 Bruce Artwick was still running the show.As for shooting stuff...you can really see that element in the webisodes, right? Fly along in your Maule and...no wait, that can't be right.At one point, there was a job posting looking for someone to manage the SDK. Which certainly implies that at some point, they were planning on making it expandable. We have no reason to believe that has changed.It's very possible the new name is just an effort to bring more people in. Flight sounds more inviting that Flight Simulator.

[cmeeks 8]

It's very possible the new name is just an effort to bring more people in. Flight sounds more inviting that Flight Simulator.

I completely agree with this. "Flight" is new and refreshing!

[Mountain Man 142]

If FS was so profitable and such a money maker then ACES would still be here today, but its not...

That's not necessarily true. Ensemble Studios developed the Age of Empires series which were some of the most successful and critically acclaimed RTS games in the industry, yet Microsoft still shut them down and basically turned the franchise into pay-to-play Farmville with swords (seriously; it's called Age of Empires Online). But you're right in that it's ultimately driven by money, and right now there's a lot of money to be made with "downloadable content" or DLC, and Microsoft wants a bigger piece of the Flight Simulator pie.

purchasers of 3rd party addon are a small segment of the sales .. confident that segment did not play into the decision to extend new release timing. The mostly likely reason the timing was extended was because of dwindling sales for the larger target audience of MSFS. Consequently, we all see MS using a different business for model for the Flight release.

And those dwindling sales can almost certainly be attributed to people extending the life of previous versions of MSFS with add-ons.

[Guest jahman]

...It's very possible the new name is just an effort to bring more people in. Flight sounds more inviting that Flight Simulator.

Exactly! "Flight Simulator" sounds way too nerdy a name!The more basic folk get into Flight the better Flight will get over time due to a portion of sales revenue being plowed back into developping the next version. And the better this basic Flight platform gets, the more accurate the aircraft and scenery add-ons will become.

...And those dwindling sales can almost certainly be attributed to people extending the life of previous versions of MSFS with add-ons.

Add-ons actually shorten the life of FSX: The more add-ons you install the more you "need" and upgraded version of FSX. I'm sure we would all have purchased FSXI and FSXII by now had MS made them available.Cheers,- jahman.

[Guest]

Yeah, it is going to be a Take On Helicopters clone just based on a biplane or Maule.It will be plenty of missions and Hawaii only missions to rescue, deliver cargo etc.. with some sort of pilot " career " progress based on achievements.Nothing more, all based on DX10 in their 15% usage of course.

[Rimshot 1,135]

Yeah, it is going to be a Take On Helicopters clone just based on a biplane or Maule.It will be plenty of missions and Hawaii only missions to rescue, deliver cargo etc.. with some sort of pilot " career " progress based on achievements.

I'm really glad some of us know precisely what Flight is going to be like. Now I know what I have to look forward to Is it so hard for some, when discussing this upcoming release, to once in a while use the words 'I think' or 'I believe' or even 'I suspect' instead of posing their sometimes very shortsighted opinions as the truth? Geez, somebody might actually believe them!