Just a patch for FSX of the work done on Flight (since Flight is based on FSX) increasing the performance of FSX (DX10) screwing all your FSX's addons and we will have to start all over again (assuming you install the patch)...can that be done....naaaaa....can it???

It wouldn't be done if only because it would then compete with their Dora The Explorer - Hawaii Edition.

Just a patch for FSX of the work done on Flight (since Flight is based on FSX) increasing the performance of FSX (DX10) screwing all your FSX's addons and we will have to start all over again (assuming you install the patch)...can that be done....naaaaa....can it???

I assume a good chunk of the performance gain comes from dropping support for legacy code and content. The code base gets pretty bloated when it has to drag around support for formats that are 10-15 years old. This is a fresh start, folks. We, the hardcore simmers, are too tiny of a market to make it worthwhile for Microsoft to invest in the development costs of maintaining legacy code or the feature set of a high end simulator.

From the outside looking in, I am very concerned for the community as a whole.

The community as a whole will be fine. There just won't be much of one around Flight.

... I cant see why any dev would want to give part of their income to M$ when they can make addon for X plane 10 or FSX and sell it without giving anything to Microsoft....

They would do that because a centralized app store will reach at least 10x as many potential customers compared to selling their addon through their own website. Probably much more than 10x the amount of potential customers

They would do that because a centralized app store will reach at least 10x as many potential customers compared to selling their addon through their own website. Probably much more than 10x the amount of potential customers

Well yeah but that only in case that people are really interested in Flight. I cant see any mainstream gamers really getting into it, and most of flight sim community surely will not if it wont support freeware third party addons.

Edited January 4, 201214 yr by pvjinflight

I think everyone is being too negative about this. If the team at Microsoft has any sense, they'll figure out how to include 3rd parties in their content store (by reducing the percentage they take on more expensive add-ons, perhaps). It makes perfect sense to offer the product for free and make areas available as add-ons. The days of buying software at Best Buy are pretty much over. Who knows how much longer Best Buy will even survive? There aren't any more physical software stores left. For example, Apple has removed the software from the shelves of their retail stores. The PC market is all about downloads going forward. Given that fact, few would be willing to download the scenery for the entire earth, which would be tens of gigabytes at least. And people don't necessarily want to fly all over the earth anyway. Maybe if you're into heavy metal you would, but if you're doing VFR you might like to just fly in interesting scenic areas, and content packs make sense. You just saved $50 on the purchase price of the sim, so you might as well spend some of that getting interesting places to fly.Think about FSX from a business perspective. Microsoft invested a lot of money developing the software, which sold well at first (at full price) then gradually tailed off until they were no longer making any revenue from it. Meanwhile they have a large user base of devoted fans who want that software to be supported. But they can't justify spending money to support the software. A lot of hobbyists are still flying v9! It's one Windows update away from ceasing to function. On top of that, there's a thriving community devoted to selling add ons at prices well in excess of the game itself. If Microsoft could siphon some revenue out of that market, then Flight could be maintained indefinitely.This could be a really good thing. It's much less disruptive if Microsoft upgrades Flight incrementally. It will always work on the latest hardware and operating system, and developers will have an easier time updating their content than they would if years pass and we get an incremented version with tons of changes.And it's more accessible. It increases the size of the add-ons market, because it's currently pretty complicated. A lot of the user base probably wasn't aware that they could add content, and that high quality payware was available. There isn't just one market for it. There isn't really a mechanism for demoing some of these add-ons, so there's now way to tell if your computer can handle them. The add ons are extremely easy to pirate, and there is no standard DRM for developers to use. There are many different methods of installing the content. Uninstalling the content can be a pain. Add ons run over each other occasionally. Microsoft standardizing and supporting all of this is a good thing for end-users, and it's probably a good thing for developers, even if they have to give up a percentage of their revenue.In the short term X-Plane will benefit from the dissatisfaction with Flight, but in the long term Austin and his team need to be thinking along these same lines, especially as DVD distribution probably won't be an option for X-Plane 11 (since a lot of computers won't have DVD drives by then). They're riding high on their success with iOS right now, but that's an app store model. Capturing some revenue from the add-ons market would help keep the developers fed and housed. All of these flight sim products are extremely complex and expensive to develop, and if we want the hobby to continue we have to recognize the fact that the money has to come from somewhere to support these platforms.

I said it earlier and am not sure that it might of slipped by un-noticed...Freeware won't exist in FLIGHT as far as I can tell.

Do you rather mean that this will not be supported (as in: no SDK), or that this will actively be inhibited (as in: DRM, scanning files for "cheats" i.e. any modifications) ?(There will be a legal side, and a technical side to this. Only the legal side may cause headache... as for technical problems, someone usually comes up with a technical solution)My rather spontaneous 2 cents on the big picture: The success or FAIL of Flight, for this community, entirely depends on the nature of third-party involvement. In theory, if done right, this thing could be great for everyone. Too prohibitive terms for the devs can wreck it.Oh, the irony: most people here agree that Microsofts default planes aren't really great, and should be left to rot while add-ons are flown, and that their default scenery traditionally needs to be replaced as soon as something better becomes available. And now, MS actually do a sim without the planes and without the scenery - it is almost funny! - and they may manage to get it all wrong.Another thought: ...and what if MS does everything alone? Now, suddenly, there is money to be made - actually, it MUST be made to recover the development cost of the game - with Things To Add To Flight. We may all be in for a surprise as how good a motivation that is to get it right: it simply HAS to sell.And why would they be hiring somebody for..."improving and adding features to the C++ software components that simulate aircraft and systems such as avionics, engine, aerodynamics model, auto pilot and other feedback control systems." (http://forum.avsim.net/topic/356743-new-flight-job-postings/)if all they had in mind was arcade stuff? The existing physics modeling would be vastly more than adequate.... this is all confusing!

As human behaviour demonstrates I think FSX will be the comfort zone for the simming community. We all want to keep what we know and experience from FSX (and i support fs2004 :-P) so what I believe will happen by nature is that we will be drawn back to the product that provides us with the most reward and hopefully (speculating a little here) 3rd party developers will see this as an opportunity and for all of us, a win win situation. Bugger it though I was really interested to see the world but just Hawaii, we can see that MS is devoted to it's long time devoted fans eh? .........yeah right!!!

It doesn't particularly matter if Flight doesn't actively prohibit freeware - as long as there is no SDK it would be incredibly difficult (even impossible) to make add-ons.How do you compile the model? What animation tags do you use? etc etc.The list is endless. It's light years beyond my (and many others) talents to reverse engineer things like that. For this kind of thing you need to talk to people like N4gix - the godfather of FS development. I'm willing to bet he'll share my opinion.

Edited January 4, 201214 yr by HowardHughes

I am well aware of what they are allowed to do. This does not negate the fact that more people may purchase licenses for it now that this news has come out.

But that is exactly what they are not allowed to do, selling to the general public. M$ may react in court if they feel threatened by LM.

Do you rather mean that this will not be supported (as in: no SDK), or that this will actively be inhibited (as in: DRM, scanning files for "cheats" i.e. any modifications) ?(There will be a legal side, and a technical side to this. Only the legal side may cause headache... as for technical problems, someone usually comes up with a technical solution)

I can't say for sure, it seems that we are getting mixed reports. I see some blogs say absolutely no SDK, but then I see other people say 3rd party are backing out because MS wants too high of a percentage... So I assume there will be an SDK just not one that you can get for any cheap amount without signing your soul over to Mr Gates.My guess is that they will back off on this eventually, I just wonder how long it will take them. I just don't see casual gamers buying this in droves enough to alienate their loyal fan base, I get leaving your followers in the dust for more money but I just don't see any newcomers jumping at the bit because their are rings in the sky and an avatar. So it doesn't make much sense...The question becomes what happens if this title fails? Does MS break the studio up again leaving it with MS Hawaii, or do they reverse their strategy and back off on their games for windows tax and bring back the only community that will keep flight anything alive (besides HAWKS). Only time will tell... Maybe we all are wrong and this will be the best thing since sliced bread.

It's light years beyond my (and many others) talents to reverse engineer things like that.

That's also illegal.

Oh, the irony: most people here agree that Microsofts default planes aren't really great, and should be left to rot while add-ons are flown, and that their default scenery traditionally needs to be replaced as soon as something better becomes available. And now, MS actually do a sim without the planes and without the scenery - it is almost funny! - and they may manage to get it all wrong.

The reason the previous FS models (with default planes and scenery) worked for me was I was able to fly from anywhere in the world with a range of planes whilst I waited for better planes and scenery (PMDG, Orbx, etc) to be developed.With MS Flight all we get to do for months (years?) is fly round one island in Hawaii in a couple of planes which won't really hold my attention. Maybe Flight will be great in a couple of years time when the add-ons are available and we're able to draw on our savings (with interest) to buy them all.

That's also illegal.

Distribution is potentially illegal. We don't know that yet.

But that is exactly what they are not allowed to do, selling to the general public. M$ may react in court if they feel threatened by LM.

Need to research more before posting. They have no restrictions on who they sell a license to. I am talking about the sale of a license. They cannot sell it at say Best Buy or Amazon.