New Reality

[VegaSS 2]

The new reality is that we should all start supporting Laminar Research and X-Plane because they still care about the hardcore enthusiast market.

+1 I'm on board now, MM. It's a damn shame, I thought so highly of MS, and they just killed all of us. This is the era of LR and X-Plane.

[VOR_Active 4]

I didn't post here to create another boring FSX v XP10 arena. It seems that you missed the point here. I asked in my first post from where Flight was given the name 'arcade game' although in the announcement stated clearly about enhanced flight physics, better weather engine, and instead there is another XP10-is-better-over-FSX! Some they went even further! They named XP10 as the simulation of the future! Personaly I don't consider XP10 as a simulation but this is my personal opinion and I am not going to discuss it on this thread. The questions that have been mentioned in the first post still remain unanswered

[VegaSS 2]

FSX with addons still looks better than XP10 anyway!

I agree that FSX still has more legs than XPX, but that will quickly change now that all of the 3rd party developers are turning to XPX. Besides, there are things about XPX that MS can't touch.

[mmann 72]

Why cant you use P3D 'legally'?

I can't answer your question, AVSIM forbids it: http://forum.avsim.n...ct-please-read/

[GHarrall 494]

I agree that FSX still has more legs than XPX, but that will quickly change now that all of the 3rd party developers are turning to XPX. Besides, there are things about XPX that MS can't touch.

Like what? The 'plausible world' or the imaginary 'blade' flight dynamics that are supposedly better than MSFS?Which 3rd party devs are 'running' to XP? Aerosoft and..........erm....................?

I can't answer your question, AVSIM forbids it: http://forum.avsim.n...ct-please-read/

You dont have to. I already answered it for you anyway.Orbx is now selling side by side licences for its FTX products. If that isnt an indicator for you, I dont know what is. Edited January 5, 2012 by Glenn Harrall

[mmann 72]

Orbx is now selling side by side licences for its FTX products. If that isnt an indicator for you, I dont know what is.

A reworded End User License Agreement (EULA) would be a great indicator.

[VPA481 27]

The reality is that FS community will turn into NEW members, arcade oriented, real target of MS.

[dazz 69]

I agree that FSX still has more legs than XPX, but that will quickly change now that all of the 3rd party developers are turning to XPX. Besides, there are things about XPX that MS can't touch.

No A2A, no PMDG, no ORBX.... hardly all of them man. Not that I would mind them all switching to XPX, just saying

[OzWhitey 3,353]

From reading the forums, Xplane seems to have about 3 (rather passionate) fans, and a lot of disappointed potential customers. I'll buy it once aerosoft pimp it, but can't see it being my primary sim. I think its overstating things to say devs are jumping ship to it.Re: using p3d, read some of the previous threads, devs (j nichol) are very happy for you to use it. More customer base=more support for them. Not that interesting to me this month, as improvements over fsx are subtle,,but very interested in making this my primary sim if v2 is good.

[Guest Id Rather Be Flying]

I didn't post here to create another boring FSX v XP10 arena. It seems that you missed the point here. I asked in my first post from where Flight was given the name 'arcade game' although in the announcement stated clearly about enhanced flight physics, better weather engine, and instead there is another XP10-is-better-over-FSX! Some they went even further! They named XP10 as the simulation of the future! Personaly I don't consider XP10 as a simulation but this is my personal opinion and I am not going to discuss it on this thread. The questions that have been mentioned in the first post still remain unanswered

I'm with you Panos and I am willing to give it a chance myself up to the point if it will have ATC or not as well as the price point and quality of regions/planes. It's easy enough to disregard the missions as I'm sure everyone here has done in FSX. It's also NICE to have a change if I want to make Flight a game as well every once in a while or for a visitor to turn them onto it to get into the simulation aspect which I see is mostly still intact. I've seen PLENTY more screens/videos showing improved rendering/lighting/atmospherics/scenery blending than I did of coin catching so far other than the people not willing to even look at it past the screens of gold coins. At least the main part of what brings us all here to gather opinions is still in tact and that is passion which I intend to use to make sure I'm not missing out on something either in Flight. Edited January 5, 2012 by Id Rather Be Flying

[VegaSS 2]

No A2A, no PMDG, no ORBX.... hardly all of them man. Not that I would mind them all switching to XPX, just saying

OK, maybe not ALL, that wasn't my point. My point is that with the addition of flight coming into the market, and clearly NOT welcoming 3rd party development, it will eventually happen. How else do you expect these companies to keep there heads above water, and what do they gain by not making XP products? Sure, I know that they will continue develpment with FSX, and I hope that they do, as FSX is still my primary sim, but, IMO they will start to do as much for XP. Aerosoft was HUGE start, not to mention Carenado. Im sure in time PMDG, A2A, and maybe even ORBX will too. You don't have to get XPX, stick with FSX, but when your ready for something different, as I was, XPX will fill that void.

[Dogstar23 0]

Nowhere have I read anything that said MSF is not going to release a tool kit for developers or a complex simulator to take FS to the next level. All they have said is that in the Spring they will launch a limited version of the program for free. I would wait for further information before coming to gloom and doom conclusions. It may be that they are intentionally not releasing information on the more complex parts of MSF so as not to obscure the marketing to new FS users in the upcoming release (not saying this is right or wrong way to do it). There was one article I read a few days ago interviewing a MSF developer who was talking about his focus on developing complex sounds in the cockpit for MSF and how important MSF believes envionmental ques such as sight and sound are to flying such as the difference between the cockpit sound of a gradual decent v. an out of control spin or a feather landing v. a hard landing. This is not something MSF would be working on if MSF was only going to be a light harted game for people who don't know anything about flying. But yes, you may have to pay extra $8 for the complex sounds DLC pack.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Dogstar23

[GHarrall 494]

There IS NO SDK.......hence no addons!http://forum.avsim.net/topic/358739-since-the-cat-is-out-of-the-bag/post number 1

Edited January 6, 2012 by Glenn Harrall

[torium 207]

Don't you think with MS Flight is the same as FSX in the past? people writing that Flight is an arcade game. Where have you seen this? on the contrary the MS announcement is saying: Representation of the regions, specific weather patters, foliage and terrain and flight physics. I let that last because flight physics and arcade doen't suit together.

I think you may be right.Some statements:1:) "There are no airlines at the moment, because considering the current geography, there is no need for them. Some people may be disappointed, but it is definitely something on the teams list for the future. There is support for multi-engine aircraft; the team says that there is nothing they cannot make."(regions, specific weather patters, foliage and terrain and flight physics....).2:) "Those looking to deepen their experience can purchase and download additional content that adds new aircraft, regions and customization options."(As we doing today).3:) "The Live marketplace allows for constant content flow and users that opt-in to share data, allow the team to react to user behaviors to improve the game and add more of what users want. It also allows for quicker response to user requests, fixes and general improvements. On top of that, integration with the Microsoft Flight® website offers a more direct link between team and users."(In oposite to the current FSX "engine", the Flight "engine" will continuously(?) be updated (fixes)).

Another horrible thing about MS pilotwings is that once this project proves to be a failure MS will pull the plug and then NOTHING will be able to be developed for it since there is no SDK

Never be?4:) "Microsoft Game Studios is looking for a Software Development Engineer in Test (SDET) to join us in building Microsoft Flight (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/) – an all new entertainment product utilizing Microsoft’s Games for Windows Live infrastructure. We are looking for an experienced candidate to work on our SDK (Software Development Kit).."Why?Because the door will be open for developers:PMDG states: "And it is also worth noting that that we haven't closed the door on developing for FLIGHT. I have been given the distinct impression that MS is not interested in having external partners- and it has been my experience that this lack of interest on their part is because they couldn't convince all of us in the development community to "shut up and get in line." But that isn't to say that if/when they decide to bring the platform to the point where they want external support we won't consider the platform. It just depends..."Exactly.......Yes, VOR_Active: - "Lets be positive and give Flight a chance as we gave to FSX."

[xplanery 250]

I think you may be right.Some statements:1:) "There are no airlines at the moment, because considering the current geography, there is no need for them. Some people may be disappointed, but it is definitely something on the teams list for the future. There is support for multi-engine aircraft; the team says that there is nothing they cannot make."(regions, specific weather patters, foliage and terrain and flight physics....).2:) "Those looking to deepen their experience can purchase and download additional content that adds new aircraft, regions and customization options."(As we doing today).3:) "The Live marketplace allows for constant content flow and users that opt-in to share data, allow the team to react to user behaviors to improve the game and add more of what users want. It also allows for quicker response to user requests, fixes and general improvements. On top of that, integration with the Microsoft Flight® website offers a more direct link between team and users."(In oposite to the current FSX "engine", the Flight "engine" will continuously(?) be updated (fixes)).Never be?4:) "Microsoft Game Studios is looking for a Software Development Engineer in Test (SDET) to join us in building Microsoft Flight (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/) – an all new entertainment product utilizing Microsoft’s Games for Windows Live infrastructure. We are looking for an experienced candidate to work on our SDK (Software Development Kit).."Why?Because the door will be open for developers:PMDG states: "And it is also worth noting that that we haven't closed the door on developing for FLIGHT. I have been given the distinct impression that MS is not interested in having external partners- and it has been my experience that this lack of interest on their part is because they couldn't convince all of us in the development community to "shut up and get in line." But that isn't to say that if/when they decide to bring the platform to the point where they want external support we won't consider the platform. It just depends..."Exactly.......Yes, VOR_Active: - "Lets be positive and give Flight a chance as we gave to FSX."

SDK will be available only for those payware devs who want to share part of their income with Microsoft, and most will not want to do so. Also that means that there will be no third party freeware at all which makes Flight suck even more. There will be no whole Earth, ever, just small regions. No ATC either.