Perspective

[Guest jahman]

I still believe that Flight is a simulator, and that it is being developed for both gamers and for hard-core flight simmers.

Flight's growth as a simulator is dependent on how successful its DLC sales are. And no one knows how that will turn out.

These two statements of course contradict each other: Either MS is developing a serious sim, or it isn't. (And the bit about MS adopting a "wait and see" attitude is part of "it isn't".)

the members here who are ranting against Flight, are damaging their only real chance of getting a simulator that could eventually replace FSX

I am merely highlighting serious simmer aspects of MS Dec, 8th 2010 press release that up to now have not been complied with.Note that:

1. I do hope MS will eventually deliver the serious simmer aspects of Flight we all want (hopefully sooner than later), and
2. I do wish MS will close the PR gap it created with the Dec. 8, 2010 serious simmer promises with an explanatory press release.

What is gained by tearing down Flight, because of what you THINK it won't ever have or won't ever be?

The mistake you are making is believing that criticism is being levelled at Flight for what it will be. Rest assured the criticism is for what Flight is today. And in the absence of an explanatory press release, that's all we can do.In the absence of any other information from MS beyond said press release and the functionality of the Flight beta as widely reported (read: arcade game), any hopes for added functionality are pure, unadulterated speculation.Finally do note that the uncertainty created by MS alone by lack of hard, reliable information hurts add-on developers the hardest for they are not able to plan (and fund) the development of the aircraft and sceneries we all like for Flight. And the lack of an SDK of course helps drive that nail all the way in.Cheers,- jahman. Edited January 16, 2012 by jahman

[Marith 2]

Thanks Tom for your posting.Here is my perspective for what it's worth.Currently I think we are very lucky in that we already have Flight Simulators from Microsoft called FS9 & FSX which have a huge range of add-ons for all areas (aircraft, scenery, utilities, weather, etc.). Sure, we would like the code fixed, improved or overhauled but right now we can go and simulate flight in almost any aircraft we want from any location we choose in any weather condition we desire. We also have XP10 and P3D so we have a great choice available to us right now.In addition we will soon have a product being released by Microsoft called Flight which could be a game, a flight simulator, or both. Nobody really knows, and to some degree that includes Microsoft, how Flight will turn out. I'm sure Microsoft have plans and hopes for Flight but I personally think that it is an experiment for them, because it deviates from past directions, and is therefore subject to change.I think we should continue to enjoy FSX (or FS9, XP10 or whatever you fly) now and treat MS Flight as a new wine to be tasted. It could mature over the coming years and be the best wine ever or it could turn out to be a flop. If it isn't the wine both we and Microsoft want, maybe Microsoft will try again - Flight 2? Maybe Microsoft already have a backup plan - who knows?But no matter how Flight turns out we can enjoy Flight Simulation now, like we have been for many years, whilst we wait and see what the future brings us :(.~ Martin

Edited January 16, 2012 by Marith

[VOR_Active 4]

The FLIGHT Team leadership did not state that they would develop beyond FSX, nor did they say they would not. We asked that question directly, for all the obvious reasons. You draw your own conclusions.

Hello Tom,call me stupid but I cannot draw any conclusions from the above. Still in the soup. I don't understand why this secrecy from the FLIGHT Team. I stated this question in another post too

[Guest]

Wise words, Tom.I myself am only VERY HAPPY with MS and MS Flight and I don't understand why a lot of people show so much hatred towards them. First of all: MS gave us FS. All those years of happy simming would not have been possible without MS. Secondly, MS didn't HAVE to create MS Flight. But they did. So why be angry about it? Be glad that flying on the PC still is alive.Things can ONLY get better... and because of that I don't understand all the anger. if things could get worse, then I'd understand it if people weren't happy. But not now.

[torium 207]

Unlike the naysayers here, I still believe that Flight is a simulator, and that it is being developed for both gamers and for hard-core flight simmers.What we will have on release day is going to be a half full glass, because the Free version is just the core.Suppose for a moment that Flight was designed (at its core) to replace FSX (as some of us still believe). Perhaps the reason for not answering the question, was that Flight's growth as a simulator is dependent on how successful its DLC sales are. And no one knows how that will turn out.If I am correct, the success of Flight might just be our last foreseeable chance of progressing beyond FSX (at least from Microsoft). And the members here who are ranting against Flight, are damaging their only real chance of getting a simulator that could eventually replace FSX. Too many here are not willing to look beyond the arcade aspects of Flight (which are not all that different from the arcade aspects of FSX), and see the potential of what Flight can become.What is gained by tearing down Flight, because of what you THINK it won't ever have or won't ever be? Nothing at all, other than perhaps convincing others to never give it a chance (which could even contribute to Flight's failure).What is gained by supporting Flight? Perhaps helping to ensure the success of a new simulator platform that is fully capable of eventually surpassing FSX.Based on my instincts, I believe that Flight is going to surprise a LOT of people on this forum.

Excellent analytical skills.

[torium 207]

By the way, has anyone seen or heard anyone claim that it will run on more than one monitor besides, and with detachable components ???

Quote: - "Long-time flyers will only be missing the option to use multiple monitors, at least when the game releases. According to Microsoft, that is likely to change in the future. Like Microsoft Flight Simulator, MS Flight will work with all 3rd party flight controllers." (kotaku.com). Edited January 16, 2012 by torium

[torium 207]

But given its freemium business model, and the fact that it caters neither to hard core simmers nor entirely to arcade casual gamers, I doubt FLIGHT will ever be able to reach critical mass and really takeoff.

But given its freemium business model, and the fact that it caters both hard core simmers and arcade casual gamers, FLIGHT will be able to reach the mass and really takeoff. :(

[torium 207]

These two statements of course contradict each other: Either MS is developing a serious sim, or it isn't.

Wrong.

I'm sure Microsoft have plans and hopes for Flight but I personally think that it is an experiment for them, because it deviates from past directions, and is therefore subject to change.

Right."Overall, the game is a lot more experimental than past Flight Simulator games sold at retail. But offering the game as a free-to-play title opens up new options for experimentation and innovation, Howard said. “This is the right way to deliver an experience that reaches a broader number of people,” he said. “It’s a new muscle we are exercising.”" (venturebeat.com).

[torium 207]

FLIGHT is a product failure that neither caters to the hard core simmers

Quote:The MS FLIGHT Sim - My ThoughtsPosted by Tom Allensworth:- "Just prior to Christmas a small group of people representing various organizations in the flight sim community were invited by Microsoft to attend a meeting in Redmond, Washington. The purpose of this meeting was to preview Microsoft's most recent and soon to be released entre' into the "Flight Game" world; MS FLIGHT. We were given an entire day to view, operate, and ask questions of the leadership of the FLIGHT team, including Joshua Howard, the studio lead for this program."Do you really believe that Microsoft invited "the flight sim community" for presenting an arcade game?

The "masses" that MS is trying so desperately to appeal to have short attention spans and probably would get bored of FLIGHT after the second DLC.

Maybe.Quote Tom Allensworth: - "The lack of profitability with FSX lead to the enevitable;......"Do you think Microsoft want more "lack of profitability". Do you prefer "No more Flight(simulator) from Microsoft"?If you don't like Flight, use the alternatives!

[simmerhead 885]

I've been an avid FS enthusiast since 1998 and every version delivered had major dissappointments in the area of lagging behind the existing technology of the times.

I've been an FS flyer since FS 5 and have never been dissapointed. For me each new version has been a great leap forward. FLIGHT is the first version of the series that has triggered my negative mode.

[Arwen 289]

These two statements of course contradict each other: Either MS is developing a serious sim, or it isn't. (And the bit about MS adopting a "wait and see" attitude is part of "it isn't".)

No they do not.Just because Flight is being marketed differently (free core + bought DLC) than FSX (boxed DVDs), does not make it any less of a simulator. Despite what many here seem to think, Flight is still unfinished . . . it is still in Beta. I contend that there are still parts of Flight that are still under development (as in still being tested). It is not uncommon for a developer to not discuss things until they know that they will be in the released product.

The mistake you are making is believing that criticism is being levelled at Flight for what it will be. Rest assured the criticism is for what Flight is today. And in the absence of an explanatory press release, that's all we can do.

I'm not making THAT mistake at all. In my replies, I have been the MOST critical of others here who are using claiming that Flight will NEVER succeed, and that the Free core + DLC will FAIL. I've leveled most of my criticism at the naysayers who are not only predicting that Flight will fail, but seem to be hoping that it will.

. . .any hopes for added functionality are pure, unadulterated speculation.

Not all hopes. Some of the "added functionality" that will be in Flight is based on a lot more than just hope. Edited January 16, 2012 by Arwen

[simmerhead 885]

A beta is usually an almost finnished verion of the product. Not much development is done after a beta release, other than correcting minor errors and tweaking interfaces and performance. What we don't know is if the public beta is the entire product or just a demo. After all, one would expect MS to have completed more than two aircraft and a single island at this stage (The Hawaii Island scenery doesn't even include the southern airports/airstips).I for one have noe idea if FLIGHT will fail. I can't understand that people waste time on games like Skyrim or Angry Birds, so how would I understand the appeal of FLIGHT. What bothers me and many other FS fans isn't what FLIGHT is, but what it isn't. What made earlier versions of FS great, in my personal opinion, is that it appealed to many different kinds of users. Arguably some of the young gamers weren't taken good care of, but an FS v11 could have been made more accesible without ruining the franchise that 30 million past buyers have come to know and love. Ironically MS' strategy seems to be narrowing down the audience, not expanding it.

[Arwen 289]

I've participated in betas, and this is just not true for all products. I was a beta tester for FLY! and there were plenty of features that were being added while I was testing that sim. Some made it into the final product, some did not.Plus Flight's beta testing has got to be a bit different, due to the DLC aspect. Because any DLC will also have to be beta tested.

[mgh 89]

Let's not forget that Microsoft doesn't have to develop any sort of flight simulator, and certainly not one targeted at the enthusiasts who frequent these forums. Microsoft invested its own money in Flight and is entitled to deliver what it thinks will give it the best return. The success, or otherwise, of Flight will be judged by that criterion - not whether enthusiasts approve of it or not.Also, Microsoft owes us nothing - any more than we owe Microsoft. We entered into a straight-forward transaction when we bought and received copies of FS and that's the end of it.Let's wait to see what Microsoft actually delivers and stop whining. If we like Flight we can buy it. If not we can stay with whaterever FS we've got, or buy a different one. Either way we're no worse off.

Edited January 16, 2012 by mgh

[pstrub 998]

A beta is usually an almost finnished verion of the product. Not much development is done after a beta release, other than correcting minor errors and tweaking interfaces and performance. What we don't know is if the public beta is the entire product or just a demo.

We know it can't be the entire product, because this is gonna be published as a free version. As MS has to make money by selling hopefully attractive content, it should be clear that there must be more to it in the store. Edited January 16, 2012 by pstrub