Flight will be good

[dighost 25]

Wow, I am all for optimism, but its like the "Stockholm Syndrome" for some people. Flight is a game. It is a game not intended for the Flight Simulator crowd. They are giving the game away for free. They will not release an SDK so that third parties can develop addons for a free game. It's in Beta and has been played by many people here and on the internet. They have said it is an arcade experience. There are limited to no advanced realism settings. Why would you think that MS is going to have a change of heart?? They were heartless enough to can all the ACES people without warning and some think they are going to change their minds and try to appease us? Seriously.

Edited January 21, 2012 by dighost

[RYR738 9]

I have no doubt Flight will be great, especially for new sim pilots. And after a dozen or two add-ons at $40 to $50 each, it may actually approach FSX out-of-the-box functionality.After reading about Flight's piece-meal Microsoft Live sales approach, I decided to buy the increasingly reliable and functional X-Plane 10. For the ONE-TIME price of $79 I got the full functionality of FSX (i.e. world-wide scenery, thousands of airports, mutliple default planes, full support of third party developers) with the added capabilities of state-of-the-art graphics (the lighting is fantastic) and the ability to fully utilize multi-core CPUs. And I can buy additional planes, scenery, etc direct from the rapidly growing list of X-plane developers without paying Microsoft's huge markup that I'm sure they'll add to everything sold through their Flight store.

If Manhattan X scenery for FS9 sells for $30 today, do you think Flight will sell the state of New York scenery for less than $40??? If PMDG sells their 737 NGX for $70, do you see Microsoft selling their commercial jets for less than that? What do you think Microsoft will charge for the ATC add-on?I have no doubt that Microsoft executives have looked at what add-ons are selling for today for FS9/FSX and adding MANY dollars to that for the "superior" Flight versions. Why do you think they're giving away Flight for FREE????? I've bought many expensive things that were "FREE" up front. But there was always somebody behind the scenes that had already figured out how to get my money at the next stage of the product.

All the trivial things are what add up to the whole.I've been a Microsoft Flight Sim fan from the Sub Logic days (OK, I'm way over 30) through FSX. I've spent a lot of time evaluating the next simulator I would get, and with all the evidence available I determined it was time to make the switch to X-Plane 10. Now I'm a little selfish hoping lots of other people make the same switch to accelerate the growing trend of add-on creators that are starting to make items for X-Plane.

What evidence ??You are in the wrong forum Larry !The Xplane one is further down...................Fred. Edited January 21, 2012 by RYR738

[xplanery 250]

Flight might be at the point where it will replace FSX, which will then essentially make it FSXI . . . but it will not fully be FSXI when it is initially released.

Thats only if we assume that Flight dev team is planning to release whole world as DLC packs, which I highly doubt. No simulator with limited area will ever replace FSX. Thing which makes FSX amazing is freedom to fly anywhere you want.

[trevorbee 0]

I am sincerely grateful that my post that ‘Flight will be good” has generated a lot of responses. I think that all of the responses have made valid points which are worthy of careful consideration and, given the meagre information provided by Microsoft about their forthcoming product, it is not easy to see the wood from the trees.But then I say to myself, how many times have I read in these forums that Microsoft needs to re-build MSFS from scratch, a new engine etc, etc. And that FSX needs to be cleaned-up and optimised and all of the bloat and legacy code needs to be removed etc, etc. Is not Flight a new start from scratch?And then there is the subject of Simulation versus Game. And I ask myself ‘how many times have you dropped off to sleep while flying a jetliner from A to B? And did it matter anyway because when you woke up the aircraft was still droning along nicely under control of the autopilot. Maybe a mission, selected from the Flight menu, may have kept me awake.But yes, we want immersion, and to feel that we are flying a real aircraft over real terrain, and to land at a real airport when we get there. From the Flight ‘teasers’ provided by Microsoft so far it looks to me the they have made considerable improvements to the immersion factor (within a limited geographical area) and may have reduced the boredom factor of flying from A to B (hopefully, without having to fly through hoops on the way).I remain optimistic that the concept of purchased DLC will provide the incentive to provide us with whatever we require to satisfy our own individual needs.

[Mountain Man 142]

I am not so certain that Flight will accomplish that. Most users-- the ones MS is targeting, are the casual players. Most of them will just have a passing interest in aviation, so what is the incentive to buy and download a Citabria or Cub for example when they have a Stearman? People who are not aviation fanatics could care less between the difference of an Airbus or Boeing. They categorize airplanes as "Jets" or "old propeller planes". Plus casual players are very finicky and move from game to game quickly. Look at what happened to so many of the Facebook games. People were tired of the microtransactions, as well as social aspects of the game, so titles that were super successful like Farmville have taken a membership hit. DLC can be successful, but only for the most compelling of games-- games like Fallout, Skyrim, Call of Duty or Battlefield 3-- not an arcade flight game.

A perfect case study is Age of Empires Online which is published by Microsoft and features the same "dumbed down gameplay in order to appeal to casuals" design sensibilities. Of course Microsoft insists that it still holds plenty of appeal for hardcore strategy fans, but it's notable that few if any hardcore strategy fans have adopted it as their game of choice.

[mgh 89]

it's notable that few if any hardcore strategy fans have adopted it as their game of choice.

As long as enought non-"hardcore strategy fans" buy it why should Microsoft care?

[Mountain Man 142]

If Manhattan X scenery for FS9 sells for $30 today, do you think Flight will sell the state of New York scenery for less than $40??? If PMDG sells their 737 NGX for $70, do you see Microsoft selling their commercial jets for less than that? What do you think Microsoft will charge for the ATC add-on?

Good call. You can be sure that Microsoft has been paying very close attention to the 3rd party market and is well aware of what prices consumers are willing to pay. If, for example, they notice that Aerosoft is making a profit selling the city of Anchorage for $30 then it's a given that Microsoft will be charging the same price for a similar sized area. There's also the fact that Microsoft has said that they will not be developing global scenery for Flight and will instead be focusing on a handful of smaller regions meaning that customers are facing the very real prospect of paying more for less.Let's just put it this way: Microsoft is not developing Flight with the goal of making less money than they did with FSX. Edited January 21, 2012 by Mountain Man

[Mountain Man 142]

And you both KNOW that MS will NEVER release a Flight SDK?

"There will be no software development kit and hence no user created content."

Read more:

http://flyawaysimulation.com/news/4317/microsoft-flight-behind-scenes-at-microsoft-studios/#ixzz1k6Zh2EHf

As for me, I'm going to enjoy Flight and I'm looking forward to a long relationship with it. I've seen the future and it isn't FSX or X-Plane.

No offense, but you're really starting to sound like a Microsoft shill.

[Mountain Man 142]

But then I say to myself, how many times have I read in these forums that Microsoft needs to re-build MSFS from scratch, a new engine etc, etc. And that FSX needs to be cleaned-up and optimised and all of the bloat and legacy code needs to be removed etc, etc. Is not Flight a new start from scratch?

No. It's a slightly upgraded version of the FSX engine.

[Arwen 289]

No offense, but you're really starting to sound like a Microsoft shill.

The last time I checked FSX was a Microsoft product.

[Mountain Man 142]

shill n.: a decoy who acts as an enthusiastic customer in order to stimulate the participation of others

[Arwen 289]

I know the definition.Are you accusing my of lying of being dishonest?

[Mountain Man 142]

I know the definition.

Your comment implied that you didn't.

Are you accusing my of lying of being dishonest?

Nope. Your comments may very well reflect your genuine opinion, but you still sound like a shill.

[Geofa 108]

Argumentum ad hominem:The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked. Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be attacked by association, or by the company one keeps.ENOUGH!!!!

[JasonD210 0]

As for me, I'm going to enjoy Flight and I'm looking forward to a long relationship with it. I've seen the future and it isn't FSX or X-Plane

Its an interestting statement. I think that's what a lot of people are looking for - an emotional relationship with the product, rather than using the best that is avialable at the present. As to seeing the future, what utter nonsense. I don't think even Microsoft know as much as you claim to. I am not at all sure whether Flight will be a success, even for its target group, becasue of the business model Microsoft are going for, whcih essentially means they will own and control all add-on and social content.FSX is just reaching its peak now because high end systems are finally catching up with it, and for that reason it will occupy that place for another two years at least. Many developers have made statements saying that the will reamin committed to that product for a few more years. The fact that Prepar3d exists is very good news because it means there are now two markets for FSX developers - since the two products are still compatible.Regarding X-plane, it came out in 1993, and since then, it has gradually improved while other simulators have come and gone. The current version may not be as good as FSX but it is still an excellent simulator second only to FSX. This trend of continuous improvement looks set to continue at an even faster rate now because it is open ended and developers don't face any ridiculous restrictions like they do with Flight. More and more developers are taking a big interest in it, more and more quality add-ons are being produced. X-Plane sales are increasing each year. Within two years I shan't be surprised if we hear an X-plane 11 announced.