Flight will be good

[ahuimanu 50]

But I can assure you that Flight is much more than just a "flying game."

based on what evidence?

[Arwen 289]

Why all the hostility?Have I ever said that I'm a beta tester for Flight? I'm not stating anything that has not been publicly released by Microsoft. All you have to do is open you eyes and stop being so closed-minded about what Flight must be.From the Flight's website FAQ: http://www.microsoft...mes/flight/#faq

Q: How does "Microsoft Flight" differ from "Flight Simulator?" Why the new name? What's changed?A: With "Microsoft Flight" we're approaching the virtual flight genre from the ground up, with the focus on the universal appeal of the experience of Flight. We believe the simplicity of "Microsoft Flight" perfectly captures that vision while welcoming the millions of existing Flight Simulator fans. The new "Microsoft Flight" retains the full fidelity sinulation longtime fans have come to expect while offering all player a whole new look and feel, a wide range of new game play and challenges , persistent experiences and social connectivity.

From the Jan 4 MS Press Release on Flight:

In “Microsoft Flight,” players view the world from above in a visually stunning and realistic representation of the earth, complete with region-specific weather patterns, foliage, terrain and landmarks. Players can choose to take the helm using highly rendered, accurate cockpits and authentic piloting procedures, or simply use their mouse and keyboard to control the plane in an exterior view. More experienced players can tailor the flight controls to match their skill level, making “Microsoft Flight” easy for beginners while still challenging for the most accomplished PC pilots.

Watch the Promotional videos again. All most of you are seeing are the game aspects of Flight, while completely overlooking all the simulator aspects.

Edited January 22, 2012 by Arwen

[ahuimanu 50]

Why all the hostility?Watch the Promotional videos again. All most of you are seeing are the game aspects of Flight, while completely overlooking all the simulator aspects.

There is no evidence to back up any of the claims made in that PR material. I simply asked you where your evidence is for the assurances you give.I walked the rose-tinted path since 2010 and I will not repeat that mistake. All empirical evidence suggests that we have no successor flight simulator from Microsoft.

[Arwen 289]

What "evidence" do we have about the claims that any developer makes about their software?I take people (including the people on the MS Flight Team) at their word until I have a concrete reason not to. What the developer has publicly released so far about Flight is pretty strong evidence that Flight is not just an arcade game.I have no reason to not believe their claims.Why don't you ask those here who keep posting that Flight is ONLY an arcade game where their evidence is?

[phillipw 0]

Hi Phillipw, you probably already know this but...The FAA only certifies a complete software and hardware solution for logging hours....a cockpit of some kind.With either Xplane or MSFS (aka ESP) we'd need to purchase/rent a third party certified taining device......or build and certify our own I suppose ;)As well, we are talking about a few hours of basic IFR procedures...not stick and rudder learning.It has little to do with the advanced aerodynamic simulation.My local FBO has a simulator that uses vacuum tubes and 1970's vector graphics.It’s hardly authentic, but all the old clockwork IFR gauges still operate :(

I live in Portland Or. Although I'm lucky enough to have access to more that vacuum tubed based sims, I feel your pain. Shoot, the only thing I see vacuum tubes in anymore are electric guitar heads and old CB radios. I'm 59 (almost), I don't miss them. :( Edited January 22, 2012 by phillipw

[meshman 109]

Why all the hostility?

I'm not trying to be hostile, it's just part of the grumpy old man syndrome. All the postings and innuendo by people who may or may not be on the beta team is uncalled for, IMO.Recently at another place in the FSX world someone asked about becoming a beta tester for a coming product. He proudly proclaimed he was testing Flight. When asked why he wasn't adhereing to the NDA, he replied not to worry about it, that he flt he was in compliance. Do you think the developer for the product was inclined to add him to his beta team?For the posters here who want to dance around the NDA while offering their assurances I would ask that they post a query at the beta forums, if there is one, as has been confirmed there was for FSX. In their query to the Microsoft personnel they should link to this thread and ask a simple question, does any of the dialog break the terms and conditions of use?Offering comments such as;Trust me on this: there's more to Flight than what has been promoted (or leaked) so far.Perhaps I've seen more of Flight than you have.There are some specific things about Flight that I happen to know,...Mincing of words, in the hopes of staying within the confines of a NDA, does in fact go against the NDA, in my opinion. It also serves no benefit to the community to have these "I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you" type of comments. I'd argue that the comments serve as incindiary words that stokes the flames seen in way too many threads, both in this forum and others.Flight will stand or fail based upon it's merits. Until we all get the opportunity to properly evaluate it, absent any speculative detraction or speculative promotion, having less of the innuendo-laced rhetoric would be a good thing.I'm amused at the bantering that goes on throughout the FS world. People can say one thing at one point in time and then conflict with it at another. Something I found at a forum;"I cannot believe the number of testers who are breaking the NDA. The beta testing process should have been a LOT more selective."So I again suggest to those who may be beta testers and of course, cannot confirm such, please be quiet. It makes you looks foolish and you might get a nasty email from Microsoft some day. They do read these and other forums.

[Scottj85 0]

I'm trying to stay cautiously optimistic. MS Flight isn't exactly what I was expecting, but I'm certainly willing to give it a fair try.Besides, I still have FSX and X-Plane.

[Attila 2]

So I again suggest to those who may be beta testers and of course, cannot confirm such, please be quiet.

While I agree with everything else and I have been telling people this, amongst other things, I have read the Terms of Use and NDA.. It has 14 points on it and none of them have anything to do with revealing that one is a beta tester for Flight.I don't know who started this rumor, but it does not appear to be true.

[Scottj85 0]

I don't know who started this rumor, but it does not appear to be true.

Beta-testers tend to take a "better safe than sorry" approach to following NDAs.

[Christopher Low 5,359]

Anyone know how cold it gets in Hawaii?

Nowhere near as cold as it gets in this forum.

[Arwen 289]

I'm not trying to be hostile, it's just part of the grumpy old man syndrome. All the postings and innuendo by people who may or may not be on the beta team is uncalled for, IMO.

To me, the following was hostile,m and very rude:

For any person who may want to imply or suggest certain vague references to the testing of Flight might I suggest one thing? Shut the heck up and honor your agreement!

Mincing of words, in the hopes of staying within the confines of a NDA, does in fact go against the NDA, in my opinion. It also serves no benefit to the community to have these "I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you" type of comments. I'd argue that the comments serve as incindiary words that stokes the flames seen in way too many threads, both in this forum and others.

Yeah, I'm the one at fault, for trying to stand up for a simulator that I'm looking forward to. I'm the on "stoking the flames," and all the Flight an Microsoft hate posts in this forum are innocent.I've done NOTHING wrong and have NOT broken any NDA. So get of my case!My only crime is showing some enthusiasm for Flight (ONLY in the Flight forum), and standing up to all the negativity and false information about Flight.

This motto of AVSIM is: "Where Flight Simulation Enthusiasts Gather from Around the World!"

Yet many of you here see nothing wrong with attacking a new sim product (in its own forum), just because you are a fan of a different product.

Perhaps the motto should be changed to:

"Where Flight Simulation Enthusiasts Gather from Around the World, to Fight over which Simulator is the Best One!"

Well, you guys have succeeded in driving away this enthusiast, because I didn't come here to fight or to to be abused. I'm sick of all the negativity and hate here. I hope you're all happy.

You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

Edited January 23, 2012 by Arwen

[JohnFromCO 15]

The Flight forum is beginning to look like a prison rec yard and there is no reason for it. Avsim is suppose to be a community of people who enjoy a hobby. I have been on numerous beta teams and have seen the products change and some even do a 180 (with nice delays) after testing. Fact is besides the dev team at MS NO ONE knows what Flight actually is or will be. Everyone just needs to relax and be cordial to one another.

[n4gix 4,947]

While I agree with everything else and I have been telling people this, amongst other things, I have read the Terms of Use and NDA.. It has 14 points on it and none of them have anything to do with revealing that one is a beta tester for Flight.I don't know who started this rumor, but it does not appear to be true.

Actually, in the case of the FSX Beta NDA at least, that was a very specific point included. As you've written above though, there is no such restriction in the terms of the Flight NDA. I would posit that many people simply assumed that the same would be part of the Flight NDA.

[alainneedle1 97]

The Flight forum is beginning to look like a prison rec yard and there is no reason for it. Avsim is suppose to be a community of people who enjoy a hobby.I have been on numerous beta teams and have seen the products change and some even do a 180 (with nice delays) after testing. Fact is besides the dev team at MS NO ONE knows what Flight actually is or will be.Everyone just needs to relax and be cordial to one another.

I've heard that before..... :(

[nateanderson 1]

I've been following the Flight forum casually for several months, but have not made a comment. My FS days began back with the original FS1 although the first FS I purchased was FS2. Somewhere around FS98 I realized that for MS, the FS series was purely a showcase product, kind of like the Concorde was for British Airways and Air France. Flight sims were a niche of the software market that MS totally dominated with an excellent product that showed off their programming prowess. MS did not continue the series because they were making money on it. Besides prestige, I believe that people like Artwick, Allen and Gates had a love for aviation and wanted FS, so the marketing people had to back off. When Gates stepped down, however, ACES got axed. In the modern competitive world, every title and division has to make money.With FSX, for example, MS makes profit off the initial sale and then is left for years with the expensive and unhappy task of 1) providing support to angry customers, 2) serving weather and 3) reactivating FSX on every new computer the customer buys. I paid $69.99 for FSX the first day I could get it. Since that day over 5 years ago, MS has not gotten one cent from me. That works out to $14 per year. I wonder how many programmers can be hired for that?Flight is an MS effort to both have a flight sim and also make money. To do this they must do two things:1. Expand the customer base. Flight sims have a very small market. I would guess that for every 1000 copies a successful flight sim sells, a successful game will sell one million copies. Flying a plane is not easy, it requires a lot of knowledge for realism and flying at altitude with the AP is downright boring compared to Call of Duty and the like. Flight sims always get panned on gamer sites. So MS is remarketing it as a game. And it seems to be working as the gamers seem more positive than they were toward FSX. Of course free flight with appropriate add-ons will be available to retain the serious simmers.2. Collect revenue throughout the life of the title. MS has decided to go down the DLC route for this revenue. It is a proven model through which companies like Apple and Android are making a nice profit. The idea is that 3rd party developers can still sell products, but of course MS will get a share, let's say 30%. Possibly MS will contract some of the development of scenery, aircraft, ATC, etc to 3PDs. There simply is no way MS alone will provide all the content people want although it seems they want to try at the beginning. If they continue with that thought, then Flight will be a very short-lived title. I play COD, but if there was no multiplayer and additional maps, the game would not be used after about a week. What makes a title last is when many people can creatively use it to interact with each other.We are very early in the days of Flight. Flying around a field of wind generators in an Akon does not make a game or a simulator. Obviously Flight will be far more than we have seen in the leaked videos or from testers who have broken their NDA. Do we really think MS did not know that people would break their NDA? Have we forgotten that the default flight in FSX is an ultralight flying over an unknown airstrip called Friday Harbor? What we have seen so far is a game that is worth about $5. Yes Flight obviously has the potential to be a far superior sim to FSX. There are some quality programmers on this project. The official screenshots and videos have already shown that.One thing I said years ago is still true. The flight sim industry and enthusiasts need to make a well-designed open source project for the core flight sim and then develop it continuously. Then the 3PDs can sell add-ons as they do now. Because FSX and FS2004 have been so successful among simmers, few have wanted to go that route, but it is always available if Flight turns out to be a dud. Yes, we do have Xplane, P3d and perhaps others, but they are still for-profit companies like MS that can pull the plug whenever the dollars and cents don't add up.I personally am simply curious about Flight, and am willing to wait to see what happens. In the meantime, I will continue to enjoy FSX which improves with each new add-on.Ben