Microsoft is Freakishly Silent with 'Tough' Questions

[Rush1169 0]

There are many views of what makes a "hardcore business person": Your's is dispassionate financially-oriented,

Although you could not be more wrong about me on a personal/professional level, Microsoft is a publically traded corporation and by it's definition is passionately financially-oriented.

while BillG's was extremely passionate. BillG bet the company on Win-32 based on a vision that he shared with anyone and everyone who would listen

Not sure the application of this to the discussion. Sure he was passionate about Windows - Apple and others showed him the way of a GUI OS and the certain demise of DOS and his OS (financial) dominance had he not done something different.

while the MS Flight team is mum on where Flight is headed.

They're really not, one just needs to listen

Please do share (since MS Flight won't...)

Already have.

I have my own vision: Their "vision"is to go where DLC sales point.

No kidding, but that's not exactly a 'vision', more along the lines of 'duh'.

[Guest jahman]

Although you could not be more wrong about me on a personal/professional level, Microsoft is a publically traded corporation and by it's definition is passionately financially-oriented.

No idea about you personally, but from your own job description the adjectives of dispassionate and calculating (decision trees!) does come to mind.

Not sure the application of this to the discussion. Sure he was passionate about Windows - Apple and others showed him the way of a GUI OS and the certain demise of DOS and his OS (financial) dominance had he not done something different.

The point you missed is that betting a company on a vision is the opposite of dispassionate and calculating. The relevance to the discussion of Flight (as explained, sigh...) is that the flight project Flight seems to be managed in a dispassionate and calculating manner.

They're really not, one just needs to listen

No, they're not saying anything of substance: It's all PR-speak, as was told to me by other simmers when I believed their Dec 8, 2010 press release. Substance means listing what functionality will be available and at what dates and whether 3PD will be allowed, encouraged or will not happen.

Already have.

I re-read you posts in this thread and no, you haven't.

No kidding, but that's not exactly a 'vision', more along the lines of 'duh'.

That's exactly the bean counter decision-making process that got ACES fired (ony to rehire a few months later) and its exactly the opposite to the kind of thinking that made Microsoft great (and MSFS the King of Sims).Cheers,- jahman. Edited February 7, 2012 by jahman

[simmerhead 885]

I'm a corporate advisor in an international corporation so I know business quite well too. What I have learned is that success in one line of business doesn't translate directly into another. Software and high tech is more about vision, innovation and the ability to stay ahead of the pack to harvest ROI somewhere down the road when you have become alpha dog. Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Apple, Adobe to mention a few didn't become succesful by staring at spreadsheets and calculating ROI. They became successful because they once were passionate about products, not ROI. If not careful creativity and innovation will suffer and investors will turn towards other milking cows. It's one tough balancing act.

[RYR738 9]

I'm starting to get suspicious of these new forum members with low post counts knowing so much about Flight and singing it's praises at every turn... :(

Probably all Microsoft guys !! :( Edited February 7, 2012 by RYR738

[Guest JSkorna]

...... and Fred's relatives.

[N738NM 0]

When anyone asks Microsoft if Flight will have ATC, jets, world coverage, NAVAIDs, etc it's like you're talking to a brick wall. The closest thing I've seen to an actual response is: "All information that is public is posted at www.microsoftflight.com. If it's not there, I can't tell you. :-)". I couldn't even find one CES video on YouTube where someone asked one of the many questions we all have. Not a question being asked where the response was "No comment", but not even someone asking. The MS Facebook page is littered with specific feature questions that are obviously being read but not answered. . .For sure the questions are being asked and they are begin ignored.

My opinion is that their silence is not sufficient to draw a conclusion either way in regards to advanced features. I think we'll get ATC, jets, thousands of airports (at least runways + navaids), HQ 3rd party planes, and all the other stuff that makes FSX what it is simply because there is a LOT of money in our collective wallets waiting to be spent. Conversely, it seems there is a LOT LESS money to be made if they don't publish those features. Microsoft has the assets (ie content) to sell and it seems rather irresponsible to simpy not sell them as DLC 'add-ons' for their 30 year old franchise. It just makes a lot more sense to sell 'expansion packs' for Flight than it does to not sell them, no?

Great post, Rush. Thanks for sharing your analysis on this. I posted a series of exasperated questions in another thread a few minutes ago regarding the lack of information. It's just maddening. I wish Microsoft would give us a clue...just a crumb about what their plan is. And, yes, I do understand Josh Howard's idea of letting the market guide the development. However, I think Redmond is making a mistake by not sending some sort of message to the "serious" flight simulation community about its intentions regarding some of the bread & butter stuff we take for granted in FSX (like AI, ATC, NAVAIDS). Just let us know one way or the other, Microsoft, just end our suffering. In any case, I hope you're right. I hope Flight is as good as some of the beta testers have telegraphed. And, I hope that we can get access to the AI, ATC, and NAVAIDS at a fair price (yes, fair is open to interpretation). Again, great post. Thanks. -- Dana

[n4gix 4,970]

And, I hope that we can get access to the AI, ATC, and NAVAIDS at a fair price (yes, fair is open to interpretation). Again, great post. Thanks. -- Dana

Well, you will already get one out those three, since the latest video makes it quite obvious that navaids and ILS/localizers are already operational, as long as you have at least one aircraft with radios and display heads (RV6) that's included in the optional Hawaiian Island pack.

[UtahJazzfan8 0]

I'm starting to get suspicious of these new forum members with low post counts knowing so much about Flight and singing it's praises at every turn... :(

Exactly where were all these Flight lovers the last 8 months? Insted they come out of the woodwork after the annoncment and upproar 1 month ago. Smells fishy to me.

[N738NM 0]

Well, you will already get one out those three, since the latest video makes it quite obvious that navaids and ILS/localizers are already operational, as long as you have at least one aircraft with radios and display heads (RV6) that's included in the optional Hawaiian Island pack.

Hi, Padre. Yup, saw that. But, what if I want the benefits of Flight (better graphics performance), but I don't want to keep flying the same localizer over and over again at PHNL (or wherever that one is)? C'mon, father, give me a sign from the Big Guy (no, not Josh Howard). Yes, I know, the Spanish Inquisition would be called in if you broke the NDA. Okay, half kidding, half serious. Thanks -- Dana

[Dillon 2,208]

Probably all Microsoft guys !! :(

You said it not me, I wouldn't know... Edited February 8, 2012 by Dillon

[rtodepart 761]

but you'll have to re-buy all your addons

we have done that for a while now....

[trevorbee 0]

And, yes, I do understand Josh Howard's idea of letting the market guide the development.

Could it be that the developers do not want FLIGHT to be committed in any particular direction at this stage? Rather 'play it by ear' until such time that the market decrees what features will be popular with the majority. So, no promises about anything. Better to play dumb.

[rtodepart 761]

Could it be that the developers do not want FLIGHT to be committed in any particular direction at this stage? Rather 'play it by ear' until such time that the market decrees what features will be popular with the majority. So, no promises about anything. Better to play dumb.

Trevor in a way i already mention before that by now the devs have a clear idea of what to put on that market , just from the feedback and other research .I can keep on talking about other things but i dont want to get myself in hot waters .I hope you feel a bit better now .Just wait till the 29 and give it a try, ITS FREE... Edited February 8, 2012 by rtodepart

[torium 207]

...... and Fred's relatives.

More precisely: "The Passionate Flight Simmer Family". :(

I wish Microsoft would give us a clue...just a crumb about what their plan is.

One clue is - earn money through addons (DLC) for Flight (the base pack is free). Quote: - "The game is built on an improved legacy engine,"Do you think the new improved legacy engine can handle AI, ATC, NAVAIDS, world-mesh, etc.?Quote: "Flight's challenge is to bring back the Flight Simulator fans, as well as attract a new generation ."How?Decide not to sell you this (improved/converted?) ATC-addon?

And, I hope that we can get access to the AI, ATC, and NAVAIDS at a fair price (yes, fair is open to interpretation)

Yes. Next challenge is = "a fair price"?Quote: "Additional content will be at a price point that "feels good to them," Howard said of the game's audience. "Over time, there will always be more to come," Howard said."Bottom line: "symbiotic relationship" - what feels good to you - what feels good to MS?

[Guest JSkorna]

Why are your posts just a bunch of quotes from Microsoft with some highlights in red?