Is this guy for real (Howard) leading ms flight

[TedG 1]

~Godwins law n all~ :(

[Tierborn 188]

Well this topic went south fast.

I live in the south .. thats offensive :(

[Fsau 0]

I don't get why people come charging in here telling others to stop being critical when the topic of the thread is critical, lol. But ooooh nooo don't anyone dare come posting in positive Flight threads with their negative ways. Double standards.

[japascoe 98]

I don't get why people come charging in here telling others to stop being critical when the topic of the thread is critical, lol. But ooooh nooo don't anyone dare come posting in positive Flight threads with their negative ways. Double standards.

And I don't get why everyone who says that they will give Flight a chance, or that they happen to prefer having a small high detailed area to fly in rather than the whole world must obviously be a paid representative of Microsoft. I'm not sure if you have claimed such, but it's an accusation that has been thrown around a lot.You and a bunch of other people don't like what you've seen of Flight. I respect that. I also respect your right to have that opinion heard. Also please feel free to call out the obvious speculation on the 'pro-Flight' side*; saying Flight will obviously contain X,Y and Z in the future (e.g. AI, ATC, whole world support) and will be absolutely great, is just as much idle speculation as saying that Flight obviously has no realistic flight dynamics and is only suitable for flying "that stupid carplane".I won't assume you had any other motivations for your posts than your own honest opinion of Flight, could I as *gasp* another one of those recently joined people who are supporting Flight please get the same courtesy in return?However the opinion that Flight will be cr*p has been stated many times now. Stating it again (wether by replying in a postive thread or by posting a new thread such as this one) is going to change absolutely nothing, except maybe drive away those who might genuinely be interested in Flight and who only see a stinking pile of negativity. Your opinion was noted by MS even before Flight was announced, and they already decided that they didn't care. No amount of posts in this forum is going to change that descision, so is it really that much to ask to leave the Flight forum for those who are willing to give Flight a chance?*Why are there even sides anyway? Why can't we just be a community of flight simmers, some of whom see Flight as a nice addition to their hobby, and some of whom don't

[Fsau 0]

People tend to defend their choices for whatever reason when it comes to peoples choice of (insert choice here), Xbox vs Playstation, console vs PC, Mac vs Windows, nVidia vs AMD... etc. I don't however see two sides here, it wasn't until a few new people signed up and decided to separate everyone into two groups by asking the "negativists" to stop posting and go somewhere else. For the record I've stayed out of most of it because it's not really worth my time, I'm waiting till the 29th like everyone else to check it out for myself. Just remember it's a discussion forum not a praise-be-to-Flight forum, ultimately it's up to the AVSIM staff how they run their site but I'd like to think all views can be expressed and read here, and I bet I'm not alone.

Your opinion was noted by MS even before Flight was announced, and they already decided that they didn't care. No amount of posts in this forum is going to change that descision, so is it really that much to ask to leave the Flight forum for those who are willing to give Flight a chance?

Seriously, who are you to tell others to leave just because they aren't praising Flight or have an opinion that you decree as unworthy? I'm sure the moderators can handle that decision so why not leave it up to them. In the meantime if you don't agree with what someone thinks, join in and voice your opinion or post your own topic and leave it at that, is that so hard?

[Attila 2]

Why are there even sides anyway? Why can't we just be a community of flight simmers, some of whom see Flight as a nice addition to their hobby, and some of whom don't

Why are there reviews of products? This forum is a review of Flight based on what people know about it. Why should only reviews that rate 8+ be allowed to appear. Why can't people rate Flight a 4, not just as a failure as a simulator, but as a failure as a flight game.I am sure every game has its supporters. Flight does too. That's nice, but it does not make it a good game in some people's opinion.So if someone writes a post claiming this or that about Flight, expect someone to point out the flaws in their posts. Right now this is difficult as the negative views are muzzled by the NDA and some of the posters would like to say more, I am sure, but are frustrated by how the ###### and fangirls are allowed to flaut the NDA and no one can write a proper rebuttal without breaking the NDA. If they try, they are labeled haters and some have been subsequently banned for it. Edited February 12, 2012 by Attila

[JET 1 0]

Here is a little bit of healthy sarcasm for ya.Based on 10+ years of experience on how a text based discussion forum operates is this:How to start an argument online?1. Express an opinion2. WaitForums are EXCELLENT for sharing information and finding answers to questions, and nearly useless for voicing out opinions. Reason being simply that fundamentals of normal human interaction like body language and social norms do not exist.As for Flight, I still think it is going to be a fun game where flying skills learned in FS or real world can be put to the test. It will never replace FS, just complement it. We will always have FS9/FSX for more serious simming.I can fully appreciate what the MS representative meant, he wasn't BS:ing anyone. Like others have said, the bland vanilla FS world takes a lot of imagination to be interesting and I find the concept of having a richly detailed smaller area with integrated missions a lot of fun. Isn't that why people buy addons like anything from ORBX?

Edited February 12, 2012 by JET 1

[Guest jahman]

I live in the south .. thats offensive

I agree, but believe me, you don't know what South really is.

*Why are there even sides anyway? Why can't we just be a community of flight simmers, some of whom see Flight as a nice addition to their hobby, and some of whom don't

Up to now those of use who wanted large aircraft technical simming could coexist with those of us wanting to enjoy small aircraft in small cozy fields because the simulator, FSX, could offer both. We were not asked to choose. And many of us actually enjoy both styles of flight simming.But now it's like we have two siblings, the older FSX and the younger Flight. We all like FS (no divisions here, really) and now there's this younger sibling Flight! that's not so good, not because what it offers is bad but because the set of flying style choices is severely restricted. And now of course FSX free-style flight simming no longer gets any attention while the new Flight! baby steals the spotlight but only has half the functionality to offer.Imagine if you will how all of us would have felt if FSX had been released only for large airliners: No GA aircraft at all, no cozy small fields. Nothing for Bill Womack to design. We would have all been up in arms. Well, the Flight conundrum is the same situation, but in reverse.

Also please feel free to call out the obvious speculation on the 'pro-Flight' side*; saying Flight will obviously contain X,Y and Z in the future (e.g. AI, ATC, whole world support)

No, Flight! will never have Whole World scenery because Josh Howard, Executive Producer of Flight! said it won't. So it's fact, not speculation. He also said he thought having 23.000 airports was silly.

People tend to defend their choices for whatever reason when it comes to peoples choice of (insert choice here), Xbox vs Playstation, console vs PC, Mac vs Windows, nVidia vs AMD... etc. I don't however see two sides here, it wasn't until a few new people signed up and decided to separate everyone into two groups by asking the "negativists" to stop posting and go somewhere else.

+1!

Why are there reviews of products? This forum is a review of Flight based on what people know about it. Why should only reviews that rate 8+ be allowed to appear. Why can't people rate Flight a 4, not just as a failure as a simulator, but as a failure as a flight game.I am sure every game has its supporters. Flight does too. That's nice, but it does not make it a good game in some people's opinion.So if someone writes a post claiming this or that about Flight, expect someone to point out the flaws in their posts. Right now this is difficult as the negative views are muzzled by the NDA and some of the posters would like to say more, I am sure, but are frustrated by how the ###### and fangirls are allowed to flaut the NDA and no one can write a proper rebuttal without breaking the NDA. If they try, they are labeled haters and some have been subsequently banned for it.

+1!

Forums are EXCELLENT for sharing information and finding answers to questions, and nearly useless for voicing out opinions.

Excellent. Why not have separate sub-forums for:

1. Flight! positivists
2. Flight! negativists
3. Flight! facts and advice.

Eventually activity on 1. and 2. will decrease to nil and those forums will self-archive without the need of anyone having to tell anyone else to "shut-up".

I find the concept of having a richly detailed smaller area with integrated missions a lot of fun. Isn't that why people buy addons like anything from ORBX?

Absolutely! But I also like to alternate small cozy strip in the fields/Piston Duke with large airports/B-744. Alas, the latter option is not possible and out of target in Flight! and there's absolutely no way I will spend on, and maintain, two separate flight simualtors. Therefore FSX stays, bugs and all, including lack of a future (dead code). Sigh.Cheers,- jahman.

[japascoe 98]

Why are there reviews of products? This forum is a review of Flight based on what people know about it. Why should only reviews that rate 8+ be allowed to appear. Why can't people rate Flight a 4, not just as a failure as a simulator, but as a failure as a flight game.I am sure every game has its supporters. Flight does too. That's nice, but it does not make it a good game in some people's opinion.So if someone writes a post claiming this or that about Flight, expect someone to point out the flaws in their posts. Right now this is difficult as the negative views are muzzled by the NDA and some of the posters would like to say more, I am sure, but are frustrated by how the ###### and fangirls are allowed to flaut the NDA and no one can write a proper rebuttal without breaking the NDA. If they try, they are labeled haters and some have been subsequently banned for it.

I don't like Flight because of X, Y and Z is a review.OMG a newbie who says he likes Flight, he must be paid by MS!!! is not.An honest review with a low score doesn't create a negative atmosphere. Posting "Flight is cr*p" in every thread does.

People tend to defend their choices for whatever reason when it comes to peoples choice of (insert choice here), Xbox vs Playstation, console vs PC, Mac vs Windows, nVidia vs AMD... etc. I don't however see two sides here, it wasn't until a few new people signed up and decided to separate everyone into two groups by asking the "negativists" to stop posting and go somewhere else. For the record I've stayed out of most of it because it's not really worth my time, I'm waiting till the 29th like everyone else to check it out for myself. Just remember it's a discussion forum not a praise-be-to-Flight forum, ultimately it's up to the AVSIM staff how they run their site but I'd like to think all views can be expressed and read here, and I bet I'm not alone.Seriously, who are you to tell others to leave just because they aren't praising Flight or have an opinion that you decree as unworthy? I'm sure the moderators can handle that decision so why not leave it up to them. In the meantime if you don't agree with what someone thinks, join in and voice your opinion or post your own topic and leave it at that, is that so hard?

I'm not telling anyone to leave. I'm pointing out that posting the same complaints about Flight over and over is doing nothing beyond creating a negative atmosphere and asking (not telling) those with a negative opinion to tone down their posts and allow this sub-forum to become a positive place for those that do enjoy what Flight is promising so far. Not because my opinion is superior, but because if the options are: (a) a negative forum and no changes to Flight, or (:( a positive forum and no changes to Flight, I think the latter is to be prefered. Since Microsoft has quite obviously decided not to pay attention to the wishes of hard-core simmers, those are the two options we (IMO) have.

Up to now those of use who wanted large aircraft technical simming could coexist with those of us wanting to enjoy small aircraft in small cozy fields because the simulator, FSX, could offer both. We were not asked to choose. And many of us actually enjoy both styles of flight simming.But now it's like we have two siblings, the older FSX and the younger Flight. We all like FS (no divisions here, really) and now there's this younger sibling Flight! that's not so good, not because what it offers is bad but because the set of flying style choices is severely restricted. And now of course FSX free-style flight simming no longer gets any attention while the new Flight! baby steals the spotlight but only has half the functionality to offer.No, Flight! will never have Whole World scenery because Josh Howard, Executive Producer of Flight! said it won't. So it's fact, not speculation. He also said he thought having 23.000 airports was silly.

I don't see the need for people to use the same piece of software to co-exist as a community. FS9 and FSX users have co-existed as a part of this community for ages and you can throw in X-Plane users as well. We are all here because we enjoy using our computers to simulate the experience of flight. Does it really matter whether we use X-Plane, FSX, IL-2, DCS Black Shark or Flight to do that? Sure there may be lesser or greater overlaps between the interests of users of those programs, but I don't see how that stops us from being a community.Maybe I worded it badly, but if you read to the end of the sentence you partially quoted, you will see that I was trying to point out that there is speculation both on the pro and anti Flight sides (for want of better words) of the debate and that I didn't see any problem with pointing out that a certain statement was speculation no matter whether it was in favour of or against Flight.

[Guest jahman]

I don't see the need for people to use the same piece of software to co-exist as a community. FS9 and FSX users have co-existed as a part of this community for ages and you can throw in X-Plane users as well

You missed the point: All three programs you mention offer very, very similar functionality, that's why they did not divide the community.Cheers,- jahman.

[JET 1 0]

You missed the point: All three programs you mention offer very, very similar functionality, that's why they did not divide the community.

Why couldn't Flight also exist, without "dividing the community"?I like the idea of a completely hassle-free game of flying without all the setting up and planning. Just fire up the game and go. Does not make me any less a sim pilot or a real pilot. I can always go back to hc simming any time I want, there are other simulators for that.Hell, I even know some professional soldiers who like CoD or Battlefield 3 and they are still good soldiers! :(

[Fsau 0]

How to start an argument online?1. Express an opinion2. Wait

LOL This is great.

I'm not telling anyone to leave. I'm pointing out that posting the same complaints about Flight over and over is doing nothing beyond creating a negative atmosphere and asking (not telling) those with a negative opinion to tone down their posts and allow this sub-forum to become a positive place for those that do enjoy what Flight is promising so far. Not because my opinion is superior, but because if the options are: (a) a negative forum and no changes to Flight, or (:( a positive forum and no changes to Flight, I think the latter is to be prefered. Since Microsoft has quite obviously decided not to pay attention to the wishes of hard-core simmers, those are the two options we (IMO) have.

You forgot about option © A friendly, welcoming yet balanced forum in which all views are expressed. I don't understand why it bothers you so much to have to read opinions that you might not agree with, such is life.

[Deltalpha 3]

I'm not telling anyone to leave. I'm pointing out that posting the same complaints about Flight over and over is doing nothing beyond creating a negative atmosphere and asking (not telling) those with a negative opinion to tone down their posts and allow this sub-forum to become a positive place for those that do enjoy what Flight is promising so far. Not because my opinion is superior, but because if the options are: (a) a negative forum and no changes to Flight, or ( a positive forum and no changes to Flight, I think the latter is to be prefered. Since Microsoft has quite obviously decided not to pay attention to the wishes of hard-core simmers, those are the two options we (IMO) have.

Welcome to AVSIM!

[japascoe 98]

You forgot about option © A friendly, welcoming yet balanced forum in which all views are expressed. I don't understand why it bothers you so much to have to read opinions that you might not agree with, such is life.

I'm not bothered by reading opinions I don't agree with. I'm perfectly fine with people stating that they don't like Flight. If you only like big tube IFR I can perfectly understand it (and I don't see why MS wasn't less ambiguous in their earlier press releases, which might have eased the dissapointment). What I'm bothered by is the people who start accusing anyone with a postive view of Flight of being paid by Microsoft or who continually call MS staff all kinds of horrible things just because they decided to make a video game the poster in question doesn't like.Option © does indeed sound good. It will take some work from both sides of the debate though. Hopefully all of us (yes, I'm explicitly including myself in that statement) will calm down a bit in the coming weeks and we can head in that direction. Edited February 12, 2012 by japascoe

[Guest jahman]

Why couldn't Flight also exist, without "dividing the community"?

I already explained why quite clearly in my post here.Cheers,- jahman.