I remember a certain company after releasing a nitch product called the MD11 and from that abandoned all future development for the FS2k4 environment stating FS2k4's market was all but dead (I say 'nitch' because more people clearly wanted an updated 737NG versus an MD11 which is a great product in it's own right). Along comes iFly who's sales of their 737NG was phenomenal for FS2k4. Not only did they sell well for FS2k4 but turned around and did well in the FSX world until PMDG released their version.Now is Flight Microsoft's excuse for Flight Simulator? Something clearly prompted them to give it another try. I remember the outcry from all corners of the world when many learned FSX may be the last sim in the franchise. Lockheed even jumped in and acquired code that had been abandoned for a higher end version of FSX to keep something going. Flight is a joke compared to FS2k4/FSX or any version of Flight simulator since FS5. If it doesn't do well will that be Microsoft's excuse to say they tried with one more version but found there's no longer a market for a Flight Simulator type product? I say give the franchise a fair shake with a solid product not a 'joke' and then see. I know I'm presupposing but when Flight fails the excuses at Redmond will be many and to cover their you know what this crack pot development team is going to blame the market not their insane idea of a product.This is not to start anything about PMDG as I know it's easier with aircraft to develop for one sim versus both. It's just that the 737NG would have sold much better in FS9 versus the MD11 just like FS11 would have done much better than a Flight type product will do (yes I'm again predicting doom). FS11 could have bought back the WWI Red Baron game with dogfighting that could be played stand alone or online along with improved missions to attract gamers (which is a crowd that likes to shoot at things not just fly around and pick up coins). They could have did a performance/graphic upgrade to the FSX engine and been done with it then see what the market would do. It's unfair to have a product like Flight out there deciding the direction of the franchise to suites in Redmond that are not pilots or in the aviation know but demand sales results.It's amazing how idiots get in these high corporate managerial jobs that have no clue, vision, or history of the products they take over (I'm speaking Microsoft here). They get paid to screw up and keep their jobs because their either connected, have a degree from some over priced high in college, or whatever insane reason their in these positions of power... :(

Edited February 11, 201214 yr by Dillon

Nope. Just an attempt to create a flight simulation program that stays lucrative throughout it's life time. I hope it delivers something to the community over the next 5 years, and I hope it's full potential is realized. In other words, I sure hope it's successful.

Dillon I've been trying to bite my tongue and keep quiet - but this supposed "topic" puts it over the line. Do you have ANY posts in the Flight forums that do not involve disparaging, name calling, inflated sense of entitlement, etc? I'm not poking fun, or being sarcastic - I'm serious. What do your posts contribute to the community, and to new members? I've see you state that you have positive posts in other forums - what is so difficult to post something positive or unbiased here?This is NOT an attack on you - I'm sure in other areas, like most people, you have some great qualities. But you are not displaying any of those qualities in the Microsoft Flight Forums.

Dillon I've been trying to bite my tongue and keep quiet - but this supposed "topic" puts it over the line. Do you have ANY posts in the Flight forums that do not involve disparaging, name calling, inflated sense of entitlement, etc? I'm not poking fun, or being sarcastic - I'm serious. What do your posts contribute to the community, and to new members? I've see you state that you have positive posts in other forums - what is so difficult to post something positive or unbiased here?This is NOT an attack on you - I'm sure in other areas, like most people, you have some great qualities. But you are not displaying any of those qualities in the Microsoft Flight Forums.

I'm sure you read this one already:http://http://forum.avsim.net/topic/362126-second-interview-with-joshua-howard-sigh/page__view__findpost__p__2254003

Nitch? Seppo, much?

Dillon I've been trying to bite my tongue and keep quiet - but this supposed "topic" puts it over the line. Do you have ANY posts in the Flight forums that do not involve disparaging, name calling, inflated sense of entitlement, etc? I'm not poking fun, or being sarcastic - I'm serious. What do your posts contribute to the community, and to new members? I've see you state that you have positive posts in other forums - what is so difficult to post something positive or unbiased here?This is NOT an attack on you - I'm sure in other areas, like most people, you have some great qualities. But you are not displaying any of those qualities in the Microsoft Flight Forums.

Flight is just over the top for me I guess. It was bad enough that FSX was released back in 2006 with so many performance problems but this takes the cake. :( -_-I don't see anything that's over the line in my post above. Maybe creating an FS11 with true gaming features like air combat is too much to ask versus gutting the sim and flying around hitting floating coins. Can you imagine what the add-on community could create if the WWI feature was brought back into Flight Simulator? True damage modeling for airplanes and missions surrounded around that. If gamers and a wider audience is what Microsoft is after open that part of the sim up to be expanded on. We'd have theaters of combat in Flight Simulator, someone would create a Naval arena, etc, etc. This is what gamers would love and we as a community could do so much with that. So I guess I'm just adding to the disappointment we all are feeling and what I wrote above could very much be a possibility should this hap-hazard effort fail. Like it or not this is how I and many others feel and I'm sure the frustration will grow when it's released. I know many want things to tone down but the disappointment is too great.

Edited February 12, 201214 yr by Dillon

Flight is just over the top for me I guess. It was bad enough that FSX was released back in 2006 with so many performance problems but this takes the cake. :( -_-I don't see anything that's over the line in my post above. Maybe creating an FS11 with true gaming features like air combat is too much to ask versus gutting the sim and flying around hitting floating coins.

Dillon, you're acting like a "poison dwarf" now. For the last time, there's a heck of a lot more to Flight than "flying around hitting floating coins."You don't like what little you've seen, nor what you've imagined. We get that. Enough already!

Flight is just over the top for me I guess. It was bad enough that FSX was released back in 2006 with so many performance problems but this takes the cake. :( :(

In the hopes of saving you time and effort typing, maybe you could just link to all those postings you made when FSX was released? You know, where you also portrayed yourself as a long-time supporter of the franchise and how FSX was a bad product that no one could afford the hardware to run it, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.There has been a chosen few who have maintained their indignation since the golden days of FS2004. So seeing a new attack coming from their direction doesn't surprise me at all. I just really, really hope that you get this out of your system before February 29th. That's when some new user of Flight might hit up Google for some more information and see Avsim listed. I would really, really hate for them to see the same old, same old and feel discouraged about hoping into a conversation or asking questions about the marvel of flying. Learning new little bits that might make them enjoy themselves and their new found hobby.Is it too much to hope for, that the emotional outcry might be over and done with by February 28th, Les?

Flight is just over the top for me I guess. It was bad enough that FSX was released back in 2006 with so many performance problems but this takes the cake.

YAAWN.....*ZZZZZzzzzzzz *

Posted Today, 06:50 PMn4gix, on 11 February 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:there's a heck of a lot more to Flight than "flying around hitting floating coins."Hahah, Not much more

I'm anxiously waiting for n4gix to respond. :(

You know, where you also portrayed yourself as a long-time supporter of the franchise and how FSX was a bad product that no one could afford the hardware to run it, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

Let's see, portray myself as a long time member but I was around in 2006 when FSX was released. Before that I must have been around in the days of FS2k4 which would mean around 2003. My profile shows I joined in 2002 but I'm 'portraying' myself as a long time supporter of the franchise...

there's a heck of a lot more to Flight than "flying around hitting floating coins."

What exactly?

Is it too much to hope for, that the emotional outcry might be over and done with by February 28th, Les?

If that's what you're asking, why are you asking for it on February 12th?Cheers,- jahman.

What exactly?

It's this new thing called 'free flight'. :)

On the subject of Free Flight !One of the really nice features of MSF is that you can place your plane anywhere on the MAP page and dependingon the topography of that area, you will automatically be placed 1000 ft above it with any heading you like and in a shallow climb.To do anything like that in FSX would be very tedious to say the least.ORClick on any airport/airfield and be placed on the runway of your choice, unlike having to scroll through an alphabetical list like in FSX.( The MAP page has got to be the best designed piece of UI software I have seen in any flight smulation program including the level-d stuff )( It is the central HUB of the program and you can get to EVERYTHING from that one page. 10/10 )Fred.

Edited February 12, 201214 yr by RYR738