All of which means that even my young friend in South Africa who's only connection to the internet is via a tethered cellphone

Holy cow!I bet downloading DLC would take weeks!

I would like to share with all of you here my opinion.Having 35000+ airports worldwide has a deeper meaning than the number itself. It has the meaning of freedom. The imagination of flying between two continents. Connecting worlds, plus the possibility to enhance the experience by adding payware/freeware sceneries.So, statements such as: "35000 airports are not needed" or "it is stupid to have so many airports" I find them very sterile. I never thought that there are simmers that they like to fly in canned enviroments.

I'm not interested in CONUS level scenery, unless there would be a possibility to develop around it. Otherwise, smaller areas of interest suits me just fine.The "I need all 25,000+ airports" crowd is OK with their request. But I can't recall flying in Africa, unless it was once or twice to look at some waterfalls. Asia? Not an interest to fly, as are so many other areas. I've been declared goegraphically challenged in the past. For entertainment purposes I can fly around a nicely done area and not get bored. I'm probably one of the few that will spend a LOT of time flying low and slow around Hawai'i. My dev work started there and I've grown to like the islands.

And on the other hand during my whole flight simming career of many years, and hundreds of jet flights I have probably done less than 5 flights that have been only inside area of USA. Big part of my flying happens in these kind of faraway places from western viewpoint.

I would like to share with all of you here my opinion.Having 35000+ airports worldwide has a deeper meaning than the number itself. It has the meaning of freedom. The imagination of flying between two continents. Connecting worlds, plus the possibility to enhance the experience by adding payware/freeware sceneries.So, statements such as: "35000 airports are not needed" or "it is stupid to have so many airports" I find them very sterile. I never thought that there are simmers that they like to fly in canned enviroments.

I agree. To me actually exploring and flying where ever I want with total freedom is vital part to explain why I like flight simming so much. In real life travelling is my biggest interest, then comes all aviation stuff. In open world flight sim I can do these two things virtually a bit, and thats great.Anyway thats just me and lots of other simmers. Those who like to have small detailed area and do not care too much where it is Flight will probably be good experience. I myself probably wont buy anything for it unless MS makes a Ferrari so I could drive around that detailed scenery.

Edited February 14, 201214 yr by FScamp

To have or to not have (20K airports)? That is the question. I'd guess the decision wasn't easy, but keep in mind, the first 7 releases of FS had had 250 or fewer airports. 3,000 in the 8th release and not until the 9th do we have 20K. If you think of the pros and cons of each decision, in view of all users and MS, they probably made the best decision for Flight 1.0 for greatest appeal. I understand that decision is not appealing to some, but most people can get more immersed in smaller, 'lush' environments than the entire world. Seems like XP10 now has 35,000 airports, but even though that's 10,000 more than FSX, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of excitement about that fact, in general. Surely, some bought XP10 just for that fact, but probably a very insignificant number.I think MS knows that Hawaii alone will never sustain Flight in the long-term and they have no intention of leaving it at that. On the other hand, I think they also know that having 24,000+ airports is not a requirement for a great product. Flight, with fewer airports + vastly higher detail can, someday, be superior to FSX in every other way in the opinion of everyone except those who expect 24,000 airports. I don't know the math, but I'd guess that ratio to be 9,999:1. Again, I completely understand the viewpoint of the right side of the ratio, but everything considered, it's probably the best route at this time.The lack of a 24,000 'airport' environment is very insignificant factor compared to the other things currently MIA in Flight and, again except for a very small fraction of users, the ATC, AI, jets, TrackIR, 'real' weather, and all the other things that are missing on Feb 29th are of more interest to typical simmers. In other words, if Flight were released on Feb 29th with all those missing features, but did have 24,000 airports, some how I don't think the Anti-Flight group will be any more excited.

If 24,000 airports is crazy, then why is MS modeling every dirt strip in Hawaii?

I'm not interested in CONUS level scenery, unless there would be a possibility to develop around it. Otherwise, smaller areas of interest suits me just fine.The "I need all 25,000+ airports" crowd is OK with their request. But I can't recall flying in Africa, unless it was once or twice to look at some waterfalls. Asia? Not an interest to fly, as are so many other areas. I've been declared goegraphically challenged in the past. For entertainment purposes I can fly around a nicely done area and not get bored. I'm probably one of the few that will spend a LOT of time flying low and slow around Hawai'i. My dev work started there and I've grown to like the islands.

Then FLIGHT is good for you! Nice to hear someone being enthusiastic about Hawaii for a change :). I'm sure I would have shared your enthusiasm if my favorite chain of islands in the Arctic had been the exclusive scenery of FLIGHT.Part of what made FS98, FS2000, FS2002, FS2004 and FSX great was that it had worldwide appeal. I'm sure the first thing most buyers of FS did after installing FS98 and later versions, was to launch a flight from their local airport.

Then FLIGHT is good for you! Nice to hear someone being enthusiastic about Hawaii for a change :). I'm sure I would have shared your enthusiasm if my favorite chain of islands in the Arctic had been the exclusive scenery of FLIGHT.Part of what made FS98, FS2000, FS2002, FS2004 and FSX great was that it had worldwide appeal. I'm sure the first thing most buyers of FS did after installing FS98 and later versions, was to launch a flight from their local airport.

and they still can.and you still can in flight.as long as you live in hawaii ;)

Edited February 14, 201214 yr by Gundamnitpete

If 24,000 airports is crazy, then why is MS modeling every dirt strip in Hawaii?

I guess I don't understand the IF-THEN relationship of that question?I'll take a shot at 're-wording' your question, as I understand it, so please correct me where I err. "If 24,000 airports is too many to model with any degree of realism, other than the NAVAIDs and alignment of the flat concrete, then why is MS modeling all of them in much greater detail in a smaller area?" Of course, that can't be the correct wording, because that answer is obvious. . .

Part of what made FS98, FS2000, FS2002, FS2004 and FSX great was that it had worldwide appeal. I'm sure the first thing most buyers of FS did after installing FS98 and later versions, was to launch a flight from their local airport.

I'd bet very, very few people refused all earlier versions that didn't have their local airport. In other words, the lack of having one's local airport was rarely, if ever, the reason someone skipped that version. Even if someone did, they should have never been under the impression that a future version would actually include their local. They just kinda showed up one day.Yep - Once my local airport become available, I did go there and check it out and was completely underwhelmed. Other than the alignment of the concrete and radio stuff, it looked *nothing* like real world. It's cool to pretend sometimes that it really is my real-world airport and fly to another nearby airport that also doesn't resemble what it should look like with enroute scenery that also doesn't resemble real life, but those flights could'a been from any generic airfield to any other and it would have looked, felt, and immersed me just the same.Anyway, there is plenty missing from Flight that are more important for a vast, vast majority of all simmers than the lack of 24,000 airports. It's not that that feature is not important, it just that it is less important (in general) than the other missing items.

I love the idea of an entire world to fly in - but have no interest in flying over generic tiles that, as mentioned, look nothing like reality. Orbx has proved popular with it's high detail/small area packages, and Flight is going for a similar low and slow market.The Hawaian island chain is actually a large area to explore, particularly with a GA aircraft. It will keep me busy for a couple of weeks, I guess. The islands do all look different (I love Molokai, and Maui, and the north shore of Oahu). By the time I get bored I hope Microsoft will have a bit of the CONUS or Europe to fly in.

My point was that if MS continues down the same road as they are doing with Hawaii, modeling every dirt strip, they will end up with a 100's of useless dirt strips with a few more DLC.As for more detail. Hogwash. They just have a better algorithm to blend the dirt surface into the surrounding grass terrain. Clearly, being able to follow the higher resolution meshes make these things look more natural, but still rather useless for all but crop dusters.

My point was that if MS continues down the same road as they are doing with Hawaii, modeling every dirt strip, they will end up with a 100's of useless dirt strips with a few more DLC.As for more detail. Hogwash. They just have a better algorithm to blend the dirt surface into the surrounding grass terrain. Clearly, being able to follow the higher resolution meshes make these things look more natural, but still rather useless for all but crop dusters.

The dirt strips are the hardest landings, and by nature, the most rewarding.

Holy cow!I bet downloading DLC would take weeks!

To say that he's dedicated would be an understatement. He's also one of the gauge/systems programmers for several Milviz projects. I can only wince at what it costs him in both time and money to have to d/l multiple Alpha/Beta builds that are often ~167MBs zipped!

I doubt there will be a 'dirt strip' DLC. Hogwash I say!I'm pretty sure MS knows people want to fly outside Hawaii at some stage. I'd expect part of the mainland US - just a small part, but in similar detail to the first release - to be made available not too long after launch.

Wasn't Mr. Howard quoted as saying that there is a team working on the next project and another working on the one after that?Guess we'll all find out come spring time, 2012?