My 2.5 cents

I think it was pretty clear, when I started with the beta, what Flight was and what it wasn't. From the postings here and on the beta message board it's also obvious what a lot of people expected. I like many others was waiting to see what the next generation would bring. While I'm disappointed that it's not FS11, for what it is, it's not too bad. I've been simming since 1989 with either FS3 or 4, I forget. So I have little bit of history here. I remember buying the Airport and Scenery designer just to make my home field a little more than the colored squares that I got out of the box. Scenery wise this is head and shoulders above that. It responds better than FSX ever did framewise.Is it "real world"? No, but I'm not going to get all worked up about it. I'll take it for what it is. A game with a touch of simulation thrown in. I stiil use FS9 on a regular basis. I have 3-400 different sceneries and 50 or 60 aircraft, not counting all the ai installed, commercial and freeware (Thank you Avsim) and it still runs great and looks pretty good. With all the time and money I have invested, I'm in no hurry to move on. Also have FSX but never really did much with it due to the performance issues early on. Am I going to keep Flight installed? Yeah, I guess. When I'm in the mood for goofing off and chasing aerocaches or stuff like that, I'll use it. When I feel like shooting approaches or working on navigation skills, I'll use FS9.I guess my point is there's no reason for people to get there blood pressure up. We have too many options to enjoy ourselves to get all worked up. There's obviously a still very active FS community out there with new additions coming out all the time. On the bright side, I always seemed to "need" a new computer for every other FS version that came out. So look at all the money I'll save.Just MHOMatt