You do know they already released three DLC products for FLIGHT right? Like the $15 Maule that is less functional then the one we got 'for free' with FSX. If that would be released for FSX at that price it would be slaughtered in reviews. And if they expand as you predict this will be the most expensive product ever.At this moment you can spend $40 on FLIGHT, and that will give you get you 4 braindead aircraft, one set of islands and bunch of missions. While I like the free base, the add-ons right now do not even come close to what customers started to expect over the last few years. At this rate it would literally take thousands of dollars to get it into a simulator that can compete. $15 for AI Traffic? $15 for ATC? $15 for real weather? $15 to get the AP's working? And keep in mind that to link Hawaii to any other place you need an aircraft that can fly the distance so it will need to be a bit more complex, so say $25. And you need a big airport to land on at the other end, $20 at least. And then you can fly back to Hawaii. Yeah! And to make matters worse... if you want to yuse your new bigger aircraft to fly to another location you will need to buy a new airport and all the scenery in between (or do with the 500 meter pixels now used). We must be in the $300 now.FSX costs $35 and has far more functionality. They would have to tweak Windows 8 not to run FSX to make that work. So FLIGHT will stay very much as it is. A fine game. We'll get new 'locations' like Hawaii, likely the Seattle area and you will fly around there a bit. In the same braindead kind of aircraft. And that's good, that makes it a good game. But not a flight simulator as the AVSIM visitors have learned to love.Am I the only one who sees the problems here? Again I like the base sim, great fun and a fine game. But just think about the add-ons you need to keep you busy. You will need to pay for every single bit of scenery you see.

Well I personally do not know, and I suspect this early in the game, no one really knows, what Flight will develop into going forward. I think it probably has some really good potential based on all that I have read, but time will tell what the future will bring. And demand as well I suspect. I think it is probably a bit early to make too many assumptions/projections.You may be exactly right, who knows - or maybe even down the road, an SDK will be released for 3PD to do their thing. It will be interesting to see what it grows into over the next several months.

Mathijs, While I agree with your general point, quoting FSX at $35 is highly misleading...FSX when released cost me around $80 and the Acceleration Pack another $50 or soand I just purchased a very nice RV7 for FSX at $40, not to mention Orbx scenery etc..So Flight at $20 for Hawaii and the RV6 included hardly strikes me as over the top..

Agreed. As a stand alone game, without FSX in the picture, Flight offers plenty for $20. It's the future scope that is so limited and that's what he's commenting on.To widen the scope to be able to really satisfy long term, years from now, the way FSX (and FS9 before it) did/do you are going to be talking about untold amounts of money spent on DLC just to get the basic functionality you already have with FSX.And if you held a gun to my head right now there's noway I'd bet on them releasing anything more then limited regions (if that) and more simplified planes and missions.Again, as a stand alone game, that is fine. I'm not bashing it. I just wouldn't hold my breath for Flight to suddenly be morphed into a deep, highly realistic, procedure based experience like FSX, even years from now. It just doesn't appear to be in the cards of their vision.I think the only exception would be if the current DLC model just crashes and they decide to give it one more go back in the direction they came from. What's most likely to happen though is they just close up the FS shop for good. Many of us are stuck in a no win situation if that's the case.

Edited March 2, 201214 yr by bonchie

Mathijs,It is not only that I completely disagree with absolutely everything you are saying about Flight that gives me cause for concern, afterall, if that really is your opinion that is fine. That said, I cannot help but think something else is at play here. To go on over and over again with the same derogatory terms as you have in the last few days, the sceptic in me feels that the purpose of your posts is to desperately try and secure your commercial interest in FSX by pulverising Flight, rather than to constructively debate Flight in a reasonable manner.

Mathijs,It is not only that I completely disagree with absolutely everything you are saying about Flight that gives me cause for concern, afterall, if that really is your opinion that is fine. That said, I cannot help but think something else is at play here. To go on over and over again with the same derogatory terms as you have in the last few days, the sceptic in me feels that the purpose of your posts is to desperately try and secure your commercial interest in FSX by pulverising Flight, rather than to constructively debate Flight in a reasonable manner.

Do you honestly think Flight represents any kind of real competition to the kinds of products Aerosoft releases and the market that buys them?

Edited March 2, 201214 yr by bonchie

Am I the only one who sees the problems here? Again I like the base sim, great fun and a fine game. But just think about the add-ons you need to keep you busy. You will need to pay for every single bit of scenery you see.

LOL And that comes from someone who earns a living selling addons...?!? Really, as Bert says, this is very misleading. I also paid for every single bit of scenery I actually use in FSX. If I am not mistaken I am using almost nothing that default FSX offers: it's all addon. And those addons cost more then the examples you are giving."$15 for AI Traffic?"My Traffic costs $46 on the Aerosoft site."$15 for ATC?"ProFlight Emulator Deluxe costs $46 on the Aerosoft site."$15 for real weather?"FEX costs $46 on the Aerosoft site."A big airport to land on at the other end, $20 at least?"Mega Airports will cost $30. So why is it weird if MS is trying to do what you have doing for years, at a higher cost too? LOLI have high respect for Aerosoft and have had big fun with some of your products, but really... come on. Don't say we can have it all for just 35 bucks when you KNOW everyone here has spends hundreds if not thousands of dollars amonst others on your products. Don't get me wrong, I do get your point (that 'out of the box' FSX offers more) but I think it's best not too post too much about it here anymore because it doesn't make you look good.

Edited March 2, 201214 yr by J van E

Mathijs, While I agree with your general point, quoting FSX at $35 is highly misleading...FSX when released cost me around $80 and the Acceleration Pack another $50 or soand I just purchased a very nice RV7 for FSX at $40, not to mention Orbx scenery etc..So Flight at $20 for Hawaii and the RV6 included hardly strikes me as over the top..

Same here, except I think I got the Deluxe edition for like 70 bucks, can't remember what I paid for Acceleration.

You do know they already released three DLC products for FLIGHT right? Like the $15 Maule that is less functional then the one we got 'for free' with FSX. If that would be released for FSX at that price it would be slaughtered in reviews. And if they expand as you predict this will be the most expensive product ever.At this moment you can spend $40 on FLIGHT, and that will give you get you 4 braindead aircraft, one set of islands and bunch of missions. While I like the free base, the add-ons right now do not even come close to what customers started to expect over the last few years. At this rate it would literally take thousands of dollars to get it into a simulator that can compete. $15 for AI Traffic? $15 for ATC? $15 for real weather? $15 to get the AP's working? And keep in mind that to link Hawaii to any other place you need an aircraft that can fly the distance so it will need to be a bit more complex, so say $25. And you need a big airport to land on at the other end, $20 at least. And then you can fly back to Hawaii. Yeah! And to make matters worse... if you want to yuse your new bigger aircraft to fly to another location you will need to buy a new airport and all the scenery in between (or do with the 500 meter pixels now used). We must be in the $300 now.FSX costs $35 and has far more functionality. They would have to tweak Windows 8 not to run FSX to make that work. So FLIGHT will stay very much as it is. A fine game. We'll get new 'locations' like Hawaii, likely the Seattle area and you will fly around there a bit. In the same braindead kind of aircraft. And that's good, that makes it a good game. But not a flight simulator as the AVSIM visitors have learned to love.Am I the only one who sees the problems here? Again I like the base sim, great fun and a fine game. But just think about the add-ons you need to keep you busy. You will need to pay for every single bit of scenery you see.

You are quite right.I'll openly admit that I took the plunge and installed the free base product yesterday. It's actually quite good looking. It runs well and has definite entertainment value. Unfortunately, it lacks the depth that any serious simmer demands. That's not necessarily a flaw, however. Like I said in other posts, this is the new strategy. The pay as you go, entertainment driven experience makes sense for the market they are targeting, regardless of how nonsensical it is when viewed through our paradigm. In other words, all of the things you pointed out would make any serious simmer question Flight. Alas, it's not intended for us.I did find one good use for Flight out of all this. I now have something for my 7-yr old son to play when he wants to "fly like dadda." Let's face, all he wants to do is take off, zip by buildings and dive into the ground over and over again. He might actually get a thrill out of the missions once he tries them. Although I am not looking forward to his puzzled look when I have to explain what someone needs with a coconut bra.

Edited March 2, 201214 yr by Lawyer+Pilot

Like the $15 Maule that is less functional then the one we got 'for free' with FSX.

Oh...You mean the one with all the missing gauges in the VC and you could see the ground... yes I remember now.That was a Christmas gift from my family in 2006.... yes the Standard Edition of FSX.Let me think which I'd rather have... whole panel missing gauges where I can see the ground...Or the one w/ one piece of avionics that I do not need, unlike the above (and I can pretend broken at the moment and needs to go to the avionics shop) :Thinking:Real tough decision that one.

To widen the scope to be able to really satisfy long term, years from now, the way FSX (and FS9 before it) did/do you are going to be talking about untold amounts of money spent on DLC just to get the basic functionality you already have with FSX.And if you held a gun to my head right now there's noway I'd bet on them releasing anything more then limited regions (if that) and more simplified planes and missions.Again, as a stand alone game, that is fine. I'm not bashing it. I just wouldn't hold my breath for Flight to suddenly be morphed into a deep, highly realistic, procedure based experience like FSX, even years from now. It just doesn't appear to be in the cards of their vision.

We simply do not know what Microsoft is going to release... maybe they do not know themselves...I'm not holding my breath, but foretelling that it will cost tons of money, is getting way ahead of the situationas I see it. I've spent thousands of dollars on FS software over time, much of which I do not use any more,so a couple of hundred does not scare me much..

Do you honestly think Flight represents any kind of real competition to the kinds of products Aerosoft releases and the market that buys them?

I can only speak for myself. I have been a flight simmer for 14 years. I have probably spent about $600 on third party add-ons for both FS9 and FSX over the life of those products. Very few of these products have impressed me in the way that even the basic Flight package has.As of today, I will no longer be purchasing any add-ons whatsoever from any third party providers for products such as FSX. I will only be purchasing DLC for Microsoft Flight. I strongly doubt I am even ever going to fire up FSX any more, let alone buy anything for it. Flight for me is that good. I ws expecting goods things from Flight, but even at first release it has way exceeded my hopes and expectations.

I think I am going to have a lot of fun and enjoyment with both, and I don't see that as a bad thing !

I think I am going to have a lot of fun and enjoyment with both, and I don't see that as a bad thing !

+1

"$15 for AI Traffic?"My Traffic costs $46 on the Aerosoft site."$15 for ATC?"ProFlight Emulator Deluxe costs $46 on the Aerosoft site."$15 for real weather?"FEX costs $46 on the Aerosoft site.

Huh? FSX: WOAI is free and amazing. Default ATC is better than none and I can virtually guarantee that Flight won't release a RC4 level ATC. Real Weather is free. Flight has it's strengths but arguing it's content vs. cost level against FSX is going to be a losing battle.

Here, grab this one, it´s only 29.95!!http://www.microsoft...uctID.216458700 :Whistle:

Automatically generated messageThis topic has been closed by a moderator.Reason: More contention argument and spite than worth, so deleted threadIf you disagree with this action, please report this post and a moderator or administrator will evaluate your request.