P.S. The thing on SimHQ is not a "review" but an "editorial". Review's try to not base things on personal opinion, but to try and present the viewer or reader with facts and let them choose there take on the product based off of those facts. Many reviews are influenced by the reviewers own views, but again, it should focus on facts. An editorial on the other hand is nothing but the authors feelings of the chosen subject. If you look on SimHQ, that artical is listed as an editorial. I think thats a more fair description of that artical.

How odd. My first sixty minutes with a new MS flight simulator are usually divided equally between joystick configuration, graphics slider fiddling, and sighing at single-figure framerates. In Flight, 90% of that introductory hour has been spent – well – in flight."

Well, at least in FSX you do not have to open an XML file and edit it to calibrate a joystick??

So..... do a letter writing campaign. Start a dear Microsoft thread. Make a list of improvements and ask if they are coming and why they were not included etc. Make criticisms that don't sound like "But we want our old stuff back!"*Stamps foot and holds breath*Is the intent to change things or vent spleens?At this point, MS is probably looking at us like this: :shok:

Well, at least in FSX you do not have to open an XML file and edit it to calibrate a joystick??

The average user (the target market) wont need to. Also, I hope that MS does fix this oversight.

Yes, lets not return to name calling and Howard this and Howard that. Flight is what it is.Now, Microsoft said they wanted feedback and that is what they're getting. If it is kept constructive and to the point maybe some of it will be absorbed, but of corse our influence is limited. What the discussions in these forums have proven is that the flight sim community isn't a united and homogenious group. We all want different things for Flight so Microsoft can't possibly please everyone anyway.

For a better review then: http://SimHQ.com/_air14/air_525a.html

Yawn! Yet another fluff-piece where the so-called reviewer totally failed to do his due dilligence. There are way too many false conclusions drawn.No possibility for "head-to-head" competition? Apparently he's clueless about multi-player. Since he didn't bother to buy the Hawaiian Adventure pack, he of course never saw the lovely RV-6, and never got to see the Maule at all. :lazy:

Yawn! Yet another fluff-piece where the so-called reviewer totally failed to do his due dilligence. There are way too many false conclusions drawn.No possibility for "head-to-head" competition? Apparently he's clueless about multi-player. Since he didn't bother to buy the Hawaiian Adventure pack, he of course never saw the lovely RV-6, and never got to see the Maule at all. :lazy:

People will make decisions about buying DLC based on the free content. If the free content does not have enough to convince them to buy the DLC, it is Microsoft's fault, not the player's or the reviewer's for not being interested enough to spend any money.

There's a huge difference between Joe Average User and a so-called "Reviewer" or "Editorializer." These two worthies owe it to their readership to be both fair and balanced, and also to perform their due-diligence......otherwise whatever they conclude; pro or con, is nothing but versose vending of vacuous verbiage.

Start a dear Microsoft thread.

No... don't. (Bad idea... really really bad idea)...

At this point, MS is probably looking at us like this:

I doubt that.. I suspect that if there is any "look" at all, it is probably closer to =

That is why we are bound and determined that we in AVSIM are going to rise above that behaviour. If that means that we are considered unfair and harsh, then unfortunate as that is, then so be it. This forum will not go the way it did before and have to be shut down because it was so toxic. It will not!

+1

Well, at least in FSX you do not have to open an XML file and edit it to calibrate a joystick??

I am having big fun with MS Flight and I haven't touched or looked at an xml file or anything.Now tell me you didn't need to edit a cfg or two (or more) to get FSX running better...?Remember those HUGE posts Nick N made to get FSX running a bit better but still not as well as MS Flight runs 'out of the box'...?How many people bought SEVERAL new computers before they could run FSX a bit satisfactory while MS Flight works well for 99% of its users on theur CURRENT pc, so NOT the one they will purchase in 5 years time?Saying that MS Flight isn't good because SOME people may need/want to edit an XML and saying that hence FSX is better while that program requires you to tweak the hell out of every cfg AND setup your OS in all kinds of time consuming ways AND requires a lot of new hardware before it can be run well enough (and stil not as good as MS Flight) is a bit er... not right.

So..... do a letter writing campaign. Start a dear Microsoft thread. Make a list of improvements and ask if they are coming and why they were not included etc. Make criticisms that don't sound like "But we want our old stuff back!"*Stamps foot and holds breath*Is the intent to change things or vent spleens?At this point, MS is probably looking at us like this: :shok:

HelloWell we did try while the Beta was on, but the MS Flight! team are not great listeners it seems.But they did add prop and mixture controls as originally these were not planned either.Proportional toe brakes would be a step in the right direction, we can only hope.