But mixture and prop rpm adjustments were added to Flight before it was released. And BOTH of these items are flightsimulator elements, NOT game elements.So, Atilla, I'm curious. What flight simulator development team have you ever been a member of? Because, if you do not have some actual experience, how would you know what the priorities might be? What percentage of uses of Flight (or even FXS) even have pedals with toe brakes?

I already stated this somewhere else. I was part of the team developing a DC-10 simulator at CAE in Montreal. Admittedly it was a long time ago, but nevertheless, I have programming and simulation experience.I don't know why my main point is being ignored by you and n4gix. I simply stated that Larry is right. If it were up to me, a simulation enthusiast, one of the first things that would have worked on my plane is the control inputs. This includes the toe brakes and the prop pitch and mixture controls - and I mean as soon as I had enough code to test the inputs.There is no way that I would have gone to beta without these controls working. MS simply forgot them. Why keep defending MS by saying that they fixed two out three once it was pointed out to them. This was my main point.

Game? Sim? I don't really care what it's called, call it a Dill Pickle if you want... I'm just enjoying having fun with it!

LOLOLOL :LMAO: That is the best post from all sides that I have read tonight!

Game? Sim? I don't really care what it's called, call it a Dill Pickle if you want... I'm just enjoying having fun with it!

LOL Thanks, that's what I was trying to say when I wrote the first post.

There is no way that I would have gone to beta without these controls working. MS simply forgot them. Why keep defending MS by saying that they fixed two out three once it was pointed out to them. This was my main point.

HelloThese are things fundamental to a flight simulator, toe brakes ok well maybe they got overlooked in the rush to push this out of the door.But mixture and prop should have been amongst the first control inputs coded and tested, thats if the intention was really to build a sim.Still as long as we see some of the omissions showing up in the frequent updates then all is good. that and some dialog with the MS team outside of Josua's interviews, it would be nice to hear there thoughts after the release has settled down, I miss the ACES blogs.

Anyone that's seen my video on YT will know my openion. Its a SIM with GAME ELEMENTS. But I dont know of a SINGLE GAME out there that has clickable cockpit and simulates sub-systems like fuel transfer, VOR, ILS and cross winds.Remember in the past SIMS didnt have ANY of the stuff people are saying disqualifies Flight as a sim. Any ATC in FS1? How about FS95, 98, 2000? It wasent till 2002 that MSFS had ATC. So I guess all sims before that are not sims? Even the simple Link Trainer is a sim. Lets not forget that.

Just some idle musing here.In another thread, a study (assuming its accurate) has been posted positing very low numbers for interest in flight simulation amongst the general public. Complexity, and presentation seem to be the deciding factors, and it appears (if the numbers are correct) that interest amongst the general populace after being exposed to a "real" simulator is extremely low.One wonders what this would do to acceptance of flight! if all of the complicated systems that are being demanded (right now if not yesterday) really were implemented as a first priority.Would we simply be setting ourselves up for the same shrinking niche market that we have now?

Edited March 5, 201214 yr by HiFlyer'

I don't know why my main point is being ignored by you and n4gix. I simply stated that Larry is right. If it were up to me, a simulation enthusiast, one of the first things that would have worked on my plane is the control inputs. This includes the toe brakes and the prop pitch and mixture controls - and I mean as soon as I had enough code to test the inputs.

Because your main point is flawed. And your initial post where you wrote that there were "no entries for prop pitch and mixture," was flat out wrong. I could adjust both Prop RPM and Mixture with my joystick while flying the Stearman on my first day of beta testing (on Jan 5th). Yes, both could only be done with button presses (and not through axis assignments), but there WERE entries in the Aircraft Control Options, listed under my Saitek X52 even back then. And differential braking worked during the beta in the RV-6A . . . with keyboard presses. And all 3 were greatly improved before Flight was released.

There is no way that I would have gone to beta without these controls working. MS simply forgot them. Why keep defending MS by saying that they fixed two out three once it was pointed out to them. This was my main point.

Again, you're posting misleading information. And I am not defending MS . . . I am defending the Flight Team, because I feel that they did a pretty amazing job in making Flight's released version as good as it is. Near the end of the beta, they made 759 bug fixes, which is no small accomplishment. Is Flight perfect? No, not by a long shot. But it is still a pretty good flightsim and a LOT of people here seem to be enjoying it. What I don't get is why you are still posting here in this forum. You've stated that you have not even downloaded the released version of Flight. Yet here you are, nearly every day, adding your negative posts about Flight. How is that beneficial to AVSIM or to anyone?

Edited March 5, 201214 yr by Arwen

What I don't get is why you are still posting here in this forum. You've stated that you have not even downloaded the released version of Flight. Yet here you are, nearly every day, adding your negative posts about Flight. How is that beneficial to AVSIM or to anyone?

You should, because I have already posted that I am in the market for the right DLC and so on. I am a user of this product, free or not, so I believe I have every right to say how I would like to see it improved. Why did you post all of your negative posts about what you don't like? How is that different? I am not going on about the same thing. Note that I am not starting any threads, I hardly ever jump in and say "met too". When I post, it is because someone posted something I disagree with. Usually once per thread. Unless of course I get someone trying to lecture me or tell me to leave. Then I am far more prone to defend myself and keep posting.Your posts of demanding to reveal my gametag, then wanting to know how I have simulation software experience and now wanting to know why I keep posting here is out of line, considering that you are now Avsim Staff. I consider your posts to me a bullying tactic. The fact is though, that when YOU are dissatisfied with something in flight, you can harp on it numerous times, like the cockpit-less mustang.Please, take a look in the mirror and stop harassing me.

Edited March 5, 201214 yr by Attila

Game? Sim? I don't really care what it's called, call it a Dill Pickle if you want... I'm just enjoying having fun with it!

NOTE: That has now been copyrighted, and you no longer have any right to use it. Look for it to appear in a FLIGHT SIM MAGAZINE near you. All proceeds for that saying will go toward an orphaned FUIII owner... someday.

:LMAO:Seriously.. that was funny and needs to be remembered by everyone. It will come back to us over and over again, I am sure.

You should, because I have already posted that I am in the market for the right DLC and so on. I am a user of this product, free or not, so I believe I have every right to say how I would like to see it improved.

You have stated that you are still using the beta version of Flight, and not even using the released version. Yet you continue to post negative comments about it. On Feb 9th the Flight Team posted: "We’ve reviewed over a thousand bugs and as of noon today, we’ve fixed 759 bugs. You can check out some of the improvements we’ve made at the bottom of this post. If a bug that was filed hasn’t been fixed in this initial release, it has been reviewed and will be considered for a future update." So you are finding fault with the beta version of Flight, which is still full of bugs, not the released updated version.If you were truly interested in Flight, and on seeing it improved, why aren't you even using the improved released version?I just read through a bunch of your most recent posts. and most of them were negative, and some included some very misleading negative untruths about Flight, The fact is you have been hammering on Flight for months now, and it is getting very old. And I am not the only one who feels this way.

Why did you post all of your negative posts about what you don't like? How is that different?

Because very few of my posts have been "all negative." Most also include positive content. And I'm not jumping into positive threads and trying to tear down Flight, or the poster's enthusiasm for it. Plus the vast majority of my posts are positive, and many are my efforts to try to help others enjoy Flight, who are having some problems with it.

I am not going on about the same thing.

No? How many times have you posted that Flight is not a simulator?

When I post, it is because someone posted something I disagree with. Usually once per thread. Unless of course I get someone trying to lecture me or tell me to leave. Then I am far more prone to defend myself and keep posting.

Wait just one second, you jumped on my reply to Larry's post in this thread. And in trying to make your point, you posted very misleading "facts" about Flight.

Your posts of demanding to reveal my gametag

I asked once, since you claimed to be a beta tester. And I gave you mine. That is hardly demanding.

now wanting to know why I keep posting here is out of line, considering that you are now Avsim Staff.

If anyone on this forum is here only to tear down Flight, and clutter the place with the same type of negative posts, over and over again, then I am going to step in. That is part of my job as moderator.

I consider your posts to me a bullying tactic.

Have I deleted ANY of your posts? Have I even edited ANY of your posts?My comments were meant as warnings, and I was doing my best to be diplomatic.I am not the only member of the AVSIM staff who has warned you about your negative posts.

The fact is though, that when YOU are dissatisfied with something in flight, you can harp on it numerous times, like the cockpit-less mustang.

I have hardly "harped" on the Mustang. And there is a difference between expressing an opinion and trying to force your opinion on others. You don't see me jumping in on positive posts about the Mustang, posting how terrible it is, or trying to ridicule someone because they happen to like flying it.I am not going to argue with you about this. You have been warned about your tactics here, so be smart and listen, instead of trying to debate with me.

Edited March 5, 201214 yr by Arwen

For anyone who thinks Flight might be a game... just try to fly the Icon inverted. Bit of an odd thing for a game to model, eh?(OK, you'll need to have the realistic options switched on... I wonder how many people remembered that step?)As for the Mustang - I was flying multiplayer last night (I always set my session to public, and there's my AI!) and a chap was all over my Maule in the Mustang. Sure, he said, there's no VC, which is disappointing... but the SOUND! The way it moved! It's $8 and so very tempting....

The way it moved! It's $8 and so very tempting....

it sure is tempting the 8$.I like many others got the mustang for free from beta testing and i wish this thing had a panel . after flying it for a few hours i think its worth the 8 just to appreciate the designers work .Here is a simple shot over the water . i titled this one Going Nowhere.

Edited March 5, 201214 yr by rtodepart

@chock: I won´t repeat your post, just ask you this:Why do you expect all this from Flight, which obviously is built on the same core as FSX, and apparently a "stripped down" one too?

I never said I expected anything from Flight, all I did was answer the question from the OP - whether Flight is a game or a sim - by pointing out that it is both. I agree that I might like some of that stuff to show up, but I don't expect it. We are not owed anything by MS, it's up to them what they put into Flight as far as additional content is concerned, based on whether there is a viable projected demand for it.All the rest of my reply merely addresses why some people might not consider Flight is enough of a sim for them without such additions, even though they should really wait and see where that issue is concerned, since there was not much in the way of realistic airliners for FSX a week after that was released either.Al

I am not going to argue with you about this. You have been warned about your tactics here, so be smart and listen, instead of trying to debate with me.

I submit that you are losing arguments in various threads and you are resorting to nit-picking when you know perfectly well what the original intent of a post was. You do this not just with my posts, but many others. Now you are going to win an argument solely because you have been given the power to have it your way.As such it is pointless to have a discussion with you.As a footnote, I find that moderators enforcing their views in a public forum is just wrong. At the very least they should be neutral in tone and stance, but the best would be is to stay out of the discussions altogether. Moderators here carry a very big stick and that skews whatever normal discussion there may be, amply demonstrated in various threads.

I submit that you are losing arguments in various threads and you are resorting to nit-picking when you know perfectly well what the original intent of a post was. You do this not just with my posts, but many others. Now you are going to win an argument solely because you have been given the power to have it your way.As such it is pointless to have a discussion with you.As a footnote, I find that moderators enforcing their views in a public forum is just wrong. At the very least they should be neutral in tone and stance, but the best would be is to stay out of the discussions altogether. Moderators here carry a very big stick and that skews whatever normal discussion there may be, amply demonstrated in various threads.

Cool it Attilla. You are far out of order. Here is a reminder of the last statement in the AVSIM ToS:

"Finally, AVSIM is operated by dozens of volunteers enabling your enjoyment and use of the AVSIM system. Any harassment, threats, or other objectionable behavior toward them will result in the harshest of consequences. This is a "One Strike and You Out" offense. There are no excuses for abuse of our volunteers and none will be tolerated"