Outrageous Pricing hurting Microsoft Flight......

[Guest mna27]

Another thought is to maybe charge sedately for the missions and planes. How about $5 for the plane, and $5 for the missions? For me I could care less about the missions, I just want the Maule to fly, and if they're considering the missions as part of the price, I think they should be sold separately.

[Guest]

flight is nothingelse than a money spin for Ms!

Er... which product created by a commercial company is NOT a money spin...?Another thing which afaik I know hasn't been mentioned yet, but if MS really wanted to turn MS Flight into a money spin, they'd go the World of Warcraft way (or any other mmorpg) and charge a monthly fee for MS Flight. They let us play online (max. of 16, okay) for free, the gave the basic game for free... Instead of saying 'Thank you' people moan. How much money have some of you spend on WoW or similar games...? Well...? And are they accused of milking us or overpricing stuff?

[Rush1169 0]

I certainly don't want to lob out $15 for each and every step towards a flyable sim with all the bells and whistles. It will cost a fortune.

Many of us "lobbed out" $120 for FSX+Accel then $80 for a PMDG plane, $30 x 10 for airports, $45 x 5 for scenery, 10 x $30 for various planes. . . so, for many of us, $15 per step is nothing ;) - Just wish it would come faster, LOL

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

Not an economist here but Microsoft has obligation to shareholders to make profits, and Microsoft is raising the barrier of entry to Flight , milk the cow, so to speak. Once the cow is milked they will let 3rd party developers in as the large return on its investment diminished. Microsoft may do things that dont make sense, but they know when sales decline on DLC they will lower the price.In the end the planes will likely be cheaper than what 3rd party people charge for today. Bet they will give out more free stuff to lay the bait to buy their payware goods on flight. Microsoft is thinking of the causal and regular fliers with this one, and its know it will never satisfy the hardcore flyers, and I cant blame them. I can see this Microsoft flight like US steel or Standard Oil 101 if you join them in future you will have good sales etc, but if you compete with on payware they will under-cut you to drive you out.

[Stoli151 6]

Also given Microsoft's history they could close up shop on this tommorow and if I pay $20 for the maule and $20 for the rest of hawaii. I'd be stuck with a sim that had only 3 planes no atc and could only fly around Hawaii(by myself) for the low price of $40. Like I said unless things are cheaper I'll wait and see.

Edited March 4, 2012 by Stoli151

[Rush1169 0]

Also given Microsoft's history they could close up shop on this tommorow. . .I'd be stuck with a sim that had only 3 planes no atc and could only fly around Hawaii(by myself) for the low price of $40.

MSFT closing shop tomorrow is far fetched, don't you think? Actually, MSFT has a 30 year history continuous of flight development - take a risk, live on the edge - just the improved flight model is well worth the price. . .

[Stoli151 6]

MSFT closing shop tomorrow is far fetched, don't you think? Actually, MSFT has a 30 year history continuous of flight development - take a risk, live on the edge - just the improved flight model is well worth the price. . .

Not really seeing there should have been a SP3 for FSX. Don't get me wrong I do want to see flight succeed.

[Longranger 148]

M$ obviously didn't like the idea of money going to developers instead of them or even the idea that stuff was free. They weant all the money for themselves.

I think this has the wrong perspective. Microsoft itself doesn't think this way. There was a small team with a proposal to sell DLC with the help of an old program. Nothing more nothing less. Now everything is the responsibilty of this flight team and they have to worry how to reach the numbers, that they promised to Microsoft. How high were these numbers? In fact it is a pretty common mistake by these projects that they set numbers that were to high, to win against other projects.It is a miscoception 6that people think that the history of Flight Simulators from Microsoft is a real issue. This is only an issue if someone like the CEO uses these words. If the project doesn't loose much money no onwe takes a critical look at its budget.If Flight doesn't shows some signs of success, they can loose their budget, without any second thought. Edited March 4, 2012 by Longranger

[hellcat38 0]

I just want to start out with saying I like how Microsoft Flight looks and feels alot...I think the flight physics are way better then FSX...this simulator has alot of potential...it's just lacking key features now like VOR's working...or a flight planner etc...I think the high prices are turning a lot of people away from Microsoft Flight.....including me. $15 for one plane......that is steep, what if I want to buy 5 planes in the future?I could understand the $15 price tag if the whole world was available to fly in, or if there was a flight planner, or if radio navigation worked.....but $15 to fly on one little island is too much. I'm definitely not even gonna think about buying any planes till there are at least working VOR's.HOWEVER, if the Maul/Vr6 were $5 each I would of bought them both the first day of launch, and I think I speak for thousands of others. Would you rather me and thousands of others not to spend a penny on these high priced planes, or would you like $5 at least?Which is better, 2,000 people paying $15......or 10,000 people paying $5. Obviously you want as many customers as possible, and as many as possible potential customers for future releases as well.Especially at launch with these limited features....the price should be the cheapest now for planes....just charge more for new regions in the future. $5 planes and maybe $30 regions in the future would make tons of money....

I think the prices for the addons for Flight are pretty cheap compaired to some of the addons for FSX . I have spent hundreds not counting a PC that now runs FSx . And many of these purchased 3rd party addons (mainly aircraft ) now don't work as I run DX10 . I love this quote, "Which is better, 2,000 people paying $15......or 10,000 people paying $5. Obviously you want as many customers as possible, and as many as possible potential customers for future releases as well."I have said the same thing to FSX developers, more time than I can count, but yet they still sell them for the price of a full game . I suppose thats why Microsoft is doing what there doing, Its all about money and FSX developers must be making money .

[NismoRR 191]

Many of us "lobbed out" $120 for FSX+Accel then $80 for a PMDG plane, $30 x 10 for airports, $45 x 5 for scenery, 10 x $30 for various planes. . . so, for many of us, $15 per step is nothing ;) - Just wish it would come faster, LOL

That's how I think of it. I absolutely understand people who use FSX without paying 3PD for any add-ons and just use freeware to their hearts content, and love it at a very reasonable cost. What I don't understand are the FSX users that spend small fortunes on add-ons, as I did, and come on here and complain how expensive the DLC is. If you've purchased a decent amount of add-ons for FSX and think that all of Hawaii and the RV is too expensive for $20, I'm just puzzled. If you don't buy DLC because Fllight is not for you, that's fine, but too expensive? C'mon. I hear guys talking about $5 planes, Heh, If the RV was available in FSX and flew the way it does (which it can't in FSX) and let's say the developer of the plane was Rob from RealAir, and he had it priced anywhere at $40 or less, I'd buy it, just like I did with the Scouts, SF-260, Spitfie, and both Duke's. The RealAir planes imo were the best, and I think the RV is close to that quality. Great gauges, lighting, and the RV flies and lands like nothing else. Edited March 4, 2012 by NismoRR

[bsmfinegan 12]

That's how I think of it. I absolutely understand people who use FSX without paying 3PD for any add-ons and just use freeware to their hearts content, and love it at a very reasonable cost. What I don't understand are the FSX users that spend small fortunes on add-ons, as I did, and come on here and complain how expensive the DLC is. If you've purchased a decent amount of add-ons for FSX and think that all of Hawaii and the RV is too expensive for $20, I'm just puzzled. If you don't buy DLC because Fllight is not for you, that's fine, but too expensive? C'mon. I hear guys talking about $5 planes, Heh, If the RV was available in FSX and flew the way it does (which it can't in FSX) and let's say the developer of the plane was Rob from RealAir, and he had it priced anywhere at $40 or less, I'd buy it, just like I did with the Scouts, SF-260, Spitfie, and both Duke's. The RealAir planes imo were the best, and I think the RV is close to that quality. Great gauges, lighting, and the RV flies and lands like nothing else.

I think you may be missing a crucial point, FSX users who bought paid addons did so to enhance what they already had, namely a complete and fully fledged sim with the whole world modelled.Flight users on the other hand are going to be nickeled and dimed for everything they want, I know who is getting the better deal.Bryan.

[Stoli151 6]

The difference is when you bought addons for FSX you were dealing with a mostly finished product. You knew there was a whole world and atc and ai planes(this is still speculation for Flight). That's the difference to me.

[JimmiG 244]

The value of addon aircraft ties in directly with the amount of scenery and other features available. If you can only fly around Hawaii in static weather with no AI traffic or ATC, a $15 aircraft addon isn't very useful and doesn't add much value. A $15 addon aircraft for a complete simulator with large-scale scenery coverage is a completely different thing.

[Guest Antlab]

$20 for an MS quality aircraft is too much. You consider this is on top of a seriously restricted area of the world compared to what we got with FSX, FS2004 etc... which also included about 10 aircraft as standard!! Rip off!

To be precise, and just to refresh memory, FSX Standard, the basic edition, had 18 different aircrafts, including ultralight, big Jets, choppers, floatplanes and a sailplane. If you like to try simulating different sectors of aviation, I think you will have to wait quite a long time before having the same variety in Flight, and probably spend quite a lot of MS points (hoping you also obtain cockpits and other features as AP).A. Edited March 4, 2012 by Antlab

[arsenal82 120]

had 18 different aircrafts, including ultralight, big Jets, choppers, floatplanes and a sailplane............ whole world - atc - ai - autopilot - real weather -let's make a quick count how it will cost flight to get nowhere as near as fsx:18 aircrafts = around us 380autopilot ?? maybe 30 ?bit more land - so you can actually leave hawaii - 20real weather - course - in real world planes fly real weather - i think so ! 30ai ?? well - in real world there is lots of aircrafts in the sky - especially over the us ! little ai is a must have - 30here we go if not alaska is california - another bit of land + go to pick mushroom on sequoias nat park mission - 30 + 20tell me who is the winner here ??