This thread is just begging for me to write something critical, but all I am going to say is that I have been critical of the moderators and some people who recently became moderators, since the Flight beta started.I stopped posting, because it seemed that I was the last person posting critical views of Flight and my days were numbered.So, kudos to the OP for speaking up and good luck.

I too have muted. Flight seems to be scratching the itch for many, so perhaps this is the flying game they've always wanted. I would only hope for an SP3 on FSX so that the graphics could come up to date.Basically, it seems that AVSIM's Flight forum is biasing towards positive-only posts, which is fine. After all, they did drop the word "simulator" as a strong hint to those of my own ilk.For me, this review nails it: http://www.simhq.com...4/air_518a.htmlI continue to show up hoping to hear news of new elements in the game that might return to the era of "as real as it gets."

I think what we should bear in mind, is Microsoft's stated aim for Flight, which has been known from more or less day one when we heard about it and they published a FAQ on the subject. That is to say, MS wanted a sim that would be accessible to more people, so they would effectively have a bigger cake to slice up when it came to producing add-ons. With that in mind, as we know, they have started with a very different base product; one which does not scare off those who are new to simming.It is all very well being a hard core type who has been into sims for years, such users have had all the complexities something like FSX can simulate introduced to them over literally years of simming with numerous versions of FS of ever-increasing fidelity, which amounts to a very gentle introduction to the complexities of flying. It is easy to forget this when considering someone who is new to sims; that type of person will want a gentle introduction like we who been flying MS FS for years have had. This is what Flight offers in its base product form; i.e. someone dipping a toe into the water does not have to shell out 100 bucks for the privelege of trying it, and does not need to cram ten years of experience of flight sims into five minutes in order to start enjoying flight simming at the computing cutting edge. Those who want hard core stuff can pay for an upgrade to the base sim, and I daresay that MS will be forthcoming with that at some point, in which case, paying for such a hard core upgrade will in fact be no different from paying for a new version of FS with the increased fidelity of systems many desire.Thus, moaning about what Flight is not when you download the base product, is akin to complaining that a quick sandwich (and one you got for free) is not a three-course meal; it's not meant to be, and to argue or complain about that is therefore not a relevant complaint. If in two years time, what MS also said from the outset, about Flight not abandoning the hardcore simmers does not come to pass, and there is no attempt to add stuff to satisfy the hard core types, then complaints about Flight not catering for the old school will have some legitimate basis, but when it is literally a brand new blank canvas, awaiting some DLC and extras, then complaints about expanded fidelity are premature. Even a single fancy airliner add-on takes years to make, so we need to give MS some time to deliver.When we don't give them that time, and start shouting about Flight not being something it is not, nor in fact could be at this point, then it should not be a surprise to see such posts getting canned, because frankly, they are not reasonable, nor indeed reasoned criticisms any more than would be complaining that there was no PMDG NGX on day one of FSX's release back in 2006 - we had to wait over five years for that to happen.Al

I too have muted. Flight seems to be scratching the itch for many, so perhaps this is the flying game they've always wanted. I would only hope for an SP3 on FSX so that the graphics could come up to date.Basically, it seems that AVSIM's Flight forum is biasing towards positive-only posts, which is fine. After all, they did drop the word "simulator" as a strong hint to those of my own ilk.For me, this review nails it: http://www.simhq.com...4/air_518a.htmlI continue to show up hoping to hear news of new elements in the game that might return to the era of "as real as it gets."

I read that review and must say, I am a an experienced flight simmer and I was not horrified as he stated all would be.I personally just don't think for writing a review, he spent much time with it - at least not enough time. I mean he refers to the Van craft, as an RV4.He says all the challenges are short, and very similar - I found them just the opposite.But anyways, it is all about one individidual's perception when writing a review, and that was his.Several serious flight simmers, have now gotten into Flight and are enjoying it very much, and there seem to be more every day. However it will not be for everyone, and there is no problem with that, I am sure there will be many serious simmers that in know way will do Flight - and that is ok. Just like there will be Flight users, that a more in-depth sim like FSX, would never work for them. But that does not mean, if an FSX flyer, finds Flight enjoyable and spends time with it as well, that Flight is the flight sim they always have wanted. For some maybe, but not all.Ah the beauty of at least having another sim, another choice. That's a good thing.I will have to defend Avsim somewhat, while there has been a time or two things might have been done that were questionable, for the most part I have seen several threads here, where there has been civil discourse regarding Flight, FSX, and the differences - pro and con, between them. It is only when things " start" to get out of hand, with personal insults, etc, that they are very quick to lock a thread or delete a post - I am sure because how things got so out of hand prior to the release of Flight...And finally, I will say my best advice to anyone curious about Flight, download the core product, actually spend some time with it, and decide for yourself if it is something you would enjoy or not.

I think what we should bear in mind, is Microsoft's stated aim for Flight, which has been known from more or less day one when we heard about it and they published a FAQ on the subject. That is to say, MS wanted a sim that would be accessible to more people, so they would effectively have a bigger cake to slice up when it came to producing add-ons. With that in mind, as we know, they have started with a very different base product; one which does not scare off those who are new to simming.It is all very well being a hard core type who has been into sims for years, such users have had all the complexities something like FSX can simulate introduced to them over literally years of simming with numerous versions of FS of ever-increasing fidelity, which amounts to a very gentle introduction to the complexities of flying. It is easy to forget this when considering someone who is new to sims; that type of person will want a gentle introduction like we who been flying MS FS for years have had. This is what Flight offers in its base product form; i.e. someone dipping a toe into the water does not have to shell out 100 bucks for the privelege of trying it, and does not need to cram ten years of experience of flight sims into five minutes in order to start enjoying flight simming at the computing cutting edge. Those who want hard core stuff can pay for an upgrade to the base sim, and I daresay that MS will be forthcoming with that at some point, in which case, paying for such a hard core upgrade will in fact be no different from paying for a new version of FS with the increased fidelity of systems many desire.Thus, moaning about what Flight is not when you download the base product, is akin to complaining that a quick sandwich (and one you got for free) is not a three-course meal; it's not meant to be, and to argue or complain about that is therefore not a relevant complaint. If in two years time, what MS also said from the outset, about Flight not abandoning the hardcore simmers does not come to pass, and there is no attempt to add stuff to satisfy the hard core types, then complaints about Flight not catering for the old school will have some legitimate basis, but when it is literally a brand new blank canvas, awaiting some DLC and extras, then complaints about expanded fidelity are premature. Even a single fancy airliner add-on takes years to make, so we need to give MS some time to deliver.When we don't give them that time, and start shouting about Flight not being something it is not, nor in fact could be at this point, then it should not be a surprise to see such posts getting canned, because frankly, they are not reasonable, nor indeed reasoned criticisms any more than would be complaining that there was no PMDG NGX on day one of FSX's release back in 2006 - we had to wait over five years for that to happen.Al

What he said.... :friends: