If they want gamers, they are going to have to add the ability to blow stuff up, shoot stuff down etc, that's just the way it is. They can add racing which will help too, although admittedly you could already do that Flight anyway by arranging a race in chat. But the fact remains that many gamers will see a flying game as boring if you can't bomb and strafe stuff, which is unfortunate, but there you go.One look at where Bohemia Interactive have gone with Take On Helicopters (which is currently a better game than Flight), by adding the Mil-24 Hind as its first expansion, tells you all you need to know about what a developer who knows how to make something that appeals to gamers, thinks is going to sell. Expect an A6M or a B5N2 to fly over your virtual Hawaii sooner or later.Of course the great thing about Flight, is that if you don't want to shoot stuff, then you don't have to buy DLC of that nature. Perhaps they could add Phillipines as DLC, so that gamers who don't want combat could surrender, or maybe Switzerland, so the bipartisan gamers could remain neutral, but still patrol their world's terrain borders in bf-109s.Al

You see, FSX didn't have a combat feature, which means they would actually have to write some original code for Flight! IE... Never going to happen

The Alaska idea was genius as Bush Flying is in a world within it's own

You're not kidding! I struggle to find the airfields around Hawaii so god know what Alaska will be like :o

If they want gamers, they are going to have to add the ability to blow stuff up, shoot stuff down etc, that's just the way it is. They can add racing which will help too, although admittedly you could already do that Flight anyway by arranging a race in chat. But the fact remains that many gamers will see a flying game as boring if you can't bomb and strafe stuff, which is unfortunate, but there you go.

It would definitely attract a larger crowd, and while most simmers may not embrace this, it would be good for the longevity of the game. My only concern would be implementation, I wouldn't want to go into a multiplayer session and end up in a warzone. Do you think the RV-6 could lift a 20mm cannon if it were strapped to the bottom? I wouldn't want to go out unprepared.

Just do what the humble Piper Cub did; it is responsible for putting more explosives on target than any other aeroplane in history, since it was an artillery liaison aircraft in WW2, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. Actually, one of them was notable for destroying several German tanks and other military vehicles in WW2 with modified infantry M1A1 bazookas lashed under its wings.Al

I actually want FS11 ..........

Since Hawaii can take a good more than 1G, I suspect that to render the entire Earth like that ...would take a lot of Terras (sic)

Wow, I love a good Piper Cub. It is actually the only GA airplane I have ever flown on in real life, it was a blast, literally the wind with the side of the plane open will give you a new hairstyle quickly. It was one of the best flying experiences I have ever had, and hope that the plane eventually graces the skies of Flight. I will have to give it to the people that flew those into a combat situation, they must have had nerves of steal.

Since Hawaii can take a good more than 1G, I suspect that to render the entire Earth like that ...would take a lot of Terras (sic)

The entire package is 862mb when installed. The scenery is only 483mb.

I doubt we will see air combat in Flight...but I'm not sure how far you can go with challenges and missions.We have SAR missions and cargo hauling and PAX carrying missions...ok adding difficult weather options can make those somewhat interesting.Then we have landng challenges and HOOP challenges etc...But no formation flying challenges, no carrier landing challenges, no midair refueling challenges - these are also part of flight...the discipline of formation break to landing in proper order, from a properly flown pattern - so much of online Flight is just a jumble of planes crossing the field in every direction, landing in chaos etc...it might be fun to incorporate the actual disciplines of flying into the game - something usefull with the explanation that even in uncontrolled airspace there is a way of doing things and good reasons for themI heard a few ideas for missions including crop dusting and fire fighting that probably wouldn't include too much alteration to Flight - those would be good ideas IMOI can already hear the fire boss lining up the drops and calling out the traffic -I personally dont see how adding a carrier group and a decent jet trainer like the T-45 and having carrier quals or some midair refueling challenges would terribly alter the character of Flightbeyond reason - but that is just my own opinionMaybe team aerobatcs or mock combat using gun cameras that could be reviewed afterward would be fun...?I can imagine that if /when Alaska is rolled out and the DH-2 is unveiled - it might be fun to have to earn your floats (and paints...and skis) rather than just the paintsmaybe having to carry a certain number of passengers safely to unlock the Twin Otter or Caravan or whatever larger plane there might be..ideas

Can anybody tell me why an WWI mode was fine for FS4 but totally out the question for Flight?

Because there's ROF now ?.....

Microsoft needs to add more fire to the flame

There you've said it !Sure we can fight and have fire and flames but still keep it 'civil' by not using guns or bombs but water and retardant...Aerial Firefighting has never been realisticly done in any flight sim ( correct me if i'm wrong ) and certainly not in any of the MSFS iterations. Many firefighting versions of MSFS aircraft have actually been created. Fires too. We can make them drop water or retardant on these fires but no daring firefighting hero ( Pete Sandich, played by Richard Dreyfuss in 'Always' springs to mind ) has ever managed to actually kill a fire in MSFS. It just seems not possible.I bet with MSFlight nothing would be easier to start a bush fire and it would probabely not be that difficult either for these devs to make us kill it if sufficient water and/or retardant is dropped (smack dab) onto it.Imagine the exitement and reward ( if you come out alive... )cheers,jan

Firefighting would be very cool as an add on. Didn't FSX have a "drop payload" command? I wonder if that snuck into Flight's coding...

Firefighting would be very cool as an add on. Didn't FSX have a "drop payload" command?

Yes, dropping stuff in FS9 or FSX is no problem. I setup a firefighter version of our (Maam-Sim) FS9 B-25.We approached various programmers but non had a clue how to dispose of a scenery object like 'a fire' when certain conditions were met. Therefor we dropped the project. Pity, it could've add some good action ...

FS4 I believe also had crop dusting which is another great idea (firefighting is as well). The thing is with Flight struggling to get acceptance clear the gammot on what Flight Simulator had in the past and see if it catches on. From there the developers can have a better since in how to guide Flight into the future. It's apparent there's still a software identity crisis and uncertain path going on in Redmond concerning Flight (or anything Flight Simulator related). WWI worked with the Red Baron in FS4, try that. Crop Dusting worked in the past, try that. Alaska Bush flying was suggested here so I'm glade we're getting that. If I were the developers I'd take all these ideas and create DLC content for them. Also address Europe with some Alps scenery or whole regions. There's no shortage of great ideas. From there a year and a half has went by and they could start taking things to the next level by bringing in 3PD with an SDK release and expanding the rest of the world. Whole regions could be offered in detail like Europe, South America, North America, etc. The skies the limit were things could go and how popular Flight could be, the developers just have to listen which is something many don't do including many of our current add-on developers (then they wonder why their products don't sell).

I never get these 'gamer' comments. What the heck are these strange 'gamer' creatures that flight will only appeal to if it adds explosions?Chaps, I suspect most of us here are gamers. I definitely am, but I'm happy flying Flight as a game/sim replicating civilian aviation.MS are not trying to capture the hardcore FPS crowd, or the real-time strategy demographic, or the gamers who are still playing Scott Adam's adventures. They're predicting that there are a large number of potential 'gamers' in the world who want the experience of flying GA planes over interesting landscapes. There's already plenty of air combat sims and games in the world. MS should stick to their plan and focus on civilian aviation - and focus on making this aspect of the game better. There's clearly plenty of work still to be done there. They wouldn't have embarked on this project if their market research didn't suggest the target audience was out there.P.S. I put 50 hours plus in to mass effect 3 when it was released the week before last. So i really do think it's possible to be a 'gamer' - and i mean the more stereotypical 'likes shooting things variety' - and still be fully engaged with Flight.

Considering the number of agriculture strips in Hawaii and the presence of one of the more popular crop-dusters in the game already, I'm rather baffled that they didn't include any crop-dusting jobs.