J. Howard Joshua Howard Interview with AVSIM

[Oracle427 45]

Arwen,You may consider me to be... Served. :Peace:

[Spartan0536 49]

Ok as for AI....General Aviation AI, with servers that can hold 60 people and for sizes like Alaska maybe 120 GA AI is not needed.Sea based AI still is as does Gorund Based to make it seem like something down there is aliveAirliner AI, yes it is needed, you can make it sparse if you want, does not need to clutter the ATC.with these settings I'm sure most people would be satisfied, I actaully didn't mind the droning ATC in FS9/FSX, it did its job, however the only real problem I had was they would send me way off course to line up for landings, if thats fixed and they sound more human, I am all for it, well I want ATC anyway even if it is from FSX, its better than nothing.

[newthog 0]

On second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place

I see, Sir, that you are a man of science!

Aviation touches all aspects of life in rural Alaska

We were staging through Elmendorf on our way to Osan - crew rest started Sep 10, 2001. The next few days, while ALL aviation was grounded, it was eery how quiet it was...you get used to the "background noise" of all the singles and light twins flying around. AI traffic around the major hubs would be great - but how much of a performance hit will that require? Is Microsoft intentially keeping Flight simple so it can be ran on lower-end computers?

[simmerhead 885]

Is Microsoft intentially keeping Flight simple so it can be ran on lower-end computers?

Either that or they ran into more problems than they originally anticipated when rewriting FSX to Flight.

[LHookins 3,117]

Is Microsoft intentially keeping Flight simple so it can be ran on lower-end computers?

That's exactly right. After releasing FSX which wouldn't run with options maxed on any computer then in existence, they learned a valuable lesson. Also, they're trying to lure in new people, and not everyone is going to have the hottest new gaming machine.Actually, I got the impression that they intended FSX to still be viable a few years after release as computers caught up to the options in the game. My first hint that FSX was likely going to be the last Microsoft Flight Simulator. I was surprised to see Flight announced.Hook

[MacGoose 0]

At least we now have decent voice syntesizing and text to speech engines. I wouldn't mind them using synthesizing. I even remember that pre FSX, when an airport didn't have a recorded voice, it could easily syntesize it even back then.Anyway, with Hawaii as our world creating voices for airports, etc, wouldn't take long.

[mgh 89]

Actually, I got the impression that they intended FSX to still be viable a few years after release as computers caught up to the options in the game. My first hint that FSX was likely going to be the last Microsoft Flight Simulator. I was surprised to see Flight announced.Hook

Some people here argue that FSX was the last simulator. Flight is a game ....shock..horror!

[LHookins 3,117]

Flight is a game ....shock..horror!

Yeah, isn't it awful!? :D I hope you're having as much fun with it as I am.Imagine having aerocaches and sightseeing tours in FSX. Not that it would be possible to have that with worldwide coverage, of course, but in a few select areas at least. These are pretty much the same activity, just scored differently.$100 hamburger runs. That's pretty much what we were doing in FSX if we flew GA all the time. At least Flight gives us some feedback from passengers, with the possibility of getting a few awards and achievements. That feedback also teaches us how to keep a passenger happy. It's pretty cool just *having* passengers.Jobs board. You either bought an add-on for that or rolled dice. I rolled a lot of dice. Bought fuel at real world prices courtesy of http://www.airnav.com and had a maintenance allowance. All very serious flying.I don't remember the last time I did aerobatics or flew under a bridge, just for fun, before Flight. It wasn't in FSX. Probably FS98. I also don't remember the last time I had so much fun with a flight sim. I thought those charter flights I mentioned in the above paragraph were fun until I got Flight, and noticed what I was missing. I don't think I ever flew inverted in FSX, although I remember flying a 747 inverted under the Golden Gate Bridge several versions back. You know. Fun. Hook

[dburne 2]

After releasing FSX which wouldn't run with options maxed on any computer then in existence, they learned a valuable lesson.

Yes it barely ran decent with most options turned all the way down at release...Even today one is hard pressed to find a system to run it fully maxed out without FSX bringing it to it's knees -especially with any decent addons.Hardware is still trying to catch up to FSX - just take a look at the FSX forum on any given day now, and how many posts there are related to trying to get decent performance, all the various tweaks to squeak just a couple more fps out of it.I sure don't seen any threads of that nature here in the Flight forum. Most threads here are about , well, flying.

[Longranger 148]

Hardware is still trying to catch up to FSX - just take a look at the FSX forum on any given day now, and how many posts there are related to trying to get decent performance, all the various tweaks to squeak just a couple more fps out of it.

Well, FSX had the Standard problem of several projexts at this time. All expected the continuation of the GHz race, but the computers took a different turn. Our computers are not the computers FSX had in mind.That's the real difference to Flight. They simply made better use of the GPU and Multicores.In fact in a way their game elements try to continue the original ideas of FSX. Even things like Missions were implemented. But some of the skipped elements are a real problem. Especially the lack Weather changes in normal flights. .

[LHookins 3,117]

the lack Weather changes in normal flights. .

Fly in Isolated Thunerstorms and tell me there are no weather changes. :)Hook

[rtodepart 761]

As far as AI goes im not missig it at all in Flight (I mean air traffic not ground vehicles) Now i know that if i see another plane there is a real person at the controls . imagine a session that can hold alot more than 16 pilots with some kind of small test to see if you can comunicate the proper way and if you can pass that test you get acces to this new session where the more seriuos pilots flight? and now with the avility to use the radios the way they are supouse to work in RL i can imagine a more realistic enviroment up in thte sky .

[Arwen 289]

As far as AI goes im not missig it at all in Flight (I mean air traffic not ground vehicles) Now i know that if i see another plane there is a real person at the controls . imagine a session that can hold alot more than 16 pilots with some kind of small test to see if you can comunicate the proper way and if you can pass that test you get acces to this new session where the more seriuos pilots flight? and now with the avility to use the radios the way they are supouse to work in RL i can imagine a more realistic enviroment up in thte sky .

The thing is, not everyone agrees with you that MP is better than having AI. And what about users who cannot remain connected to the Internet? That pretty much leaves them out.Asking for AI does not mean that I want MP to be discontinued. This is not about replacing what we have, but about expanding Flight, to make it a more complete simulator.Having more options is rarely a bad thing for anyone. If you don't want AI, or your system cannot handle it, you can just turn it off (like you can in FSX).

[rtodepart 761]

Arwen all I was trying to say its that I like interacting wirh real people and not AI. Dont take my reply the wrong way.im not forgetting about the other guys that dont have internet available all the time.

[tom79 6]

To summarize this:There should be an option to have AI and ATC in Flight.Anyone opposed?