Talking about emailing [email protected] , I did that indeed (a couple of weeks ago), but never got any acknowledgment of receipt. Did you guys ever get any feedback? Note that I was courteous and supportive. I've done what I could, I won't spam them with trackIR requests, I'll just do what I'll do with sims that are promising but problematic at launch: I'll shelve it for now and come back in 3 or 6 months (and hope it's not going to be the same story as IL2 Cliffs of Dover...).

I have emailed them twice regarding Track IR support, and will probaby do so again here in the next week or so. I have posted in this forum, many times, encouraging others to do the same, and for those that have such as yourself, I thank you very much!I have not received, nor have I expected to receive, any response to come back to my emails. I did not end my email with a tone of a question , like - will you? when will you?I do not expect them to have to take their time to reply, I only want them to see that they have a user out here, one who really likes the Flight program, that adding Track IR support would mean a great deal to. I did also mention, while I bought the current dlc, buying any future dlc will probably be put on hold until such time as it does have Track IR support. Of course in a curteous manner. And I do believe these requests are garnered and analysed, especially when there are many requests coming for one thing. Strength in numbers gang!

I really don't see that emailing in your requests for Track IR support is going to have much of an effect. I may be wrong, but it now seems clear that the emphasis is catering to what the majority (of gamers) wants, not the things that flight simmers want. Based on Joshua Howard's anwsers, the current focus seems to be to make Flight a better game, not a better flightsim.

Most people who go to those shows do not want to see puddle jumpers. They are into sound and speed.

Do you even know what Oshkosh is? Yes, they do have some jets, but anyone who goes to Oshkosh for "sound and speed" are really in the wrong place for that. Its the worlds biggest GA fly-in. Also, how many people go to MUSEUMS for "sound and speed"? Last I checked, museums house mostly static aircraft and are very quiet.

I really don't see that emailing in your requests for Track IR support is going to have much of an effect.

I am sorry, but it absolutely can not hurt. You may be right, you may not be. But darned if I am going to sit by idly and figure well, it won't do any good, why bother.Then I would always wonder...The Flight team asks for feedback, they state they want to hear our opinions and what we would like to see in Flight - well this user is going to do just that, and continue to encourage other users to do the same.

Don,Your same argument could be used for adding ATC, or more dynamic weather, or a plethora of features that would improve the user experience for Flight. As Mr. Howard has alluded to in his interview, these features are considered secondary to the overall experience of Flight. Down the line, the same thing could also be said of trackIR... if Microsoft decides on that direction, then all of the requests and suggestions that were made become a futile effort.The one thing to remember is that Microsoft is looking at Flight in a different light, with a whole new cast of players. That's who they're focusing on, and listening to. Cases in point from the interview:"Our marketing has already done a good job of bringing us the diverse audience we wanted for Flight, and we expect to get better at this over time. One great improvement in the way we now track player behavior is that we can see what players are actually doing, allowing us to pay attention to real user behavior, and not be inappropriately led by the vocal negative minority who post on forums and Facebook."And..."We looked forward to engaging in a productive dialogue with our users, but were disappointed in the degree of non-productive behavior some flight simulator enthusiasts exhibited. If anything, the unwillingness of the simmer audience to accept that Flight was intended to appeal to whole new audiences prompted the team to focus on areas where our engagement with our players is more productive. I want the studio to keep an appropriate balance of considering the needs of all of our customers, simmer or otherwise."Alan

...the current focus seems to be to make Flight a better game, not a better flightsim.

Agree.However, since they are planning only limited areas, they are using the wrong game engine.

That is a gross oversimplification.

Sounds more like a simple statement of fact to me.

Hey guys. Interesting reading about the experiment that is "Flight". Very disappointed with the direction they are going so far. I hope I didn't miss any posts, but reading through I saw one mention the number of Facebook followers or "likes" for 'Flight'. Well I did a quick search for Microsoft Flight Pages and FSX pages on Facebook and came up with the following.Microsoft Flight Pages:http://www.facebook.com/#!/msflight 10,239 Likeshttp://www.facebook.com/#!/MicrosoftFlight2012 41 Likeshttp://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Microsoft-Flight/104411702952366 2,851 LikesMicrosoft Flight Simulator X Pages:http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-X/109562969069904 145,429 Likeshttp://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/FSX/110752908946809 20,556 LikesI know this is a very simple comparison with little scientific value, but the numbers certainly grab your attention...

I know this is a very simple comparison with little scientific value, but the numbers certainly grab your attention...

Flight has been around a few months. FSX has been around for about 6 years. Cant really compare the two. Its like me comparing the current active users on the forum to say Flight is more popular. Currently there are 34 people viewing the FSX forum, and 47 viewing the Flight forum. Those numbers mean nothing. P.S. Flight currently has 3x the number of post's over XP10. So according to you, Flight > XP10?

6 Year comment doesn't mean much either, people familiar with FSX are certain to know about Flight as well. Likes don't represent page views growing over time, they represent people who currently like it. Perhaps its even more telling that FSX followers haven't 'liked' Flight yet and the targetted gamer crowd is not growing all that fast...

I never got bent out of shape about Flight, but at the same time I never was offended or frustrated by the backlash of some in the community, it is thier right to circle the wagons if they want to. If they, like me, have spent thousands on computer equipment, controllers, and software, then go forth and be mad as hell, I really don't think any amount of constructive feedback would have changed the outcome by any margin. It is Microsofts right to do as they please to shape their own future, and it is our right as consumers to wring our fists in their faces if we don't like what they put out,simple as that. I have downloaded Flight, liked it, but it has taken a back seat to FSX, RoF, and DCS, maybe I'll check back with Flight later in the year, or next week, or probably tomorrow.

Hey guys. Interesting reading about the experiment that is "Flight". Very disappointed with the direction they are going so far. I hope I didn't miss any posts, but reading through I saw one mention the number of Facebook followers or "likes" for 'Flight'. Well I did a quick search for Microsoft Flight Pages and FSX pages on Facebook and came up with the following.Microsoft Flight Pages:http://www.facebook....com/#!/msflight 10,239 Likeshttp://www.facebook....osoftFlight2012 41 Likeshttp://www.facebook....104411702952366 2,851 LikesMicrosoft Flight Simulator X Pages:http://www.facebook....109562969069904 145,429 Likeshttp://www.facebook....110752908946809 20,556 LikesI know this is a very simple comparison with little scientific value, but the numbers certainly grab your attention...

<sarcasm>Yes, especially when FSX has been out for like 5 years and Flight has been out for less than 3 weeks...makes total sense! </sarcasm>

Your same argument could be used for adding ATC, or more dynamic weather, or a plethora of features that would improve the user experience for Flight. As Mr. Howard has alluded to in his interview, these features are considered secondary to the overall experience of Flight. Down the line, the same thing could also be said of trackIR... if Microsoft decides on that direction, then all of the requests and suggestions that were made become a futile effort.

I hear what you are saying.However what many seem to be perceiving, is that Track IR is more content for Flight, like ATC, dyamic weather, etc.. Same to be said for them not allowing 3PD's, MS wants to offer that type of content directly themselves.I view, and maybe I am wrong, Track IR totally different. It is a peripheral, not some addon put into Flight, a peripheral that needs to be supported through the program.Many Track IR users such as myself, now view the device as critical to have for their flight simming, or gaming if you will, as their joystick.Joystics are peripherals, Throttles are peripherals, rudder pedals are peripherals - these items allow you to control the movements, of if the airplane. Track IR allows one to control the movements of the view in the airplane. It is just another peripheral.Already, Flight supports my stick, my throttle , and my rudder pedals. Heck not only that , it recognized my controls as TM Cougar, which is what it is.So Flight is already supporting peripherals for us flight simmers - it was not released as just a mouse and keyboard game. Including native Track IR support, would not be the first rodeo for MS, they have already done it in the past. Adding support for this peripheral, to allow for better view movement, they can do and probably do easily. I just am not sure they realize, how many users there are that feel this way and how big a deal it is for them - just like if we didn't have joystick support and had to use the mouse for controlling the aircraft, that is much how it feels to us, to control our view without our Track IR. I will still say, and will always say, let them know how important this issue is for you. I can say for me at least, important enough even though I am loving this sim, I will not go further with it unless a: they state it will be added and when, or b: they add it in for the next dlc release.Ok I will shut up now, I think I have beat this horse enough in this thread. :smile:Respectully submitted,

Thank you Tom for the interview. Very insightful questions.MS nor the flight sim community ever talk hard facts. Aviation is a numbers driven business but the real reasons behind FLIGHT lay undisturbed.1. How many copies of FSX have been sold. How many are bought each day?2. How many unique users does FSX have. How many are novice, hardcore?3. How much is spent on customized hardware?4. Is 3rd party development for FSX a profitable enterprise?5. Licensing is where Xbox makes money? Why can't the same be true for simulation?If this hobby is to thrive, we need an alternate sim. If MS chooses not to be part of the simulation community lets start focusing our efforts on a Developer that will talk in facts,and provide a platform for the next 10 years. Lets not beg MS to service a market they have no interest in.

Honestly, if Flight does for this new generation what the old sims did for me, then I'd say mission accomplished. If this is what appeals to this generation, then I say go for it.

I think you have hit the nail on the head !!!FLIGHT is for the "New Generation", and is typically what the majority of the "New Generation" want.Instant gratification, maximum play for minimum work, and a short attention span, before jumping on to something else.No doubt it WILL be very sucessful, and give MS a good ROI -- which these days, is the bottom line.Have a "Nice Flight" ----