There should be an option to have AI and ATC in Flight.

Optional at extra cost.Hook

Sure, no free lunch!

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

Options are fine. I can run FS9 on my computer at a reasonable frame rate but I find the overall immersion poor due to the graphics. I cannot run FSX worth a damn - when it is dumbed down to run the overall immersion feels worse than FS9. Flight on the other hand runs well at full settings. I am all too aware that adding features can hit performance so I would not want anything imposed that kills the performance I am now enjoying. That said a bit better ATC comes for me before AI traffic.

Multiplayer traffic and AI traffic will influence in very different ways.Example: an AI Grumman Goose has lined up for a short airfield landing, suddenly it *dives* to the right when it sees an aerocashe! ... Not very likely...Example 2: an AI plane enroute to Anchorage suddenly makes a hazardous landing at a local road because the passenger had a bathroom emergency... Not very likelyExample 3: player Hotshot66x has flown for one hour on a steady course inbound on the Honolulu Intl vor. Strictly keeping to the FAA regulations he will fly no lower than 500 feet AGL before entering a standard lefthand traffic pattern... NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!Basically with AI traffic players will see a closer to realistic aircraft behavour.Multiplayer with 15 year-old casual players? It will be a kindergarten... Im talking from experience on fshost :)(Devs: please lets have more options for making "exclusive" game rooms.)-

Optional at extra cost.

I think that*'s a general problem with AI and ATC: It raises the costs for all sceries. Suddenly they have to implement taxi ways for all bigger airports. How can these elements interact with the missions or jobs?You suddenly have to plan multiple times, on the one hand for users without ATC and AI and for users with ATC and AI.So i must admit that I see a reason why they simply dropped AIs and ATC.

Multiplayer with 15 year-old casual players? It will be a kindergarten... Im talking from experience on fshost :)

I remember my time in kindergarten being fun.

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

Not really what I thought about. The problem with many missions is: They are pretty repetitive.It would be much more interesting if conditions would change during such flights.If their would be a financial environment (You have to pay for fuel and repairs) there could be real emergency missions and so on.We can walkaround the basic problem as we like: We fly around in a dead and static map!

Mixing aviation and kindergarten... As long as I knew how to stay away from the fighter-plane kamikatzes it was fun to watch. 747 on shortest possible runway seemed to be a favourite. Some would just leave the computer to go for dinner while they were parked on the runway, basically a very spontanous lot :)-

This is not about replacing what we have, but about expanding Flight, to make it a more complete simulator.

For me, this is an important topic. Currently Flight is a big improvement on what has gone before (default) but presents us with a world devoid of any form of life, which is not natural. So I need to see evidence of human activity in the landscape i.e. AI traffic in all its forms. Let's have it as an option, or set of options, that we can turn on if our rigs can support it.

Not really what I thought about. The problem with many missions is: They are pretty repetitive.

Yeah, missions are so boring.... extremely repetitive also from a weather point of view. Ok you can change the weather manually but the missing of real world weather cuts all of the fun.There should be few dozens of missions type instead of only one with ducks noises or pigs ones, quite pathetic IMO.

It would be much more interesting if conditions would change during such flights.

If you've flown in Isolated Thunderstorms much you'll see conditions change. Will you ever! :DHook

I remember my time in kindergarten being fun.

For the teacher? :LMAO:

Optional at extra cost.Hook

Why does it need to be "at extra cost?" MP isn't something we are charged extra for.I could argue that AI should be a basic core feature, so it should be included as part of Flight's free core download.MS is already charging for all the scenery (beyond the Big Island of Hawaii) and all the aircraft (beyond the Icon and the Stearman), and AI will generate more interest in Flight, which will lead to more DLC interest. Charging for every basic feature of the game is not going to work . . . it will just further turn users away from Flight,The biggest current problem with Flight (in my opinion) is that it does not hold the majority of users' interest for long enough. Most people are not going to pay for any DLC unless they really enjoy the free download. Adding more simulator features to the free core (or improving existing ones) would generate more interest in Flight.

Why does it need to be "at extra cost?"

So that those who don't want it don't have to pay for it. So that those who do AND ARE WILLING TO PAY can have it. If you want it for free, and wouldn't pay for it, how badly do you really want it? Trust me, if it's included for free you'll pay for it in other ways.Some people want an "option" to have AI and ATC. Some people want an "option" to be a concert pianist. Does this put the word "option" into perspective? I want an "option" to be a billionaire.Hook

So that those who don't want it don't have to pay for it. So that those who do AND ARE WILLING TO PAY can have it. If you want it for free, and wouldn't pay for it, how badly do you really want it? Trust me, if it's included for free you'll pay for it in other ways.

AI and MP should both be optional core features. Why should users who prefer AI over MP have to pay extra for their preferred core feature? If they are going to charge for AI, they should also charge for MP.And it is NOT about whether I'm willing to pay for AI . . . it is about increasing the user base, byt making the core product more interesting. Read my previous post again.