It's 5:38 am and I stayed up all night just to give everyone a hard time. :diablo: Goodnight! :lazy:Kind regards,

Great great job Mr Allensworth, I imagine how hard it can be to remain calm to ask such objective questions in the storm of trolls inspired by Flight, and all the (sometimes too much) passionate debate around it.However, I feel more unconfortable than ever.My simmer heart tells me to beat MS out, what I did read was hard to believe. I refuse to fly long haul around Hawai.My pro heart tells me that we just had answers from someone who plays his role, and speaks marketing language. After a marketing/business translation, no very much remain from the answers. Politicaly correct answers. A company works for benefits, MS goes where they are: where the largest and most profitable audience is. I understood, am I wrong, that Flight did not reach the target, yet. "Encouraging" figures means under objective.Thanks for this masterpiece of information.

I can't believe he didn't ask him how we're supposed to get the Curvature of the Earth aerocache...

It would be nice if people would write not only about "what" do they feel (like angry, depressed, left behind, disappointed, sour, unsatisfied etc) but also why - and elaborate on that for change :) I guess the letdowns were IR, no 3pd for time being, broading the audience, no plans for long-hauls. That's not THAT bad people, is it? We were promised working business model which would mean more money on everything and thus more goodies, we were promised deepening of simulation, which could mean ATC, AI aircraft, working toe-brakes and more. I would feel bad if those promise were not satisfied - but that is yet to be seen, isn't it.

I can't believe he didn't ask him how we're supposed to get the Curvature of the Earth aerocache...

:Peace:

Interesting read indeed, and the right questions asked. I would love to see Flight opening up for third party devs at some point as I think that's the part which enables the spirit of some sort. It did for FSX and its predecessors, means pay and freeware. I couldn't live with the current monoculture growing into that restricted Flight market.Well, if the guy who's in charge for the idea and concept of Flight reports about good DLC sales, that's not too surprising of course. What else could he say and who could prove him right or wrong? But, apart from that, I think that interview offers a nice and fair chance to allow the Flight devs to respond to the rather harsh third party 'I'm so disappointed' threads we saw, being more or less reasonable. However, they only tell one side of the story which, again, renders the interview very valuable.I hope the Flight folks keep up the pace though. 3 or 4 titles a year isn't that much on the scenery part.

Great interview, almost the questions every simmer would ask.Very bad answers.We definitely are not the core business for this Microsoft game, they are interested in a different marketing target.Why develop the entire world? Why develop features non needed by the majority of customers?A lot of people (he say) are downloading the game and buying planes and expansions, the revenues (he say) are higher than expected, so why change strategy?Our only hope is that gameplayers will be tired and slowly abandon the game after some months, maybe one year (as in the normal videogames lifecicle).After this, the simmers market, generating revenue after many years from the "birth" of FSX, will become an interesting target again.Maybe we need wait two or more years before see an opening to other developers, and maybe at that time, and for me only at that time, MS Flight could become again interesting and worth of a second try.Until that day I believe the best thing we can do is NOT buy any single scenery or plane, hoping in this way to short this time by some months.Only my opinion and strategy.

Good interview and probably a good idea to make it once the dust had settled.I'm as cognitively biased as most of you so I read into that interview what I want to read into it. I'm not going to nitpick every word and sentence coming from mr. Howard, but as a simmer I noted that the simmer aspects of FLIGHT aren't on top of their list. Focus is on the gaming elements which is great news for those who enjoy FLIGHT in its current form and feel the selection of DLC is enough to keep things interesting.Seems my days as a simmer are numbered. It was a fun ride for 20 years, but all good things must end and when you find yourself in a diminishing minority it is better to take cover than fight futile battles. Simmers voices have been heard and ignored.

Until that day I believe the best thing we can do is NOT buy any single scenery or plane, hoping in this way to short this time by some months.Only my opinion and strategy.

I've held back but this has to be the most hilarious comment I've seen in here.. Suggesting people to not buy something is implying that people would buy it but you'd rather they not in the hopes Microsoft bats their eyes at a certain demographic again which isn't getting the attention they currently desire.Makes sense..

Why develop the entire world?

"The entire world" was never developed. It was automatically derived from various datasets, airports came from Jeppesen's databases and most of the terrain was based on public domain (free!) NASA and USGS data. Even when MS Flight doesn't provide worldwide terrain, it would've been very easy for a third party to add it. The real issue here is that Microsoft - for the first time - wants to have absolute control over all aspects of the game only to maximize their own profits. They are deliberately hindering third party development. Can't really blame them, but in the long run I believe it's gonna kill the community that has allowed MSFS to evolve into serious sim territory (see Prepar3D and real world training), as Microsoft is not even trying to push boundaries with its cockpitless P-51 and Maule with broken autopilot.

Until that day I believe the best thing we can do is NOT buy any single scenery or plane, hoping in this way to short this time by some months.Only my opinion and strategy.

Good luck with that, Claudio. I'm sure MS will miss your money (not) :)Blimey, here we go again. A few words from Mr. Howard and the world (limited to a small area around Hawaii) has gone mad! Why do people who don't like Flight have to beat up on everybody/everything connected to it in any way. If you don't like it, go away! Microsoft couldn't care less about the dissenters, that is obvious from the interview. Why is this a suprise/ I think, perhaps, a few people need to go away, take a deep breath and do Business 101.I agree with Chocks sentiments (and others, but they were too many pages back and I forgot what they said already :D)Good interview, Tom. Many thanks for posting it.I've said it before, but I'm a glass half-full person. I took all sorts of stuff from that interview. You know what I took most from it? That MS are considering a whole heap of stuff, some of that stuff will delight some of the dissenters on this forum (and by dissenters I mean ppl who have nothing good to say about MS and Flight and just troll, not ppl who are voicing their very real concerns for a fledgling, and as yet, unfinished product) and that they are, as of now, undecided as to which of these many, many enhancements they are to focus resources on.In any business (I run two very sucessful ones) it is resource that drives any expansion. It is money that provides base resourses. It's not rocket science (my 13-year old daughter - who is far cleverer than me, always says Dad; rocket scince isn't that difficult, why do you always say that? LOL - kids!) MS already know how much money we have spent on FSX (literally in the 000's for me, and that's just on hardware!) They are not stupid. I'll say it again: they are not stupid. But, and it is a big but, they will not devote endless resource to a project that isn't doing brisk business. This means that, if no-one buys DLC, then they will stop making it. If they stop making DLC then people will stop D/L Flight, then there will only be FSX and P3d.I still fly FSx every day. I also fly Flight every day. They give me two totally different experiences. Flight lets me jumps traight in to a very good (even the limited weather there is makes for some cool flying) fast GA sim. FSX lets me pretend to be a 737 pilot. I love both. I shall continue to play both, as long as both are there. be warned though..Enough downers on Flight, not enough users and supporters of Flight, and it will be gone..NOT to be replaced any time soon. But then, we still havr FSX..What's the problem?Of course there are issues with Flight, and I've taken to dropping a little email, or blog post, to MS every time I think of something...I'm polite; I joke a bit, and I point out where I think they have gone "wrong" and "right". If enough of us "hardcore" simmers do the same, who knows...I think some people need to grow up a little, and be careful what they wish for...bestjake

The "simmer" has been summarily dismissed in this interview as being completely unimportant to the future of Flight. I am not at all optimistic abou the future of this platform in any way shape or form.

I have to disagree... The so called "hard core" simmer (whatever that may be) made themselves completely and overwhelmingly irrelevant when their overriding response to Flight was a whining, carping and bleating tirade of negativity with minimal constructive dialogue attempted. Ya gets what ya sow...

The so called "hard core" simmer (whatever that may be) made themselves completely and overwhelmingly irrelevant when their overriding response to Flight was a whining, carping and bleating tirade of negativity with minimal constructive dialogue attempted

/me pipes up in a small voice: Not all of us!!bestjake

I was a beta tester and after a few days of giving Flight a fair shakedown I just wasn't impressed at all. If I had been age 12 then things probably would have been very different but then again I really don't see this holding the attention span of anyone for long especially kids who would most likely rather be playing Skyrim or the amazing new Mass Efffect 3. Sure, it looks nice to us older simmers but to any young noob they would expect that regardless considering the high fidelity of todays HD games. After having shelled out many shilling for FSX and FS9 add-ons I'm certainly not going to invest a dime into Flight even if it does eventually have some of the things which I would require which is mainly the ability for realistic aircraft carrier operations (on a global scale), the ability to use realistic live (and FREE) ATC like VATSIM, and lastly the ability to pick and choose free aircraft as well the ability to install payware gauges and create / modify panels. Obviously we know it's not going to do any of this anytime soon and from the statements made my guess is never.I am one of the more hard-core simmers who has gone from a GA VFR simmer to a real world IFR multi-engine pilot and so my needs are obviously much greater than what they are willing to provide at this point. (thank GOD for Lockheed picking up the ball) It's a sad shame that we purists have now been placed into a corner of "whiney gear heads" who only enjoy one type of simming. Nothing could be further from the truth as the sim community is filled with a huge vast diversity of different flying styles just like the real world it mocks. I routinely enjoy flying low altitude GA aircraft on some nights and various business jets on others. I got into the big tin long haul 2-4 hour flights for awhile but it certianly isn't the end all be all and to hint at that clearly illustrates who's wearing the foggles. For that reason, among all the many others, I have admittedly done a little brow beating myself to these folks and I may continue to do so simply because I often get some sort of sadistic enjoyment out of being an irritant, especially when it is so warranted. I'm sorry, it's the french in me. I guess what is most dissappointing to me is to see the top blown off this beatiful mountain that has been built up over the last 10+ years. Some will remain happy with FSX and FS9 but I think many of us were really ready to move on. I am lucky enough that I am moving on as the real world is now my "sim".Personally, I think that at bare minimum they should have at least started off with a mixed bag of 10 aircraft and the entire world in say 2048 textures, reasonable LOD and then sell DLC with 4096 textures along with more aircraft and better topography. At least that would have satisfied some folks to an extent even if it is a game. With a full world to explore I would be much more likely to keep it onboard as I really want the flexibilty of choice. Simply put I just don't want to be limited to one area but maybe that is the old "simmer" talking. More importantly though I just don't feel like I should have to break out the wallet to do a two or three hour hop somewhere. What if I don't like Hawaii...what if I wanted the Azores! As I've touted in some other forums I really feel like they greedliy hijacked the entire world and are slowly going to sell it back to you at a kings ransom. That "business model" is just totally unacceptable to me and I hope any rational minded adult or parent will see "the real story" here when their child (or inner child) is begging them for money each week for new DLC. It's skyway robbery IMO.The best thing about FS9 and FSX is the free choice of NOT spending anything other than the cost of your orginal ticket. You don't have to buy anything else if you do not want to....plain and simple. With Flight it is now mandatory and given this interview (and others) there is no clear definition of a total cost to achieve what you can have right now with the base packages of FS9 or FSX. Many of the overly vague politically correct statements simply tell me stay far, far away and this is regardless of thinking of Flight as a "flight sim" or a "flight game". I'll admit that I really do not know what Flight is all about yet (and they don't either) but I can clearly say that If I wanted a "flight game" I really think there are many other sim / flight games out right now that are much better, are more fun, and will cost you a ton less in the long run. As the saying goes.. "ain't nothin' in this world for free" and if something sounds too good to be true..it usually isn't.Lastly, and as others have mentioned, I must say that If I was the head bean counter for this venture I wouldn't be too happy knowing that I have a new ship with a captain at the helm who has no clear direction of where to point and steer said ship. It's rather fishy smelling don't you think. Watch out ....$50.00 Iceberg dead ahead !!!!!!!!

It seems to me that while some of us may not like what was said it comes as no surprise. Like it or not it is consistent with what has already been said and the path of the product. For those that it will not cater for then FS9/FSX has a long and fruitful life with the full support of many third party developers. I have said it before but it still comes to mind. FS9, FSX, Flight, AeroFly, XPlane etc are not mutually exclusive. Putting Flight on your computer will not somehow spirit FS9/FSX away. Of course there are things I wish for Flight but in the meantime I am enjoying it along with the other sims depending on my mood

Our only hope is that gameplayers will be tired and slowly abandon the game after some months, maybe one year (as in the normal videogames lifecicle).After this, the simmers market, generating revenue after many years from the "birth" of FSX, will become an interesting target again....Until that day I believe the best thing we can do is NOT buy any single scenery or plane, hoping in this way to short this time by some months.Only my opinion and strategy.

Don't hold your breath. MSFS is not coming back unless the hard core sim market grows ten times in size this year. That's an inconvenient truth but you should come to accept it eventually.Stop making boycott calls against Flight. It brings fresh blood into this hobby. By calling people to boycott it you are just hurting your own cause.