I think this particular team is past critical mass as far as failure for the title goes.I would expect heads start rolling by Q3-Q4 2012 if things don't change.

Actually, the team itself has clearly demonstrated they are capable of delivering extraordinary products. Flight's current state is due simply to mismanagement. If heads do need to roll, they must start at the top.

Yea I think that is what it boils down to price, I think they realize the audience that they are targeting can't spend $20 every time a new plane comes out. I think this particular team is past critical mass as far as failure for the title goes.I would expect heads start rolling by Q3-Q4 2012 if things don't change.

I am curious has anyone that flies multiplayer alot seen a larger number of P51 pilots?I wonder where the large audience of them hides at, I've only seen a few and most of the time it's people talking about the surprise that there is no cockpit view and they didn't know it when they bought it. Maybe lots bought it and don't fly it once the try it?Also I wouldn't want to guess how long before those responsible for MS Flight's poor marketing decisions have to face the facts, if you look at the history of other misguided MS products like Vista/Zune/Windows Phone, the products seem to just keep living on in pain for years without MS acknowledging the failure and changing course to salvage it or take advantage of the opportunity and loyal customer base.

Ugh, I never thought of it that way, but yeah, Flight is officially in Vista/Zune territory.Soooo much potential, being driven right into the ground.

I am curious has anyone that flies multiplayer alot seen a larger number of P51 pilots?I wonder where the large audience of them hides at, I've only seen a few and most of the time it's people talking about the surprise that there is no cockpit view and they didn't know it when they bought it. Maybe lots bought it and don't fly it once the try it?Also I wouldn't want to guess how long before those responsible for MS Flight's poor marketing decisions have to face the facts, if you look at the history of other misguided MS products like Vista/Zune/Windows Phone, the products seem to just keep living on in pain for years without MS acknowledging the failure and changing course to salvage it or take advantage of the opportunity and loyal customer base.

Well ZUNE was always a monstrosity. (Why brown? Ewwwwwwww!) :LMAO:As for P51's I see them, but not often, and usually the player is asking how to get the cockpit working. Once a more knowledgeable player mentions that it has none, several rude comments including various Anglo Saxon monosyllables are usually heard from other players to the affect that it is now on their non-purchase list.The player with the plane usually ends up saying ruefully "So that's why it was so cheap!!"(for some reason, they often disconnect, right after that)

Releasing the non-cockpit Zero as their first post-release DLC (as in not at available when Flight was released in Feb), is perhaps the worse PR I have ever witnessed.This is not just a slap in the face to the "hard-core" simmers, it is a slap in the face to all flightsimmers.Based on what I have read (and I've been to a LOT of different sites, including many gaming sites), a non-combat small warplane is the last thing that anyone wants as a Flight DLC.Microsoft (under Howard's leadership) just punched a very large hole in Flight's fuel tanks. It is like they now want Flight to fail. I don't get this at all.This was exactly what I was afraid they would do. I stated during the beta testing that adding basic aircraft (non-cockpit) was a horrid idea, and that it would make Flight a joke, and completely turn users off.

Actually, the team itself has clearly demonstrated they are capable of delivering extraordinary products. Flight's current state is due simply to mismanagement. If heads do need to roll, they must start at the top.

Thank you both, you spared me from flaming MSGS management. I'm afraid what I had in mind could probably get banned from this site.

I think Flight is going to become the "RMS Titanic" of flightsims. J. Howard is steering collision course full steam ahead and doesn't even know yet...I've played Flight and having been a VFR "low and slow" flyer for most of my flightsim experience should have actually enjoyed it but I didn't. Still too many familiar issues and also some brand new ones under the nice, glossy surface:- Weather (configurability) is still a joke. Blue skies during thunderstorms, very realistic indeed. Fog has somewhat improved, but that's it.- Night textures and night lighting are still an utter disaster or have even deteriorated compared to FSX. Night is way too bright all the times.- No controller configuration menu and MS(!) FFB2 joystick doesn't work either. Wouldn't have expected FFB but centering forces would have been nice...- No AI aircraft, no signs of life at allWhen I learned that the payware P-51 had no cockpit I just laughed. Looking into the other DLC aircraft (Maule and RV-6) I decided not to buy them due to their insufficient to non-existent implementations of GPS and autopilot as there were and are no hints from the developers to change that. The overblown pricing wasn't helping much either.But that brings me to my major gripe regarding Flight. Stripping J. Howard's statements from all marketing buzzwords and his negative smearing of "hardcore simmers" there remains simply nothing. No strategic vision, no ideas, no leadership - apparently the guy is somewhat overchallenged with running a long-term evolutionary project coming from his itty-bitty casual games background.I've read Tom Allensworth's interview with Howard a few times and still don't know what Howard actually wants the game/sim to be. And I'm not going to spend any money for any DLC unless I know what the future of Flight is supposed to look like. I'm sick and tired of that silly, childish hide-and-seek "Guess what will be next?" game by the developers. If they want me to spend my $ or € for their product I got to have the feeling that I'm a welcomed and informed customer which I currently don't have, especially not with Mr. Howard. Am I the only one? I mean, just adding the prices for the Hawaii pack, the Maule and the upcoming Alaska pack brings you way beyond the MSRP of an FSX Gold copy. And you get what? A slap in the face by Mr. Howard and a half way broken "flightsim game" whose creators do not even acknowledge its flaws.Sorry, I'm going to spend my money somewhere else. Prepar3d, XP10 - but definitely not for Flight. And I'm probably not the only one.Happy sinking, Mr. Howard.Thomas

Exactly. I have to wonder if somebody is actually doing this on purpose to skew the data in the direction they want things to go. If not, they seriously need to consult somebody who actually understands how to conduct a controlled scientific experiment.

Thank you. That is precisely my point. If they only release a "LITE" version of any aircraft, then (maybe) later release a "DELUXE" version, many (most?) of those who bought the "LITE" won't be interested in the "DELUXE" version at all......which of course would skew the sales results and make the data invalid.On the other hand, "never ascribe to malice that which can be more simply explained by ignorance." :LMAO:

Thank you both, you spared me from flaming MSGS management. I'm afraid what I had in mind could probably get banned from this site.

Never a reason for that Ramon - part of the problem in some of the perception the Flight team has of us flight simmers, and is evidenced by comment or comments made in the JH interview, is so many have been so rude in comments both at the website, and their facebook site, down to just downright nasty in every respect. I mean seriously, some of that stuff I read I would expect to hear spoken in a big mob fight that has broken out somewhere, not in a comment regarding a product on a website. Life is just way the heck to short to sweat the small stuff, and trust me gang, while to many this is really a big deal, this is the small stuff.I firmly believe in critisizing and making our opinions known - after all, if we do not they are not going to read our minds. Likewise at the same time, we should express our pleasure at what we do like - and I doubt there is any simmer that has truly tried Flight, that can not point to one thing they actually like. May not be enough to keep them with it, and that is ok, but I guarentee there is at least one thing there for everone to like.We should be firm in our beliefs, but respectful and professional in our comments as well. I myself try to keep strong emotions in check, and just state what I see, what I would like to see, and what I do not like and what I would not like to see.Now the information I send them , usually via the email addy, may get no further than the initial person reading it - but I feel good knowing I sent it. And I know it has been stated by some in the know, that some on the Flight team, on any given day, may be reading this forum. And perhaps maybe, someone that can make a difference did read it, and if possibly the same sentiment is expressed by many others, for example Track IR or lack of cockpit, then it is noted... and maybe just maybe, make a little difference in the future...In any event, dang all these hours in Flight and I just keep finding stuff to perk my interest, now am fully using manual on the mixture, and even better, fully using the checklists as appropriate for the flight/plane I am flying. Seems to have brought Flight to a little higher level for me, and increased my optimism that there may be more for us simmers forthcoming. I ain't giving up on it just yet.

I would say that MS if smart (and especially since the release is not too far off, supposedly) should be giving a lot more solid data on Alaska. My use of Flight! has tailed off a bit and that is not unexpected; On the other hand, my use of FSX has flat-lined, and I am not sure if it can be revived. Even Orbx cannot tempt me.And XplaneX................Is most grimly and determinedly aimed at somebody else, though I do toy with it.

Amigo, I think you should start looking at something else since the Flying Sim-Games are not your thing, have you tried Dirt? or Dirt2? maybe running around tracks and other aspects of racing would be more of your liking and enjoyment.

Flight flatlined for me about 2 weeks ago. Flying around after golden coins, by myself in a dead world, started losing its luster. I was still hopeful MS would add AI planes and at least some basic ATC and real weather(I am beginning to wonder if MS won't add these things because they fear most peoples hardware will not be able to run Flight well anymore). However, after hearing the interview Avsim did with the developer, I lost all hope of this becoming reality. So I now have taken the money that I was planning on spending on Flight and spent it on ORBX scenery(a considerable sum, that MS just lost out on). I really want Flight to succeed but apparently MS doesn't want me as a customer.

I am partly very happy at what Flight is. First of all it has Opened a Wide window for others to come out with a new flight sim with all the technology that has not yet been used. Prepar3D just lowered its price and now can be gotten by most. Prepard3D will in a short time be covering all corners of FSX and with a much better platform. That is very good for us Sim Hobbyists who like FSX but keep looking for something better. MS and the new crew in Flight have really broken the eggs!!! To come out and practically say that they have forgotten their great past of Sim-Game software is the most incredible thing I have heard of any company trying to sell a new Flight game that they have not a clue how it will fair in the year!!!!..Mr.Howard is lost in space and has no idea what the thing he fostered is. A game? A Sim-Game? a baby Sim Game?....planes without cockpits have been around for decades in shooting arcade games so that´s not new. When I flew (??) the PT-17 over the island I felt as if the "Maya 2012 revelation had occured right there to start"..it is so lonely without a human figure, IA aircraft or even static ones, no cars just vegetation and water....a very lonely place to be in. The big ship in teh harbour is dead as a door nail, not even some smoke from the chimney!!!..I tried On-Line flying and there were Two!!!(2) guys!!!!! What??? I was expecting at least eight or ten!!!!..two guys and in about five minutes they quit, I did too.....Let´s see the bright side of this MS blunder: A Great Window is wide open for the bettering of FSX through new addons both freeware and payware, Prpa3D lowering prices and many new addons to it, Sounds of New Sims on the way, and X-Plane 10 struggling more and more to be better....all that is just fine for us Simers who love our hobby. In my case, I am more eager to upload more of the freeware many of you like....Sometimes, many times, what looks like something bad is a Blessing....I think that´s the case in hand.

My take is that two markets are repelled. The flight-simmers are not going to be interested, and the gamers will be insulted that somebody thinks they can only handle baby planes. (Heck, even WARHAWK on the PS1 back when dinosaurs ruled the earth had a cockpit!)On the other hand, its cheaper...........

It is cheaper, but what do you do with such a plane?The only rerason I see: Make money.It is much easier and fadter to get the flight dynamic of an external view plane right.But what should the gamers do with it? Can they buy guns and bombs? But even this wouldn't work. A Thunderbolt is simply to strong especially if you consider the armament. It is pretty pointless.

Never a reason for that Ramon - part of the problem in some of the perception the Flight team has of us flight simmers, and is evidenced by comment or comments made in the JH interview <Snip>

Don, Thank you.I removed most of what I had planned to post; this is just an edited excerpt:Yesterday, less than a month after Flight’s debut, they slap us with a cockpit-less aircraft. (It is not the aircraft per se; for all I care it could have been a cockpit-less 747). Of all the options they had for an update/DLC, they choose the worst one.If they had made NO announcement or announced a minor update, or some bug fixes, support for more controls, track IR support (in your dreams), multiplayer tweaking and enhancements, fixed some CTD’s, Maule’s working AP or whatever would have been much more appropriate. (In aviation terms: Flight is trying to take off, with spoilers deployed)I have to ask myself: What is MSGS management goal? Do they want to alienate not only the “hard-core” simmers, but all Flight supporters, including some of us "beta testers?"?BTW: I already made my case over there, and still enjoying Flight a lot.

BTW: I already made my case over there, and still enjoying Flight a lot.

:smile:Good job!!

Yesterday, less than a month after Flight’s debut, they slap us with a cockpit-less aircraft.

Not to mention a slap in the face to Americans like me that would rather not fly a Zero over the Arizona. Seems this would have been better suited for a historically accurate combat flight sim.