New A/C available.

[JonP01 104]

I'm not so sure Microsoft wants to make $$$. If they do, this isn't the way to do it IMHO

Actually, it would seem that the exact opposite is true. Evidently the Mustang sold extremely well and quite likely the Maule not so well. So it seems that creating these silly planes is indeed making MS money.I thought that I was bang in the target market for this game being a casual flight simmer but given the content they are producing I am beginning to think I am in a grey area - too hardcore for Flight but not hardcore enough to want to use FSX on steroids.I guess I will wait to see what the Alaska add-on brings, but I am not particularly happy thus far with the direction this game is taking. Unless they bring out some reasonably substantial passenger twin in the near future I fear the more critical users of Flight might be reaching back for those FSX disks if they haven't already. Then again, I knew all along this might happen, since the plans for Flight have been admittedly very rubbery at best.

[HiFlyer 9,374]

One thing I always wondered was that with so many simmers refusing to buy any DLC (or even give FLIGHT a chance) until certain demands were met, if that left our niche severely underrepresented in the sales figures.I had "rambled" before (in another forum) that by voluntarily removing ourselves from the table, we might be in a situation where other segments filled the vacuum to decide the course of future development.If true, could we really complain, when we voluntarily threw away the chance to influence events constructively with our wallets?Would a concerted effort to buy Maules and RV-6's and to engage positively with the product have been the more constructive course?

[DAD 2,661]

buy Maules and RV-6's and to engage positively with the product have been the more constructive course

that is one of the reasons I bought both, the RV obviously as part of the hawaii pack. and I will buy alaska to show interest (which I actually have, of course). but then I will start to hold back, that is at leat my intention, unless MS comes up with something like a roadmap as I already mentioned here multiple times now and also requested in an email to msflight@microsoft.com. if I see a majority of planes without aircraft then obviously flight is not for me. even worse if MS does not add major 'hard core' functionality like autopilot and ATC.

[DeadManDriving 0]

... does not add major 'hard core' functionality like autopilot and ATC.

If they keep building oldtimers, they do not need AP.ATC is a huge feature, as it requires calculations on the air and field situation.

[japascoe 98]

One thing I always wondered was that with so many simmers refusing to buy any DLC (or even give FLIGHT a chance) until certain demands were met, if that left our niche severely underrepresented in the sales figures.I had "rambled" before (in another forum) that by voluntarily removing ourselves from the table, we might be in a situation where other segments filled the vacuum to decide the course of future development.If true, could we really complain, when we voluntarily threw away the chance to influence events constructively with our wallets?Would a concerted effort to buy Maules and RV-6's and to engage positively with the product have been the more constructive course?

Quite so. Sending a message is not really going to work. MS has no way of telling who didn't download DLC because they're happy enough with the free pack, who didn't download DLC because they don't have any money to spare, and who didn't download DLC because they refuse to buy anything until MS adds Track IR support. Similarly MS has no way of telling who bought the Mustang because they thought it was a fun plane and only an external model was fine, who bought it because they didn't realise it didn't have a cockpit and who bought it because they wanted to support further development, even though they didn't like the Mustang at all.Given all that here's what I would propose: Judge each piece of DLC on it's own merits. Forget about 'sending a message', just ask yourself: if I buy this DLC will it give me sufficient enjoyment for my money? If the answer is yes, then buy it. If the answer is no, then don't buy it. Simple.

[DAD 2,661]

ATC is a huge feature

no doubt. I do not expect this right away. but I would like to see it on the agenda. and btw not just a hidden agenda

[dburne 2]

One thing I always wondered was that with so many simmers refusing to buy any DLC (or even give FLIGHT a chance) until certain demands were met, if that left our niche severely underrepresented in the sales figures.

Well in my case, to date I have only bought DLC that truly interests me at least to some extent.After finally downloading and trying Flight , and realize that unlike what I initially thought I actually liked it - I went ahead and purchased the Hawaii Adventure Pack and the Maule. I did not purchase the P51, as I have no interest at all in an exterior model only aircraft. The serious part of the simmer in me, relates to me only flying from within the cockpit. I want that immersion of being inside the actual airplane, and at least have some of the basic funtionality available to me from within it.And for that same reason, I choose not to purchase the Zero. While I do want to support Flight and see it succeed, I see no sense in spending my dollars on something I will not use, like the two mentioned planes.Both planes, if they had included a cockpit, I would have purchased.As far as the upcoming Alaska DLC - I have stated numerous times, I will not buy any future DLC unless either Track IR is supported by then, or included with it, or at the least an announcement with an app date it will be included.For me, I think not having the support already is unacceptable in today's flight sim market. Heck it was unacceptable 6 years ago - FSX had it - and Flight is the first flight sim released in several years that did not have it.Now this part of my thinking, who knows - when it is released and I start seeing early reports, perhaps that may change and I go ahead and get it. I certainly am not going to totally rule that out , I do want to support Flight, but at the same time I do feel very strongly about this. Flight for me, would be a whole new level of immersion if it only had the support for that peripheral.

[Faire 0]

One of the reasons of POSSIBLY higher sales of Mustang over Maule is that Mustang is far more fancy. Maule doesn't look that good.

[Guest]

Again an ancient rusty piece of virtual metal ? Why does MS hate so much the planes built in last 30 years ?Is MS boycotting itself ?

[dburne 2]

One of the reasons of POSSIBLY higher sales of Mustang over Maule is that Mustang is far more fancy. Maule doesn't look that good.

And for videos I guess - many of the videos I see posted seem to feature the Mustang. I am sure many more will be featuring both the Mustang and the Zero.I want to simulate flying the airplane, I want to have some level of immersion that I feel like I am flying the airplane, looking out the windows watching the scenery go by, looking down at my gauges to make sure all is well, feeling the ground slip away from under my feet as I take off...I have to have that feeling, at least that level of immersion, when flying with a flight simulator. I invest too many dollars in good equipment - ie mb, video card, ram, sound system , contollers, Track IR - primarily for flight simming - to not get that level of satisfaction and immersion when i am flying. Certainly I use my computer for a lot of other things, but those things can be done on much less equipment wise.So for me, choosing the Maule over the Mustang was a no brainer. If they throw an airplane with a vc up there available for download, odds are extremely high I will purchase it immediately, unless it is something that totally turns me off.

[quadraspleen 7]

Is MS boycotting itself ?

Nope, the Flight team are staring up their collective backsides, hypnotised :Hypnotized: by the marketing jedi's talk of 20 million users..Please...Can we just be a little more realistic about this, MS?jake

[Guest]

Nope, the Flight team are staring up their collective backsides, hypnotised :Hypnotized: by the marketing jedi's talk of 20 million users..Please...Can we just be a little more realistic about this, MS?jake

Yeah, MS Flight is sinking so fast that no one could have imagined it, that's astonishing indeed.

[DAD 2,661]

sinking so fast

let's wait and see what comes out with the alaska pack. and WHEN it comes out, they have to hurry now again. they did the same mistake when then released flight, aweful response from the communities after they let the cat out of the sack (re Hawaii only etc) and then suddenly they released flight. now again aweful response from the community.they could have it so easy. just give a roadmap what they have in the pipeline or what they are committed to do and people would calm down. of course there would be still the usual questions WHEN the release date is for a specific DLC but at least people like me would be willing to lean back and relax a bit. but as they do it now I can understand why people get upset, look at all the comments at facebook and their flight website. aweful. but also this hide and seek game they are playing.

[Guest]

they could have it so easy. just give a roadmap what they have in the pipeline or what they are committed to do and people would calm down.

The roadmap has already been published by Joshua Howard.2-3 scenery per year and 1 plane each 1-2 months. No ATC, NO jets, NO weather management, NO helos and NO whole world at all.Considering this roadmap even the most optimistic man in the world would drop ball now.

[quadraspleen 7]

So now we're consigned to the Apple product release rollercoaster -1. wild speculation regarding release dates and type/upgrade path of product;2. release; world goes mad;3. product is much cr***er than anticipated4. world goes mad;5. Product is patched (or not)6. rinse and repeatjake