But they don't want to do it, and wont, no matter what.How much money have MS ever made from FS? They only sell the base product, not all the add-ons. The 'eco-system' earns them nothing.

This is, in my opinion, a wrong reasoning, quite common in these Fligth days.I think MS during the years made a lot of money from the FS franchise, considering that there have been 10 editions of the game, and they were the leaders of the sector.After decades, now it seems that all that was completely useless, as if MS had no advantage from the activity. Furthermore, if they wanted to also sell addons, it certainly wasn't forbidden.The reality, for me, is another. MS saw the great success of DLC model in consoles, the huge success of casual games on Iphone, tablets and FB (Zynga docet), and thought that they could transform the good old Flight Simulator in a new money machine, obviously loosing almost all the previous rich features, and adopting a cheap business model (as the planes without AP and cockpit demonstrate).Nobody denies the right of MS to search for profit, but when this is made with the brutality we are seeing, and the complete direspect for history and old customers, the reactions are fully understandable I think.A.

From the Prepar3D people (Lockheed Martin):"Prepar3D application is not to be used, offered, sold or distributed through markets or channels for use as a personal/consumer entertainment product."We are unable to comment further on the EULA, nor interpret the EULA outside of the wording already incorporated in the document.Plain and simple language from the folks in charge of Prepar3D. What part of it don't you understand?

If it were, all the flight sims that have been released the last few years would not all have support included in the initial release

More genres need to start using headtracking (I've stopped following 360 games, have the devs started using kinect for headtracking?) but with the big companys going the console route it's going to take ages.One bonus I can think of with kinect (maybe a load of webcams would work?) is the ability to use the controls with your hands.

(as the planes without AP and cockpit demonstrate).

I think the lack of a damage model for anything on the plane is more worrying :Doh: I want to rip a flap or wing off, while trying not to black out and then attempt a landing.

What part of it don't you understand?

I understand it completely - Prepar3D is not to be used as a game.That does NOT say it cannot be used by serious people as a Flight Simulation, nor that third-parties cannot make and sell serious products to serious simmers.And PMDG customers are pretty serious.I think this situation will change, far more likely than Microsoft having a change of heart.????Keith

Bill. In my humble opinion he did pick the right target. It does not count that in the past MS did not provide native TrackIR support because back then they released an SDK. So the manufacturer had to provide the integration Now however if they hold everything back and inhouse they have also to expect that the trackIR request is directed to them and not it's manufacturer. MS chose another path now. The burden of proof shifted. If MS does not like it or does not feel up to it then they should consider to release an SDK and let as in the past others do the work

Both MSGS and NP have stated that they have interest in support*, and that NP provided their SDK to MSGS. MSGS will with some high degree of probability implement support whenever it fits within their work schedule. No matter how "simple" it might seem, it is not a trivial task that can be done in a few hours, but will take weeks of coding, testing, tweaking, bug fixing, etc. In short, suppose they decided to begin work next Monday. It would still likely be four to six months before it might be completed and ready for release.As this involves a cost in real dollars, MSGS will have to weigh out the cost vs. benefits and make some determination as to whether the costs involved will result in any significant changes in their projected revenue stream. After all, adding the support for a third-party product -no matter how popular- will not directly add one cent to MSGS' bottom line.*NOTA BENE: some of the MSGS developers have and use TIR themselves, so I'm fairly certain that they would like to see support added as well!

As this involves a cost in real dollars,

Carefull, Bill. You start talking busness and people's eyes glaze over. They'll skip everything in their hurry to respond.My 35 years experience in program development agrees with your time estimates of how soon we could get TrackIR support, and the level of effort involved.Hook

MSGS will with some high degree of probability implement support whenever it fits within their work schedule. In short, suppose they decided to begin work next Monday. It would still likely be four to six months before it might be completed and ready for release. some of the MSGS developers have and use TIR themselves, so I'm fairly certain that they would like to see support added as well!

Well that certainly at least gives me a little more hope than I had prior. I don't mind it taking time to implement, I am a very patient person, as long as I feel like it will be implemented at some point down the road, I don't mind the wait...Thanks for the feedback,

To further ride out this hijack...My impression is that TIR support for Flight was shelved to allow time for developers to work out Kinect for PC integration issues. After all, Flight is the perfect platform for demostrating the excellence of using Kinect (as all us TIR know all too well, much to our dismay). Along this same reasoning, I would not be suprised if MS is sandbagging us on TIR support, as in if Kinect is integrated, why would their business interest want to support a direct competitor for a product that they have just launched?Here's the future: http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-L6M-00001-Kinect-Sensor-Windows/dp/B006UIS53K

My impression is that TIR support for Flight was shelved to allow time for developers to work out Kinect for PC integration issues.

What is your basis for this "impression?" It certainly hasn't been from anything discussed in the beta forum, so I'm curious as to it's source...

My basis...connecting the dots...that is all. It's 100% speculation, after all it is only an "impression".

I believe the EULA prohibits use for 'entertainment' because Microsoft put that requirement into the contract Lockheed Martin signed to buy the rights to the base code. LM don't care what you do, it's Microsoft wanting to limit competition (again, and in commercial terms, quite fairly).

understand it completely - Prepar3D is not to be used as a game.That does NOT say it cannot be used by serious people as a Flight Simulation, nor that third-parties cannot make and sell serious products to serious simmers.

From the Prepar3D people (Lockheed Martin):"Prepar3D application is not to be used, offered, sold or distributed through markets or channels for use as a personal/consumer entertainment product."We are unable to comment further on the EULA, nor interpret the EULA outside of the wording already incorporated in the document.Plain and simple language from the folks in charge of Prepar3D. What part of it don't you understand

Caution: AVSIM has forbidden discussion of the Prepar3D EULA. Other than noting that a new catagory for home students has been created for $50.00, do not discuss the terms, or the possible legal meanings. Please be very careful to obey this instruction as we are under strict orders to enforce it rigidly. End of discussion here and now. Thanks for your understanding.Kind regards,Edit:http://forum.avsim.n...ad-eula-notice/Quote from Tom Allensworth:"This will also be posted in the MS FLIGHT Forum.Armchair and wannabe lawyers pay attention to what follows...There comes a time when speculation, rumors, innuendo and allegations do harm. Wannabe lawyers who have endlessly dragged the subject of the EULA provided by MS to Lockheed through every perturbation of "expert" opinion, can congratulate themselves. You have succeeded in putting people, careers and products at risk.I have been contacted by sources that do know the facts, and the consequences of the BS occurring in these forums. It is time to cease and desist.I am asking all the MODS here to be alert to any further discussion of the so called EULA and shut down the topic immediately. Continued posting of any aspect or proximity to the subject of the EULA will result in the removal of posting privileges here.So, folks, it is time to bring the damaging speculation to an end." Unquote

:bad:

Caution: AVSIM has forbidden discussion of the Prepar3D EULA.

That is both a hilarious and depressing statement on the software industry at the same time.Pretty soon we will all need to hire lawyers to determine if we have the right to use the software licenses we purchase. :Just Kidding:

Hi everyone,Please note edit in my post #402 above.Kind regards,

To further ride out this hijack...My impression is that TIR support for Flight was shelved to allow time for developers to work out Kinect for PC integration issues. After all, Flight is the perfect platform for demostrating the excellence of using Kinect (as all us TIR know all too well, much to our dismay). Along this same reasoning, I would not be suprised if MS is sandbagging us on TIR support, as in if Kinect is integrated, why would their business interest want to support a direct competitor for a product that they have just launched?Here's the future: http://www.amazon.co...s/dp/B006UIS53K

I don't really see Kinect and TrackIR competing with each other, and therefore don't see why Kinect would influence M$'s impelementation of TrackIR in Flight.No one who owns TrackIR for Flight simming is going to shell out $250 when they already own TrackIR and it's supported in every game but Flight. In similar vein, no one who's into simming, but doesn't own head tracking software is going to choose Kinect over TrackIR. TrackIR is a staple in the sim community, is cheaper, and is supported in most sims. Kinect is not.As far as casual gamers go, they probably wouldn't be interested in paying $100 for TrackIR for playing Flight since they aren't that into simming (if they are that into simming, then they belong in the first group I discussed above). On the other hand, they might buy Kinect because of the "cool factor" and the fact that it can be used in a lot of ways other than just head-tracking for MS Flight.Did that make sense? In other words, TrackIR -> Simmers/Fims, Kinect -> Gamers/General Entertainment.My 2 cents.