... It has gotten me back into FSX with a vengence. I havne't flown on my computer in years, literally. I tried flight and for now, for some reason, I am head first back into FSX and loving it. Odd how that works....

Yup, I think that quite a lot of people are finding that. It even appears to have garnered one or two new FS users judging by the forums.Flight is okay, and much of it is good fun, but MS really need to think about their marketing strategy. Releasing another cockpitless aeroplane after the reaction the P-51 garnered was not a smart move. But more shockingly, to suggest that we fly a Mitsubishi A6M, performing low level antics over and around Pearl Harbor, where there is a memorial to the sailors who died in the attack which that very aircraft escorted, is not what I would call a very sensitive or respectful way of going about things, and is unlikely to win them many American admirers. I'd love to meet the genius who thought that was a good idea.Even I was disgusted by that one, and I'm not from the US. I presume that next we'll be expected to perfom a bomb run on the Cenotaph in Whitehall in a He-111, with bonus points if we perfom it on Armistice Day. I'm not saying combat flight sims should not be made, but putting what were enemy combat aircraft over modern-day war memorials of any nation, is insensitive in the extreme. If I did not know any better, I'd think they were deliberately trying to make Flight fail.Al

... It has gotten me back into FSX with a vengence. I havne't flown on my computer in years, literally. I tried flight and for now, for some reason, I am head first back into FSX and loving it. Odd how that works....

I would imagine that for a lot of people who have tried Flight and never used FSX or FS9 see these two platforms now as a "deluxe" version of Flight since the whole world is modeled, has downloadable real world weather, AI planes and cars, etc.If I was new to the hobby and tried Flight then got interested in it and then saw a bunch of Youtube videos of FSX showing what is capable and all the features it included I would dump Flight right away and move to FSX or FS9. Personally I had lost interest in Flight once it finally became known that it was going to be a localized area sim and without a lot of features I enjoy in FSX. I never even downloaded it just because I know myself well enough that I would be bored after a few days of it and would return to FSX anyways.In addition, I agree with Al that releasing a/c without cockpits seems to be a bad idea and the A6M idea even worse. It will be interesting to see going forward how Flight fares, but it seems like with only a few regions being made available per year and the lack of a lot of other elements, it will lose steam and a lot of people will become very bored with it after a while.

So THAT's microsoft's trick!!

Well you can't even get the plane if you wanted it as promised. It isn't in the website marketplace nor in the hangar in game. I have to agree tho, bone head move...

It wouldn't surprise me if they withdrew it based on the reaction it has received. It's a shame, I have nothing against anyone making an A6M for a flight sim, just not when you can only fly it over the place where its notoriety is such a contentious issue.Al

Guilty as charged.. I'm in this boat too. I got bored of Flight about 2 weeks ago.. Then proceeded to give FSX a second look. $500+ spent later in planes and scenery I'm happier than a pig in.... I can continue my learning of everything Flight sent to the recycle bin.

I never gave up FSX as my primary sim, but Flight opened the world of Hawaii to me.So I picked up Oahu, Maui, FSDT payware sceneries and a bunch of nice freeware addons, and I'm now really enjoying flying around Hawaii away from my usual Orbx sceneries.

If I did not know any better, I'd think they were deliberately trying to make Flight fail.

Well said Alan. I'm also not US, and after I read that release-post, I was just shaking my head with disbelief.

I would imagine that for a lot of people who have tried Flight and never used FSX or FS9 see these two platforms now as a "deluxe" version of Flight since the whole world is modeled, has downloadable real world weather, AI planes and cars, etc.If I was new to the hobby and tried Flight then got interested in it and then saw a bunch of Youtube videos of FSX showing what is capable and all the features it included I would dump Flight right away and move to FSX or FS9. Personally I had lost interest in Flight once it finally became known that it was going to be a localized area sim and without a lot of features I enjoy in FSX. I never even downloaded it just because I know myself well enough that I would be bored after a few days of it and would return to FSX anyways.In addition, I agree with Al that releasing a/c without cockpits seems to be a bad idea and the A6M idea even worse. It will be interesting to see going forward how Flight fares, but it seems like with only a few regions being made available per year and the lack of a lot of other elements, it will lose steam and a lot of people will become very bored with it after a while.

Until you realized that you needed to invest another couple hundred dollars in add-ons and possibly new hardware to get your $30 copy of FSX to look like the youtube videos you just saw.

Guilty as charged.. I'm in this boat too. I got bored of Flight about 2 weeks ago.. Then proceeded to give FSX a second look. $500+ spent later in planes and scenery I'm happier than a pig in.... I can continue my learning of everything Flight sent to the recycle bin.

Case in point.For those that have already invested the money in FSX, it makes sense to not ditch all that for Flight. But (IMHO, based on my actual FSX experience) for someone who just picked up FSX, you're staring at another $100 - $200 to get it looking like Flight does for $20. Of course FSX includes the whole world plus some additional features, but it's hard to assign value to those since they're affected by flying style/personal preference.My intention isn't to re-ignite a Flight vs FSX debate. I just wanted to remind folks that in general FSX tends to require significant investment to get the best experience, and that can be a major turn-off (speaking from experience).

It's probably true that most old hands with FS have spent a fair few quid to get it looking good, I know I certainly have, but let's not forget that a lot of what those payware add-ons can do, could be done to largely similar effect with no cost at all other than the cost of the electric power to your router, thanks to what Avim's file library has on offer.Al

What is a hobby anyway, if not a place to put a whole bunch of money you didn't have in the first place. :(

So THAT's microsoft's trick!!

You got it!FSX will be taken off the market and soon return as Flight Classic :(

FSX tends to require significant investment to get the best experience

It's either this or drink heavily! :(

It's probably true that most old hands with FS have spent a fair few quid to get it looking good, I know I certainly have, but let's not forget that a lot of what those payware add-ons can do, could be done to largely similar effect with no cost at all other than the cost of the electric power to your router, thanks to what Avim's file library has on offer.Al

That is true, and is more the route that I have taken. But (now this is totally off topic), what you save in terms of $$$ you also lose in terms of convenience. If you want to pay for environmental addons, that's pretty easy. A quick forum post and "you can't go wrong with REX" and you're set. But try and cobble it together with free addons and you get a millions suggestions and a million google search results. And a whole lot of trial and error.And, to actually contribute to this thread's original topic, I too rediscovered FSX after being part of the Flight Beta. I still enjoy both, but also think they both have their weaknesses. If I could have the content of FSX with the scenery quality, graphics, and performanc of Flight... oh yeah.