The problem here is, if that trend continues. MS will kill the little simulation that still remains in Flight.

 

 

Oh so there is no room to complain then?

 

I'm failing to see how the dots get connected with your first quoted statement. I got the Mustang for free and have flown it twice in six weeks. I did not buy the Zero because I want a VC in a plane. If next month's offering is another "basic" plane, I won't buy that either. So how are "basic" planes suppose to eliminate "the little simulation" that I get out of Flight? My not buying the Zero has not impacted my use of the Icon or the Maule or the Vans or the Stearman. Is it suppose to? Because if it is, I need someone to explain that to me.

 

Respects to your second quoted statement, what's to be gained from complaining here? Microsoft has a feedback email address. There's a Facebook page that has tons of complaining. There's a Steam forum that will allow for complaints. But again I wonder, what's to be gained from complaining? Some people have gone back to FSX after trying Flight. That's great for them, but they then like to come back into this forum and offer their snippy little comments. And I don't understand their motivation for doing so. I could offer up some ideas, but to be honest there would need to be a mental helath professional reviewing the responses and my ideas to see if I was correct or not.

 

Gripe, moan, complain all you want. But it's not going to change what Flight *is* and may well affect what Flight can become. And the griping, moaning, complaining just isn't welcome here anymore. That people express their desire that it go some where else is OK by me. There are other forum sites that will welcome those that want to bash Flight. Let me know if you need any links...

I downloaded the Zero too and it lasted for 30 mins. I can't enjoy a plane where the only thing I can do is just look it from external view and that'll all.

The problem here is, if that trend continues. MS will kill the little simulation that still remains in Flight.

I have played simulation since the spectrum and can't remember of any simulator without a cockpit. This is simply against common sense.

It did have cockpit, not a 3d one at least they did it.

Trying to say it's a good idea is non sense.

 

If you want to go literal then, then you really need to get outdoors and go get in a real simulator, not one confined to a single, dual or even triple monitor in your home.

 

Unless you are getting into an multi-million FAA rated simulator - no home flight simulator is ultimately realistic in every sense of the word.

 

Regarding cockpits - I seriously doubt any virtual cockpit is the most ultimate experience of real flight. There is nothing wrong with having a no cockpit plane. If that is what someone wants to build, who's to say they are wrong? I don't remember any laws or rules that said all aircraft have to have a cockpit.

 

My 7 year old loves the cockpitless Zero. Even when he was flying within FSX he was always switching to external view. THAT is who Flight is catering to with the cockpitless warbirds. And I have a sense of that "kid" in me too, for I love to fly around the Islands like that.

 

And when I see my son enthusiastically flying around and doing a really fantastic job of landing the Zero on a runway, my $4.99 was well spent! Because I love to see a smile on his face when he tells me "Daddy I did it! I landed, come and see!!!"

 

I'll spend a thousand dollars to get those reactions!

I'm failing to see how the dots get connected with your first quoted statement. I got the Mustang for free and have flown it twice in six weeks. I did not buy the Zero because I want a VC in a plane. If next month's offering is another "basic" plane, I won't buy that either. So how are "basic" planes suppose to eliminate "the little simulation" that I get out of Flight? My not buying the Zero has not impacted my use of the Icon or the Maule or the Vans or the Stearman. Is it suppose to? Because if it is, I need someone to explain that to me.

 

Respects to your second quoted statement, what's to be gained from complaining here? Microsoft has a feedback email address. There's a Facebook page that has tons of complaining. There's a Steam forum that will allow for complaints. But again I wonder, what's to be gained from complaining? Some people have gone back to FSX after trying Flight. That's great for them, but they then like to come back into this forum and offer their snippy little comments. And I don't understand their motivation for doing so. I could offer up some ideas, but to be honest there would need to be a mental helath professional reviewing the responses and my ideas to see if I was correct or not.

 

Gripe, moan, complain all you want. But it's not going to change what Flight *is* and may well affect what Flight can become. And the griping, moaning, complaining just isn't welcome here anymore. That people express their desire that it go some where else is OK by me. There are other forum sites that will welcome those that want to bash Flight. Let me know if you need any links...

 

Very smooth...

I'll keep posting my complains on this forum as long as I do it respectfully.

 

Besides, You can make up the story that you want. This idea of no cockpits is a non sense, unless you are a beginner and don't care about aviation or simulation. I have been around computing since 1980s and this idea is meant for the masses which means, Flight will end up being dumbed down for the sake of these people.

 

If you want to go literal then, then you really need to get outdoors and go get in a real simulator, not one confined to a single, dual or even triple monitor in your home.

 

Unless you are getting into an multi-million FAA rated simulator - no home flight simulator is ultimately realistic in every sense of the word.

 

Regarding cockpits - I seriously doubt any virtual cockpit is the most ultimate experience of real flight. There is nothing wrong with having a no cockpit plane. If that is what someone wants to build, who's to say they are wrong? I don't remember any laws or rules that said all aircraft have to have a cockpit.

 

My 7 year old loves the cockpitless Zero. Even when he was flying within FSX he was always switching to external view. THAT is who Flight is catering to with the cockpitless warbirds. And I have a sense of that "kid" in me too, for I love to fly around the Islands like that.

 

And when I see my son enthusiastically flying around and doing a really fantastic job of landing the Zero on a runway, my $4.99 was well spent! Because I love to see a smile on his face when he tells me "Daddy I did it! I landed, come and see!!!"

 

I'll spend a thousand dollars to get those reactions!

 

Even most of the freeware planes have a cockpit. In the past there was always a cockpit. We can't go backwards.... We can't have a 6 core CPU and a GPU that can render amazing sceneries and then you play a plane without a cockpit.

You can try to convince yourself that everything is ok, but it's not.

 

When I was 10 years old. I used to play simulators and enjoy reading the 200 pages of manual and learn about how planes worked. and.... they had a cockpit. Yes, it might not be a 3d one but a cockpit after all.

 

This story is crazy and makes no sense.

 

I don't have many options to choose from, so I don't want them to destroy the very few that still remains.

I think your conclusions are a bit off. Flight isn't full of cockpitless planes. If it were, then you'd have a legit complaint there. And yes there are tons of free planes without virtual cockpits, a cursory look through simviation or flightsim.com will get that. I've got quite a number of planes I flew in FSX where I had to alias the cockpit to the default FSX plane by editing the config file.

 

Even Captain Sims released and sold a cockpitless B-52 before coming out with the full driver. They sold that B-52 body because there was a high demand to fly the plane even before the pit was released. I bought that B-52 without it's cockpit. Loved it! now they have the whole deal.

 

To say "In the past there was always a cockpit" is just a factual error. No, not every single plane released for all Flight simulators since FS came out had cockpits in them.

Then what' the trend now. More cockpitless planes?.

1 deluxe plane every 3 months vs 1 basic plane a month?.

 

I enjoyed the Maule, Stearman, RV6. I found them the way to go. But it seems that trend can change in the future.

I just landed from a flight and my ears popped.

 

Yeah, I know, it was probably just a coincidence.

 

Probably.

 

LoL !!!!

A lot of us have been around flight sims since 1980 or so. Some of us remember what they were like. Some of us were even 30 years old by that time.

 

There was a 2D "panel" that took up the lower half of your screen. It was the same for all aircraft, if there were more than one in the game. It took a while to get the "custom" panels for different aircraft in flight sims.

 

That 2D panel was no more than the HUD we have in Flight, and really a lot less because it took up so much screen real estate for what you got. The HUD is more like a "glass cockpit" version of what those early flight simulators had.

 

I'm betting the next DLC will be cockpitless, and probably the one after that as well. They'll sell very well, too. Not necessarily to the hardcore simmer crowd, but to the new people that Flight is bringing into the genre. And this will fund further development of Flight, which is necessary for us to get the higher complexity aircraft, which probably do little more than break even.

 

Hook

This game is silky smooth on my PC with max settings. I've never experienced this in any previous FS incarnation and that smooth frame rate does indeed give better immersion of 3D and motion than any before. If only FSX could be that smooth for me. The aircraft included are super easy to fly, so much so its like sitting on a comfy couch with a trim wheel.

 

I don't have enough addon to judge sounds and flight dynamics though. After all, does anybody actually own the A5 yet?

 

That being said, Flight didn't last an hour on my PC before I got rid of it. LOL....FS9/FSX, I'm coming home.

 

Sacha.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cheers

For me there is nothing wrong with the HUD in FLIGHT.

In gliders we use that sort of display, and that's great. Some dedicated apps for smartphones do it in various levels of detail that you can choose, but I have allways preferred the simplest and easier to glimpse info. I wish I could have it in the form of an HUD in my glider :-)

 

I remember when FS had those ILS windows you could follow to get aligned with the ILS... I found that rather "game-ish", just to find out a few years later that NASA was really considering that type of HUD for future avionics :-)

 

We can disable the HUD in FLIGHT, but I like to have mine enabled, and I use it a LOT!

 

BTW: FLIGHT inherited the wrong Stall Warning from previous versions - it only sounds when you're already stalled... But the visual component on the HUD works correctly !!!

 

;-)

 

A lot of us have been around flight sims since 1980 or so. Some of us remember what they were like. Some of us were even 30 years old by that time.

 

There was a 2D "panel" that took up the lower half of your screen. It was the same for all aircraft, if there were more than one in the game. It took a while to get the "custom" panels for different aircraft in flight sims.

 

That 2D panel was no more than the HUD we have in Flight, and really a lot less because it took up so much screen real estate for what you got. The HUD is more like a "glass cockpit" version of what those early flight simulators had.

 

I'm betting the next DLC will be cockpitless, and probably the one after that as well. They'll sell very well, too. Not necessarily to the hardcore simmer crowd, but to the new people that Flight is bringing into the genre. And this will fund further development of Flight, which is necessary for us to get the higher complexity aircraft, which probably do little more than break even.

 

Hook

Well. I must be the only one who don't like cockpitless planes then.

 

Besides. During the 1980s there was at least a flat cockpit Despite back in the 80s technology wasn't that evolved at least they tried to make it look as realistic as possible. Nothing compared with these cockpitless planes in Flight.

 

I guess people on this forum support each other...

Nope, you're not alone! I don't like cockpitless airplanes either...

 

I might consider buying the Zero to fly it as an RC plane, using the "R" key ... but I decided to save my money for a detailed add-on :-)

 

 

Well. I must be the only one who don't like cockpitless planes then.

 

Besides. During the 1980s there was at least a flat cockpit Despite back in the 80s technology wasn't that evolved at least they tried to make it look as realistic as possible. Nothing compared with these cockpitless planes in Flight.

 

I guess people on this forum support each other...

I am not and will never be interested in planes without a VC. I like to pretend that I am flying and afaik no pilot flies behind his plane. In fact, I don't even care at ALL how the planes looks from the outside. In FSX I never left the VC (apart for taking a few screenshots, although I usually create screenshots from within the VC). Some people love to look at little details on the outside of planes (flew wing anyone?) but I couldn't care less. I have to say that now I can get out of the plane in Flight, it IS nice to do that after landing and see the outside of the plane, but during flying... I couldn't care less.

 

I also don't care about much planes. I usually fly ONE plane for months. I've done that in all my previous sims and it's already quite amazing that I fly both the RV and the Maule in Flight...! Most default planes in FSX I didn't even look at, let alone fly in them.

 

What I DO miss in Flight is scenery. I am looking forward to Alaska because even though Hawaii is nice you spend a lot of time flying above water and imho that boring...

I agree, that's the way I see it too Jeroen :-)

 

As a mater of fact I have my own ideas about flight simulators having way too many models... We may get overwhelmed, and, IMHO, giving too many airplanes to a flightsimmer is as useless and, maybe, "dangerous" as giving too many toys to our children....

 

I would perfectly accept just a few very detailled aircraft and good weather/scenery/VFR/IFR environment to "fly" them ...

 

 

I also don't care about much planes. I usually fly ONE plane for months

I was on MP early hours of this morning with a group that had seemingly just joined through Steam, and the comments were the usual. "didn't realise the Zero had no cockpit" and "it's an ugly plane, won't fly this again".

 

I don't know if MS intend to release Flight on consoles but if they ever do the Forza4 and PS3 fans will have a field day on the no cockpit issue. You only have to read the forums of the PS3 to see how mad they were and are, on PD releasing cars without cockpits, and the Forza4 guys laughing because all their cars had cockpits, so, the "gamers" that MS are after still want and demand cockpits.

Flight is just a game, not a simulator, therefore it will never replace FSX/9.

This doesn't mean you can't get some fun with it tho.