I love Flight for what it is. I hate Flight for what it isn't but easily could have been.

 

I can't recall anyone simply saying that Flight is the best thing since sliced bread or that Flight doesn't have any problems or shortcomings at all.

You are all taking this way too personal . . . which was not my intent at all.

 

My point was that it would not be fair for me to not allow any criticisms about Flight here, while allowing posts that praise Flight.

 

But anyone who has spent any time here knows that I will not allow any posts that are simply to bash Flight, without any substance. I'm just trying to be fair here.

I'm pretty sure that I understand your post. But we have the exact same issue from several members here who seem to view Flight as the best thing since sliced bread. How many threads are there in this forum about how wonderful Flight is, or about a user who has become a Flight convert? What do Flight fan threads really contribute to this forum?

 

This thread began by criticizing people who have been critical of Flight. So you are going to have a number of users here take issue with that . . . and rightfully so.

 

I guess I could only allow threads that offer concrete help on Flight, and delete any post that praise or criticize Flight. But is that what you all want?

 

The difference for me would be if I wrote a "Why flight is the best thing since sliced bread" post again and again. In my memory, those posts have been from those new to the genre, to the forum, or new to flight in some other way. Some are from doubters who have changed thier minds, and some have even been from fans feeling new qualms. "The is flight losing steam" thread comes to mind.

 

What I do not have an impression of those threads being is the same people coming again and again to say the same thing again and again in ways that are not positive or constructive. So far, reading through the entire thread we have yet again the same "MS has stolen something from me, and I am mad" views that I have yet to see go anywhere constructive in a single thread I am aware of, and in fact usually ends in a closed thread.

 

Has there been even one helpful suggestion? One request for an improvement? One hint of a way to appease the negativity short of turning Flight into FS11 and capitulating to all other demands, pronto?

 

Instead I see the same old thing that eventually subsumed and killed the previous forum, (and is attacking the steam forum) that if given free reign will eventually lose this forum its painfully hard-won stability.

HiFlyer, read my last post again. I am doing my best here to keep this forum free of Flight "hate" posts, but I will NOT censor critical posts, just for being critical of Flight. That would not be fair, and it would put an end to any chance of having a balanced, honest discussion about Flight,

It will be interesting to see where the thread goes.

I have yet to see this go anywhere usefull, but who am I? I will watch with interest for some actually helpful and/or constructive critisism and see where that leads.

 

This applies to everyone: The best way to deal with (what you feel are) unproductive/useless threads (and posts) is to just ignore them, rather than add your own posts.

 

Also, the reason the last Flight update added non-linear response to joysticks is because people like me were critical of the over-sensitive linear response during the beta testing (and after the game was released). So being critical can actually lead to improvements.

So being critical can actually lead to improvements

 

Sorry, I'm breaking my own embargo here, but Arwen: do you think you got that changed because:

 

a) You (and others) were a (vocal) beta tester

b ) because you wrote loads of negative stuff about that bug/feature on AVSIM

c) because you emailed them loads of insults

d) because you articulated, either here, over at msflight or via email, a sensible, reasoned argument for your position

e) All of the above

 

I bet it was d) but I may be wrong.

 

There are some very reasoned and non-personal posts in this thread defending the position we are putting forward (that the anti-flight posts always degenerate into the same old negative heard-it-all-before stuff over and over) and I haven't taken anything you have said personally, as in OMG you've really upset me (I have much thicker skin than that, believe me), but I did respond to your post as it was directed at ppl who hold similar views (and me, even)..I hope I didn't come across as self-serving or dismissive of others, as that isn't the case, but the responding to posts because you disagree with the content thing is one half of the entire basis of any forum (imho) It's just that when the issue is contentious, it's all about proportianality, if you ask me. The point Devon (and others) is making is that it's all a bit pointless and unproductive (as is writing this reply to your reply )

 

Now I will shut up. Goodbye.

 

J

Jake, I don't claim to have an inside track to MS's decision making process, but I know that I filed the first bug report on the joystick issue, and suggested that they change it to a non-linear response curve. I also know that a LOT of people on this forum also complained about the joystick issue. Was it changed because of my more formal bug test report, or because of the number of people who complained after Flight was released? My feeling is that it was mostly due to the latter, since MS has been pretty clear that their main focus with Flight is in pleasing the masses.

 

[i just removed a couple of totally useless posts. Please don't just post stuff like "I am done with this topic."]

A few people on the beta team complained about the twitchiness of the controls. I recall the Icon being slightly twitchy on the roll axis, and the Stearman somewhat more twitchy on the pitch axis. I couldn't find evidence of this in the release version, and figured it was due to my using a lighter hand on the joystick. Maybe they changed something.

 

I didn't have the Maule in beta, and found the release version extremely twitchy, especially in the roll axis at anything over 100 knots, almost to the point of being unflyable. I posted in the beta forum how I adjusted the response curve in my CH Control Manager software to get the plane to an acceptable level of control repsonse, although just one click worth of flattening of the curve was a bit too much. The update seems to have gotten it just about right.

 

It wasn't any one person, but input from the whole community that got this change added. And you know that the input that got the most attention was the input with the least complaining and the most constructive criticism.

 

There's considerable difference between saying, "I'm finding the XXX difficult to fly because of the overly sensitive controls" and saying "Flight isn't any good because it doesn't have <insert the entire infrastructure necessary to fly airliners> and I won't use it until it does." This is what the OP was talking about. The moon on a stick.

 

I'm all in favor of the first kind of criticism. We really don't need the second kind, as Microsoft already knows there's a market for airliners but they don't fit the initial direction Flight is trying to go. Perhaps in the future. And complaining about their lack won't get them here any faster. In fact, given the tone of most of those kinds of complaints, it may even delay their introduction.

 

Hook

I filed my Bug Report on the joystick issue was on Jan. 7th. 28 other beta testers agreed with my report, and this issue came up a LOT on the Flight Beta Discussion Board.

 

Below is what I posted in my bug report:

 

Non-linear Response Curve: "Controlling Flight with a joystick (I'm using Saitek X52 Flight Control System) feels linear and jerky, and it can be difficult to make small adjustments. Using a non-linear response curve would greatly improve this, with the initial movement away from center having a very small effect, which increases the further you push the joystick from center."

 

But, nearly 2 months later, when Flight was released on Feb. 29th, the joystick issue remained unfixed. This was not fixed until the first released update.

 

From the April 1st Update Release Notes: Under Control and Gameplay Updates

 

"Improved the ability to make small adjustments in flight with joystick and Xbox Controllers through non-linear mapping."

 

So I do have to wonder what finally made them decide to fix this issue.

 

Hook, members have the right to post the things that they don't like about Flight . . . even stuff like the lack of airliners. I do not feel that it is up to you nor me to say what is or is not a legitimate criticism . . . so as long as they are posted in the appropriate manner (and not just done as Flight hate posts), I will continue to allow these complaints here.

wellll, there has been some rumblings from the 3pds, and rightfully so. At the same time, you have been making money off of their hard work too, so you can't really say much when they pulled the plug on you. Let me ask.. did you, or any 3pd, have to pay a dime to MS for creating addons for their product?

Had Microsoft not wanted 3rd parties to "make money off their hard work" they'd not have released the SDK so that we could do so! While it is true we never had to "pay a dime to MS," many of us have had to pay for research, and license fees to the aircraft manufacturers...

 

...and for commercial products, we've had to invest many thousands of dollars for the tools we use such as 3d Studio Max, Adobe Photoshop, etc. It's not been a "free ride" by any stretch of the imagination!

 

I continue to follow this forum because we are still in the first stages of Flight development, so it is interesting seeing how it is shaped, and the views of the players about their experience.

 

Actually, a "more interesting" forum is the official "Flight" forum hosted by Steam/Valve, since most of the comments there are from the actual target demographic (the so-called "Gamer" crowd)...

 

What is most interesting is that with very few exceptions, the comments are about how much fun they're having, and how cool Flight is... :Thinking:

Had Microsoft not wanted 3rd parties to "make money off their hard work" they'd not have released the SDK so that we could do so! While it is true we never had to "pay a dime to MS," many of us have had to pay for research, and license fees to the aircraft manufacturers...

 

...and for commercial products, we've had to invest many thousands of dollars for the tools we use such as 3d Studio Max, Adobe Photoshop, etc. It's not been a "free ride" by any stretch of the imagination!

Hey, everything is within the rules, I agree! I even believe that the addon market / 3pds is one of FS's greatest assets and helped it become successful (contrary to what MS wants us to believe).

 

My point was is that you don't have much room to belly ache about there not being a Flight market since you were kind of a parasite to begin with- you had no agreement with MS, and you went into the biz knowing the risks. It's obvious that MS views you as nothing more than revenue out of their pockets, rather than you contributing to their success (unfortunately). Furthermore, it's unfortunate that they view their most loyal customers poorly as well.

 

... and I mean parasite in a business sense, no way in a personal attack.

Dang is it a full moon or what...

 

Let's relax and have some fun gang!

Actually, a "more interesting" forum is the official "Flight" forum hosted by Steam/Valve, since most of the comments there are from the actual target demographic (the so-called "Gamer" crowd)... What is most interesting is that with very few exceptions, the comments are about how much fun they're having, and how cool Flight is... :Thinking:

 

Wow! hundreds of posts talking about how kewl Flight is. I bet that is very interesting. :Hypnotized: haha!

 

Just wait until this title flinally launches on xbox- where 99% of those kids have never had access to a flight game of this genre before. This game is going to have a kewl factor of like a million gold coinz.

 

But my contention all along is that MS didn't have to scuttle their current customers or 3pds to add these new gamers. Show me one thing that Flight has that is going to be ruined by FSX- continents? Jets? Jets are going to turn away the gamers? Everything about the budget, complexity, etc is hogwash! Hogwash I say!

My point was is that you don't have much room to belly ache about there not being a Flight market since you were kind of a parasite to begin with- you had no agreement with MS, and you went into the biz knowing the risks.

 

You're point is moot with respect to me, because I'm not bellyaching, whining or knashing my teeth over the current lack of an SDK. I understand and in some ways actually support MSGS's decision to keep the ecosystem closed at this time. It is clear to me that at some future point, there will almost certainly be some entry path made available for third-party participation.

 

Whether the terms and conditions of such participation will make it attractive for me remains an open and unanswerable question. Until such time though Flight remains my preferred sim-of-choice for relaxation after a hard day of working on FS9/FSX projects.

 

Likewise, just because Flight was released hasn't suddenly caused me to stop working on those FS9/FSX projects, and sales remain fairly steady regardless. There was of course some slight droop in sales during the year or so of "uncertainty" while some folks closed their wallets and decided to sit on the fence for awhile waiting to see what Flight was going to turn out to be.

 

Wow! hundreds of posts talking about how kewl Flight is. I bet that is very interesting. :Hypnotized: haha!

 

Oddly enough, they are on the whole far more mature than to use such silly misspelled words.