It seems pretty clear that the British Isles will be one of the first DLC packs, after Alaska, US Pacific Northwest, perhaps the Caribbean. There is no doubt that a large part of the market would appreciate and enjoy Britain and Western Europe, so keep hoping, guys. :Peace:

 

Best regards.

Luis

I am guessing the next DLC region to be somewhere near San Diego........

 

Nice little triangle.............

 

Pure Speculation.

UK would be a lot more interesting than Kansas.

Certainly GB would have to come with France... flying the channel is a must, and the landmarks in Paris are naturals for aerocaches.

Certainly GB would have to come with France... flying the channel is a must, and the landmarks in Paris are naturals for aerocaches.

 

Paris ? That means Charles De Gaulle and Orly airports.

 

Mhhh.... I think MS is against those airports because they keep inside them the virus, AKA jets.

 

We are forced to point to the source code to defeat the Matrix.

Paris ? That means Charles De Gaulle and Orly airports.

 

Mhhh.... I think MS is against those airports because they keep inside them the virus, AKA jets.

 

We are forced to point to the source code to defeat the Matrix.

 

You yourself mentioned it would be good to have Heathrow. What's the difference between that and Charles De Gaulle?

 

If MS continues to stay away from areas with a lot of airliner traffic, then they are going to run out of areas really quick. I have to admit though, an empty Heathrow or CDG is going to look sad (hilo for example). Hopefully AI traffic will be along soon, and hopefully I wont have to pay for it seperately!

I like whatever airport that is a real airport therefore with planes inside it and I also would like to see them working and not being cartoon targets....

 

So I like whatever airport like Heathrow, Charles De Gaulle, JFK, Innsbruck, Fiumicino, Shilphol etc. etc..

 

Also the small ones are fine but like Sting was used to sing : in Flight I feel So Lonely, So Lonely, So Lonely !!!!!

Paris ? That means Charles De Gaulle and Orly airports.

 

Mhhh.... I think MS is against those airports because they keep inside them the virus, AKA jets.

 

We are forced to point to the source code to defeat the Matrix.

 

I don't recollect MS ever coming out against jets. In the inteview Joshua Howard said that according to his information a very large percentage of Flight users had no interest in long-haul flight. How this got morphed into "jets baaad" I'm not sure.

 

As for future DLC regions Mr Howard stated that they would focus not just on new areas of the world, but also new types of flying. If they do add ATC / AI traffic at some point, something like the UK with a very busy airspace would be a good place to introduce it.

Jets do not mean long hauls necessarily. For instance I play PMDG 737 NGX and my flights are average 1-2-3 hours long, take offs and landings included.

 

Which is the average flight time of an aerocache with no cheats ?

a very large percentage of Flight users had no interest in long-haul flight.

this quote sets off my BS caution light every time.

this quote sets off my BS caution light every time.

 

Instead of assuming Howard is wrong, wouldn't it be a better use of your time to figure out how to get that large percentage interested in long haul?

 

For example: today's aerocache is at the intersection of 3 VOR radials. It's a fun little challenge for someone new to flying and radio navigation. They don't even realize they're learning something necessary for doing any kind of long haul flights.

 

Look at the awards for hauling passengers. It's going to take approximately forever to get even Plastic Passengers at 500. There's not even an award for 100 passengers, which would be an easy one to shoot for. Eventually we'll have to have planes with a larger capacity. The way things are going, this will mean a slightly larger plane and maybe some slightly longer flights, but not necessarily a long haul airliner. At some point that large percentage will be looking for something bigger.

 

If you dropped that large majority of new players into a 737 NGX right now, they'd be totally overwhelmed and turned against Flight. Microsoft is easing them into it gradually, which is the proper way to do things.

 

I have certain ways I like to fly, but I fully realize that I'm a minority, a niche market. I'm willing to wait and see what Microsoft will deliver. The Flight roadmap almost certainly includes airliners, and other aircraft I'd prefer to see, but for a future release. Now is not the appropritate time for them. They need to build the market first, and that means the most fun for the most people. Once the market for flight simulators is 100 to 1000 times larger than it is now, the sky is the limit.

 

Hook

You are right Hook on your considerations but MS will never develop something comparable to the PMDG fidelity, you know that better than me.

 

If a day a 737-200 will come from MS it will have only few main switches and it will miss at all for ex. the FMC and the over head panel, that's for sure.

I'm not ready to totally rule out the possibility of the actual PMDG 737 NGX in Flight at some time in the future, in full FSX fidelity and with a couple of years worth of improvements over the FSX version. A lot will depend on what makes good business sense for Microsoft and PMDG.

 

Hook

Reading what MR. Randazzo said about MS and PMDG relationship and considering how PMDG has been treated by MS I would doubt there will be any deals in the future.

 

Even if within 2 years the situation may change again, let's hope it !

Instead of assuming Howard is wrong, wouldn't it be a better use of your time to figure out how to get that large percentage interested in long haul?

 

I have certain ways I like to fly, but I fully realize that I'm a minority, a niche market.

 

I just don't agree. As a youngster, I spent the first couple of hundred hours of simulation flying f-16s, f-18s, etc, and even landing on carriers- I wanted to be Pete Mitchell, not Joe Cessna. I would imagine many of you had a similar learning curve. Of course you are correct- no way was I mature enough to handle a PMDG back in those days. So how about helping kiddies get involved by making a basic and a deluxe version of a 777, boing!

 

And the day an airliner is released, this whole learning progression goes right out the window. Is a new gamer going to be wowed by a Maule (what is that?), or a 777?

 

If your type of flying is airlines, then please don't consider yourself a niche market just because Josh says so. Look at the add at the bottom of this page- an airliner. What percentage of freeware downloads are airliner oriented, over 90% probably? How many virtual airlines are there, compared to how many bush flying focused websites are there?

 

I guess I don't have a larger point to make anyway, it is what it is.