I guess I should thank MS for saving me some money... there's nothing to buy in Flight this month.

 

You wrote today:

 

"I think based on the past releases and the obvious flying heritage collection tie in we have here, the next release after the p-40, will be either a p-47 or the il-2m3. My money is on the il-2m3."

 

I wrote three weeks ago, in the thread concerning the cockpitless Zero:

 

"Oops, do you mean that you are not interested to the fabulous IL-2 (obviously without cockpit) they are preparing for flying over Alaska?"

 

A.

yeah I referenced a schedule on the flying heritage museum website that lists what planes from the collection will be on display and when. The p-47 and il-2 are scheduled for a flight in June. I don't see where you referred to that source, but I concede that you clearly mentioned the il-2 first. If that matters.

These threads are so up and down, it must be that time of the month :-)

 

I say just be patient, they'll eventually cater for everyone. And if any of the warbirds gets a good cockpit, i'm in! In the meantime, perfect your IFR skills or finish those aerocaches or just fly your fave sim. Or vent your frustration in battlefield 3 like I do sometimes!

I dont get it.

 

There are other options if you want to throw a warbird around from chase view, namely Birds of Steel. You can shoot in that as well!

 

Flight is sat in no-mans land at the moment. It doesn't appeal to the simmer market OR the gamer market.

 

I downloaded it on my kids PC. "Played" with it for a couple of hours and never went back...............

yeah I referenced a schedule on the flying heritage museum website that lists what planes from the collection will be on display and when. The p-47 and il-2 are scheduled for a flight in June. I don't see where you referred to that source, but I concede that you clearly mentioned the il-2 first. If that matters.

 

Just to clarify. Your reference to the museum is really interesting, sincerely I did not know it, and it also probably helps explain the "strange" choices of old war aircraft for Flight.

I was only joking in my old post, because some weeks ago still seemed quite odd that a civil flight sim would propose a lot of war planes, so my reference to the IL-2 was ironic then. But now ....

 

A.

I'm not quite sure what to think at this point. The P51, Zero, and P40 are all "the same" to me: single engine vintage taildraggers. For me, got one, get 'em all. I'll assume the P40 will be sans cockpit. So, we have four very nice, "complete" planes: Icon, RV, Stearman, and Maule and all sufficiently different from each other and we have three very similar, non-cockpit planes. I don't see a "panic mode" coming on just yet. If I think as if Flight had been released day 1 with this hangar make-up: 4 GA planes and 3 "arcade" planes, then I don't think we'd be quite so 'alarmed' as a group. We have IFR capabilities, fantastic flight models and 'sensation' of flight, highly detailed scenery, and a spattering of stuff to do. The known arcade planes don't really 'fit' with Alaska, so if they had always planned to do 3 of 'em, it makes sense to get them out before everyone shifts to Alaska.

 

So, with the first scenery area, we have 4x 'real' planes and 3x 'arcade' planes. I'll assume Alaska will come with a 'real' plane and it may be a good time to add variants for the Maule. We still have more 'real' planes than 'arcade' planes and that is a good thing.

 

Let's not forget, even with the 3x 'arcade' planes, Flight is still a fantastic foundation for a simulator and MSFT has demonstrated they are taking the simming side of it more seriously than we had first thought. No, it doesn't have all the simming stuff, but when I load up FSX, position myself at Hilo, set some winds and IFR conditions and compare it within the limits of Flight, FSX feels very dated, simple, and 'flys' like in slow-moition. We're currently at a 4:3 ratio of real to arcade planes. Alaska should bring that to a 5:3 ratio. At least for now, it doesn't look too bad for Flight. . .

Let's not forget, even with the 3x 'arcade' planes, Flight is still a fantastic foundation for a simulator and MSFT has demonstrated they are taking the simming side of it more seriously than we had first thought.

 

Indeed nice to see some others trying to look at Flight in a positive note, and for what may lie for us down the road...

Boooooring....

I was talking to my dad the other day. We both play it and he is around 73yrs old(retired Western/Delta Airlines Mechanic) right now, but we were talking about how it was getting boring. We used to play everyday, but lately I only play it on the weekends. He will get on and at least do the daily aerocache, but I am down to weekends only.

 

One thing I sort of understand is with this next P-40 coming out, that it was already in the line-up.

However that could be good news or scary, because if they have a "preset plan" then we could literally be "unheard" for 1-2 years, thats scary. The good of it could be after this plane, they start incorperating some of what their fans are asking for.

 

I don't know....I am in the middle still. I love Flight and the mechanics so far of it and really want some bad-&@($* new aircraft to play around in.

 

 

the way this is going, once alaska is released, it will be completely consumed in the first month and we will be right back to where we are right now waiting for the NEXT expansion......hmmmmmmmmm Circles

the way this is going, once alaska is released, it will be completely consumed in the first month and we will be right back to where we are right now waiting for the NEXT expansion......hmmmmmmmmm Circles

 

I too play less frequently than when Flight was released. But that's true with any new game I get. Lot's of play at first, then gradually taper off. It used to be that I'd buy FS4 and play it to death, then taper off, then forget about it for long stretches. Then FS5 would come out and the cycle would repeat. I've done this pattern for a LONG time. Sadly, it was typically two years between the cycle peaks. When Alaska is released, I will "go nuts" again and taper off more and more, and then a new 'real' plane or new scenery will be released and I'll do it all again. I see the excitement of a "new release" coming much more frequently than in the past FS series of releases. . .

Indeed nice to see some others trying to look at Flight in a positive note, and for what may lie for us down the road...

 

Yes. But MS is making it very hard to do so... Flight is indeed still a fantastic foundation for a simulator, but what's the use of a foundation if they don't build on it? Well, I am sure (I think ) that in a year or so we will all be laughing about how impatient 'back then' we were while we are flying our er... whatever plane above er... whatever region... with maybe some ATC replacing LiveATC... I am still hopeful, but also impatient...

The only message that comes to my mind is "we want no simmers to play this game at any costs", which frankly doesnt make any sense to me.

 

Josh's last two or three interviews have been very clear that this game was designed to attract a new audience, and not to cater to the "complex" needs of the HCS.

Here is the plane dogma by MS :

 

- 60 years old

 

- you do not have to see the runway when taking off

 

- weapons you can't use

 

- a dozen of crazy liveries wow

 

- 1200 credits to have the New toy

 

- the certainty the the next plane will be again a WWII plane with the same specs

 

 

cheers

Yes. But MS is making it very hard to do so... Flight is indeed still a fantastic foundation for a simulator, but what's the use of a foundation if they don't build on it? Well, I am sure (I think ) that in a year or so we will all be laughing about how impatient 'back then' we were while we are flying our er... whatever plane above er... whatever region... with maybe some ATC replacing LiveATC... I am still hopeful, but also impatient...

 

Exactly. I also think Flight is a fantastic base for a high quality sim and am truly disappointed to see it taking a different direction. Don't get me wrong, i understand they want to earn money and that's normal but it's not fair to divide the community with moves like this. Simultaneous release of both basic and deluxe a/c model would be the best solution since no one would feel let down.

I also agree with the second part of your post :) I hope that's what happens so that we can all look back and smirk at how impatient we were. However, there is one thing i can never understand and that is an extreme lack of communication from MS side. Is it so hard for them to just talk to us through any means available? Is it too much to ask to just be informed where are they heading and at which pace. It could only do good to Flight. It's psychology; they tease the community with some slim information about upcoming releases and do it on regular basis. Or at least give us hints about features Flight is lacking and they're working on. I sent them a private message on Facebook asking about force feedback support, deluxe to basic model release ratio, custom and real world weather and bunch of other stuff and they replied with "Sorry, i can not answer your questions". Not even one? That's just not right.

 

Still, i am enjoying Flight for what it is now and that's an awesome GA sim / game but the biggest problem i have with it is not Flight itself, rather Microsoft's blurry and undefined strategy for it's future. That's what makes me angry the most.

 

 

Cheers

However, there is one thing i can never understand and that is an extreme lack of communication from MS side. Is it so hard for them to just talk to us through any means available? Is it too much to ask to just be informed where are they heading and at which pace. It could only do good to Flight. It's psychology; they tease the community with some slim information about upcoming releases and do it on regular basis. Or at least give us hints about features Flight is lacking and they're working on. I sent them a private message on Facebook asking about force feedback support, deluxe to basic model release ratio, custom and real world weather and bunch of other stuff and they replied with "Sorry, i can not answer your questions". Not even one? That's just not right.

 

Still, i am enjoying Flight for what it is now and that's an awesome GA sim / game but the biggest problem i have with it is not Flight itself, rather Microsoft's blurry and undefined strategy for it's future. That's what makes me angry the most.

 

I posted something similar on the Steam forum because that's the place where some MS employes are actually replying to posts of us mortals. I don't expect answer though...

 

Just to clarify. Your reference to the museum is really interesting, sincerely I did not know it, and it also probably helps explain the "strange" choices of old war aircraft for Flight.

I was only joking in my old post, because some weeks ago still seemed quite odd that a civil flight sim would propose a lot of war planes, so my reference to the IL-2 was ironic then. But now ....

 

A.

been up all night at work... Sarcasm detector is on the fritz