For those that don't know me, I'm one of those that thought I could see Flight as a potential FS next and was/is very happy with the new format and performance.

I'm also one of those that doesn't care much for the gamy side of it and therefore don't use it as such and thought that the majority of us were like minded but there seems to be a lot of excitement about these aerocache things lately and I really am left wondering whether I'm on my own or whether I'm missing something.

 

So what am I missing?

So what am I missing?

 

Nothing, except maybe a little fun? If you try them and like them, you aren't required to expose that to the community.

 

I liked getting the ones on Kaua'i. You really need a heli for a lot of them, but with some creative landings and a little physical exertion they can be found. Trying to find where you left the Icon can be a problem!

 

I went hunting for one and crashed. Went back on another attempt following much the same path and had this "Uh, not again" thought rush through my head. I kept going, found the "gold coin" (love that term!) and somehow, someway got the Icon to stall, nose over, miss the trees and worked my way back out of the canyon. On that trip I got three gold coins and shamelessly admit to feeling like a little kid, which belies the gray hair, gray beard, etc.

 

Sometimes it's just nice to have a little fun. And no need to feel guilty if you do!

The aerocaches at times make us fly into some very nasty terrain. I got all except one,while flying... several I had to power off the maul, use full flaps to keep speed down, and dive on the aerocache.. They are a challenge reminiscent of my younger days in a PA18 on floats. Flight clearly gives me the best simulation of bush flying. I can hardly wait for Alaska which I hope contains the panhandle... I lived about sixty miles from Juneau

Ken :LMAO: you can land the airplane in a field or on a road, and just walk to the Aerocache. But, you are right, it is more fun to try getting it with the airplane! :dance:

 

Lots of people are looking forward to Alaska and fun!

 

Best regards.

Luis

Luis I could have walked but would have probably got lost in the canyons on the way in. It was at least a three mile hike to the aerocache from where I could have landed.

Ah, I never saw the aerocache as a landmark pointer. I thought they were things that you just collected

A bit of both really. Landmarks and neat things to find.

I've had to knife edge a few of them as I really don't want to get out and walk if I can help it.

I recommend hunting for aerocaches while taking a passenger on a biplane tour. Many times they will help in spotting them with the clues and descriptions they provide about the area.

 

However, they never appreciate the low altitude flying as you swoop down to pick an aerocache up. :sorry:

I know this post is 2 months old but I do hope the people revelling in the aerocaches aren't just doing so for the hell of it.

If the Flight team are gauging our habits via LIVE/Steam the last thing we want is for them to get false data.

I'd be wary of even bigging these things up in this forum too if the rumour that the devs read this is true.

So, again, what is fundamentally flawed with the concept of aerocaches? It's generally a pointer to a landmark, or something else of interest, and the information on it or if you research it before setting out can be quite educational. It's also an excuse to go flying, which is the origin of the entire "$100 hamburger" tradition in aviation.

 

Fear of MS noticing a lot of people are doing aerocaches seems a little silly to me.

 

How do you suggest people should be spending their time instead?

 

And they certainly do read this forum. If you watch the names at the bottom of the pages, and know the names the devs commonly use, it's obvious.

So, again, what is fundamentally flawed with the concept of aerocaches? It's generally a pointer to a landmark, or something else of interest, and the information on it or if you research it before setting out can be quite educational. It's also an excuse to go flying, which is the origin of the entire "$100 hamburger" tradition in aviation.

 

Fear of MS noticing a lot of people are doing aerocaches seems a little silly to me.

 

How do you suggest people should be spending their time instead?

 

And they certainly do read this forum. If you watch the names at the bottom of the pages, and know the names the devs commonly use, it's obvious.

 

I was kind of hoping that we wouldn't be so much into the gamey side of things scoring points.

The same way as NOT buying the basic VCless aircraft would give them the impression that people don't want them.

 

Which way do you want this game to go? I was under the impression that this new way of delivering was to gauge peoples habits and therefore guide the team in what to develop next.

I wasn't aware that flying around looking at the scenery and hoping to spot something specific was "gamey". There are points for it? I guess so, but that doesn't mean you have to look at the points. I sure don't.

 

If it's because "points" get awarded, shouldn't the Jobs Boards go away? You earn points for those, too. Missions give points. Do they have to go?

 

Heck, if "gamey" things are bad for simming, shouldn't everyone delete their FSX installations? That had games in it also, you know?

I think you've got things the wrong way around. MGS spent a lot of time and effort with market studies, surveys, focus groups, before making the decision to create Flight.

 

What they found is probably what most of us, and they, had pretty much already known and suspected:

 

1. Many, many people found FS to be excessively complex and difficult to use.

2. Very few users bothered to follow the ab-initio syllabus in order to learn to fly.

3. The lack of structured activities led a lot of users to feel bored quickly.

4. What most people want is just to get up in the air easily and quickly and simply... fly!

 

The result of their studies is a flight "game" that is:

 

1. structured, that is, that contains numerous and varied activities related to flying. Viewing scenery and landmarks (Aerocache Hunts) is one of those activities. But, there are also Missions, Landing Challenges, Hoop and Obstacle Courses, and many sorts of Flying Jobs. The structure in the game should prevent much of the boredom that was so prevalent in FS.

 

2. motivated, with "game levels", Experience Points, Awards that automatically accrue. Many users like being motivated and this should keep the enthusiasm level and competitive feel high for many.

 

3. fun! And they certainly seem to have succeeded with this.

 

At the same time, Flight is the best pure flight simulator in the FS series. The flight models are the most realistic so far, in spite of the numerous and inevitable flaws, particularly at the edge of the flight envelope. The airplane models are the most detailed and appealing ever, and the scenery (including weather, lighting, objects, terrain, and water) has made leaps and bounds over what was previously available in FS.

 

Of course, nothing is perfect, and the lack of content is disheartening. But, we must learn patience, grasshopper. All good things come to those who know how to wait. :lol: Even airplanes with cockpits!

 

Best regards.

Luis

I wasn't aware that flying around looking at the scenery and hoping to spot something specific was "gamey". There are points for it? I guess so, but that doesn't mean you have to look at the points. I sure don't.

 

If it's because "points" get awarded, shouldn't the Jobs Boards go away? You earn points for those, too. Missions give points. Do they have to go?

 

Heck, if "gamey" things are bad for simming, shouldn't everyone delete their FSX installations? That had games in it also, you know?

 

Now I'm a bit confused.

I know I spend more time lurking here than posting but you're one of the members who always seemed to agree with.

 

Flying around looking at scenery is not gamey, of course not, that's what I spent most of my time doing. If I see one of the aerocaches then yes I'll head for it but it seems that a lot of people here HAVE to get all of them pokemon style and question the fact that they have some missing and if they will be able to get them again.

That's gamey in my book but I don't begrudge people from taking that route.

 

I love the job boards, it gives the game some purpose but I'm not interested in how many points I get from each job. I just like having the virtual reason to fly and for the record I never flew any missions in FSX for the very reason you state.

 

 

I think you've got things the wrong way around. MGS spent a lot of time and effort with market studies, surveys, focus groups, before making the decision to create Flight.

 

What they found is what most of us, and they, had pretty much already known and suspected:

 

1. Many, many people found FS to be excessively complex and difficult to use.

2. Very few users bothered to follow the ab-initio syllabus in order to learn to fly.

3. The lack of structured activities led a lot of users to feel bored quickly.

4. What most people want is just to get up in the air easily and quickly and simply... fly!

 

The result of their studies is a flight "game" that is:

 

1. structured, that is, that contains numerous and varied activities related to flying. Viewing scenery and landmarks (Aerocache Hunts) is one of those activities. But, there are also Missions, Landing Challenges, Hoop and Obstacle Courses, and many sorts of Flying Jobs. The structure in the game should prevent much of the boredom that was so prevalent in FS.

 

2. motivated, with "game levels", Experience Points, Awards that automatically accrue. Many users like being motivated and this should keep the enthusiasm level and competitive feel high for many.

 

3. fun! And they certainly seem to have succeeded with this.

 

At the same time, Flight is the best pure flight simulator in the FS series. The flight models are the most realistic so far, in spite of the numerous and inevitable flaws, particularly at the edge of the flight envelope. The airplane models are the most detailed and appealing ever, and the scenery (including weather, lighting, objects, terrain, and water) has made leaps and bounds over what was previously available in FS.

 

Of course, nothing is perfect, and the lack of content is disheartening. But, we must learn patience, grasshopper. All good things come to those who know how to wait. :lol: Even airplanes with cockpits!

 

Best regards.

Luis

 

It's not really that structured though is it?

 

To me a structured flight game would be to start off getting your PPL and move through the ranks as in real life.

Add some game elements by all means for when we get bored of our instructors LOL. But I think most people wanted to see a realistic career element.

 

From PPL to commercial passenger movements is what I envisaged.

Flying around looking at scenery is not gamey, of course not, that's what I spent most of my time doing. If I see one of the aerocaches then yes I'll head for it but it seems that a lot of people here HAVE to get all of them pokemon style and question the fact that they have some missing and if they will be able to get them again.

That's gamey in my book but I don't begrudge people from taking that route.

 

That is a good point. When a count is being kept, a lot of people will feel an urge to maximize it. This is even more true when the thing being counted is only available for a limited time and then is gone. True completionists may be dismayed to miss any.

 

I rarely miss one if I'm able to play that day, but I don't make an effort to play simply to get the AotD. I just find they often give me an excuse to go someplace new.

 

They are only a game if you want them to be a game. As I usually take off from my "home field" and fly to them, sometimes taking a Job along the way, they are often just part of my routine simming.

 

That is not always happening now, though, as Alaska is so big. I'm more likely to miss them now, as I don't like just skipping around on the Map.

 

To me, something like aerocaches would seem to require minimal effort to produce, so they could also be a high "bang for the buck" item in Dev-hours if they are actually as popular as they seem.

 

I love the job boards, it gives the game some purpose but I'm not interested in how many points I get from each job. I just like having the virtual reason to fly and for the record I never flew any missions in FSX for the very reason you state.

 

I think of aerocaches the same way, just a reason to go fly. I've gone sightseeing with a specific goal in mind a few times in real planes, too.

 

But the Jobs are by far my favorite Flight activity.

 

It's not really that structured though is it?

 

To me a structured flight game would be to start off getting your PPL and move through the ranks as in real life.

Add some game elements by all means for when we get bored of our instructors LOL. But I think most people wanted to see a realistic career element.

 

From PPL to commercial passenger movements is what I envisaged.

 

That is what previous MSFS versions attempted, but it was often too much structure. If the structure is too strong, those who don't appreciate it are left to just wander around with none. A lot of them got bored, and found something else to spend their time with.

 

This time, MS seems to be trying "structured fun" rather than "structured flying lessons."