The P-40! Released At Microsoft Flight.

[Guest]

I don't understand how anyone thinks that a (voluntary) payment of a mere 7 bucks for a beautifully detailed (external only) model is being 'ripped off'...

The complete planes like the Maule are only around 15 bucks... or roughly half the price of Carenado's equally lovely planes for FSX which cost from $25-35 each...

Flight pricing seems reasonable to me...

 

 

No Russell - you have it the wrong way round, my friend. They are honouring the glorious memory of veterans everywhere.

 

Because beside missing the cockpit ( this alone eaquals to a freeware product ) they also miss machine guns.

 

It is like acting in a porno movie being impotent.

[RoboRay]

So, you're saying Flight needs fluffers?

[staib]

It is like acting in a porno movie being impotent.

 

I wouldn't know about that, but if you say so, I could imagine it being a bit awkward... ;)

 

I don't suppose these warplanes were ever supposed to be live 'gun-totin' fighters from the 40's but modern (civilianised) historic aircraft, restored to airworthiness and digitised for our pleasure. And for 7 bucks you don't yet get the cockpit...

 

[gizmosellsbunnys]

MSFS is playing pysc warfare like millitary does. They are waterboarding its customers. 7.00 planes without cockpits. The maule its retread plane MSFS thinking of shareholders instead of its long term customers.

[Sigma54]

7.00 planes without cockpits.

 

Am I missing something? There are 7 planes without cockpits? As far as I know, there are 7 planes currently available of which 3 do not have a cockpit.

[Guest russellbdavis]

I've said it before, comparing apples to apples, ROCK BAND 3 (RB3) releases songs every few weeks. The effort to create a song for RB3 is not an easy task. I have the toolset Harmonix released to do that, and it can take hours, if not days to program a 3 minute piece of music for all levels of all instruments. But I am also a 3d modeler and know the effort to create a 3d model using 3d Studio Max 9 as well. A new RB3 song cost $1.99. RB3 also uses the Windows LIVE marketplace for developers to upload and deliver the DLC of new songs to users. I think there a lot of similarities in how this is being done. But the pricing of DLC for FLIGHT is far too expensive, even for older users with disposable income. If they would put the pricing more in the range of the model RB3 uses, they'd sell a lot more, in my opinion and wouldn't get as many complaints. But, purposing leaving out a cockpit (even a static image would be better than nothing), is like purposing leaving out the drum part in a new RB3 song.

[Guest]

MSFS is playing pysc warfare like millitary does. They are waterboarding its customers.

 

That's exactly the point I am, between the lines, have been saying since 2 years about Flight.

 

This is also the reason why I am conducting my war, in a gaming contest of course.

 

[Ralph_Zimmerman]

Hello Ralph

You do not like the direction that Flight! is taking, but will buy the P-40 anyway.

Do you not think that sends a message to MS that their direction is validated ?.

 

Why buy something that you are not happy with, unless you want even more aircraft releases like this.

 

Well, I said I would buy the P-40 just to have some speed. I have not bought any of the other cockpit less planes and have no interest but I would like some speed for now and I said I was willing to give Flight a chance to develop. Besides, my one purchase for a small amount of money will certainly not spur any upward sales curve for the P-40!

[keithb77]

Russell - Re RB3, agree, and they also do extra DLC, in the form of RB3-Pro parts for the standard tracks for another 99c. M$ could do exactly the same and release cockpits for another few dollars. :-)

However, even if the amount of work is similar, I think the market for songs is a bit bigger than for aircraft so M$ do have to charge a bit more.

Also I wouldn't equate cockpits with drum tracks, (mostly cos I don't drum)...but also cockpits are really needed to experience the aircraft but drumming is definitely an acquired taste.

IMHO :-)

 

Ralph - do you think the P40 is that fast? I believe its quite a bit slower than the Mustang, even downhill, in RL...

Also the screenshots I've seen of the P40 don't look quite right...keep the faith, just say NO!

 

Cheers

keith

[AllFiredUp]

Because beside missing the cockpit ( this alone eaquals to a freeware product ) they also miss machine guns.

 

This is just sad.

 

Why does flying a warbird in a simulator automatically mean combat? Have you heard of warbird collectors? Civilian pilots who fly warbirds?

 

I fly the P-40 and the Zero because I can't get into the real aircraft and go fly them. So I want to fly them in a simulation. I love combat games too, but Flight isn't a combat game, yet people think that since they put in warbirds, that must mean that Flight is trying to be an "impotent" combat game.

 

that's just bad reasoning right there.

 

Look at Flying Heritage and Planes of Fame, and others that work very hard to take a junked aircraft and restore it to flying condition - all without operating machine guns in the wings. These men and women do something they enjoy doing and work their heart out to restore these aircraft faithfully.

 

"Glacier Girl" is a beautiful example of a once lost warbird, a P-38, that was recovered from under 200 ft. of ice/snow and now is flying again. I saw this aircraft being built up in Kentucky and recently saw it flying at Chino near my home. I got to touch this amazing aircraft and see it's inner workings.

 

These warbirds that MS Flight are releasing are probably based off of the Flying Heritage aircraft. See: http://www.flyingher...spx?contentId=1

And also Chino Planes of Fame: http://planesoffame....e=static-flying

 

It is very sad to see so many people fueled up for a verbal riot and tell Microsoft "what for" just because they believe they are entitled for something more.

 

More than that, there are these same people telling those who do actually like Flight that they are "wasting their money" - that is just plain wrong, to attack MS Flight for these beautiful aircraft models to telling the customers that they are wasting their money.

 

I'm not joining the crowd mentality, I'm going to be uniquely different on purpose because I enjoy Flight and enjoy the aircraft they release.

 

Flight simmers who are engaging in this type of verbal abuse upon Microsoft Flight team and those who support them, need to get a reality check and rethink their life.

 

[xplanery]

Selling just outside model is just simply useless in a game that is marketed with having some realism too, planes are not meant to be flown from outside.

 

But I do not criticize MS from doing that really, only purpose of Flight is making money and maybe releasing flyable outside 3d models with textures makes them more money than actually spending time and making one with virtual cockpit.

 

But myself I can find no way I would pay for aircrafts that can be flown from outside view only. I can do that in loads of other games too, such as some GTAs and Just Cause & Just Cause 2. Even graphics are better and area at least almost as big as in Flight.

[arsenal82]

Interesting to read this kind of comments:

 

'I fly the P-40 and the Zero because I can't get into the real aircraft and go fly them. So I want to fly them in a simulation.'

 

how do you fly a plane without a cockpit ??????????????

[RoboRay]

'I fly the P-40 and the Zero because I can't get into the real aircraft and go fly them. So I want to fly them in a simulation.'

 

You're not getting into the simulated aircraft, either.

[AllFiredUp]

Interesting to read this kind of comments:

 

'I fly the P-40 and the Zero because I can't get into the real aircraft and go fly them. So I want to fly them in a simulation.'

 

how do you fly a plane without a cockpit ??????????????

 

I fly the cockpit planes too you know. For the exterior models, I fly them purely for the fun of it. The deluxe models are for some good simulation flying. The Basic models are for just the fun and cool flying. I can fly both planes easily and land them both very well, cockpit or non. What's so hard to understand? I have a lot of payware aircraft that I've purchased for FSX, including the B-52H and the C-130 from captain sim that cost far more than these basic exterior-only aircraft, but I don't fly them anymore because they just are very chuggy on the graphics cards. I've also bought mega scenery and Rex 2 add-ons for FSX.

 

All in all, I like the smoothness and the default quality that MS Flight offers far better than the defaults that FSX provided.

 

You're not getting into the simulated aircraft, either.

 

um, that's why I said "So I want to fly them in a simulation" and yes, I am getting into the planes, I'm flying a simulation of a P-40, regardless of it not having an internal cockpit, it is still a computer generated simulation of the real aircraft.

[RoboRay]

um, that's why I said "So I want to fly them in a simulation"

 

Woosh.