Flight interest dwindling...too bad

[Guest]

Just how much time? A month, 3, 6? a year?

It's a flop. I reckon in 6 months time it might even be withdrawn or at best gathering dust under the shop counter.

vololiberista

 

I think you are mistaken. But that's no surprise (EDIT that I think that). Why is it a flop? Because it isn't yet what it could be? The release of Alaska will be very important. If it fails I think most people will abandon Flight. But I wonder how it could fail, really. I like Flight a LOT: I just want more scenery and Alaska will give me a LOT more. I am sure I can have a lot of fun with the Maule and RV-6A in Alaska for a few months. Everything else will be a (welcome) bonus.

[psolk 3,057]

The release of Alaska will be very important. If it fails I think most people will abandon Flight.

 

I think this is a very accurate statement... There is a lot riding on Alaska, if it is a big success and MS can deliver a great scenery combined with 1 or 2 good detailed aircraft it could swing a lot of people back to supporting Flight...

The lack of those things could be devastating though, not only to all of us as simmers but I think it would cause MS to have to look at their support for continued development...

 

I hope they can pull it off and give us some great Bush flying with 1 or 2 good detailed aircraft to complement it so they can not only please the folks who are enjoying Flight today but so they can sway back some of those that tried it and have been less than excited as well as those who may not have tried it at all...

[Guest Antlab]

This thread is absolutely hilarious!

 

I wish I had the fortune telling skills of the people in this thread. In fact I think a poll is in order:

 

"What is your method of foretelling the DOOOOOM of MS Flight?"

 

1) Crystal Ball

2) Tarot Cards

3) Tea Leaves

4) Aliens transmitting via radio waves picked up by your fillings

5) Stolen internal MS documents outlining their financial goals versus their current sales performance

 

We are all happy for your amusement, but in this thread we are mainly discussing about some interesting data reported by Kabronicus on the effective use of Flight in the biggest PC online gaming platform of the world.

And further we were comparing those quite small numbers with the public declaration by Howard regarding the target of millions of users for Flight.

If you prefer to ignore objective data and simple comparisons good luck with the tarots and the tea leaves

 

A.

[enamel 4]

So the old tried and true method of 100% pure conjecture based on an absurdly small, and mostly irrelevant data set, got it :Just Kidding:

 

I am only teasing of course. Mostly. :Big Grin:

[FrankFasi 0]

Yes, we're all waiting on Alaska. Has the Flight team stated whether or not ALL of Alaska will be included? If it's only a certain region of Alaska that might end up being a bit underwhelming. Hopefully someone has read a description of what will be included, a description that I've missed.

[Guest Antlab]

So the old tried and true method of 100% pure conjecture based on an absurdly small, and mostly irrelevant data set, got it :Just Kidding:

 

If for you the Steam statistics are absurdly small and mostly irrelevant then I fully understand why you prefer the other alternative methods.

Besides, we would happy to also analyze the comparable Live numbers, but it seems that they are not made public (I don't know why).

 

A.

[RamonB 449]

Yes, we're all waiting on Alaska. Has the Flight team stated whether or not ALL of Alaska will be included? If it's only a certain region of Alaska that might end up being a bit underwhelming. Hopefully someone has read a description of what will be included, a description that I've missed.

 

Alaska DLC title description was apparently changed from “Journey to Alaska!”

 

 

 

We're excited to announce some upcoming DLC: journey with us to Alaska, with over 1.5 million square kilometers (~600,000 square miles) of captivating scenery, new aircraft and additional missions! Check out the screenshots below for an advance look.

https://news.microso...-to-alaska.aspx

 

As per their announcement, all Alaska scenery should be included, I don’t have the slightest idea of what else is included or not.

 

Again, I hope. (<- I should add that to my signature)

[FrankFasi 0]

all Alaska scenery should be included

 

Thanks.

[enamel 4]

If for you the Steam statistics are absurdly small and mostly irrelevant then I fully understand because you prefer the other alternative methods.

 

To get serious for a moment, and to make my point explicit...

 

There is only one relevant data point to determine if a software product is successful: "Is this product producing profit?". Unless they make this information public, any amount of analysis based on any external observations is simply conjecture. The only data that provides insight into the health of the product is a comparison of sales goals vs. actual sales data.

 

 

 

But, that's not very fun, and you can't play the conjecture game that way! So to get back on topic, I will throw my fortune telling into the mix as well:

 

Because Flight had a short development cycle, and lack of content available at launch, Microsoft recouped their development costs of Flight in the first month by sales of the Hawaii Pack. Since they have a small team of content developers, their overhead to produce content is very low, so every DLC is basically pure profit to them. Based on these observations, it is clear that noy only is the product healthy, but the user gained by the Steam release turned what was a profitable game into a runaway success from a business prospective and will soon rival the Office suite in profitability.

[Guest Antlab]

To get serious for a moment, and to make my point explicit...

There is only one relevant data point to determine if a software product is successful: "Is this product producing profit?". Unless they make this information public, any amount of analysis based on any external observations is simply conjecture. The only data that provides insight into the health of the product is a comparison of sales goals vs. actual sales data.

But, that's not very fun, and you can't play the conjecture game that way! So to get back on topic, I will throw my fortune telling into the mix as well:

Because Flight had a short development cycle, and lack of content available at launch, Microsoft recouped their development costs of Flight in the first month by sales of the Hawaii Pack. Since they have a small team of content developers, their overhead to produce content is very low, so every DLC is basically pure profit to them. Based on these observations, it is clear that noy only is the product healthy, but the user gained by the Steam release turned what was a profitable game into a runaway success from a business prospective and will soon rival the Office suite in profitability.

 

Well, after some people comparing this Flight forum to a place of worship, some other referring to gospel, now we have Flight that rivals Office in profitability.

Nobody's suggesting that Howard should challenge Obama in the next presidential race?

 

A.

[Glynn 405]

Based on these observations, it is clear that noy only is the product healthy, but the user gained by the Steam release turned what was a profitable game into a runaway success from a business prospective and will soon rival the Office suite in profitability.

 

Hello

That runaway success has 599 players using it on Steam out of 4,131,971 online.

If all of those 599 bought the P-40 that's less than $4,500 generated.

The MS Office team won't feel threatened just yet

[Guest Antlab]

Hello

That runaway success has 599 players using it on Steam out of 4,131,971 online.

If all of those 599 bought the P-40 that's less than $4,500 generated.

The MS Office team won't feel threatened just yet

 

Hey, please quote correctly, otherwise it seems that the crazy comparison could be mine, instead that of Enamel

 

A.

[Glynn 405]

Hey, please quote correctly, otherwise it seems that the crazy comparison could be mine, instead that of Enamel

 

A.

 

Sorry, I was laughing that hard at the MS Office comparison that I messed up

[enamel 4]

HAHA I sure hope no one is taking me seriously on that one.

[fritzgohl 29]

What I like about Flight compared to FSX

 

1. Enhanced graphics

2. Realistic flight model

3. Collision detection

4. Superior Performance

5. Simple updated user interface

6. Disabling of cheats such as slew

 

What I am disappointed with Flight compared to FSX

 

1. Limited area

2. No cars, no AI, no birds

3. No Jets

4. Restrictive and terrible performing multi-player

5. Monopoly on extended content

 

I echo the sentiments of the original poster, at first I was very excited about Flight regarding the a fore mentioned likes, it even renewed my interest in general aviation for two weeks. Then, as the original poster commented, it got stale.

 

Although this list shows more likes then disappointments it is important to focus on what I use flight simulator for. I fly jets, online, recreating commercial operations. Flight at this stage has no way to satisfy this for me. For general aviation flying, what Flight has to offer is acceptable, even with it's limited multi-player assuming many more areas to fly in will be forthcoming.

 

What I'd like to see from Flight is obviously open development. I cannot put my trust or hopes that MS will ever deliver a satisfactory commercial airline simulation to me with Flight. The 737-800 was the most detailed and complex aircraft that was delivered with FSX but got boring due to it's limitations. Assuming that if MS does eventually decide to provide an airliner it will likely be limited in a similar way i.e. without a functional FMC or virtual cabin. Therefore, without open development, I believe I will never adopt Flight as my sim of choice.

 

I'd like to say, I will adopt Flight when

 

1. I can fly anywhere I want in a commercial jet with an FMC

2. There is an open unrestricted massive multi-player online network to fly on

3. Offline flights can be performed with A.I. represented in real world airline liveries

 

Why Flight will never be able to provide A.I. in real world liveries is obvious due to licensing obstacles. Will I be able to repaint an MS Flight Jet Liner offering in the future? Most likely not due to monopolizing of content.

 

Yes, I know, I can keep enjoying FSX as I have for the past years, but now, I know there is better and I am spoiled.

 

Solution: if MS opens development to the thousands of talented passionate individuals who make this hobby a community, then Flight can be FS11.

 

Reality: MS will maintain a monopoly on content unless determined software engineers find a way to bypass the restrictions, ultimately forcing those community members who desire to sim in the best looking and performing simulator the same way they have for many years to become rouge license breaking users.

 

Notice: the take it or leave it stance does not work with fluid evolving creations such as computer software nor should it. This may be the end of the PC as we know it and we will all be forced to purchase closed hardware solutions designed primarily to disrupt creativity and freedom.

 

If you read this entire post, I apologize to you and at the same time, thank you.

 

Regards;

 

Fritz