However, I don't see this game going to XBox

 

For some reason I thought they were planning on releasing it on Xbox... I may be wrong though. It would probably open the game up to a lot more players.

I'll bet cookies to donuts Flight will be an Xbox title at some point. If not on the 360, then the next generation console.

 

If they don't just give up and end the "experiment."

Given the currently available resources for the further development of Flight I’m not very optimistic at all. If the release cycle of new DLC establishes itself as it seems to materialize now – the first major (or deluxe) addition Alaska to be released mid-year/summer with the next one probably scheduled for the 2012 holiday season – Flight is most likely going to reach its very own technological obsolescence on this semi-annual release schedule before growing into anything more substantial.

 

To me it just seems as MS tried the impossible; enviously looking at the revenue others were generating from their open platform MSFS franchise they decided to have the whole cake for themselves. What they apparently weren’t willing to do was allocating the required resources to that job properly. So they vaguely announced some kind of “flying experience” more appealing to the general public, which allowed them to leave out all the time-consuming and performance-heavy elements of the simulation. Borrowing heavily from the legacy, who could seriously deny that there’s still a lot of FSX in Flight, they eventually managed to get something pretty decent done within that deliberately cut down framework although their resources were quite limited.

 

So what can we expect next? Alaska will probably bring nothing but an extension in geographical terms and one theme oriented deluxe aircraft along with some more specific missions and challenges as well as (hopefully) regionally appropriate weather themes. Maybe also some useful gizmos, such as skis/floats on the Maule and a working GPS. I would be really surprised if anything more substantial was included in the Alaska package.

 

But who’s going to take bets that the next upcoming deluxe DLC includes more simulation oriented, more complex additions to the game? I for sure don’t. Given the estimated release date I’d rather expect a theme much more suited to the taste of the masses, let’s say a Reno Air Races theme. This would also offer the perfect opportunity to introduce the Kinetic controller to the PC market, for flying these cockpit-less air racers from 3^rd person view. No questions here what the following DLC of cockpit-less “basic aircraft” would comprise of (I have to admit I’m still somewhat scratching my head which “appropriate” VC-less aircraft could make sense in Alaska…).

 

FSX, despite being somewhat revolutionary at its release and in some areas still ahead of Flight but also severely lacking in others, can now rightfully be declared obsolete. Six years after its release, the major issues still unresolved, it is somewhat dead in the water as its developers have ultimately abandoned it. One can remain curious whether Lockheed Martin is capable of taking the dated code to new frontiers while retaining backward compatibility, but this only time will tell.

 

Now, given the current development cycle of Flight, imagine where Flight will stand in six years if the team insists to do the entire content development themselves: Some limited areas to fly in but not in between scattered across the world, some more mission/challenge based themes (just speculating: air race, helicopter SAR, maybe soaring competition and last not least a proper flying school, which Flight despite its “newcomer” approach still almost completely lacks). But it will be a far cry from what’s been offered by FSX from the very outset.

 

Apart from the fact that Flight may probably have become technologically obsolete by then I doubt that many of their customers will ultimately muster the patience to wait for its “completion” or “maturity” which actually may never happen, as the developers prefer to remain very secretive about their intentions and future plans at all. In addition the currently ongoing replacements of key figures in the MSF team (e.g. the lead designer post) do not exactly instill a sense of confidence that things in the team are going all smooth and well.

 

My personal estimate is that MS will abandon Flight in about two years time from now due to lack of customers/revenue and the developers realizing that despite all their optimizations the already obsolete FSX core code cannot be pushed any further.

 

I’ve been on some sinking ships regarding corporations or projects in my professional career and Flight definitely looks like one. If – after presumptuous announcements – nothing but silence except some minor diversionary blah blah is coming from the big shots at management you know for sure that there’s something wrong, irremediably wrong. You could even bet on a dead horse with more success rather than hoping that this particular project would still turn into something good.

 

So my pessimism for Flight’s future doesn’t feed itself from its current state, but from an analysis of the resources that will most likely be available for its further development. And the answer is pretty straightforward: With a team that small and apparently somewhat unstable the developers won’t be able to achieve any essential expansion of the game before it has reached its own obsolescence.

 

But as my current rig and controller are somewhat unsuitable to really enjoy Flight I’m in for an unexpected positive surprise when eventually giving Flight a second chance on a new computer somewhen a year ahead and finding out that it has grown into something substantially larger and complex than it is right now. However I don't really expect that and won't call anybody names if it hasn't happened.

Your speech comes from a wise thought. I agree.

 

The only weird thing is that MS is claiming Flight is a blockbuster and the DLC has amazingly exceeded their sales expectation. Cockpitless warbirds are the backbone of the structure and new ideas are feeding the devs studios all around the clock.

 

They have a perception of the reality that is immensely different from what we perceive. I came to the conclusion that we are leaving in a different solar system with different physics rules and different state of minds.

 

It all just reminds me some great Star Trek old series episodes

If expectations are set low enough, it's easy to exceed them.

If expectations are set low enough, it's easy to exceed them.

 

That is correct.

 

I am anyway under the impression that MS started a long marathon hoping to reach the first hundred meters.

The only weird thing is that MS is claiming Flight is a blockbuster and the DLC has amazingly exceeded their sales expectation. Cockpitless warbirds are the backbone of the structure and new ideas are feeding the devs studios all around the clock.

 

Content removed. Profanity will get your posting rights removed. Astericks do not reduce the results.

Edited April 30, 201214 yr by Tom Allensworth
: Profanity

wow...the disagreements about Flight has become very civil here. Since the moderators did not over moderate the arguments, things have cooled a lot. I think it is like letting steam out. I hope I don't jinx it though.

you wont jinx it .. the back and forward was a result of passions running high. Most no longer have a passion for Flight, consequently you will not see as much of the "non" civil disagreements.

Couple of things I myself would really, really like to see with the Alaska DLC.

 

Track IR support. I am enjoying Flight very much, but every time I launch it I feel like I have stepped back several years in regards to my views. This sim just begs for Track IR support, it would be so much better. I know they told us while nothing was official, they were working on it. I do hope that is still the case.

 

A nice airplane, with a full VC and one equipped with an autopilot. Going to be a lot of square mileage to cover with Alaska, I think that would be a very nice addtional to help the cause.

Tierborn, I don't mean to intrude but I wonder why you haven't over clocked your system? It looks like a perfect candidate for one.

I wonder how many people are like me. Although I really like Flight, I will not be buying any more until much more content is released. Who wants part of a product?

This means that Microsoft don't get any money, they will then decide to close the whole project and people who have gambled and invested in the game expecting more, will have wasted their money. I don't see how Microsoft can succeed selling things this way.

It might make more sense to think of the Hawaii DLC as being the entire product, with Alaska and follow-ons as expansion packs. You wouldn't wait for the final expansion pack in a series to be released before buying the base product, would you? You could be waiting years as in the case of The Sims 2. The Sims 3 hasn't issued the final expansion pack yet and is already a few years into production.

 

If you're worried that Microsoft will cancel Flight development because no one will buy their "expansion packs", well, I think we all considered that at some point. You're still getting the entire product at any point, so you haven't lost anything.

 

If you're waiting for Flight to become a drop-in replacement for all of FSX plus all third party content... you'll be waiting a very long time. If you're actually hoping that Flight will fail and Microsoft will decide to make FS11 instead, just keep in mind that the first condition makes the second one impossible. If Flight fails then Microsoft is out of the flight simulator business for good. But don't worry, it won't fail. It's already successful, according to interviews with Mr. Howard... "better than expected." Will Flight grow into something recognizable as FS11? Give it a few years. In the mean time, enjoy it for what it is.

 

Hook

But don't worry, it won't fail. It's already successful, according to interviews with Mr. Howard... "better than expected."

 

At present that sentence by Howard would seem the only index that Flight is successful.

By seeing the official FB page, the News section of the official site, every forum on the web where people can freely discuss and, most importantly, the first numerical data about real usage, one could think differently.

Do you have other sources apart the old interview?

 

A.

Given that any numbers can be interpreted to support anyone's position, and the degree of polarization in this community, the only thing I'm interested in is if Mr. Howard and Microsoft think Flight is successful, because they're the ones who will be making the decisions to go ahead or cancel Flight.

 

In the end, no one outside Microsoft has enough information to make an informed opinion.

 

Hook