Some thoughts about In-game updates.

[Air1 136]

Hiflyer, prepare to be stunned! I run a plain vanilla version of fsx. I have never added anything, just run it as it came out of the box. Just before FLIGHT came out I bought a new Gold addition with the acceleration expansion pack because I was no longer allowed to load the old one anymore. Just figured I would start over again. But then FLIGHT came out and I have not been back to fsx. I don't really want big jet airliners. I would not mind C-46, DC-3, or DC-4 types. I am more of a GA, bush plane type and I don't think I am alone in that respect. To me FLIGHT is shaping up to be just about perfect. Maybe a Beaver, Malord/goose and a super cub with tundra tires and floats and I would be a happy camper. Ok a chopper and a sail plane also would be nice. One more thing, must have VC's please, I can't stand flying with a HUD. Off my soapbox now, don't know what came over me.

[n4gix 4,947]

the FSX auto instalers arent all gravy either, as Ive had problems with those too.. and then what do you do?

 

You are quite right, but the problem is not the installer(s) per se, it's the developers who don't take the time to actually learn how to create a proper "build folder" with all of the requisite files in their correct folders, and to configure the installer to do its job flawlessly...

 

...and test, test, test their installer's operation on a "Dummy FSX" folder and finally on a "Virgin FSX" installation before release!!! :shok:

 

One of the major advantages to using the Flight 1 "Wrapper" is that all the folders and files that absolutely must be installed in specific locations can be done in that step. Once that has been done, the customer then can make a choice between running the actual content installer automatically, or allowing it to be extracted to a ..\Temp folder of their choice for examination, and hand-migration to FSX as they see fit.

[staib 1]

I don't really want big jet airliners. I would not mind C-46, DC-3, or DC-4 types. I am more of a GA, bush plane type and I don't think I am alone in that respect. To me FLIGHT is shaping up to be just about perfect. Maybe a Beaver, Malord/goose and a super cub with tundra tires and floats and I would be a happy camper...

Agreed. You are not alone :)

[HiFlyer 9,359]

Hiflyer, prepare to be stunned! I run a plain vanilla version of fsx. I have never added anything, just run it as it came out of the box. Just before FLIGHT came out I bought a new Gold addition with the acceleration expansion pack because I was no longer allowed to load the old one anymore. Just figured I would start over again. But then FLIGHT came out and I have not been back to fsx. I don't really want big jet airliners. I would not mind C-46, DC-3, or DC-4 types. I am more of a GA, bush plane type and I don't think I am alone in that respect. To me FLIGHT is shaping up to be just about perfect. Maybe a Beaver, Malord/goose and a super cub with tundra tires and floats and I would be a happy camper. Ok a chopper and a sail plane also would be nice. One more thing, must have VC's please, I can't stand flying with a HUD. Off my soapbox now, don't know what came over me.

 

Consider me duly stunned! :shok:

[Oracle427 45]

HiFlyer,

 

You should seek medical attention if you go into shock.

 

I am also running a 99.9% vanilla FSX w/Acceleration install. It has been 100% vanilla for the several years I've been using it until read that Accu-Feel would add sounds effects to make it sound like Flight.

 

The only other modification I have is my own scenery that I've created for my RL home airport, Lincoln Park (N07).

 

I see absolutely no reason to upgrade. I have absolutely no interest in eye candy or any other aircraft at the moment and the default C172SP w/G1000 does a really good job of simulating the real airplane I fly along with many of the systems. The sim also represents the landmarks of the tri-state area in sufficient detail that I can recognize where I am in the sim.

 

I would have patched by FSX up to the latest service releases had any been released by MS (I forgot what the SP # is for FSX which I installed).

 

Since I engineer software, I am not turned away by "manual" 3PD installers and I will happily debug a flawed installer if I really want to get something working. I consider myself (and most of us) to be exceptions, however and most users are going to expect the Flight model of "pay, click and play" upgrades. I see this as a positive that will foster adoption of the product.

 

---

 

The built in update system for Flight will "help" me upgrade my software to the latest version. I am unlikely to purchase most DLC unless it offers me something I can't refuse.

[HiFlyer 9,359]

HiFlyer,

 

You should seek medical attention if you go into shock.

 

I am also running a 99.9% vanilla FSX w/Acceleration install. It has been 100% vanilla for the several years I've been using it until read that Accu-Feel would add sounds effects to make it sound like Flight.

 

The only other modification I have is my own scenery that I've created for my RL home airport, Lincoln Park (N07).

 

I see absolutely no reason to upgrade. I have absolutely no interest in eye candy or any other aircraft at the moment and the default C172SP w/G1000 does a really good job of simulating the real airplane I fly along with many of the systems. The sim also represents the landmarks of the tri-state area in sufficient detail that I can recognize where I am in the sim.

 

I would have patched by FSX up to the latest service releases had any been released by MS (I forgot what the SP # is for FSX which I installed).

 

Since I engineer software, I am not turned away by "manual" 3PD installers and I will happily debug a flawed installer if I really want to get something working. I consider myself (and most of us) to be exceptions, however and most users are going to expect the Flight model of "pay, click and play" upgrades. I see this as a positive that will foster adoption of the product.

 

---

 

The built in update system for Flight will "help" me upgrade my software to the latest version. I am unlikely to purchase most DLC unless it offers me something I can't refuse.

 

Hmmmmmmm.......... actually I have always considered "vanilla" fsx to be just that, with no upgrades at all, including acceleration or cfg mods. To me, the fact that sp2 can be downloaded and installed for free means the main reason for purchasing acceleration is for the graphical enhancements.

[Oracle427 45]

I bought the gold pack. I had no idea that acceleration included graphics enhancements.

[dburne 2]

I bought the gold pack. I had no idea that acceleration included graphics enhancements.

 

I think it just added some planes and missions, and included a version of SP2?

 

I myself would consider FSX w/ Acceleration, and nothing else, a vanilla install.

[Guest]

I bought the gold pack. I had no idea that acceleration included graphics enhancements.

 

Well, not graphic enhancements for the entire game, but Acceleration offers more content:

 

Acceleration introduces new features, including multiplayer air racing, new missions, and three all-new aircraft, the F/A-18A Hornet, EH-101 helicopter and the P-51D Mustang. The new scenery enhancements cover Berlin, Istanbul, Cape Canaveral and the Edwards Air Force Base, providing high accuracy both in the underlying photo texture (60 cm/pix) and in the detail given to the 3D objects.

 

Acceleration was an Expansion pack, so some sort of DLC on DVD...

 

So... although I would also call FSX w/ Acceleration, and nothing else, a vanilla install, you COULD call it FSX with addons... It's just that the addons were made by MS.

[Air1 136]

_{Yes, it is true. The Acceleration pack is very nice. I did not have it before, it is a big improvrment to the basic FXS for sure! I will get back to it one of these days.}

[scruffyduck 4]

Hmmm. It seems to me that we have gone rather off topic here. We have moved from a discussion on In Game Updates to the merits or otherwise of different flavors of FSX...........

[Oracle427 45]

Hear hear, I was making a very long winded point about why I think that the Flight model for updates is a good one. :)

 

The biggest benefit I see is how this platform can be used to market updates. My head was spinning when looking at updates for the prior sim. :)

 

If I am condemned, please make it quick. *closes eyes*

[HiFlyer 9,359]

Hear hear, I was making a very long winded point about why I think that the Flight model for updates is a good one. :)

 

The biggest benefit I see is how this platform can be used to market updates. My head was spinning when looking at updates for the prior sim. :)

 

If I am condemned, please make it quick. *closes eyes*

 

Yeah, I am pretty much thinking the same thing. The tone of the thread was pretty abruptly changed.

 

Oh well. I was just getting into a nice discussion!

[RoboRay 126]

The way Steam content is added to Flight via "coupon codes" indicates that actual 3PDs may be able to even operate their own store-front for their products, once we get to that point. Buy the content at their website, get a code for Flight. MS handles the actual downloads.

[RichLP 32]

I like in-game updates. (There... got that out of the way)

 

Count me in as one of the stunning group, too... aside from a few freeware planes, and freeware scenery of KCOI, my hometown airport... vanilla Gold as well.

 

I think there's a lot more of us than people on here think.