Is Flight Just a Stepping Stone

[Air1 136]

I still have more the I can handle with the Hawaii island chain just flying around exploring every nook and cranney.I will not be done with Hawaii when Alaska comes out and will be back for more fun often! So what's the big hurry anyway.

[Gibbage 199]

I view Flight as a way for people interested in flying, a way to step into simming without an overly complex UI and more entertainment value. Yes, FSX has more content, but not everyone gets the same level of joy from "just flying" as hard core simmers do. A lot of us really do like the missions and activity's.

 

Right now, I think its to big of a step between Flight and FSX/XP10. The Flight team really need to fill that gap, and its not getting filled via cockpitless aircraft.

 

Also, were simmers go from there is up to Microsoft. Simming is a progressive hobby. Once your into it, you dont stay at the same level flying in mouse mode. You learn about VOR, ILS, joysticks, and cross winds. You progress in your skill, and want something more challenging. What MS needs to do is give these new pilots what they want, or they will find other sims. The market has a surprising amount of verity right now with FSX still on the shelf, XP10 out there, and even AeroflyFS nipping at Flights heels. MS will need to work hard to keep the pilots, but I just dont see them doing that yet.

[Guest]

Well, considering the fact that I have had quite some fun just with Hawaii, I think I will also have quite some fun, probably even more (considering the size) with Alaska. I never liked flying above water (oceans) but I did in Hawaii, so I think I will be fine with Alaska until the next DLC scenery will be released. To me Flight is not a stepping stone to something else. Flight is it. And I say that while I haven't Flight for two weeks now (also due to some nice (real life) weather here ). I even uninstalled FSX last weekend: Flight spoiled me and I am totally focusing on Flight now (like I did since the day it was released) when it comes to virtual flying.

 

I still have high hopes for this game! You do have to have some patience though, that's for sure.

[Lethalgoat 0]

1st post ever.

 

Flight to me is not a stepping stone. At the tender age of 37, I am enjoying going to work(the school i teach at) and discussing VOR and ILS with some of my students, learning how the Maule doesn't like yank/bank landings, and doing touch n go in the Honolulu canal.

 

DLC is what MS has chosen, and you either pay to play, or you go somewhere else!!! I have watched the criticism from afar (down under) and I am also impatient for Alaska, VC aircraft ( I have one warbird), and the other gizmos that flight is currently missing.

 

The differences are:

1: I don't have an expectation that MS will listen to me whining,

And 2: Caveat Emptor. I downloaded flight, then went and bought it for what they told me WAS in it, not what I WANTED in it.

 

You can call me a Newb (last flight sim I bought was F18 on Amiga!!!) but I've bought many games off Steam or in the shops, and never complained about what wasn't in the game. I'm too focussed on enjoying it.

 

 

[EastCoastGuy 0]

^ Welcome and g'day.

[DreadMetis 5]

Not complaining is certainly a way to enjoy, another style of life it is to have 'greater expectations' :)

Of course, only the ones complaining will suffer when not satisfied, but only these ones will enjoy the true evolution when it occurs ;)

Just differents style of life are requested to find a good balance !

[LuisFelizTirado 33]

I've been doing this for so long and have gone through many of the phases.

 

- The "Pretend I am really learning to fly because some day I shall get a real license" phase

- The "Diligently learn all navigational techniques and all FAA regs and fly this sim as if it were really an airplane" phase

- The "Make this sim as real as it can be by studying the SDKs and making my own realistic aircraft and scenery" phase

- The "Realize I shall never be a real pilot because it's too complicated to learn, too expensive to buy and maintain an airplane, and what would I do with one anyway?" phase

- The "After all, I am not really interested in the complexity of flight, just in flying" phase

- The "Stop pretending and start having fun" phase which is where I am now

 

So, many people might very well use Flight as a stepping stone to bigger, more complex aircraft and procedures. But, perhaps:

- some people, like me, will do the opposite and relish the ability to fly without complexity

- many more people, if what has been often mentioned is true, are not at all interested in complexity and, in fact, that is what has prevented the FS series and all other training and airliner sims from selling many more copies.

 

So, I would respectfully suggest the MGS carefully studied the market and came to the conclusion that a simpler flight sim is what most people want. Although since they have worked on FS for so long, they insisted on keeping much of the complexity of flight (navaids, panels) as an option for those who wish to use that aspect.

 

At the moment, the principal problem with Flight is the lack of content. This is not at all surprising since the product life has just begun and it was to be expected that this would be an important issue at this time. And it was also clear that glitches in the production of DLC would initially appear and delay content even more.

 

But, 6 or 8 months from now, if we only have the patience to wait that long, the situation will be completely different, and Flight will be the flight sim that most of the market has wanted. I hope.

 

Best regards.

Luis

[jcomm 5,938]

Exactly!, couldn't find a way to describe it better Luis!

 

I can just add that when I started flying gliders again, in 2007 after a long period away from RL flying, I soon discovered that in fact the further I could possibly get was mastering the "art" of glider flying... Gliders are so simple instrument-wise (well, thos fancy competition computers are complex, and actually account for many accidents when pilots start spending too much time looking inside...

 

I found through my RL piloting exprience that I seldom used the instruments - only on trasition between lift zones and on final approach...

 

Flying for leisure, and sometimes even professionaly when you ferry people or goods accross islands like in Hawaii is a LOT MORE made of sensations and their feedback, experience, and looking around, a lot more than inside!

 

FLIGHT teaches us what flying for leisure really is!

 

Thx for your post Luis!

 

- The "Pretend I am really learning to fly because some day I shall get a real license" phase

- The "Diligently learn all navigational techniques and all FAA regs and fly this sim as if it were really an airplane" phase

- The "Make this sim as real as it can be by studying the SDKs and making my own realistic aircraft and scenery" phase

- The "Realize I shall never be a real pilot because it's too complicated to learn, too expensive to buy and maintain an airplane, and what would I do with one anyway?" phase

- The "After all, I am not really interested in the complexity of flight, just in flying" phase

- The "Stop pretending and start having fun" phase which is where I am now

 

[Glynn 405]

But, 6 or 8 months from now, if we only have the patience to wait that long, the situation will be completely different

 

But, 6 or 8 months from now, if only the MS beancounters have the patience to wait that long, the situation will be completely different

 

Corrected for you

[xplanery 250]

- many more people, if what has been often mentioned is true, are not at all interested in complexity and, in fact, that is what has prevented the FS series and all other training and airliner sims from selling many more copies.

In my opinion GA flying in FSX is not complex at all if you don't want to make it hard.

 

Main reason why flight games do not sell very much is simply the fact that most gamers are not interested in civilian flying. They may like something like IL-2 Sturmovik where you can shoot other planes down, but no matter how simplified you make civilian flying they will never find it entertaining enough to keep playing it for long.

 

Flight is not going to be different It is just civilian flying game where most complex stuff of actual simulation software has been removed, but that doesn't mean that it would really get much market.

 

Also most of flight simmers I know like to fly around where they live, or at least some place which is their favorite in real world. Only few just keep flying somewhere for graphics. I have no interest in Hawaii and Alaska no matter how good they look, and that is where Flight has a problem. It does not allow many people to fly where they want.

 

 

So what I think Flight should become to be successful?

 

Either make those war planes useful by adding combat which would interest wider audience, or optionally add ATC and few other simulator things, adequate planes to fly and more areas = make it real General Aviation simulator.

 

Currently it seems to be mix of simplified flying game and general aviation simulator that is missing some things, now they should take some direction to continue.

[TheFamilyMan 280]

If MS steps anywhere with Flight, a very wise next step would be to implement TrackIR. For me it's a 100% deal maker/breaker. For this reason alone I lost interest in Flight within the first few hours I tried it (though I'll be back the day TIR is supported).

[trevorbee 0]

I had got bored with FS9/X ages ago but still kept track of things and when FLIGHT came out it got me back into simming. (for a while)

I loved it to start with and could see the massive potential and the fact it was a kind of back to basics approach, what with the limited areas and aircraft, actually made me more enthusiastic about it.

 

I was hoping that I could follow whatever journey FLIGHT was going on but if that journey is going to be in 3 month steps then I'm not sure I can keep up with it.

 

This just about mirrors my experience with Flight. I began this thread during a moment of disenchantment with the whole waiting, not knowning thing and I think that the responses have been quite revealling. Clearly, quite a lot of us are concerned that the pace of issuing new DLC may be too slow whereas others appear to be quite content with the way things are going.

 

I would add to my concerns the fact that we are being kept in the dark as to how the developers are planning to expand the game (behond Alaska). Will it be only new areas and GA aircraft to fly in or will they incorporate some of the many suggestions for broadening the game that people on this forum have put forward?

 

Well, the Alaska screenies are out and enthuiasm begins to rise again. But I still think it is all too painfully slow. Perhaps the failure to make a deal with the 3PDs is the real culprit. With 3PD involvment there could have been a lot more on offer at this stage.

[trevorbee 0]

Trevor! how's life down under?

 

Greetings, Newthog my friend. Nice to talk to you again.

 

We are just back from a couple of weeks in Brisbane, Queensland where we visited one of my daughters and spent time with the grand children. The weather was not very kind to us but we had a good time anyway. Also been too busy to get much flying in but am finding FS9 a good alternative to Flight while we wait for more stuff to come through. Best Wishes.

[Mickel 42]

I would add to my concerns the fact that we are being kept in the dark as to how the developers are planning to expand the game (behond Alaska). Will it be only new areas and GA aircraft to fly in or will they incorporate some of the many suggestions for broadening the game that people on this forum have put forward?

 

This one is the strange one. On the legacy platform, I understand why the 3PDs often stay quiet about they're working on - but they have competition on the platform they develop on. Some say nothing until they're almost ready to release (eg, a certain scenery developer). Some say what's going on in the short-medium term, but don't give on going details or release dates (eg a popular airliner dev). Some admit to talking with friendly 'competitors' to make sure they're not working on the same thing. MS doesn't have any competitors on Flight, and don't intend to. So where's the issue with dishing out broader plans?

 

It doesn't much matter when things get announced: there will be happy people and dissatisfied people whether it be three days or three months out. Those that have been around flight sims for a while know that release dates can be fuzzy at best, especially as the complexity goes up, so aren't likely to be that upset if something they want slips a week or three. Those that haven't, well... might have to get used to that idea.

 

It wouldn't be such an issue if the DLC cupboard wasn't so bare. A couple more planes with a VC and another scenery package early on in the piece would have placated the masses somewhat. So, like Trevor, I'm getting a lot of miles up on a legacy platform waiting for Flight to catch up (and actually enjoying it more than I had been recently, ironically, because of Flight).

 

Mike

[nfmz1 1]

I get the impression that those who think it is "over" for flight would complain if it was released weekly and it was all free product. So let's do a mathematical count. It was released in February and this is June so imma GENROUSLY say 4 months because today is the 9th Lord help us... so 4 months and 4 Warbirds available, 2 Bundle packs, 1 FREE Stock Island, 2 Free Stock Planes, 1 Free DLC Plane and if you averaged that out it's like 2.5 items EVERY month.

 

So you're complaining about what?

 

Hell I still need the the Bundle pack. Just picked up the Maule so it's all new stuff for me.