They've set themselves the admirable goal of having a flight simulator that runs within reach of your 'average' PC. The 'best' scenery packages in the other sim require a lot of grunt. To try to reach the lofty heights of some of the 3PD offerings would take Flight away from that goal. Flight's Hawaii is without doubt better than the FSX default Hawaii, so it's more detailed.

 

I don't think they'll do state by state, assuming all of the US gets done. Some states are pretty small. Some will argue that Hawaii is small, so why not..? But Hawaii is also easy to ring-fence and use a petrie dish to experiment with (we're the amoeba). Rhode Island, not so much.

Being a product that is designed to enrich MS Shareholders first and foremost the likelyhood is that the most profitable locations would follow, my prognostication The United Kingdom before Arkensas or any southern states , the US North East and West Coast to follow the U.K.

What he said! Although I hope that MGS does the Caribbean someday.

 

Best regards.

Luis

Maybe they would release DLCs based on themes...sometimes releasing small maps, sometimes with big regions.

In some cases, a small map can have plenty of things to do...I bet they would launch a "Big City" (like NY) DLC focusing on helicopters jobs and missions!

I tend to agree with the theory that for the foreseeable future we are probably going to see isolated islands of scenery developed for their desireability based on whatever criteria that MS uses to decide what's most interesting.to their users. I'm not sure we will ever see a complete seamless world as it exists in FS9 or FSX.

Since 88% of the worlds population lives outside North America.

But 90% of the purchasing power exist there!

well, Alaska and hawaii are not our most populous states, I think that MS will develop areas that people want to fly, which would be the US and Europe because most flight sim peeps live in those two areas, Africa, Caribbean, South Pacific, Arctic Canada, Brazil etc... places with either natural beauty or aviation heritage or both

To me, both Hawaii and Alaska meet all three of those criteria... natural beauty, aviation heritage, and a desire to fly there.

I think, no, I know I will like Alaska more then Hawaii because I don't like flying above the sea at ALL. And in Hawaii the sea is all around. Flying from one island to another is quite boring. I am looking forward to flying low and slow through endless valleys above the wilderness!!!

 

And of course Alaska will have more airports: I have seen all Hawaii airports by now. It will take me quite some time to visit all Alaska airports! I might plot a route from one side of the country to the other, which will probably take a long time. I am thinking about flying somewhere and then leave the plane where it is and proceed from there the following day. So no flying here and there and everywhere, but a long journey across the land. And by the time I have finished I will have forgotten what the first airports looked like. Alaska will keep me entertained a lot longer then Hawaii, I am sure.

 

All in all I am very excited about this upcoming release!

Finally, with Alaska, we'll have a place big enough to get lost in.