Now that Alaska was released I wonder what's coming next (besides the deluxe CC). Of course this is nothing but speculation, but It would be interesting to hear opinions about what's likely/unlikely included in Microsoft's development plan for Flight. I'd like this not to be confused with the "what we want in Flight" topic but more of a prediction of what the developers have in mind for the future based in what we have received until now as the customers.

 

For now I think MSGS will continue to improve on Alaska by creating new missions, jobs and perhaps give us another new aircraft with VC (Beaver, Goose, etc.) and a few other cockpitless planes.

 

And after that? Well, I don't know why they started with Hawaii and then Alaska. If it's because they're planning to release all of USA then I suspect they're going for the contiguous states as the next major DLC.

I hope they beef up Alaska with as much as they can throw at it. Get Holger involved, FSAddon (FSCargo), requested Bush Planes, AI Traffic, Static vehicles/aircraft, updated airports throughout the whole area, update cabin locations with actual docks for aircraft (not to mention actual structures), AI Ships, AI traffic on roads like FSX, ATC, Updated Mesh, and Real Weather.

 

Before moving to other scenery areas Flight could be one awesome experience with Alaska alone. Imagine the missions they could create (everything from mail runs to saving a Polar Bear). Alaska could set the stage for other areas they choose to model before they bring on third party developers and hopefully open up the whole world with the end game being FS11 (you guys know the whole world is actually there just not developed). Not to sound too enthusiastic I just hope Microsoft exploits every possibility with Alaska which in the real world is truly a GA utopia worthy of a dedicated virtual experience. The very essence of 'Flight' is Alaska more so than any other area in the world...

I'm expecting a contiguous territory to Alaska as well, to minimize terrain cut-off borders and to eventually facilitate longer-range aircraft.

 

Western Canada is possible, but my money is on a Pacific Northwest area covering BC, Washington and Oregon. Maybe Idaho and even Yukon if we are lucky, but probably not.

 

PNW brings in more scenery variety from Alaska than extending across just Canada. It also opens up California, which I think would be very popular, for an obvious follow-on release.

 

I think I would prefer a non-US release next, like New Zealand, Norway, Japan or the Iberian Peninsula, but I bet the Flight Team wants to take us to their neck of the woods next.

 

C'mon mate, give us a few days to explore some of the hundreds of strips up north, before we go pleading for more scenery :-)

 

I'd like to think they feature the prettiest areas of the world, not just 'God's own' country. Maybe Switzerland? The evil corporate strategist in me even suggests a deliberate featuring of the UK to counter Orbx's development. What, $30 for one little cute pommy airfield? Wot about just $15 for the entire UK (including the falklands and new revolting rain effects :-) )

 

Just saw Robo's post, sounds likely too, PNW, would attack x-plane territory too.

I have been flying to 4-7 different airports every day, since I got Alaska, and there are a ton of them to go. This will keep me busy for quite awhile.

Canada would be the best, especially BC, Yukon, and Alberta. The Rockies are a great place to feature in Flight.

I hope they beef up Alaska with as much as they can throw at it. Get Holger involved, FSAddon (FSCargo), requested Bush Planes, AI Traffic, Static vehicles/aircraft, updated airports throughout the whole area, update cabin locations with actual docks for aircraft (not to mention actual structures), AI Ships, AI traffic on roads like FSX, ATC, Updated Mesh, and Real Weather.

 

Before moving to other scenery areas Flight could be one awesome experience with Alaska alone. Imagine the missions they could create (everything from mail runs to saving a Polar Bear). Alaska could set the stage for other areas they choose to model before they bring on third party developers and hopefully open up the whole world with the end game being FS11 (you guys know the whole world is actually there just not developed). Not to sound too enthusiastic I just hope Microsoft exploits every possibility with Alaska which in the real world is truly a GA utopia worthy of a dedicated virtual experience. The very essence of 'Flight' is Alaska more so than any other area in the world...

 

LOL, based off what MS has done for Flight since release, I highly doubt, based off their own record, that most of that will ever be included as an option. As has been pointed out many times on the forum, Flight is not FS next, it's a seperate entity that resembles what many of us are used to with FS9/FSX.

 

I share your desires, and would LOVE to be proven wrong since Flight has a few details that I love that FSX will never have.

 

Enjoying Flight for what it is, I love the water in Flight and would love to see the Caribbean done .

Very short-term and obvious: expanding Alaska with missions and aerocaches.

 

 

I'd expect to see a few more planes and perhaps some visual optimization before more scenery. There was a model of a truck with a camper in one of the landing missions, they may indicate that they're looking into making the ground look more alive.

 

It's also fairly obvious that helos are coming, as one of the loading screen tips say "Reaching some aerocaches may require a seaplane or helicopter".

 

Less obvious: the framework for ATC and autopilot is in place (look at the currently underutilized VOR and frequency identifications and the detail of the checklists). With that I'd expect to see more options for people who wish to fly IFR- look at the inclusion of a VOR waypoint and an ILS landing mission right away in Alaska. That will provide support for larger planes.

I hope they beef up Alaska with as much as they can throw at it.

 

My thoughts too. I think there is a lot of scope for adding DLC to improve on what is a pretty good rendition of Alaska in order to bring it alive. I hope that the devs will spend some time on this and make themselves a lot of extra DLC revenue before moving on to the next area.

My guess is that they go international next, but staying in the Pacific to maintain some continuity. Maybe Australia, Western Canada, New Zealand, or Japan. My second guesses would be Western US (Washington, Oregon, California).

 

I also predict there will be at least two more aircraft before any further terrain.

 

- Gary Letona

As with other members, I really hope they improve the mesh. They got so much else right (lighting, shadows, fps at high autogen levels, autogen, textures) that the poor quality of the mesh is starting to distract me and preventing it from being what I really think it could be, the most graphically immersive flight sim ever.

 

IMHO.

As with other members, I really hope they improve the mesh.

same here. besides the fact that currently I am not able to fly at al since I got continous corrupt installation messages recently I was able to do 2 or 3 flights and I am also not impressed by the mesh, it's ok, sure. and what I would have expected after FSX. but all too round and not rugged as in hawaii. too sad if MS thought to do hawaii at 110% to attract folks and then fall back to standard quality with subsequent DLC. obviously this is how marketing is done but nonetheless they raised the bar with hawaii and should now be able to meet their own standards (yes, I know that alaska is huge compared to hawaii and this means possibly manual work to make mountains more rugged; on the other hand IMHO there could be some minor programming involved to to take away some of the soft hill tops and add some edges and corners?).

As it is now, I'll be happy with anything... Although I also would prefer some more polishing of Alaska... I don't really like the idea of leaving Alaska as it is and creating a new region with the same quality. I do like Alaska, but it does need improving in various areas... A better mesh would be nice indeed. I am doing a lot of low-and-slow-through-the-valleys-flights and although things look great, specially with the sun rather low, it does indeed look a bit too soft and hence a bit too simple and basic. There also are too many bugs (bumps in the water) and the seaplane bases need some detail.

Yep, I'm fine too with Alaska and Hawaii. As a mater of fact I find myself going back 1 in every 3 flights to Hawaii because I really like that place and the scenery is gorgeous!!!!

It's also fairly obvious that helos are coming, as one of the loading screen tips say "Reaching some aerocaches may require a seaplane or helicopter".

 

I really hope this is true - although there was a reference in Hawaii that some aerocaches would require either walking (not sure, too lazy to check) or a helicopter. I would think that if a whirlybird was "in the pipeline" it would be released soon.

 

Maybe wishful thinking - but, as many have stated in other posts/topics, what Microsoft is doing is purely conjecture. There doesn't seem to be an indication as to where Flight is headed - aircraft, scenery quality, etc...