It is already running right, has been for some time now.

 

Did they ever fix "Plane casts shadows on itself"? Last I heard they removed it entirely because in certain cases it could be glitchy. I saw the glitches myself in FSX maybe twice. But I have hundreds of screen shots of planes casting shadows on themselves.

 

Hook

I am happy that this happened. Maybe Microsoft now finally realised that they have headed in the wrong way with their arcady crap. Hopefully they have learned a lesson, and who knows, maybe they will be working on a new sim? (sometime in the future). Yeah I know that's a unlikely.

 

XPlane 10 is heading the right way but definately not their yet. They need more detailed airports, and especially that user-interface need to be addressed. There needs to be better plug-and-playability and then it would be better. Probably 2 more years in FSX, at some point this game will die. Just compare it to the beautiful graphics of nowadays and compare it to FSX, then it look absolutely crap. There isn't even any shadows and lightning effects in the cockpit, it's a very unstable and badly running sim with many problems. Now let's hope XPlane 11 will be good enough...

Hello

It is already running right, has been for some time now.

You really need to let go of the idea that FSX does not run great on today's hardware.

The 3rd party industry around FSX would not be able to sell so much product if everyone was having issues with performance, think about it.

 

You might as well give it up. It's obvious from all his posts that he has never had a good experience with FSX so by default everyones elses experience is the same as his and the sim is worthless..

Hello Michael,

You are right, some folk will be forever convinced that FSX runs badly and looks poor.

But do they ever look at the constant payware releases and wonder just who buys all this product for such a poor platform.

Or why so many refused to buy into Flight!

P3D is owned by a Lockheed Martin, company that is having major financial problems and expecting layoffs presently. How long do you think they will be throwing money at what is basically FSX trying to get it to run right?

 

http://www.politico....0612/77779.html

Did you bother to read the linked article? Fair bit of extrapolation there on your assessment of "having major financial problems". The potential (note the use of 'potential') layoffs mentioned are due solely by the threat of the US government pulling the financial plug ala "sequestration", which is something that LM nor any other defence contractor has any control over, and it has nothing to do with how well defence contractors are running their companies. I imagine that since P3D is not a direct government contract (and so relatively miniscule of an LM asset) that it won't be affected in any event.

 

As for the OP, IMO losing Flight is a major set back...I was just begining to get back into it since they finally added TIR support. :(

What a shame it certainly had potential just hope that this gets released for 3PD’s as open source now so they can continue to build upon. If MS thought anything of this project as I’m sure they do they would allow this right?

with their arcady crap

 

This is getting really old. FSX can be just as arcady: how often does this have to be said? But it doesn't matter anymore.

 

In case you didn't know: you can actually use Flight as a sim. Just as you can use FSX as an arcade game. I wrote a complete tutorial about using VOR in Flight, which would have been published on the MS site (which I suppose won't happen anymore now): that shows MS also wanted to tell people about the sim parts of the game.

This is getting really old. FSX can be just as arcady: how often does this have to be said? But it doesn't matter anymore.

 

In case you didn't know: you can actually use Flight as a sim. Just as you can use FSX as an arcade game. I wrote a complete tutorial about using VOR in Flight, which would have been published on the MS site (which I suppose won't happen anymore now): that shows MS also wanted to tell people about the sim parts of the game.

 

Why would I do this, if it only covers such a small percentage of the world? After an hour I would be sick of boredom. And yes I have tried FLIGHT as I even got selected for the beta. It terms of graphics and flight dynamics it's got potential. Yes, flight dynamics are good, aircraft requires more corrections then in FSX but not too many, and the ground effect has been simulated. But it's a completely useless piece of garbage when you can only fly on one island. And no, I won't be paying for Alaska, I will only be paying them if they make a proper sim featuring the whole world with good graphics, AI traffic, a living world...

I'm being serious here. We need to start a huge campaign to get MS to resume the FS franchise. We need to show them that they will gain huge popularity and profits.

 

I've made a FB page to start our campaign. https://www.facebook.com/bringbackfs

 

Now that's funny..... :lol:

This is getting really old. FSX can be just as arcady: how often does this have to be said? But it doesn't matter anymore.

 

What's getting old is people who continue to pretend that Flight was a serious sim, when in fact it had a severe identity crisis. The advances that Flight offered were significant - performance, flight modeling, lighting, terrain mesh, coastlines, autogen, etc. - but they were WASTED on a crippled and unsupported title. Can you imagine the success that Flight would have been if only they had built upon the basic functionality of FSX?

 

Instead, Flight greeted us with mandatory arcade games that required users to slalom an amphibian ultralight between hot air balloons before we were allowed to do anything else. Its insulting to have to "unlock" the sandbox by participating in arcade games. In FSX, that stuff was optional and by all accounts, widely chagrined and disused. Flight made that stuff the centerpiece of the experience. It's intellectully dishonest to imply that FSX is as "arcady" as Flight, or that Flight is just as "simmy" as FSX. It's not, and everyone knows it's not; that's why it failed.

I've seen the balloon reference more than once. I think Flight haters turned it off after the first 27 seconds.

Using the word "hate" to marginalize an opposing viewpoint is pretty common these days, but not very honest. I was on the "beta" team from day one (I put it in quotes because it wasn't a beta test in any sense of the word), and I spent significantly more time with it than "27 seconds".

 

You only reinforce my point: It seems that you're ready to accept that a very significant portion of users were completely turned off after a mere 27 seconds with the program. I think that's a problem; don't you?

Using the word "hate" to marginalize an opposing viewpoint is pretty common these days, but not very honest. I was on the "beta" team from day one (I put it in quotes because it wasn't a beta test in any sense of the word), and I spent significantly more time with it than "27 seconds".

 

You only reinforce my point: It seems that you're ready to accept that a very significant portion of users were completely turned off after a mere 27 seconds with the program. I think that's a problem; don't you?

 

And the Phrase "People who continue to pretend" does not marginalize the feelings of all who may feel differently than you? Bit one sided hmmmmm....

I am happy that this happened. Maybe Microsoft now finally realised that they have headed in the wrong way with their arcady crap. Hopefully they have learned a lesson, and who knows, maybe they will be working on a new sim? (sometime in the future). Yeah I know that's a unlikely.

 

Serously?

You are happy that Flight has been killed, even though as evidenced on this forum and elsewhere, there are many that enjoyed it very much. I guess because it was not for you though, that makes you happy?

I guess your happy that some folks may have just lost their job? Folks passionate about developing for the flight sim community?

MS learned a lesson and working on a new sim - I am sure you mean like FS11?

I hate to burst your bubble - odds are extremely high that will never happen!

 

But enjoy your time here...

Serously?

You are happy that Flight has been killed, even though as evidenced on this forum and elsewhere, there are many that enjoyed it very much. I guess because it was not for you though, that makes you happy?

I guess your happy that some folks may have just lost their job? Folks passionate about developing for the flight sim community?

MS learned a lesson and working on a new sim - I am sure you mean like FS11?

I hate to burst your bubble - odds are extremely high that will never happen!

 

But enjoy your time here...

 

No buddy of course I am not happy for the guys who actually enjoyed it and especially not for the people who lost their job. You probably just misunderstood me, I am happy that this is an important lesson for MS that whenever they MIGHT attempt a project for a flying game at the future, that an approach like this for the casual gamers isn't gonna work out. So maybe now they realised that they are wrong. And who knows, maybe next year they will announce a new project that is more based on FSX. And yes I know that that's very unlikely, you don't have to tell me that.

 

Thing with FLIGHT is, it's got so much potential, graphically, plug-and-playability, in terms of flight dynamics, in terms of how easy it is to use, and how stable it is, gives the game so much potential. But by making the game so "childish" by letting us do arcady unrealistic missions in a very tiny non-living world, makes the "sim" totally useless for us serious flight simmers. If it covered the whole world like in FSX, if it featured AI traffic, AI cars and boats, navaids, all airports, then this would be a dream. But as I said earlier, game developers are starting to focus more and more on making money (which is somehow understandable), and they actually don't care that much about the customer's needs.