Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

watermouse

Microsoft Flight - Mission Editor - Possible?

Recommended Posts

Hello guys/gals,

 

So I have been flying a TON of jobs in Alaska. I like to visit as many of the airports as I can, some are dang hard to get into and others I would have never ever gone there. So with these jobs, it makes it a lot of fun for me and my pops to fly around on Multi-player and do jobs and explore.

 

Anyways, I was thinking. Most games have Mission Editors I know flight is done with, but what would it take to have a mission editor?

I was thinking how cool that would be to make our own missions from here to here to there, ect.

That way we could maybe have a community upload or download or whatever to import new jobs into the game.

This could allow us to see other airports that no one goes too and also use some of the sea bases with the Icon in Alaska to land in.

 

Also, it would allow for heavier loads/passengers for the C46.

 

Just a thought -- Probably wont happen, but it would make it that much funner I think. Hrrmmppffh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh, that needs the SDK? The same SDK that 3rd party devs could make aircraft? That SDK?

 

If it is, then I retract my question as it will never happen. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that was actually on Scruffy's big wish list for Flight.

Now of course we will never know if it was considered or could have been implemented.

While apparently they are doing a little with the current title, like bug fixes/tweaks, they will not be working on any new features, at least I would not think.

It would be nice though.

 

I like to visit as many of the airports as I can, some are dang hard to get into and others I would have never ever gone there.

 

Some of those clandenstine jobs will sure send you to some interesting airstrips.

2012-9-4_14-57-52-161.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not possible now, but I would hardly ever say never. If Flight ever becomes true abandon-ware, some clever people might find ways to tweak things here and there.

 

What I would really love is access to an external scenery editor. I had one for FSX and spent quite some time annotating Hawaii. (My interest in the area predated Flight by quite a bit) but I was never pleased with my results. I would love to take a crack at Flight, though!!

 

201062923220990.jpg

 

2010629232032520.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If MS does truly abandon Flight, someone just might be able to figure out a way to convert and add scenery from FSX to Flight. Now wouldn't that be something!

 

Flight just has too much promise to be allowed to wither away; here's hoping the program will have future life someday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft Flight is tightly closed. Unless Microsoft open it up, I really doubt someone can find a way to tweak it.

 

There actually was already a thread from somebody who was making some small inroads on making minor changes and that was months ago. Thread was locked, for obvious reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not possible now, but I would hardly ever say never. If Flight ever becomes true abandon-ware, some clever people might find ways to tweak things here and there.

 

What I would really love is access to an external scenery editor. I had one for FSX and spent quite some time annotating Hawaii. (My interest in the area predated Flight by quite a bit) but I was never pleased with my results. I would love to take a crack at Flight, though!!

 

201062923220990.jpg

 

2010629232032520.jpg

 

Very nice job on Sand Island! The close-up alone was enough to identify it for me, before I scrolled down to the wider shot.

 

I spent many hours walking up and down that beach picking up sea-glass. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If MS does truly abandon Flight, someone just might be able to figure out a way to convert and add scenery from FSX to Flight. Now wouldn't that be something!

 

Flight just has too much promise to be allowed to wither away; here's hoping the program will have future life someday.

 

I strongly agree and I've been thinking a lot about this recently. I just can't see how it's in anyones interests to keep it closed. I know someone put a save Flight page on facebook but it seems geared towards asking MS to return to development which they seem to have no interest in. Also only 100 people or so have liked it so not exactly persuasive numbers for MS.

 

I'm wondering if the community could be more energized to support a campaign asking MS to open it up. I think even the Flight haters would be interested to see what 3rd parties could do with what everyone agrees is a very good engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's called finding a computer scientist/computer engineer and telling them what you need help in. Of course, because of Flight, my aim is to be a Computer Scientist/Computer Engineer and program Flight Simulators for the community (maybe from scratch).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly agree and I've been thinking a lot about this recently. I just can't see how it's in anyones interests to keep it closed.

 

It benefits Microsoft to keep it closed, as it remains an "asset" on their books. The code developed for Flight may be useful to them in the future, either in the development of another project or as something to be sold off.

 

Even if they know they will never do anything with it, it would not benefit them (except in their public image, which MS has no concerns over) to open the code. It's rarely helpful to show your current or potential competitors how you do things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft as a company seems to actively be down on the simulation genre. Even flight seemed extremely (extremely!) poorly supported, and in many ways even when it was still under development, they seemed to be trying to kill their own product by neglect of even basic marketing 101

 

As much as I would like it not to be the case, I suspect that rather than giving somebody else the chance to do it right, they will simply hide the code in a cave (just out of habit) and by the time any interest is generated again, that code will be completely out of date and worthless.

 

In other words, a total loss. For everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It benefits Microsoft to keep it closed, as it remains an "asset" on their books. The code developed for Flight may be useful to them in the future, either in the development of another project or as something to be sold off.

 

Even if they know they will never do anything with it, it would not benefit them (except in their public image, which MS has no concerns over) to open the code. It's rarely helpful to show your current or potential competitors how you do things.

 

Given the speed of change in tech I'm not convinced at all that thata a valid reason. The code would be obsolete before it was valuable. Tbh I have no idea about accounting for intangibles in tech but would be surprised if it's given any real value as an asset while dormant.

 

Microsoft as a company seems to actively be down on the simulation genre. Even flight seemed extremely (extremely!) poorly supported, and in many ways even when it was still under development, they seemed to be trying to kill their own product by neglect of even basic marketing 101

 

As much as I would like it not to be the case, I suspect that rather than giving somebody else the chance to do it right, they will simply hide the code in a cave (just out of habit) and by the time any interest is generated again, that code will be completely out of date and worthless.

 

In other words, a total loss. For everyone.

 

Sad though it is to say, simple petulance seems a more likely reason. It seems to drive quite a lot of MS strategy since Balmer took over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea about accounting for intangibles in tech but would be surprised if it's given any real value as an asset while dormant.

 

Releasing the code has a non-zero cost. And due to the way Live is so deeply integrated into it (at least, according to people who know more about the Flight code than I do), the cost of making it releasable would be substantial.

 

Even if the "locked up" code is valued at $0, it's still more cost effective to let it sit in the vault rather than expend the effort required in releasing it.

 

Especially since releasing it offers MS nothing in return but good-will. Which MS also values at $0.

 

So, however much we might wish it to be otherwise, it's not going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Especially since releasing it offers MS nothing in return but good-will. Which MS also values at $0.

 

So, however much we might wish it to be otherwise, it's not going to happen.

 

I appreciate it costs to make an SDK but nothing in return but goodwill? How about the revenue from Live sales of 3rd party content? Could be huge if skilled developers like Orbx get to show what they can do with the engine. Surely worth a punt.

 

After setup costs and some small expansion of the current support team MS can just sit back and watch the game, community, revenues etc. expand. Everyone agrees it has huge potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Releasing the code has a non-zero cost. And due to the way Live is so deeply integrated into it (at least, according to people who know more about the Flight code than I do), the cost of making it releasable would be substantial.

 

Even if the "locked up" code is valued at $0, it's still more cost effective to let it sit in the vault rather than expend the effort required in releasing it.

 

Especially since releasing it offers MS nothing in return but good-will. Which MS also values at $0.

 

So, however much we might wish it to be otherwise, it's not going to happen.

 

I see what you are saying and mostly agree. I also know that Microsoft could give two figs about what hypothetical tangents we fly off to here. I still submit though, that after spending a probably substantial amount of money to get flight up and running and then not allowing it to continue long enough to recoup that investment, it might be smart to salvage something from the disaster by polishing it off a bit and selling it, rather than letting it languish in purgatory as a complete waste of time and effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad watching the fall of an empire!

Yes it is.

 

I looked at the web site last night and they are still inticing people to join the "ever expanding world of MS Flight".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's certainly not an expanding world, but probably it's an expanding number of people trying it. The word free is very powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it highly unlikely that someone would be actually able to create proper sceneries and aircraft for Flight without SDK. Sure it's possible to somehow make some small edits, but creating actual new content is another thing. Really pretty much all scenery editors for FS out there use tools from FSX SDK, so I can't see how it would be possible to create similar tools for Flight when there is no SDK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it highly unlikely that someone would be actually able to create proper sceneries and aircraft for Flight without SDK. Sure it's possible to somehow make some small edits, but creating actual new content is another thing. Really pretty much all scenery editors for FS out there use tools from FSX SDK, so I can't see how it would be possible to create similar tools for Flight when there is no SDK.

 

I am not sure of the appropriateness of the analogy, but I clearly remember several "closed" systems that were nonetheless reverse engineered to the point of compatibility through different means. The Original Activision broke into the Atari market that way, and Cyrix and AMD broke into the Intel/Pc market-space etc.

 

All by means deemed so unique (but that worked) that no successful claim of infringement was possible.

 

There are a lot more examples, even in the software arena.

 

I also keep in mind that recently some tablet app makers have found enough similarities with what they are familiar with that they were able to hook into Flight rather quickly, and I suspect (only suspect) there may be more such similarities that when compared against current code might (might) be educational in figuring out how to talk to and even manipulate flight.

 

Rosetta stones.

 

I know that's all a very long shot, but I have also learned to never underestimate the web.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) is another good example.. After being descontinued, many projects were born... :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...