Remind me to remove your image posting privileges sometime.. I guess I should be grateful that it was not the other end of the beast. :Big Grin:

 

:LMAO:

Don't forget PREPAR3D uses an online activation system, I can imagine that it would not be very difficult for LM to ensure that any user install would become non operative after a certain date if they so chose.

Bryan, so to does FSX depend on an online activation system (which admittedly so far has continued to work)...

 

But, if MS did decide to shut down their activation system, are you suggesting that FSX would suddenly stop working entirely on every computer in the world?

 

Of course not!

 

Similarly, once activated, Prepar3D will continue to run on the system to which it is installed until catastrophic hardware failure occurs, at which point one will be SOL... :wacko:

 

By the way, the only "time-limited" license is the monthly developer's subscription scheme. Both the "Professional" and "Academic" license do not "time out" at some defined point in time...

Its nice and refreshing to see so much desire for ACES/FS to come back. If only reality would match our dreams... I would be all for the re-forming of ACES, just as long as its NOT under the Microsoft banner.

It really doesn't matter who funds a new ACES team initiative as long as they would not be hampered in their effort. If I was a rich dude I would definitely invest in such an effort because I see the possibilities.

 

Regards

jja

Its nice and refreshing to see so much desire for ACES/FS to come back. If only reality would match our dreams... I would be all for the re-forming of ACES, just as long as its NOT under the Microsoft banner.

 

Of course it is... FSX is getting a little old but just look at it! It is a completely different sim to what it was when it came out. It's testament to the huge achievement those guys made. Ah but the strides forward have been made by third party's. So true, and only because the base package was so good for its day with no updates or SP's since v2

 

So +1 from me including a +10 for no more MS involvement.

 

 

 

I would be all for the re-forming of ACES, just as long as its NOT under the Microsoft banner.

 

It would be interesting to see what kind of a new sim you guys could build with todays tech had the whole group not been broken up. It was too bad that after all the years of the MS FS franchise they broke up your group then gave us a little bit of hope with Flight, then completely ended it as well.

I see Flight as a positive thing because it shows that MS is still interested in the FS market. The problem is that MS let the marketing folks (and Ballmer) dictate the feature set which resulted in a major flop. I hope that the recent experience with Flight would serve as a lesson to those in power and therefore I still have hopes that a viable FS platform will once again rule the day. Stay tuned for Flight II LOL.

 

Regards

jja

I see Flight as a positive thing because it shows that MS is still interested in the FS market.

 

True, but since they cancelled any further development of Flight doesn't that mean they are no longer interested in the FS market? Had they kept Flight going and kept producing DLC then I would say they were still interested but since they dont do that anymore, my feeling is they threw in the towel on that project.

 

I bet they would have been way more successful with Flight had it been a whole world model at time of launch, even if it had limited included a/c, released the SDK to 3rd parties, and didn't give the base package away for free. I never even downloaded it since I dont care to fly Hawaii or Alaska as nice as it might have been. Had they sold a boxed/download version of the whole world in similar detail to Hawaii or similar to FSX/FS9, I would have probably spent the $50 the day it launched. Granted I might not have used it much until all my favorite developers started releasing for it, but I would have at least spent the money on it and had a lot of simmers/gamers done that, they might have brought in enough revenue to see it as some type of success and consider the next or future versions.

Yea that is the $64,000.00 question. MS is first and last a marketing machine and will jump on any chance to make $$. Since I'm a simmer I know like MS that there is a huge market for a viable FS product. It boils down to price. Do you want to sell 1 million copies of a product at $1 or 10k copies at $100. The gamble then is to figure out if your market WOULD pay the $100. I know that I would it if it WAS a great FS product. Once again the MS marketing folks need to reeducate themselves and get with the program.

 

Regards

jja

Do you want to sell 1 million copies of a product at $1 or 10k copies at $100.

 

Neither. $1m gets you six engineers working out of their homes for a year. It doesn't come close to building a sim.

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

The final irony is that after having effectively "shown the door" to those third-parties who were initially excited to be going "on board" with Flight, they (MSGS) tried to produce all new content "in house..."

 

...only to begin contacting third-parties frantically months later, after it became crystal clear that there was no possible way they could build new content fast enough "in house" and that the lack of store content was killing them!

 

Unfortunately for MSGS, by that time the overweening arrogance of senior management had so poisoned the well that they could not find one single company willing to work with them...

The final irony is that after having effectively "shown the door" to those third-parties who were initially excited to be going "on board" with Flight, they (MSGS) tried to produce all new content "in house..."

 

...only to begin contacting third-parties frantically months later, after it became crystal clear that there was no possible way they could build new content fast enough "in house" and that the lack of store content was killing them!

 

Unfortunately for MSGS, by that time the overweening arrogance of senior management had so poisoned the well that they could not find one single company willing to work with them...

 

Yep, it's just infinitely tragic...

 

And for all those that think we are better off without Microsoft... I don't think so. Almost every new version of their flight simulator has been groundbraking leaving the competition in the dust. A testament to that is that we - and Lockheed Martin - are still clinging to a software released 2309 days ago.

No Word Not Allowed, you missed nothing. It's in fact very "old news" that's been resurrected by some necrophiliac... 8P :crazy:

I didn't read through 5 pages, but to the original post: isn't this the fact from the beginning? I remember reading way back, when P3D was announced, they already then said they had ACES team members on the team, fixing the code and working on DX10, and all that...? Did I miss something?

 

There were ACES folks on board from the get go, but who knows? Maybe the team has been expanded for all we know.

 

No Word Not Allowed, you missed nothing. It's in fact very "old news" that's been resurrected by some necrophiliac... 8P :crazy:

 

I'm glad I have no access to the part of your mind that dug up that metaphor...

One more thing to consider - Some of the major expenses to developing a good sim are assets and attributions AKA Bing and weather systems and geo data (roads , landclass ect) not top mention the FSX source code. Since MS already owns rights to these why wouldn't they seek another avenue to seek revenues from them? Maybe I'm in the wrong business or that the MS execs are really missing the boat here.

 

Cheers

jja