I think MS is taking advantage!

[Guest]

I'm not trying to start any wars here, just expressing my opinion to enerate more opinions from the public. I just noticed the price for FS2004 and I was shocked. CA$80 + Tax. :-lol You've got to be kidding me. I don't know about you guys but all I see in FS2004 is FS2002 with a new sky color, some tweaked clouds which are still not volumetric, some more planes and a couple more tweaks/additions to the rest of the code. Now MS prices this at 80 bucks?? Come on! There is not really any competition left so they are taking advantage now. If it was a preice like all other games (CA$50) I would maybe buy it. Now instead of making the planes better quality and the flight models more realistic they just add more low-quality planes. FS is probably the only game/sim where all add-ons are better quality then what the developers made. The planes that MS produces are low quality and almost anyone can do better. I mean, game companies usualy make an effort to produce a high quality model for their games, but MS just makes some quick low quality planes and leaves the rest for the 3rd party to make...Thank God for talented people that spend their time making such great add-ons. The add-ons is what make FS where it is today...the MS developers can't hold a candle to what 3rd party can do..makes you wonder why MS does not hire people who are obviously more talented. 3rd party can make everything that MS made better..a whole lot better. Why then does MS jack up the price like that? It does not seem like they even make an effort. They still can't beat the FLY! clouds..even ProPilot 98 had clouds that were much better. They still don't produce high quality panels like FLY! did years ago or virtual panels wlike IL-2 has. MS does not even listen to the community for suggestions/comments, they don't even make patches! As real as it gets eh?? HA! All this being said....yeah, eventualy I will go buy FS2004 as well because I know 3rd party developes will make FS2004 into something the MS developers can never do or don't want to do. I still say that MS is playing us, but what can I do? FS is basicaly the only sim left except X-Plane..which is fast approaching MS quality. Austin has alreaday made volumetic clouds that make shadows on the ground. OK, my rant is over...what are your thoughts? Am I right or paranoid?

[Guest ba747heavy]

I have to agree with most of that post. However, I propose to you an alternative explanation for the lack of high quality airplanes made by M$. They are providing a sim that can compete with hard core simmers, and new simmers alike. They dumb down there planes so that the newbies can handle the sim, and have fun whilst not being overwhelmed. While us, the hardcore simmer, have to go spend a little extra $$ to get anything done to our satisfaction. Perhaps something that I(being a hardcore simmer) don't like, but I can hardly blame M$ for taking that stance.What I would like to add to your arugement is the horrid scenery that microsoft puts forth. Airports and ground textures alike, they don't match at all. The mountain regions right outside my door(I live right near KALM) are in real life really sharp, steep mountains that are desert on the side that I face. In the sim(every version I have come across) the ground is very fluid, nice, *hills* that are very nice and green. Pffffffffft ;-)BTW, the clouds in FS2k4 are *amazing*! Being a diehard FLY! simmer I thought I would never admit that M$ beat FLY! in that department, but the day has come. They look that good. But, the caveat is that they eat FPS like you would not believe. So much so that I am wondering how to go back to my 'good' old 2D clouds ala FS2002.

[Guest]

TROLL ALERT!!!jack up the price?FS2002 cost close to

[Guest]

Um... I just picked up FS2004 for $50 (tax included). I dont know where you shop... but man I think it is time for a change

[Guest]

Fred: Yes, I was gonna say about the 'dumbed down planes being for normal simmer' etc..but if it is intended for an average simmer then what average simmer is gonna pay 80 bucks compared to 55 on other games/sims? The scenery, I don't complain there because it's difficult to make accurate scenery for the entire world so in my book they are excused for that :-hah I'm surprized to hear that the clouds are that good. I just read another post about how bad it is to slice trough the planes of the flat clouds. Jeff: Read again, I'm talking about Canadian dollars..it's 80 bucks Canadian that I got to pay..excluding tax.Jeroen: Troll alert? I've been a meber of AVSIM since FS98 was out, how can you call me a troll?? It looks like a drop in price because of the Standard/Pro scheme they had with FS2002. Games/sims used to be around 55 Canadian dollars. Now they are still that price but FS2004 is 80 CA dollars now. Not nice! If MS made some big improvements in their sequels like most other game companies make with sequels then it would be OK but IMO MS is not making a big effort into making the sim "As real as it gets" and to me it seems like they hold back on what they can do with FS. I'm sure if they wanted to MS with their resources can make an awsome "as real as it gets" sim to make us all fall out of out chairs..but they are not..they just add one or 2 features in every version and cash in. I would call FS2004 an Expansion pack and not a sequel. Anyway, like I said..I argue but in the end i'm still gonna go out and buy it..just trying to get my point across. Take care

[Christopher Low 5,324]

Jeroen,I sincerely hope that you were just joking with that "troll alert" comment. I have read quite a few of your comments concerning various aspects of flight simulation over the past year, and you seem to come down hard on EVERYONE who criticises ANYTHING. Surely you don't think that the default MSFS is 100 per cent perfect ? As for the price, well.....I agree with Mikk. I personally think that, for a product that sold extremely well all over the world, a price of

[Guest jrsky75]

You're completely right!But that's just one of the many tricks they use in order to secure their money for a not so distant future. What would happen if they released a sim "As real as it gets"? There wouldn't be anything left to improve in the simulation, and therefore, people wouldn't even think about buying another version, as there would be no bugs to fix left (and that's where the new "versions" come from....)That's why I call FS2004: "The FS2002 Payware Update"Not that I dislike the new sim though, because I do really love it :)But then again... if it isn't expensive, it isn't related to aviation.Cheers!:-waveRod

[boshar 6]

>TROLL ALERT!!!>>jack up the price?>>FS2002 cost close to

[Guest GalacticCowboy]

>FS2002 also had a>rebate action for owners of FS2000 which makes FS2002 Pro>cheaper than FS2004.And FS2004 has a rebate for owners of FS2002 (either version). At least it does in the US and Canada, I dunno about other countries. I've got the form right here in my hot little hands... ;) $10 US or $15 Canadian. And after getting it at Wal-Mart for $50 US last night (including the Wright Flyer miniature) it'll end up costing about the same or less than a lot of the games I've bought recently.

[boshar 6]

>And FS2004 has a rebate for owners of FS2002 (either version).> At least it does in the US and Canada, I dunno about other>countries. I've got the form right here in my hot little>hands... ;) $10 US or $15 Canadian. And after getting it at>Wal-Mart for $50 US last night (including the Wright Flyer>miniature) it'll end up costing about the same or less than a>lot of the games I've bought recently.>Nope no rebate here in the Netherlands. Perhaps more important I might have been wrong about the cashback for Fs2002 too. Maybe I mixed it up with FS2000 which did have a cashback option. So that would make FS2004 a bit cheaper than the old Pro package.Now with the currency markets saying $ 1 is about

[Guest]

"if it isn't expensive, it isn't related to aviation" hehe..that is so true. I agree with all your statements Rod, they are not doing their best so that they can release version after version after version. Sims like FLY gave it all they had IMO and preice was OK. At least MS should make enough improvements to make it worth an exaggerated price. Thanks to the guys defending me against the troll comment. As for rebates, i'll have to look and see what rebates I get in Canada...maybe it makes the price more convenient. Take care

[gosta 0]

>Um... I just picked up FS2004 for $50 (tax included). I dont know where you shop... but man I think it is time for a changehttp://hifi.avsim.net/activesky/images/wxrebeta.jpg

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, "They still can't beat the FLY! clouds..even ProPilot 98 had clouds that were much better. "let me clarify you:Weather/Clouds/sky in fs2004 are way better then fly, x-plane.to date, Fly clouds and weather engine are extremly basic and outdated.The whole weather engine in fs2004 is WAY much better then fly, x-plane.The fs2004 weather is FULL cusmozible, from the shape, the visual, control the amount of the formation and particle. They have included all clouds type in the worlds, dynamic engine, weather change from the condition and shape, fulll customizle light and weather and sky.The old fuIII engine still beat FlyII hands down, FUIII is the closed sim can approach fs2004 for some weather feature, but not the visual at all.The fly weather engine, which is limited clouds 3 layers, clouds remain beside the aircraft, 1 clouds type, NO thunderstorm, disappearing clouds from high altitude, all bugs remain in their weather system, the sun that`t cut the horizon, the base of the clouds a SOLID line cutted, did you consider as a weather or real wx joke?And what's about the haze in flyII which is NON, truly unrealistic with all sky color available in flyII, they are even not 30% near the accuracy from the real thing from the bottom haze to the up.If you are called FLY like a good weather engine and clouds/sky, you should consider all your post on anything related to flightsim because there is trully a HUGE lack of understanding and accuracy with the real life worlds."FS is probably the only game/sim where all add-ons are better quality then what the developers made"Oh you said the Ms is the only sim that's the 3rd party is better then MS default, Ok remove Terrascene in fly and remove the fly bgl importer from Ms, and all fly 3rd party, looks fly how will looks like :-lol. Did you remember the flyII default release ? glommy glommy, buggy.If fly 3rd party was never made stuff, this sim will be clearly not used at all.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

[Guest]

OK, I was talking about FLY! 1 not FLY!2. FLY! had volumetric clouds that MS still can't make or don't want to make. Even if MS clouds look pretty with all kinds of colors and shapes you still cut through them like they are sheets of paper and you don't really fly inside a cloud...that adds a lot to the realism. That is what I was talking about. Pro Pilot had some really nice cloud effects that made you think you are really going through a thick cloud and not sheets of paper. I agree that MS has a very complicated weather engine. They have put all the effort in the weather engine but they still leave the paper clouds. X-Plane might not have such an advanced weather engine but X-Plane has volumetric clouds, hail, weather radar that shows the thunderstorms to avoid, very good turbulence engine, icy/wet runways that actualy affect the handling of the plane on the ground, blowig snow on the runways, windshear and more that I can't think of right now. I can't comment on FU3 weather engine because I still can't get my FU3 to work on my computer. Another thing...at least the FLY team worked on the problems and released patches...something that MS still has to learn to do. Yes, sky color in FLY!2 was more like Mars but that was easily customizable. I never said anything about FLY having a better weather engine, I was just referring to the way the clouds are made. I also didn't say anything about the ground in any sim. Yes, if you remove 3rd party add-ons from FLY!2 it won't be so great but try removing 3rd party add-ons from FS, then you'll see a sim that won't sell much. Anotehr point, it's not easy to create add-ons for FLY that beat the quality of the original planes for example...in FS the default planes are probably the least flown planes on anyone's computer.I still say 3rd party add-ons is what maded FS into what it is. You guys are FSW are a prefect example of this. What would we all do without the FSW clouds? The default ones were horrible compared to what you guys made, I can't even imagine going back to the default ones, and I'm positive that you guys will redo the FS2004 clouds so good that the MS developers start drooling. The point I was trying to make is that MS does not put much effort into some of the areas of FS because 3rd party people can do so much better and what does MS do? They make the sim 80 CANADIAN dollars for the half-effort they put into making the sim. MS should learn from FSW and the many talented designers here.

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, "had volumetric clouds that MS still can't make or don't want to make. I have installed fly2k special edition, few cumulus on the sky, they do not have the particle inside the clouds which no sim have yet, I through the few clouds, the clouds just disapears slowly but completly when you fly through them, (to simulate the through them), but the clouds should remain here."Even if MS clouds look pretty with all kinds of colors and shapes you still cut through them like they are sheets of paper""I can adjust,add and control the amount and the shape to reduce the sheets of papers."Another point, it's not easy to create add-ons for FLY that beat the quality of the original planes for example...in "The flight dynamic If I remember was from Rob Young and the ground from Jack, which are not on the tri team at all, remove them and a huge completly step back on the entire sim. I consdider both as 3rd party, because this is cleary not the tri team works at all. This is like Ms will have all the flight dynamic from Rob young and others stuff from 3rd party in fs2004 default, what's is the difference. The only things excellent created by default from tri, was the panel on flyI and II, but all others stuff, the default tri team officialy made by their hand are not good and they are lower default quality than Ms hand made, you need 3rd party files.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs