It won't. Steam OS will only run Linux games natively. Windows and Mac games will be streamed from a PC or Mac elsewhere on the local network.

 

Still not a worry, there is always a way to have a dual boot system, which would be better in a way as Windows 7 can be configured for the sole purpose of running FSX. Then just have all your other stuff on Steam's Linux based O/S

 

I've done dual boot in the past with Windows NT and Windows 98 as I had all my AutoCAD and 3D Studio Max stuff in NT and had a boot for Windows 98 to run MSFS. Made for good breaks in between work  B)

Isn't this just common or garden capitalism?

 

Yes. And this thread existing in the first place smacks of bitterness and childishness.

Yes. And this thread existing in the first place smacks of bitterness and childishness.

 

Here here sir! This thread is disgusting. I once heard a quote somewhere that went something like "any argument is convincing until you hear the other side of the story". Or words to that effect. MS/Joshua aren't here to defend themselves and I would bet Mr Howard is a far more successful individual than a lot of people on these forums.

Given how much people spend on add ons for even a 6 year old version of Microsoft Flight simulator I think how much they could have made with an app store! 

Given how much people spend on add ons for even a 6 year old version of Microsoft Flight simulator I think how much they could have made with an app store! 

 

Yep, one of the major flaws of FLIGHT was lack of content. I could add to that lack of gameplay and dumbed down graphics (to satisfy all the cry-babies who get their panties in a twist when they can't run every slider to the right).

 

Howard was obviously not the right man for the job. In his interviews he came about as arrogant and uninterested in the fan base that pushed the franchise into the Guinnes Book of World Records as one of the most successful games in history.

 

I don't blame Howard though. I blame Microsoft as a company for being short sighted and not understanding the value of building a franchise and brand over time. Even if Flight or FS11 as individual game titles wouldn't have earned Microsoft the ROI-% they wanted, there is a bigger picture. All software comapnies should focus on innovation and freedom of creativity. That is what in the end will result in cutting edge software that blows the competition out of the water. Flight could have been a good sandbox for Microsoft to build a world class gaming engine for simulation games, not to mention building a functional and good Games for Windows DLC store to help keep Windows and the PC as the most capable gaming platform. If MIcrosoft had understood anything they would have intergrated an appstore into Windows a long time ago.

 

Hopefully Microsoft will not follow the example of Kodak - once a giant in innovation and profitability. Hopefully they will follow the example of SONY, a company that once was the very definition of innovaition, but almost ruined by suits who knew nothing but bean counting. But SONY has manged to turn things around again and are now innovators and trend setters in several segments.

... successfully helped to kill off one of the most historic and well recognized titles in all of the gaming universe, and certainly the least misogynistic game ever, and you are now pandering to 14 year old boys with T&A content!

 

...

 

Yes. And this thread existing in the first place smacks of bitterness and childishness.

 

Here here sir! This thread is disgusting. I once heard a quote somewhere that went something like "any argument is convincing until you hear the other side of the story". Or words to that effect. MS/Joshua aren't here to defend themselves and I would bet Mr Howard is a far more successful individual than a lot of people on these forums.

 

 

It seems to me that the target of this thread has shifted somewhat since the original post. I don't think there's anything bitter or childish in being disgusted by the use of pornography and violence to make money. Consider which stratum of society most frequently makes use of such means.

 

On the other hand, if it's the rest of the thread that disgusts you - reviling effective business practices and successful capitalism - I'm with you all the way. The purpose of any business is to make money; the product is nothing more than a means to that end.

 

D

 

edit: ... It's spelt 'Hear hear', as in listen to the speaker.

Sandbox's sell too, look at GTAV, Minecraft, Eve Online....

Sandbox's sell too, look at GTAV, Minecraft, Eve Online....

 

...Sim City, The Sims... Yep, big sellers! Lots of people like games with lots of freedom.

The Man Who Helped Kill FSX - His New Role

 

Microsoft stopped development of FSX in 2009. What role did Joshua Howard have in that?

 

Also, where did the idea come from that companies shouldn't make as much profit they legally  can?  I always aimed to make as much as I could when I was working. How many posters have never changed their job to make more money, or turned down a pay rise?

 

Microsoft stopped development of FSX in 2009. What role did Joshua Howard have in that?

 

Also, where did the idea come from that companies shouldn't make as much profit they legally  can?  I always aimed to make as much as I could when I was working. How many posters have never changed their job to make more money, or turned down a pay rise?

 

 

Well, if $ was the only object with creating FLIGHT it was an even bigger failure because it was almost completely without commercial appeal.

 

I think Tom's tounge in cheek title was more about the fact that FLIGHT in the beginning seemed more like a rebirth of the FS franchise, but when Howard took over management, things were changed, and from a simmers perspective, not for the better.

 

I liked parts of it - it wasn't all bad, but the overall execution, the marketing, the lack of DLC content and miserable gaming elements made it into a cult hit with a very tiny cult following. Not the best way to make $.

Well, if $ was the only object with creating FLIGHT it was an even bigger failure because it was almost completely without commercial appeal.

 

I never claimed Flight was a success. The fact that Microsoft dropped it so quickly shows it wasn't.

 

I also believe that the key choices about Flight were corporate decisions and that  many  of them had already been made by the time Joshua Howard came on the scene. I doubt, for example, that he decided by himself that Microsoft would develop a new flight simulator, that it would be free with income coming only from the sales of DLC, nor that he developed the financial forecasts used to justify it. 

 

 

How many posters have never changed their job to make more money, or turned down a pay rise?

 

Me ... at some point more money becomes meaningless (it just doesn't buy happiness) -- I've reached my point of life comfort.  I have changed jobs because of the challenge and environment, but I've also turned down positions of considerably more money.  I like working for small companies because I get a direct sense of accomplishment (and the rewards that go with that).  There is more stress, but it's the good kind of stress (work smarter/harder rather than more quantity, CYA, and politics).

 

 

 

The fact that Microsoft dropped it so quickly shows it wasn't.

 

Windows 8 is a horrible failure.  Win8 gained a little more market share 7-8% total now, but Win7 gained more market share than Win8 over last month ... wondering if Microsoft really understand this?  Both gained market share because of the pending termination of WinXP support - no more security updates.  And YET, Microsoft aren't going to drop Win 8 or change their direction with Win9.  In fact Windows 9 is going to be more of the same only it really will be "one OS fits" all (no desktop mode at all).

 

So Microsoft doesn't always drop something because of the lack of sales/acceptance ... if they did, Win8 would have been abandoned in favor of something people want rather than something Microsoft want.

 

As far as Joshua Howard, someone in that position with a "passion" for what they do (rather than just collecting a check) would have been smart enough and creative enough sell, develop, and manage the politics behind the continuation of Flight in a direction that would ensure it's survival (aka keeping the hardcore folks on-board also).  Manage your manager ... success can be measured by how well an individual manages the person or people they report to.

 

In almost all cases in my working life, the quality of a product will be reflected by the level of passion one has for the product.  If you can find anyone left in Microsoft that has passion for what they do (other than Ballmer jumping up and down shouting with sweaty armpits which is ineffective given the environment he has created), then I'll be very surprised.  IMHO, most of the "passion" has left Microsoft.

 

Anyway, the code lives on in P3D, lets hope their is passion at LM.

I never claimed Flight was a success. The fact that Microsoft dropped it so quickly shows it wasn't.

 

I also believe that the key choices about Flight were corporate decisions and that many of them had already been made by the time Joshua Howard came on the scene. I doubt, for example, that he decided by himself that Microsoft would develop a new flight simulator, that it would be free with income coming only from the sales of DLC, nor that he developed the financial forecasts used to justify it.

 

Yep, I touched upon that earlier. I'm sure the suits had some say in what went down over there. They didn't put him there without a mission. He was probably a Trojan.

 

There's much more to life than making a profit and not breaking any laws. I've turned down plenty of job offers and traded down in position and salary to do what I enjoy the most. The people that go for the money are rarely those who have the passion and talent to excel in whatever they choose to do. To each his own.

Well, sad to say it, we are simply too small a demographic to appeal to the "big boys" in gaming.  Microsoft had an idea with Flight that was poorly implemented.  Microsoft wanted to take the Google or Apple approach whereby you buy 'apps' for FLIGHT through THEM, thus they get a piece of every single add-on through their online store.  Smart business model, but the underlying simulation totally ignored the peeps with the Benjamins, namely US in the active sim community.  They totally forgot about JETS, FMCS and complex airplanes.

 

The concept of running a 'master' sim from their gaming server is actually a cool idea, but in their effort to make everything compatible with all manner of hardware (dumb terminal) PCs, they 'dumbed down' the graphics, in lieu of having 'levels of detail' that could be user-selectable.  Those with overclocked and high-end graphics CPUS and GPUS could play at "maximum" detail whilst those with laptops or happy-meal PCs could play at minimal to average levels.

 

All in all, it COULD have worked, they simply fumbled the ball.  Now we look hopefully to Lockheed Martin, and once again, the deadly threat of backwards-compatibility means no 64-bit freedom in P3D, which is shortsighted.  As the operating systems progress, you likely will soon see the 32-bit support dropped by future Microsoft OS'es, much as 16-bit support was dropped starting with Windows 8, one of the biggest DUDS in Microsoft history, on par with Windows Me and Vista.  In their effort to be ever more apple-esque or Googley,

 

Microsoft is leaning heavily toward icon-driven (read: "Tiles" or "Giant Icons") and touch-screen interface and going away from the smart user who is a heavy multi-tasker or serious PC enthusiast.

 

Not all bad, because the average Joe doesn't know how to properly maintain or even defend his/her PC, so Microsoft is again leaning toward the lowest common moron level of competency.  Those who can do, those who can't call Microsoft PAID SUPPORT.

 

Ultimately, though I have returned to FSX exclusively at the moment, my true hopes lean toward X-Plane 11 or X Plane XII.  Hopefully, at some point, the scenery weaknesses, lack of seasons, and views to the horizon will be trumped by higher levels of detail that take full and complete advantage of Direct X 11 and its successors.  

 

I recognize again, that with X-Plane also shooting to run on Linux and MAC, there are inherent compatibility roadblocks to my dream of CGI-level graphics, butter-smooth, with no hint of stutter, pause or crash at any time.

 

This all probably could resolve with a CONSOLE based flight simulation game, and if only our numbers were substantially higher as pilots, we might command the attention and resources of companies big enough to totally revamp the flight sim experience.

 

From a corporate marketing perspective, though, our future is guardedly dim.  It's a numbers thing.  If you're building video games, you go after the largest segment of potential buyers, the pre and teen-aged group, who have the money and time and gaming lust to invest in an unending cavalcade of shooter games.  It boggles the imagination how "DOOM" has evolved to the titles for sale today.

 

Regardless of your politics or 'ethics', whether or not you think shoot-em-ups are no worse than playing toy soldiers or a recipe for mindless RW violence, the truth is that violence SELLS.  It sells movie tickets and video game titles, it fills seats at cage fighting and WWF matches, and keeps the NFL in business.  At heart, humanity hasn't really progressed since the ancient Roman times, when people flocked to the Coliseum to view Christians versus the Lions on a regular basis.

 

We, the flight community, generally operate on a higher moral plane, yet are confounded by the sheer smallness of our demographic.  We just can't buy enough product to justify the capital investment.  Therefore we pin our hopes on P3D v2 and XP 10.3 or XP 11 as pathways to ever-better flight sim experiences.  It isn't simply inept or stupid corporate leadership that is hurting us, it is purely a diminished power position due to too few customers compared with the masses who play the shooter games.

 

Truthfully, I have come to accept FSX for what it is, and deeply enjoy it.  With REX Essentials and some nice payware airports, plus ORBX global and PNW using Orbx FTX Central's new "Hybrid" mode, I get some downright cool graphics and decent frames.  I won't win any Academy Awards for my YouTube videos, but I enjoy the experiences on a daily basis.  At times, I still have the "Gee Whiz" moments when the scenery is peeking out behind the thin wafting and scudding clouds on approach...that makes the investment of time, money and sweat all the sweeter.  Toss in my 'must have' PilotEdge real-time end-to-end live ATC, and I'm a very happy camper.

Microsoft stopped development of FSX in 2009. What role did Joshua Howard have in that?

 

Also, where did the idea come from that companies shouldn't make as much profit they legally  can?  I always aimed to make as much as I could when I was working. How many posters have never changed their job to make more money, or turned down a pay rise?

 

 

I'm doing a PhD (yes that's a job here in the Netherlands) rather than going straight into an engineering job, which set me back at least €500,- a month. I still have enough to live comfortably and I enjoy my job. On the other foot, I'm pretty sure that companies in the US are in fact legally obliged to maximise profits for their share-holders.

 

It seems to me that the target of this thread has shifted somewhat since the original post. I don't think there's anything bitter or childish in being disgusted by the use of pornography and violence to make money. Consider which stratum of society most frequently makes use of such means.

Which social stratum do you mean exactly? Because I can't really think of one that contains Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, every major movie company, every cable company, every hotel chain that offers a pay-per-view adult channel, every bank that invests in or loans money to those companies, every bookstore, news agent, and gas station that sells adult magazines? I'm not counting all the companies that employ the 'sex sells' technique, which is strictly speaking not pornography, but comes pretty close at times. I agree with you that these are bad things, but can we lay off the sweeping social strata generalisations?