I see a Big Problem with FS10(FS2006).......

[Paul 2]

With all the great add-ons that are still coming out, along with the prior freeware, paywares, etc....It's really going to be hard to let go of FS2004 and start again with FS2006.I know the common responses will be...Keep FS2004, while your exploring FS2006....But let's face it, eventually you let go of the past and move ahead....So again I say, it's going to be hard because FS2004 has been the best yet and it has taken so long to tweak to perfection.....Do you agree?Paul

[Guest panda234]

I bet that MS has thought of this too. They are probably pretty much aware that an incremental release is not going to generate many sales. It's going to have to a whopper of a release, or allow seamless transition of all addons, which would be difficult. Interesting thought, though...billg

[Geofa 108]

Then there are lots of us who even though we buy a lot of add ons-end up not using many of them all that much. In the aircraft department even though I buy aircraft to ooohh and ahh over-I usually end up going back to flying the aircraft I fly in real life for 99% of my simming.I am more for the general level being raised then a single great add on and am willing to sacrifice any add on for the higher level of the sim. The great add ons that I do use on a regular basis will probably be updated in short order for the next version-and some of the most valuable to me that I do use on an everytime basis (mesh, landclass,roads) will probably be compatible. If not however-they will be quickly abandoned on my part for a newer version of fs.Bring the next version on! :-)http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest Jetfan]

Exactly why I'm still with FS2002.I have FS2004, still in the box, in a drawer. Don't want to go back to constant tweaking or have to use a disc to run the sim. If FS2006 turns out to be a whopper change and I see rave reviews from fellow simmers for a while, I may check it out.Cheers,Bob

[JonRD463 146]

>Then there are lots of us who even though we buy a lot of add>ons-end up not using many of them all that much. In the>aircraft department even though I buy aircraft to ooohh and>ahh over-I usually end up going back to flying the aircraft I>fly in real life for 99% of my simming.>>I am more for the general level being raised then a single>great add on and am willing to sacrifice any add on for the>higher level of the sim. The great add ons that I do use on a>regular basis will probably be updated in short order for the>next version-and some of the most valuable to me that I do use>on an everytime basis (mesh, landclass,roads) will probably be>compatible. If not however-they will be quickly abandoned on>my part for a newer version of fs.>>Bring the next version on! :-)>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgThe precise reason why I don't get into payware, although Holger's Misty Fjords is looking miiiiighty tempting. I'm just a casual simmer, and while I recognize there is a market for the high-end stuff like PMDG and RFP, I'm not a part of that market. I can have has much fun flying the IFDG A320 with Eric Marciano's panel as I'm sure users of the more complex stuff have fun with their purchases. If I ever spend money above and beyond the FS purchase price, it'll probably be for a really great scenery product.Did I mention Misty Fjords is tempting me? :DAnyway, much to the chagrin of many who've spent more on addons than I have on automobiles in the last year, I hope MS builds a brand new sim from the ground up. To not be so caught up in backwards compatibility as to choke development, I wish they could more free to learn the lessons of Flight Unlimited, Fly!, and X-Plane, and wrap it all up in a Flight Simulator release that would knock the socks off of even the most persnickety simmer.

[Guest]

That was also true with FS2000, FS2002, and FS2004, and probably with FS98 as well.For most people it doesn't matter, they buy it anyway. Some may hold off until their favourite addons are ported or replaced, and a very small minority may not get the new product at all (but there's likely less of them than of new customers so they can be safely discounted as a blip).

[Guest Dakota]

"that was also true with FS2000, FS2002, and FS2004, and probably with FS98 as well."Not exactly, for the previous version of FS there was not a proliferation of Payware like there is now. I don't think those who have spent hundreds of dollars on add-ons for FS2004 are just going to throw them in the recycle bin and start over. The only reason I bought add-ons for FS2002 was because the vendors made promises they would work in FS2004. I don't think they will be doing that for FS2006.

[Dillon 2,197]

Man after 15+ years of simming we still go around this same topic with every release :-roll. Most everyone is going to buy the new sim and add-ons will be updated in short or long order. It's one of the many pains of being a dedicated flight simmer and /or aviation enthusiast. I got a funny feeling that the new version won't be such a pain on our add-on aircraft as much as most are thinking (maybe some minor FDE tweaking but hopefully that's it). Seeing as Microsoft already set the standard program for aircraft modeling (GMAX) and the clickable virtual cockpit is no longer an issue. I think the next version will hone in on aspects like ATC (traffic and otherwise), graphics (incline runways, see below), and weather. I can't see Microsoft throwing away it's standard (GMAX) and requiring something new. I'm almost positive no matter what changes are in store our add-on aircraft should be safe. Old Simflyers scenery might be done for. In fact if anything is threatened it would have to be the airport add-ons. Seeing what X-Plane is doing with airport elevation points, Flight Simulator would seem the next in line for something like this. I bet (and I hope I'm right) the only add-ons that'll need major updates this time around would be airport scenery (see the pic below)... Guys the pic below is more common than you would think at many airports around the world. It would be about time something like this was addressed in Flight Simulator's scenery. Based on Flight Simulator's evolution in the past, competition has actually helped shape the development of Flight Simulator over the years. If it weren

[Dillon 2,197]

"If it doesn't have a VC, I won't be flying it."John that's a great line, I'll have to use it because that's so true for me as well....:-hah

[Guest]

90% of my addons in FS2002 were payware, about the same percentage as for FS2004.Some of those don't work in FS2004, some do.Many addon authors didn't make any promise their products would work in FS2004 until shortly before FS2004 went on sale. They couldn't because they didn't know the work required to port their products.Don't expect products originally released for FS2000, upgraded for FS2002 and once again for FS2004 to be upgraded again for FS2006 (or whatever).In fact, don't expect most addons released for FS2002 and upgraded for FS2004 to be upgraded once again.You CAN likely expect (unless there's a major change in the underlying system) most addons released for FS2004 to be upgraded.As authors don't have FS2006 (or whatever it's to be called) yet they can't make any promises.And personally I don't care much either way...You seem to think that you have a godgiven right to eternal free upgrades for everything. You don't.

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

Once you've flown a quality payware aircraft like PMDG, PIC, RFP, etc, it is hard to switch back to the "looks good, but sounds, flight dynamics and panels are not much better than the default aircraft". 767 PIC was the first payware aircraft for me, and since then I have NEVER looked back.GaryPS. Misty Fjords is calling you ;)

[MD83 1]

>Exactly why I'm still with FS2002.>>I have FS2004, still in the box, in a drawer. Don't want to>go back to constant tweaking or have to use a disc to run the>sim. If FS2006 turns out to be a whopper change and I see>rave reviews from fellow simmers for a while, I may check it>out.>>Cheers,>BobI still use FS2002. I didn't feel the need to upgrade to FS2004, and go through the process of tweaking etc :-P. I also use 767PIC, the PSS 744 and 777. FS2004 didn't strike me at all. I will almost certainly upgrade to FS2006 later this year :)

[maxter 0]

As i've said on several occasions previously (hopefully if the FS devs read this...), I would much rather they hold off one full product cycle and go with a whole new platform/sim engine to make use of the very latest graphics tools out there, without giving the slightest consideration to backwards compatibility.This would hopefully provide the 3rd party developers with enough time to generate adequate profits from the utilisation of the toold that they have at present, as well as giving the FS2004/2004a users enough time to get the maximum enjoyment from the add-on's they have already purchased.The development of faster CPU's, Memory and GPU's (and therefore generally faster base model computers) will make the FS2004 much more enjoyable for most users who currently have low end machines who may have upgraded over the next year or 2. The development of FS 2007 or even 2008 would then hopefully make use of the computers that would be the norm at that time which could then be a real jump in the "As real as it gets" experience.Cheers,Chris Porter:-outtaPerthWestern Australia

[JonRD463 146]

>Once you've flown a quality payware aircraft like PMDG, PIC,>RFP, etc, it is hard to switch back to the "looks good, but>sounds, flight dynamics and panels are not much better than>the default aircraft". 767 PIC was the first payware aircraft>for me, and since then I have NEVER looked back.Well, not being a real pilot, I can't tell the difference in flight models. Besides, I've read the manuals PMDG have on Avsim. Any game that feels so much like work that I'm inclined to wear a tie and sport jacket at the computer kinda defeats the purpose for me. :) That's why I gave up the Sim City series. >Gary>>PS. Misty Fjords is calling you ;)One of my most favorite things to do here is read the Pireps in the BFU forum, and the building desire to participate, plus the Siren's song of that beautiful place is having that effect... Yes... yes... Master... ;)

[MarkRey 16]

Part of me agrees with you Chris - I love what MS has done 'in the box' but thus far for me it's freeware/payware addons that make this hobby what it is.With the inevitable evolution of all aspects of the platform and associated applications it takes (naturally) longer and longer for artists to develop new a/c, panels, sceneries etc - and when they're done - WOW! It may be time MS let each new version either 'soak' a little longer or perhaps better facilitate (timely SDKs?) 3rd party developers as each new version is released.The part of me that diagrees bought fs9 because I simply could not pass on the opportunity to lose that blasted blue band of a horizon in fs2002, not to mention the other aspects of the new weather engine - stuff I've longed to see in/from the sky around me since fs98 - heck I'da chucked any addon I had for the new sky!!regards,Mark