I would think that backwards compatibility is generally good for end customers, but bad for an addon developer, especially if there is an easy way for an addon developer to update their product to the new version and resell it with marginally better experience.  I think backwards compatibility is primarily useful for the first initial time period until there is enough original content for the new product.  However, if not enough people switch quickly, it can leave addon developers in the not-so-fun spot of having to make addons for potentially two different engines to get the maximum market potential.  The main issue with Flight's success is that MS didn't support it long enough to get to that point.

 

There are several other reasons I think they are missing the point.  Contributing factors to Flight not working:
- Poor marketing led to expectations that it would replace FS, and after release FS veterans reacted very negatively

- Lack of SDK at release or prior to release led addon developers to react very negatively

- Not having a physical retail presence missed out on huge opportunities to sell product

- The use of unsupported GFWL led to a lot of installation and support issues that caused people who downloaded Flight to never get a chance to try it.

- Initial experience was a turn off for more experienced FS veterans who didn't give the rest of the product a chance.  If my memory is correct, there were over a million people who downloaded Flight, but only a small fraction of them got it installed without issues, and played for more than 5-10 minutes.

- The free offering didn't include content such as aircraft with IFR capabilities that would give veterans an opportunity to fully experience what Flight had to offer

- Key features from FSX were missing that the more veteran simmers have come to expect in a simulation product

 

Other than the last issue, none of these are failures of the codebase\engine, and can easily be remedied by a company with a cleaner slate, and more care for the genre and success of the product.  Even though things like autopilot, ATC, etc are not in Flight as a public product, the code for them is still there, but disabled.  It would not take a lot of work to resurrect those features (although the lack of accuracy of the ATC was one of the most complained about features of FSX).  I am obviously biased, but having worked on both Flight and FSX, any developer who would take the FSX code base as a starting point over Flight would be very, very stupid.

Other than the last issue, none of these are failures of the codebase\engine, and can easily be remedied by a company with a cleaner slate, and more care for the genre and success of the product.  Even though things like autopilot, ATC, etc are not in Flight as a public product, the code for them is still there, but disabled.  It would not take a lot of work to resurrect those features (although the lack of accuracy of the ATC was one of the most complained about features of FSX).  I am obviously biased, but having worked on both Flight and FSX, any developer who would take the FSX code base as a starting point over Flight would be very, very stupid.

Are you saying that the ATC and autopilot was implemented in Flight? Why was it never enabled? Or are you saying that you can just use FSX's ATC and put it into Flight?

 

I am obviously biased, but having worked on both Flight and FSX, any developer who would take the FSX code base as a starting point over Flight would be very, very stupid.

     Agreed. People just don't realize Flight's capabilities over FSX. You can't get everything at once! Microsoft Flight was still being updated and bugs fixed, and when people downloaded it and saw that there was no ATC, they ditched.

     I am sure that MSGS would have listened to what we wanted in the game! It was the patience from the Flight Simulation franchise that was missing.  :(

In PC Pilot's (Sep-Oct 2014) interview with Dovetail they say that they "won't make games with guns or killing" so it seems clear that Combat games can be ruled out. It also seems clear that Steam will be used for software distribution. In addition Dovetail say that they "know that existing fans have invested in significant collections of planes and airports and we want to preserve that investment but in a way that does not prevent us from making major improvements to the underlying technology".

 

IIRC Stonelance & co have made some progress on importing FSX planes terrain into Flight so the statement above doesn't necessarily mean that they will base their new game on FSX rather than Flight. Food for thought anyway.

 

EDIT: Correct error.

The ATC and autopilot code from FSX was in Flight but disabled\not compiled.  It doesn't work as is and would need updates in order to work with Flight systems, but it is not like you would have to write them from scratch.

Hope to hear some good news from you soon Steve on the scenery importing/conversion tools!  :wink:

Steve keep up the good work. Jim thank you for sharing your (usual) insight into anything that is not FSX.

 

Moe 

Just to break this silence. 

Any new things to discuss about?

Hoping to hear something soon! Like many others waiting with great anticipation for the scenery conversion tools.... hope it's continuing to go well.

Making progress.  Got the Seattle area working with no red.  Still fixing lots of problems in other places in the world, or hidden issues under the hood that aren't super obvious from just flying over an area.

Great to hear it Steve! Keep it going! 

Thanks for the update Steve; appreciate it and your work a great deal!

Thanks for all the effort you have put into this project!

Steve is making a near superhuman effort ot convert FSX scenery content to Flight. Unfortunately, there's not much we can do to help him... just encourage the effort and let him know his time isn't being wasted.

 

There is still lots more to do even after the scenery is converted. Aircraft creation, new scenery creation, missions, aerocaches... and the development of some tools to assist in these pursuits.

 

Flight can become something of a sandbox for us to play in.

 

Dick

Steve is making a near superhuman effort ot convert FSX scenery content to Flight. Unfortunately, there's not much we can do to help him... just encourage the effort and let him know his time isn't being wasted.

 

      True! Just keep it going Steve!

 

I've already discussed the possibility of mission development and it seems unlikely that any tool will come out to support it. Mission creation is tricky through .xml and creating one from scratch requires a mission editor.

 

     Everything else seems achievable! 

I understand that Steve can't accept money for his efforts, as that is in conflict with MS. As long as money is not exchanging hands they will leave him alone. I however propose helping his efforts this way... Steve, is there any kind of computer hardware that we could donate to you to help you in your efforts?

 

Sincerely

Moe