Sure many of us would pay for all the nice stuff (like we already do). The problem is that the sim can't exist based only on us as the market. There aren't enough of us. MSFS is aimed at a much larger audience and the level of detail and complexity contained in the sim has to be carefully balanced based on the broad market it's designed for. If the sim is too complex it will stop appealing to the mass market and when that happens it will cease to exist. As far as I know, the biggest reason for the decision to do away with the pro version was simply that the more expensive version didn't sell well and created confusion amongst the general buying public. People don't like to think they are buying the "amateur" version, but they don't want to spend the $90 or whatever for the pro version...As far as performance of add-ons goes, I'm not sure I understand the point being made. Does MS have some sort of magic wand they can wave that will allow them to include the kinds of detailed add-ons we all enjoy without it impacting performance? As far as I know theres no way around the basic truth that more complexity and more detail equals higher system demands. As it stands now, we have the choice to add whatever add-ons we want which we think will work with our systems.

I guess he thinks that Microsoft deliberately prevents 3rd parties from getting the best possible performance out of FS.After all, every conspiracy theorist knows that Microsoft deliberately slows down applications they didn't write themselves :-lol

Thanks for the comment jwenting, it's what I have come to expect from you. :-roll No conspiracy theory here, I actually like MS."As far as performance of add-ons goes, I'm not sure I understand the point being made. Does MS have some sort of magic wand they can wave that will allow them to include the kinds of detailed add-ons we all enjoy without it impacting performance? As far as I know theres no way around the basic truth that more complexity and more detail equals higher system demands. As it stands now, we have the choice to add whatever add-ons we want which we think will work with our systems."I've designed scenery and work in Gmax, FSDS and 3DSMax, so I am well aware of how it all works. I learned the hard way trying to get as much detail as possible without compromising performance. Many scenery addons can be optimized to get more performance out of them, texture formats, LODs, etc. My point is that I would rather have more detailed default scenery overall, not just specific areas, done by MS and optimized by them based on their programming, than to add 3rd party ones that use poor coding based on 3rd party apps and not following the SDKs to get the best performance.Oh well, guess I'll just wait till 2007, FS9 will scream on the hardware that will be out then! LOLRegards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/mcdcvabanner.jpgCalVirAir International

You did write it like you were fully expecting Microsoft to have some secret to making highperformance things that they don't want others to have...More detailed default stuff will mean a LOT more data. That means a LOT more cost to create and distribute the product.At least if it is more than a gradual improvement, say Simflyers style scenery at every airport worldwide...

For me, it was a $5 sim! $25 from Amazon then a $20 rebate from Microsoft. That is what I call value. With so many great freeware downloads to work my way through, I am the ultimate cheapskate. Apart from a 5 Euro mesh for Switzerland (where I live) I haven't added anything yet... although a handful of GA planes and Austria Professional scenery are looking tempting.

I would say that, in the first post of this thread, there is the idea that the target user for Microsoft are us, those who read fora like this in Avsim. That would be total disater for us, as instead of selling possibly more that one million worldwide, MS would sell merely no more than some tens of thousand. That would mean that MS would stop producing FS, or would put a tag price that would have exactly the same result: only a few would buy it!So, although I am not particularly fond of MS (in professional terms), I think that they have in this case the right approach: they sell a product that can be purchased by a large number of persons who see it just as one more game, and allow us, the simmers, to have a good basis to build up, with free or commercial add-ons, a marvellous hobby.Domingos

People are doing their best to add SID/STAR data should this data be full and complete and part of the FS package?I love comments like this from people who act like the out of the box FS is somehow dumbed down or missing things. not meaning to pick on the originator of this thread, but...FS2004 out of the box, with no add-ons, will let you fly any SID and any STAR you program into the default flight planner.You have to be smart enough to be able to read a DP plate or a STAR plate and modify the flight plan.It requires the real knowledge of a pilot who knows that 50% of the time in the real world a SID or STAR will be modified by ATC. And that almost never in the real world will a pilot hear "Fly xxx SID or Fly xxx STAR".When a real pilot will hear SID or STAR mentioned is when he/she files their flight plan and talks to the FSS.If the ATC wants you to descend too fast, have the default ATC put you into a holding pattern - they are in FS for almost all the major airports.The key is to not act like a newbie with no real world knowledge. Plan your flights, don't accept default takeoff runways or default straight in ILS approaches.Fly according to the charts and the approach plates.You want a fully functional FMS - the FS9 default GPS can as much as any FMS currently available for an expensive payware aircraft. Might not look as pretty and it is a bit generic - but it has all the procedures and is frankly a lot easier to modify procedures inflight than either the PDMG or the PSS in my opinion.Guess what - modifying a flight plan in the air is what you will have to do if you fly in the real world.The biggest complaint on the forums about FS from people with these aircraft is that upon arrival FS will not let them use the preplanned runway.Guess what, neither will real world controllers if the weather changes - even VATSIM won't let you fly against the pattern because that's what you have programmed into the FMS.Learn to USE the equipment and the program. Don't just ride along.FS can operate in two modes - novice and experienced.Which are you using?What FS cannot do, and will never be able to do, is maintain an updated world - with either scenery or navaids or airport layouts. That's what much of the cost for new versions pays for - the updates to the exisiting data. We all know how much the real avaition world changes between versions of FS.EDIT - also want to add something:STAR in the US stands for Standard Terminal Arrivals - and normally involves a standardized routing for the portion of the flight from 350-400 miles from the destination airport to about 60-80 miles from the destination airport. The STAR for KDFW if traveling from KATL starts at Meridian Mississippi (KMEI).In Europe, a similar STAR for EGLL would start in Germany. Each nation has different controllers and procedures. In Europe what is often called a STAR corresponds to the US "Initial Approach Procedures".Read some very good notes by jvile01 - who has been writing new procedures for approaches for over a year in the thread "ILS Transitions" on this forum.

Only $2000? I wished. By the time you do all the hardware upgrades plus the software add-ons, try $5000 or more. I would have no other reason to upgrade, Microsoft word and the internet run fine on the old machine and so does the $50 default program with no upgrades.

My take on it is from a personal perspective. When I first got FS2002 I WAS overwhelmed by what was inside this package. I knew nothing about aviation, other than being a passenger, and was intrigued, amazed, and surprised by all the differnet aircraft, their history, the lessons, and the look of the sim. To me this was such a bargain at $50. Surely if they had added all the bells and whistles we talk about as if any beginner should know, that might have scared me off to go further into the hobby back then. I didn't even know there were other 'simmers' or sites out there until 6 months of just playing with the default setup. And I believe there are 10's of thousands who get started this way. I think MS got a pretty good take of what to add and improve with each version... heck they've only have had 25 years of practice.$50 sim... $5000 hobby... Priceless enjoyment!

Well said. Most of us indeed started out like you did. Some of us tend to forget and start to think like everyone at any point in time will be an expert and require total realism (forgetting that even the addons they're using can never bring them that, but then they're only make-belief pilots who will never fly a real jetliner or they'd likely be totally lost and complain to Boeing for not being realistic enough).

I've spent $0 dollars on FS2004. The MS part was a gift from a friend. My one payware plane, a helicopter from TheLZ was also a gift. My computer hasn't had an upgrade since, well before I had FS2004. I have tons of freeware scenery. TONS of freeware planes, repaints. Probably 25-30 gigs worth, if I were to guess.One of these months I'll get a good vid card for my new computer, and I'll enjoy the extra visuals.Maybe in 6 months I'll splurge and get 3 payware planes...I'm thinking maybe a Cheyenne400LS or a B200, RPF-747-200, and maybe one of them 737's from PMDG...possibly a Concorde. And if the mood strikes me, I may buy a payware Kai Tak....but other than that, I really don't see a huge need for me to spend big bucks. I know that might not be a popular or even common sentiment here, but I bet I represent at least 80% of Microsoft's FS customers (well other than being lucky that it was bought as a present...then again, with the Xmas sales, maybe I'm more representative than first thought!)

If MS provided a totally complete game, it would cost much much more. Add ons leave the choice to the user what he wants more. Add ons leave the door open to competion. MS provides just the basic and anyone can use it as he whishes, using it 1 hour per month or 3 hours per day. One can fly with general aviationand look at the scenery, another can traine with the biggies without bothering about sceneries.I am happy the way things are.Roger :-)

>It requires the real knowledge of a pilot who knows that 50% of the time in the real world a SID or STAR will be modified by ATC. And that almost never in the real world will a pilot hear "Fly xxx SID or Fly xxx STAR".When a real pilot will hear SID or STAR mentioned is when he/she files their flight plan and talks to the FSS.If the ATC wants you to descend too fast, have the default ATC put you into a holding pattern - they are in FS for almost all the major airports.The key is to not act like a newbie with no real world knowledge. Plan your flights, don't accept default takeoff runways or default straight in ILS approaches.

You are expected to fly the procedure BUT ATC can at any time override the procedure and tell you to do differently.During slow hours you'll often hear controllers tell pilots "direct XXX" where XXX is the endpoint of their SID.yes, you've always pushed for Microsoft to turn the game into your personal fullmotion sim.Get over it. Not only is it getting old but it's not going to happen, and certainly not for the price this game costs.FS DOES include procedures now. Maybe not the full set and maybe not all the real names but they're there. I'd not be surprised if these are pretty much what a GNS500 would include (as it's meant for non-airliners which typically would have only a limited subset of SIDs and STARs available to them.And you may get your wish and VORs/ADFs removed in the future. Many countries are starting to dismantle them. Officially it's because they're not used anymore (yeah right) now that everyone uses GPS anyway, but in reality it's simple cost cutting.

I don't think anyone is suggesting MS shouldn't continue improving and adding features to FS. However, it seems to me that the message contained in your post here isn't simply an "innocent" request that MS add this or that feature or fix some specific issue you've found with the sim. The impression I got from your post was that you were taking to task anyone who might choose to cut MS a bit of slack by pointing out that the product is at heart a piece of PC entertainment software rather than a professional training aid for r/w pilots or something. There is really an almost limitless list of things we could want added to the sim. But our desires have to be balanced by reason and an appreciation of the fact that the sim is never going to be perfect, and it's never likely to be aimed directly at the "hardcore" market that we represent. We all know there are some issues with the sim, but I'd wager that while they are important issues to us, they are likely not even recognized as issues by the vast majority of FS users. When I mention the fact that "it's a $50 PC game", I don't mean to imply that that lets MS off the hook for anything that might be wrong with it. Instead, all I'm suggesting by that fact is that when I look at FS ootb ("out of the box") and compare it to other games and simulations I've purchased over the years (many of which were more expensive than FS9), I feel I've gotten more than my money's worth. Have I bought add-ons to make it even better? Sure. But I can't be overly critical of what MS has produced since I find it to be better than most anything else out there even in it's current "flawed" and "feature-limited" state.