>Consider this: Do the best and brightest, with the most>ambition, do they want to work for Bill Gates or do they want>to BE the next Bill Gates? Those are the kind that can take a>sim to a level where you might just want to fly the default>planes. The void would be filled a LOT sooner than you thinkI doubt it! In today's world, it takes money to make money, when you want your productions to be very high end. As much ambition as there was with the FLY series, the dollars and "time" just wern't there to keep it up to expectations, let alone the early loss of Mr. Harvey. You really must know, that FLYII went "downhill" in most respects from it's previous versions.X-Plane is rather a mess at the moment, because "one" programmer with limited help, can't keep up. It has little 3rd party support because of too many changes between compatible versions, and not enough user base to support advanced 3rd party payware. Improved 3D cockpits and working scenery enhancements are still in future "dreams" for many X-Planers.Sorry, but in a realistic world, the best and brightest writers will seldom come up with multi-million dollar backing for flight simulation. Hoping for the demise of the MSFS simulation series to provide a slow jump start for other programmers is just a selfish dream.L.Adamson

Hello All, When Microsoft trashes the PC version of FS for jut Xbox, then I'll continue flying the last PC version they created. Plain and simple. And I do believe there are a whold bunch of 'hard core' simmers, who like me, desire to modify the simulation with scenery, aircraft and such, that will NOT adjust to XBox's no adjustability or acess to file information.If FS never changes from what it is right now, I could live with FS9/2004 for the rest of my days, for as we know, computer tech is growing daily, FPS will get better and new programs will be written --2004 will just get better and better.Personally, I don't believe MS will quit making FS for the PC, not for a very long time . . . however, that is just my 'not so humble ' opinion, your mileage may vary.Best,Clay http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...ers/Dopke01.jpgClayton T. Dopke (Clay)Major, USAF (retired)"Drac"

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!The simple fact is that in the earliest days products by Sublogic were superior. Their entire staff could fit on a single school bus. No, I am not saying old sims would be written again at the level they were. A niche would be opened in the, as I clearly stated, unlikely event that Microsoft does retreat from the PC flight sim market and it would seem like a good idea for a major new effort with hopes of return. Yes, even the guys and gals at Sublogic made their living off the sim. A good look at Burt Rutan and others will reveal that the most dramatic innovations most often do NOT come from companies with the inertia of a multibillion dollar corporation. Dynamic weather, working weather radar, interactive ATC, all that stuff is nice, but Sublogic had it in the eighties. But I do see hope in the new X box, not as a replacement to flight sims on a PC but a major enhancement, which will open up new possibilities due to its ability to be ported to any PC with Windows XP.By the way, DLL files have been developed that can make the instruments in FLY 2 planes functional in 3/4 views, it's just a matter of applying them.Best Regards, Donny:-wave

Many of the best and brightest already work for Microsoft so what's your point?And those that don't are way too smart to go and write a GAME.Games may sound like fun to write but it's a highly competitive business with miniscule margins, a very high failure rate, and extremely high work pressure.The really bright ones work for stock brokers, that's where the real money is made.

LOL LOL LOL.Get over it kid, the team today isn't large because they like the company. It's large because if it weren't they'd never get the product done given the massive scale it has today.Sure FS1 was written by one or two guys in an attic, but the product was so much smaller they could do that.If you'd be content to have line drawings for scenery and no outside views in 3D with animations and 32bit colour, no weather etc. etc. than maybe you could do it today.In fact I've a book containing the code to such a sim, needs only porting to Windows.But I'll just write your delusions off to inexperience in the real world and overexposure to Microsoft hate propaganda and not conclude there's something wrong with your brain that can't be fixed by a decent reality check.

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!I won't bother trolling for the actual quotes, but it has been stated clearlyThe best part of MSFS is the addonsSome of those addons are so complex they are actually miniprograms running in MSFSMost of these addons are developed by corporations much smaller relatively than MicrosoftWhere is the disagreement here?Best Regards, Donny:-wave

I'm on par with you P

>>Donny AKA Shalomar>Fly 2 ROCKS!!!>>I won't bother trolling for the actual quotes, but it has been>stated clearly>>The best part of MSFS is the addons>>Some of those addons are so complex they are actually>miniprograms running in MSFS>>Most of these addons are developed by corporations much>smaller relatively than Microsoft>>Where is the disagreement here?>Ever wonder, why so many are always trying to import MSFS scenery, topography, and airport data-bases to FLY and X-Plane?MSFS is much better right out of the box, than the competition. It can also easily be enhanced with 3rd party additions.Why start over?L.Adamson

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!I never suggested starting over. The very suggestion that Microsoft would pull out of PC flight sims I did not advance and do not think is likely. But it is a sound fact of economics that less competition=less innovation. You and your friends are absolutely right, it does not make sense to pour a lot of capital into a new shell considering the expected return. Hence the 1/2 of one sentence that you initially responded to. IMO, it might actually be good for progress... The quality and, in some cases, DECREASING price in MSFS addons is due to competition. Which admittedly the shell itself does not have much of. Though the price is very steady if you wait a while after a new release to upgrade. But I am in this thread because I am very intrigued with the possibilities presented by X box ported to a computer. No loss of your peripherals, addons, whatever. Some people might be upset that they wasted thousands of dollars on a system mostly geared to simming. But who then is being selfish? I use FLY 2 cuz it gives me value for the money, planes that get from point A to point B with real pilot inputs. As you pointed out, many of the flight models are by the great Rob Young. Most of the planes have sophistication of avionics I deem acceptable for general aviation, and I do have a PMDG 777. There is continuing innovation, ROTW is soon to release an ATR 42. But I see real value for the money in the X box concept. I have FS9, haven't used it since February but I do have it. FLY 2 does what is important to me, I enjoy the default planes but most of what ROTW puts out is far superior. Their 3/4 views have functioning instruments. Just the way cockpits are presented has more potential if you're not a VC guy. Not everyone who flies Microsoft is. I enjoy Maria Noriega's Avanti for FS9 better than Robert Vigetti's for FLY 2. I'm not totally biased. There ARE some things about the shell I don't like, but it's entirely possible it's what I'm used to.There seems to be serious potential in X box ported to a computer. It seems to me a quantam leap for simming. If you read carefully, I have been consistently one of the most positive towards Microsoft in this particular thread. For the record, I am a LOT more interested in converting "Ultimate terrain" than default FS9 scenery. IF I bother, I like to fly in 200 foot ceilings 1/2 mile vis very often. Dangerous and even maybe illegal at the airports I go to, but it's just electrons dancing across a screen.Totally forgot to mention it this mornig, but at leat the main panel CAN easily be converted to higher than 1024X768. The overhead and throttle quadrants would be harder, but it's doable.Wouldn't it be ironic if I do switch to FSX and you switch to X plane...Best Regards, Donny:-wave

>Wouldn't it be ironic if I do switch to FSX and you switch to>X plane...>I already own X-Plane, and the most stunning screenshots I ever produced were from FLYII and the 3rd party SoCal scenery at higher altitudes. But these were all lost with a HD crash; unless I actually find them on a burned CD somewhere.However, at the moment, MSFS with it's mesh scenery addon's for the KSLC area, combined with a few 3rd party airplanes; re-creates my actual mountain flying experiences of flying out of Skypark (BTF) and heading up over the canyon summit slightly under the veil of KSLC's Class B airspace with more realism than any other sim out there. For me, that's what counts I guess. When flying low agl altitudes between peaks, auto-gen and clear crisp textures make a whopping difference.Before that, the original FLY and many areas of TerraScene were a lot of fun. Those were the days when a lot of FLY freeware from many sources was be pushed to it's limits. X-Plane still has great looking glossy mountain photo-textures though. But they are limited, and repeat alot.L.Adamson

There is tons and tons of people that want to make games because it

>As we all know you can

As an add-on maker my hope is this: IF they were to make an FS version for the console(s), then I would hope it would be a launch point for those users to by a PC and get the full/real version of FS thus capturing more of the market.I wouldn't discount the console just yet because it may just help us all out in the long run. Remember, the PC version isn't going away but will get better.As it stands now the people who buy add-ons probably only make up about 1% (my guess) of the actual sales of FS for the PC.One of my goals has always been to try and get back those casual/weekend (.5-1 hour on Sunday) flyers and reel them back in and get them more involved in the actual product itself in order for them to make more of a hobby with it.I know the FS team are going to be looking to break a few molds with the next PC version to try and keep people more interested while also upping the stakes in terms of graphics, fluidity and functionality, etc.I think the next version of FS is going to be the real head turner. That's just my hunch...I'll stop there...LOL.

Yep FS should just be for the PC elite and its totaly uneccesary for MS to release an FS version for a game console that is probably going to cost about what we tend to spend on a good graphics card. Or is it?- X-box hardware seems capable enough to run a very good FS. Beter still the hardware can be used for the best performance with no worries about compatability- Even the current X-box has more then enough special controllers. So why wouldn't there be a special controller. There is already a HOTAS set for the Playstation 2 so why wouldn't Flight Simulator 360 get a special yoke. - But what about the add-ons? Wel X-box 360 comes with net connectivity build in. Commercial add-ons could be released via the Microsoft network. The add-ons could be protected with build in DRM so for the add-on makers this could be much beter. No piracy to worry about.The only problem with this scenario is the freeware add-ons user tweaking. I would mis it nut when I get an FS360 that runs on relatively cheap hardware, has the best visuals ever, and I can buy everything I want via my X-box online account I would be very happy indeed.

How the #### do you know that??? To say you "can't" simulate a DF727 etc on an XBOX 360 is ludicrous!If anything the XBOX 360 will be far more capable of simulating a complex airliner than any PC currently in existence.James