hehe....I think, we haven't seen nothin' yet on the FS front in general :-) I'm sure like with everything there will be trade offs, but I think we're going to see a lot more of what we all want pretty soon.

>Hereis a page from their web site. Without actually showing>add-on products, I think this is a comprehensive list of web>sites to learn more about what one can do with MSFS. I think>most people are just not that interested in doing anything>except flying the product in it's natural state. >>http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulator/community.aspIf I may, I would like to mention how many hours it takes to "play" with this hobby. I'm pretty new to MS flight sim, as well as the file structure of the game. Also, it can be very intimidating with as much addon stuff as there is out there.Here's an example. I'm pretty computer literate. I come from the first person shooter section of the crowd (and still do fps) and can tweak a unit with the best of them. It's part of the hobby. Get into the machine and make it sing.Now, yesterday, I decide to see if I can find a fairly decent 767-300 to download and fly around, cause that's what my wife and I are flying out on for vacation next may. Be pretty cool to sit in the left seat of this bird and see what it's all about. Well, I found a nice one (or two or three, I'm not sure) over on the POSKY site, and decided to check it out. After around 5 hours or so researching the forums, digging around the site and trying to get all the info on files to download and what not, I gave up. Well, not really gave up, but ended up finally putting something together that I think is what I need but not real sure but it flies and hey...it's free. Now, I'm not bashing POSKY, this is not a unique situation. From what I understand, they make some great freeware addons. It just happpens to be the most recent site I've been to where tryng to download a plane with a panel and sounds is more like a treasure hunt than a controlled sequence of events. There is nothing on their site that says if you want the (insert plane here) than do this...Step one...Step two...Step three...Add this and that to this folder in this file and your done wa la go fly. There are no clear instructions. It's a crap shoot on what is out there and what works with what plane/engine type/sound/panel/texture etc... and now I'm bald. There are forums that just end abrubtly with no further help. It may have been a bit much for this newbie. But, this is typical. Anyhow, what I was trying to relay is that this hobby can be very frustrating at times. If a person isn't really determined, they will stick with the default, or just drop it and go fly BF2 or something.I would like to add that I purchased the Flight1 ATR72-500 and am having a wonderful time with it. My flight desk looks like a tornado hit it with the manual/charts laying out all over the place. Here's the kicker. Purchasing this addon actually gave me a better understanding on reading charts/stars/sids/ and enroute procedures. Best investment I ever made concerning my MS sim experience. The only downfall, and I don't mean this in a negative way, was the price. Not for me, but for the simmers who could really benefit from a product such as this if they could afford it. It's amazing what a diffence this product has made to my experience.Anyway, sorry to be so lenthy. I just think if some of this stuff was made easier to understand, with better step by step examples, starting slow and working up, that more would persue it. Just my .02.

Flaps,I think the reason why freeware is not as structured (in some cases), is that in this 'online market' whether freeware or payware, the audience is for the most part already well versed in the inner workings of the sim.I also think that the newcomers to the online arena are also wanting to learn thus making the 'hunt' part of the overall adventure.In the payware side of the house we try as much as possible to make the solution happen with as little 'mouse clicks' as possible in order to get the user running as fast as possible. It's a work in progress.The freeware side of the house doesn't always have the money to spend on those tools in order to make their solution easier to use, then you also have to conetend with the sim itself. In the past and still currently it's not real easy for anyone (freeware or payware), to make a product that can easily fit into the sim without writing all kinds of fancy code. We hope this will substantially change in the future for both freeware and payware.I also think that in the future for both freeware and payware, we're going to get those 2-3 hour per week simmers back into the market spending more time in these online forums and such, and the overall industry will be much easier for 'anyone' to not only get involved, but stay involved and enjoy much more in freeware and payware add-ons that are much easier to integrate into the sim.This is where I think we could be headed.

>Really? Well, I guess after 20 years we'll finally see some>impressive flight modeling (please MS, fix that rudder>authority problem) and some fleshed out systems modeling>(there's more to electrical systems than a battery and a>generator switch). I for one hope you're right, but my money>is on MS's FS history...as was mentioned earlier, they cater>to the masses, not the simulator addicts. I don't expect much>except more of the same 'improvements'; prettier eye candy,>better ATC, and smarter AI. All good stuff to be sure but not>what is necessary to turn this into a competent simulator and>not merely just a fun game.Personally, I hope MS keeps this as fun game and resists the (minor) pressure to turn it into a 'simulator'. Most of the supposedly competent desktop 'simulators' I know are not fun. Neither are many of the other simulators I know.The current flight modelling seems ok for many 'aircraft' by all informed reports. (Interesting that the generic, default 744 is similar in many respects to the specialised PS 1.3 and PMDG variants. Interesting also that the 'high-end' add-in aircraft are so well received, including endorsement from the manufacturers of the real thing.) If you hold grudges about 20 years ago, maybe you should attempt time travel - and then, having succeeded in that, do better by the standards of what's around in 1985.Systems modelling can be a costly bore. Actully, there's not that much more to a basic electrical system from a pilot's perspective than a battery and generator. I would not mind a few simplified switches about APU, and main electrics, pneumatics and hydraulics. But I can live without the tedium of the real thing.The 'masses' keep MSFS going, so it is churlish to mock them. There are plenty of other products on the market that cater for simulator addicts. In my view, MSFS provides the best overall experience for a desktop PC. Some of the reputable add-in developers add to that.Michael

I happen to think that we are capable now of having it both ways, tailored to any level of user.We need to be going a little further 'out of the box' so to speak in our thinking.Keep up the great comments and ideas. :-)

Tend to agree. Airliner simulations - for example - can end up being a bit boring once one has got the general hang of it, despite the enormous and excellent efforts put in by the developers. For airliners, I quite like the idea of scenario products now. Some developers are moving that way, thankfully. 767 PIC was ahead of the field for FS 2000 in my view.Michael

Yes, there also needs to be something to do, more to see, maybe something to earn in different areas, a more immersive environment while maintaining the realism (as much as the user wants), you get the picture.

Do some training scenarios - or computer assessed flights - for a pretend airliner like the PMDG 747-400, and you've got at least one sale!Easier to say than do, I suppose (unfortunately).Michael

>Flaps,>>I think the reason why freeware is not as structured (in some>cases), is that in this 'online market' whether freeware or>payware, the audience is for the most part already well versed>in the inner workings of the sim.>>I also think that the newcomers to the online arena are also>wanting to learn thus making the 'hunt' part of the overall>adventure.>>In the payware side of the house we try as much as possible to>make the solution happen with as little 'mouse clicks' as>possible in order to get the user running as fast as possible.> It's a work in progress.>>The freeware side of the house doesn't always have the money>to spend on those tools in order to make their solution easier>to use, then you also have to conetend with the sim itself. >In the past and still currently it's not real easy for anyone>(freeware or payware), to make a product that can easily fit>into the sim without writing all kinds of fancy code. >>We hope this will substantially change in the future for both>freeware and payware.>>I also think that in the future for both freeware and payware,>we're going to get those 2-3 hour per week simmers back into>the market spending more time in these online forums and such,>and the overall industry will be much easier for 'anyone' to>not only get involved, but stay involved and enjoy much more>in freeware and payware add-ons that are much easier to>integrate into the sim.>>This is where I think we could be headed.Jeff, thanks for the synopsis. I really do kinda understand the challenges of putting all this "stuff" together. Not to mention the cost. I find it very honorable for freeware designers to put their art on the web for all. I'm sure it's very complicated. After some thought, what I found myself saying was very similar to what I have heard myself. That is, when I try to tell someone something technical, I tend to forget that they may not fully understand the bacics, and I may be somewhat way over their head. An eye opener for me. Thus my newbie brain and the desire to learn may lead me back to some basic fs9 learning first. I tend to get in a hurry sometimes. Might be my age and that live long enough to do it thing :) j/kThanks for the perspective, it's always welcome.

No problem, but I think you missed my point. That's good for you though.We as developers are going to have to continue to simplify things even more if we want to keep the 'masses' interested. As a developer those are the ones that we are loosing out on. Those numbers probably range in the hundreds of thousands. I think that we actually only have an audience of about 100K that would potentially buy any payware add-on. Only a small fraction of those will buy any particular scenery. A bigger fraction will buy an aircraft. I might be wrong here, but I think I'm close. Freeware is completely different.The hard core simmers will be here no matter what happens. A few, and only a few, will see the current state as somewhat of a challenge and choose to remain dedicated.In any case, the natural progression, as I see it, is for FS to go more towards what everyone's used to in the 'gaming' market, in terms of ease of use (I use that term in the general sense), thus possibly making things a bit easier for more people to remain involved in the sim.I guess what I'm saying is that, if the sim follows the natural progression, which we really haven't for quite some time, if ever, then FS in general is really going evolve by leaps and bounds this time around. This should make things a lot easier for all of us.

Yeah, this would be cool.I downloaded one of the dangerous airports and approaches packs and was amazed at how much harder it was to land with a strong cross wind in the rain with fog and zero vis. I'm still doing these things. I crashed so much I put a shrimp boat in to rescue me. Didn't look good though in Des Moines. Great fun. Would be nice to see more stuff like this.ps: kidding about the shrimp boat. I would if I could though.

>Really? Well, I guess after 20 years we'll finally see some>impressive flight modeling (please MS, fix that rudder>authority problem) Some third party addon aircraft for MSFS, already have the best "rudder authority" in sim land. No other sim, slips as well as these, let alone aerobatic routeins. MS just needs to seperate the ground and air modeling again, so that I can gun the engine & raise the tail with a bit more finess, using the elevator.L.Adamson

LOL, see, I'm learning er or something. From my perspective, and a newbie, flight simming (fs9) is a somewhat complicated, but fun, thing to do. Now, for MS to make it easier on the programing side of things, in all honesty, matters only a little to me. Only in the fact I may get a cheaper price for a quality product. I'm an end user. To be able to download a plane, freeware or payware, and be able to install and fly, is all I care about. Now, with that being said, I fully understand that freeware will always be more to deal with due to resources and such. Payware, from my first, and hopefully future downloads, will always be as pleasent. I'm a realist and understand the process. But for payware addon products to succeed well and appeal to the masses they need four things. Ease of use, great prices, realistic, and volume sales. Unfortunatley, ease of use is already built in to the base product. This leads to a whole seperate sub set of product sales consisting of cool neat addon planes/adventures that would appeal to simmers who want easy cool planes to fly (dirt cheap)that are different from the base fs package. That leaves the other three for the rest of the sim community. Addon products must be easy and appeal to the masses for cheap...and use that to help fund and keep cheap the more complicated aspect of the addon. There almost needs to be a seperate company which does almost nothing but cater to the masses, and thus provide good quality well priced payware to the hard core simmer as well. And, to increase sales of the good quality (real) stuff, provide easy to use subtle training techniques which includes some training aids or something. Fs9 actually does a very good job of this. Thus, the good sales figures. An addon company would have to do something similar, and different (for the hardcore) market.Dang. Does that make sense?

Yeah, sure...lol.

>Yes, there also needs to be something to do, more to see,>maybe something to earn in different areas, a more immersive>environment while maintaining the realism (as much as the user>wants), you get the picture.GeoffWith all the more automated the aircraft become the more boring. Once the route is programmed LNAV and VNAV engaged there is little to do but let the aircraft do its thing.If that means for three or four hours then thats a big yawn.Real flight generates a fear element. That fear element on the whole revolves around weather, icing turbulence.That fear element also involves overload of the pilot when things go wrong, or events happen too quick where the pilot starts to get behind the aircraft.WEATHER is still an area where they can be major advancements in FS. In my opinion it is an area which is still poorly done.Not in the visuals so much but more in the structure.We need to have a more dynamic weather with proper pressure systems and fronts developing the correct airmovements clouds and conditions.Turbulence, icing, cloud cover and density all need to be far better modelled.With better weather we will start to add that element of uncertainty adrenaline and fear.I keep harping back to FU3 which was a very immersive programme in its time with an excellent weather engine and very challenging adventures.If FU3 was all structure MSFS was all glitter. MSFS still needs to add the structure in various areas of the sim to really make it have that immersive element which can be lackingPeter