It still begs the question about why DTG did not simply take their FSX-SE product, convert it to 64 bit and DX11, and release it as FSW.

The changes they have made by removing options from FSX,  adding a Mission Workshop, and changing the interface to a game-like interface, have yet to get a positive response from the audience..

Every time I start a flight, and get told that I will not get credit because I do not have a destination airport defined, I cringe again..

Edited May 23, 20179 yr by Bert Pieke

1 minute ago, Bert Pieke said:

It still begs the question about why DTG did not simply take their FSX-SE product, convert it to 64 bit and DX11, and release it as FSW.

The changes they have made by removing options from FSX,  adding a Mission Workshop, and changing the interface to a game-like interface, have yet to get a positive response from the audience..

Conversion to 64-bit is one thing, generally requiring a recompile and breaking compatibility with many add-ons but not necessarily taking an excessive amount of development resources in terms of man-hours.  Re-writing the rendering engine to support a newer API is an entirely different matter.  

As for the "removal of features", this is not a finished product.  As such it is premature to state that the final product will not have a given feature.  DTG have stated that many features which have been written in code have not yet been enabled.  That clearly tells us there is more to come, and there is a plan to roll out these features (likely in phases).

(likely in phases).

In Train Sim that's called DLC... LOL

9 hours ago, glenecho3 said:

All of a sudden now we're playing dumb to VAS and OOMs. OK. You're right. FSX is perfect in every way.

All 64bit means is more memory is addressed. So less chance of an oom. That is until developers produce more complex scenery of course and everyone ends up complaining that 64bit is not enough and demands 128bit!

10 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

It still begs the question about why DTG did not simply take their FSX-SE product, convert it to 64 bit and DX11, and release it as FSW.

Unless you're being facetious, I just don't get that question...do you really think "everything" would be working if they just converted it to 64bit and enabled DX11?  I would suspect MS would have grounds for a lawsuit had this been the case.  Additionally, I would say that because the Microsoft name is no longer in the title or EULA, the interface itself had to change in very significant ways as to not resemble the old - you know MS is an old pro at this game...wink, wink.  Nevertheless, I expect most of the functionality to return and useless functions will vaporize as FSW gets enhanced.  Until this is proven wrong, it appears that DTG is doing the due diligence required and taking baby steps in order to not get the cart before the horse and for this I applaud them.  So, no, I have never begged for that question because it isn't realistic.

Uh... no... Microsoft couldn't sue DTG for releasing FSX under a new name.  They sold FSX to DTG.  Microsoft no longer holds any legal standing with regards to derivative works.

On the face of it that assertion seems to contradict this statement from DTG:

 

Missed the 'derivative works' part did we??

This latest about the naming convention for the simulator is really a semantic debate.  Microsoft owns the rights to the name "Flight Simulator X".  That's why even DTG's variant, the Steam Edition, still features Microsoft prominently in the branding.  Any subsequent flight sim to be released by DTG, regardless of its use or modification of the FSX engine, will doubtless NOT feature the name "Flight Simulator X".  We don't even have to speculate about this as they've already unveiled the name of said product, and it's Flight Sim World.  

DTG clearly has purchased the rights to both use the FSX engine, and sell commercial flight simulation products based on this code.  

23 minutes ago, WarpD said:

Uh... no... Microsoft couldn't sue DTG for releasing FSX under a new name.  They sold FSX to DTG.  Microsoft no longer holds any legal standing with regards to derivative works.

Irregardless, I would not want my version to be a "MS FS look and feel" 'interface' derivative.

"...I would suspect MS would have grounds for a lawsuit had this been the case.  Additionally, I would say that because the Microsoft name is no longer in the title or EULA, the interface itself had to change in very significant ways as to not resemble the old..."

Anyway, I was responding to Bert's comments but injected my profound legal ignorance to the subject matter, so I stand corrected on that.

12 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

It still begs the question about why DTG did not simply take their FSX-SE product, convert it to 64 bit and DX11, and release it as FSW.

The changes they have made by removing options from FSX,  adding a Mission Workshop, and changing the interface to a game-like interface, have yet to get a positive response from the audience..

Every time I start a flight, and get told that I will not get credit because I do not have a destination airport defined, I cringe again..

For free or as a new product?

They need to make money so free is out of the question. If they charged for it, most of the community would have been enraged, just like they already are. Also, everyone would complain that the billions of addons are broken.

You should watch the grumpy old men video explaining the programming difficulties involved here. They're starting small for good reason. It's not like "poof, done." 

21 minutes ago, carbonbasedlifeform said:

For free or as a new product?

 

As a new product

Just like Microsoft used to launch a new version of FS every few years.

13 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

Every time I start a flight, and get told that I will not get credit because I do not have a destination airport defined, I cringe again..

 

Bert - not sure why no one has answered you yet but... after typing in your departure airport just left click and hold on the map to move it around and use the mouse scroll wheel to zoom out.  Find your destination and left click and then right click.

You can just right click on the chosen departure if you want and click OK on the 'you must land at an airport' message.  It still gives me credit so long as I land where I tell it Im landing.  Im not crazy about not getting credit for landing elsewhere but it is what it is and I also tend to think its good to not be able to change aircraft or weather in mid flight.  One can also just cancel the flight and start over.

18 minutes ago, sightseer said:

Im not crazy about not getting credit for landing elsewhere but it is what it is and I also tend to think its good to not be able to change aircraft or weather in mid flight.  One can also just cancel the flight and start over.

I think it's reasonable not to allow changing aircraft mid-flight. XP doesn't allow this either, mainly because it would put you in an untenable position regarding airspeed and altitude if the change is too drastic. For example, changing from an airliner to a Cessna 172 at the jet's airspeed, or vice versa regarding stall speeds.

Changing weather mid-flight is critical though. Unless you're hardcore enough to divert to a different airport when real weather closes in on a VFR flight, you need a way to lift the cloud base and change the visibility while in flight. I'm assuming this feature just isn't in yet, because it would be crazy not to allow it.