Imagine Microsoft releasing an inexpensive VR headset for MFS?

10 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

Lol... it is all about money & how to monetize their 63 million Xbox users.. 

Read my post again, i said its MORE about passion RATHER than just balance sheets....i never claimed they are a charity

13 minutes ago, dmiannay said:

They had a Microsoft Sidewinder Force Feedback 2 joystick and it was excellent.

I have three of the MSFF 2 joysticks.  The power cord connector in the stick broke off inside so contacted MS and they sent one for a replacement (new model) no charge.  Then a few days later MS sent another one. Contacted MS support and said keep it, it's being discontinued. That is what I use since.  Built like a rock!

3 minutes ago, Woozie said:

Read my post again, i said its MORE about passion RATHER than just balance sheets....i never claimed they are a charity

Ok, I'll rephrase it then..

Lol... it is MORE about money & how to monetize their 63 million Xbox users.. 

They are not a charity & are responsible more to their board, than to us simmers, that is why Microsoft is a $1 trillion company.

Is there a list anywhere of which developers have said anything about the new sim? So far I think we know that pmdg and orbx definitely weren’t, and that Aerosoft probably were, but what about everyone else. I just noticed there’s no comment either way on the a2a forum, and they are trying to recruit extra programmers and PBR experts at the moment....

Edited June 21, 20196 yr by Superdelphinus

45 minutes ago, Wobbie said:

Ok, I'll rephrase it then..

Lol... it is MORE about money & how to monetize their 63 million Xbox users.. 

They are not a charity & are responsible more to their board, than to us simmers, that is why Microsoft is a $1 trillion company.

To be skeptical and cynical is certainly justified, but lets face it, only a trillion $ company can create a truly great flight sim. 

X-Plane is still a cottage industry product which still hasn't got mass appeal.

Lockheed Martin have done some great things, but it is still just a dressed up version of FSX as far as I'm concerned. To me it seems like LM has put limited resources into the P3D devlopment and are satisfied with the ESP engine for their needs. 

Aerofly FS 2 is also a cottage industry product. Great at what it does, but it's a "dead world" with limited functionality. 

So all I can say is, welcome back Microsoft! 

8 hours ago, Jim Young said:

When FSX was first released, AVSIM was the main site watched by the Microsoft Aces team members.  They posted here a lot and also mentioned topics and posts in the lead developers web page.  But it does not mean it will continue.

And we all know how that ended... Lets hope things go better this time around. Seems like Microsoft will have their own forum over at the FSI-pages, so they can avoid the trolling. 

Wow. i'm buzzing! Cant wait for this to go live!

16 minutes ago, simmerhead said:

To be skeptical and cynical is certainly justified, but lets face it, only a trillion $ company can create a truly great flight sim. 

Like with Lockheed Martin, a $100B company, it is safe to assume that MS will not put all it's net worth into their flight sim. 

It's also safe to assume that companies and their staff whose sole product is a flight simulation show more dedication to their product, are more agile in development, are more responsive to customers and have less overhead. They do not have the stamina to survive severe setbacks, but large companies on the other hand often lack the will in these circumstances (FSX, Flight, Edge - and hopefully not Bing because then MSFS will be toast).

But if the will exists (over time), MS can certainly make a great product, the potential definitely exists.

16 minutes ago, simmerhead said:

So all I can say is, welcome back Microsoft! 

I second this.

Someone on the team is tuned-in to the community enough to have made a specific point about distinguishing the word 'simulator'.  That was a positive sign, right there.

Edited June 21, 20196 yr by ErichB

16 minutes ago, dilore said:

Like with Lockheed Martin, a $100B company, it is safe to assume that MS will not put all it's net worth into their flight sim. 

It's also safe to assume that companies and their staff whose sole product is a flight simulation show more dedication to their product, are more agile in development, are more responsive to customers and have less overhead. They do not have the stamina to survive severe setbacks, but large companies on the other hand often lack the will in these circumstances (FSX, Flight, Edge - and hopefully not Bing because then MSFS will be toast).

But if the will exists (over time), MS can certainly make a great product, the potential definitely exists.

Difference between LM and MS is that MS is a dedicated software company. The flight sim team over at MS can draw on massive internal resources, decades of R&D and access technology exclusive to MS. In terms of software development MS have synergies like few other company in the world.  

I don't really see how I benefit from smaller developers being more dedicated, agile or responsive as long as they don't create a product that I want or need. Yes, MS has burned us in the past, and they probably will again, but their apology sounds sincere, and here they are with the greatest looking screenshots and trailer in flight simulation history. 

6 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

And what if the aircraft can be ported over, just like porting from ESP to XP, but less effort?

I'd  feel less irksome about an aircraft being created specifically for a new sim and not having to pay full bore for an aircraft I paid for on another platform.  I'd be quite willing to ride out the development process for new things.  Be gone with port-overs.    I'd be happy to finally see the word not allowed-end of backward compatibility.

" Yes. We are supporting 3rd Party Content Development and Community Content creation. We are aware of the concerns in the current eco-system and are working to address them "

I still wish MS would impose a very strict rules on 3rd party products to insure good quality before releasing to the mass, I'm sick and tired of freezes, lockups and CTD caused by 3rd Party products.

8 hours ago, Greazer said:

MSFS will never eclipse XP in flight modeling. That was developed by genius Austin Meyer and has been tested, tuned and tweaked over decades. It is as real as real - something I cannot even explain to the uninitiated.

I'd agree that the default aircraft in XP11 have better flight models than the default aircraft in FSX/P3D. However, the best add-ons for FSX and P3D are equally as good as the best in XP11. The constant slight wobbling about you get in XP, which all XP fans seem to think is so realistic, doesn't happen nearly as much in the real world. Add-on developers have proven time and again that you can make excellent table-based flight models for flight sims so I'd have no problems if MS continued using this system in their new sim.

1 minute ago, penta_a said:

" Yes. We are supporting 3rd Party Content Development and Community Content creation. We are aware of the concerns in the current eco-system and are working to address them "

I still wish MS would impose a very strict rules on 3rd party products to insure good quality before releasing to the mass, I'm sick and tired of freezes, lockups and CTD caused by 3rd Party products.

It makes it quite hopeless for any party to offer support with a myriad of addons installed...