Skywatcher you do seem to have the bit between the teeth on MSFS here and other sim forums hopefully not long and Microsoft will spill the beans.

@Skywatcher

People aren't as stupid as you think.  

Hook

IMNSHO, people that feel the need to end almost every post with "lol" usually have nothing useful to say.

7 hours ago, Skywatcher said:

A "little" use of landclass and autogen. The final product will require a lot more across the entire planet.

I'm not sure how else I can explain my thoughts to people. The 1min 30 sec trailer tells you it's an immaculate, spacious, 4 bedroom, 2 bathroom home with extensive outdoor areas. You need to see the property in person. Every person here would buy the home from the description alone. Not only would they buy it but from the description are now expecting the bathroom will have a spa, his/her showers, the outdoor area will have a pool. It doesn't state that in the ad but they are now expecting it to happen.

That's how it's going with MSFS. lol

I'm one of those expecting for the best to happen.

What can I actually loose by thinking / hoping like that ?

Why would MS decide to re-enter the market, after all that happened with MS FLIGHT if they weren't sure about the possibility to offer their customers something worth the investment ? 

Have you used MS FLIGHT ? Did you enjoy it ? Did you notice the many, evident but also some subbtle differences between it and FSX / fs9 ?  I did, and really was looking fwd for it's continued development.

This being said, I only hope they can model the Moon phases correctly... That's all I expect from a flightsim!

Edited July 11, 20196 yr by jcomm

4 hours ago, jcomm said:

Why would MS decide to re-enter the market, after all that happened with MS FLIGHT if they weren't sure about the possibility to offer their customers something worth the investment ?

Flight was released during the transition period from old time gaming markets to modern gaming markets. MS tried to jump in early to benefit from the new gaming era. They got their marketing wrong as did many during that time and their product failed. How to market a game today and have it be successful is very clear cut so they are back for another attempt. First step, slap a well known badge on it.

It was interesting to see they didn't put a version designation into the title as well. It's just MSFS.

This community has really surprised me.

Edited July 11, 20196 yr by Skywatcher

1 hour ago, Skywatcher said:

This community has really surprised me.

It hasn't surprised me.  The trailer was very encouraging and gave us high expectations, but what MS has said since the trailer has been even MORE encouraging.  To me, and so it would seem to many people, it looks like MS might be on the right track with this one.  Like maybe they decided to actually pay attention to the market and to what people want in a new MSFS and chose to try and deliver it this time.  That's how it seems to me at this point at least.

It's okay if you want to be a negative Nancy, feel free to have your viewpoint too, but I completely understand why so many people are feeling super positive about the new MSFS.  It's nice to have something so promising to look forward to.

And sure, all the positivity might be unfounded and MS could deliver another failure, that's a distinct possibility.  However, based on the evidence we have so far it does not appear that way.  To be so totally negative about it at this time is to go against the evidence we have at hand thus far.  It looks promising, it sounds promising, let's keep our fingers crossed and our hopes up while we have reasons to, okay?

8 minutes ago, Mengy said:

And sure, all the positivity might be unfounded and MS could deliver another failure, that's a distinct possibility.  However, based on the evidence we have so far it does not appear that way.  To be so totally negative about it at this time is to go against the evidence we have at hand thus far.  It looks promising, it sounds promising, let's keep our fingers crossed and our hopes up while we have reasons to, okay?

That's the point, I am only going by the evidence presented so far and it's quite clear.

2 hours ago, Skywatcher said:

That's the point, I am only going by the evidence presented so far and it's quite clear.

The evidence presented so far is very ambiguous; essentially just a tech demo of the scenery engine with no information on flight model realism, weather systems, or anything else related to the simulation of aviation. Just pretty scenery, pretty skies, and pretty aircraft models. Which is why we're seeing both rainbow unicorn extrapolations from that very limited information, and your more negative take on it. 

Personally, I'm trying to stay somewhere between neutral and cautiously optimistic until we know more in August. Given the history with Flight, DTG's failed attempt, and the fact that this is a dual PC and console release, it would be very easy to slip into more skepticism. But I'm trying to retain some balance until we know more.

3 hours ago, Paraffin said:

The evidence presented so far is very ambiguous; essentially just a tech demo of the scenery engine with no information on flight model realism, weather systems, or anything else related to the simulation of aviation. Just pretty scenery, pretty skies, and pretty aircraft models. Which is why we're seeing both rainbow unicorn extrapolations from that very limited information, and your more negative take on it. 

Personally, I'm trying to stay somewhere between neutral and cautiously optimistic until we know more in August. Given the history with Flight, DTG's failed attempt, and the fact that this is a dual PC and console release, it would be very easy to slip into more skepticism. But I'm trying to retain some balance until we know more.

I would "like to think" that given the mishaps of both Flight & FSW, MS is serious about addressing many of the criticisms / concerns / requests of the market, and will produce something epic.

Of course time will tell, but I can't imagine that any Dev would sink cash into a 3rd attempt while "knowingly" stumbling down the same path as previously failed projects. Why bother, when there are several well established titles out there?

So, I can certainly understand both camps of thinking, but I am very optimistic about what MSFS will bring to the table. 

8 hours ago, Paraffin said:

The evidence presented so far is very ambiguous; essentially just a tech demo of the scenery engine with no information on flight model realism, weather systems, or anything else related to the simulation of aviation. Just pretty scenery, pretty skies, and pretty aircraft models. Which is why we're seeing both rainbow unicorn extrapolations from that very limited information, and your more negative take on it.

It's not a negative take, it's a rational assessment based on them not showing anything to confirm it will be a modern day FSX. Everything points to plane game. They had opportunity to state beyond this but didn't. At this point, I have no expectations because everything they have released, the platforms it will be on, the modern day market, key developers knowing nothing, it all screams modern day plane game. It's not a matter of being negative or positive. As I said, I don't think we will ever see the likes of a FSX again. These types of open hardcore sims are not viable in 2019 as they were in 2000-2005.

Edit: How positive would everyone be if it didn't carry the MSFS name and had something else? Everyone would be far more negative. One single piece of marketing by using a known badge and everyone is jumping with joy. Even the badge is concerning because it also creates no statement MSFS is a carry on from previous versions.

Edited July 11, 20196 yr by Skywatcher

16 hours ago, Mengy said:

It hasn't surprised me.  The trailer was very encouraging and gave us high expectations, but what MS has said since the trailer has been even MORE encouraging.  To me, and so it would seem to many people, it looks like MS might be on the right track with this one.  Like maybe they decided to actually pay attention to the market and to what people want in a new MSFS and chose to try and deliver it this time.  That's how it seems to me at this point at least.

It's okay if you want to be a negative Nancy, feel free to have your viewpoint too, but I completely understand why so many people are feeling super positive about the new MSFS.  It's nice to have something so promising to look forward to.

And sure, all the positivity might be unfounded and MS could deliver another failure, that's a distinct possibility.  However, based on the evidence we have so far it does not appear that way.  To be so totally negative about it at this time is to go against the evidence we have at hand thus far.  It looks promising, it sounds promising, let's keep our fingers crossed and our hopes up while we have reasons to, okay?

What a great post!  I remember the excitement (and waiting okay longing haha) for the release of FSX to Best Buy (where I purchased the sim).  The FSX trailer was a little tacky but this new sim looks incredible.  I'm super excited all over again!

13 hours ago, Paraffin said:

The evidence presented so far is very ambiguous; essentially just a tech demo of the scenery engine with no information on flight model realism, weather systems, or anything else related to the simulation of aviation. Just pretty scenery, pretty skies, and pretty aircraft models.

Wait what?  In the trailer I've seen clouds that look far better than any cloud in any sim at this time.  I've seen rain on windscreen (ditto previous sentence), I've seen a super cell thunderstorm off the coast (looks pretty accurate to me).  Not sure how often you flight real world, but the clouds, skies, storms, rain look basically identical to what I've seen aloft.  Sure there's no way to know exactly how the weather is generated yet, but how "pretty" something is is important to me.  It get's us once step closer to reality!  I'm quite excited for the weather in the new sim. 

8 hours ago, Skywatcher said:

It's not a negative take, it's a rational assessment based on them not showing anything to confirm it will be a modern day FSX. Everything points to plane game. They had opportunity to state beyond this but didn't. At this point, I have no expectations because everything they have released, the platforms it will be on, the modern day market, key developers knowing nothing, it all screams modern day plane game. It's not a matter of being negative or positive. As I said, I don't think we will ever see the likes of a FSX again. These types of open hardcore sims are not viable in 2019 as they were in 2000-2005.

Edit: How positive would everyone be if it didn't carry the MSFS name and had something else? Everyone would be far more negative. One single piece of marketing by using a known badge and everyone is jumping with joy. Even the badge is concerning because it also creates no statement MSFS is a carry on from previous versions.

You know whats funny? You laugh about the positive, half-glass-full-crowd because their excitement is based on zero facts, yet you claim there's enough evidence to be negative about the project? Thats some proper logic...

 

4 hours ago, Woozie said:

You know whats funny? You laugh about the positive, half-glass-full-crowd because their excitement is based on zero facts, yet you claim there's enough evidence to be negative about the project? Thats some proper logic...

 

Correct! There is clearly enough information available to make a logical, rational, assessment of the game. It doesn't mean everyone will make one.

Listening to the radio yesterday, a man was suggesting humans are not from planet Earth. His reasoning was we don't appear to suit the environment of this planet as well as animals. He thinks we came from somewhere else.

Conclusions of a situation may vary person to person. lol

Edited July 12, 20196 yr by Skywatcher

 

Ok gang, keep it civil please. I have dealt with the reported issue.

Thanks,