ActiveX

Issue resolved, it was my router,- somehow the NAT was not functioning correctly. I also got a 877 number for Windows LIVE games. Thanks for help. lk

Yes, and also I was able to login via their market place app to d/l my purchased items for MS Flight such as Hawaii Adventure and and aircraft I purchased. Also, can anyone give me e-mail to MS Windows LIVE gaming support,- everywhere I look I end up at dead end (page not found).

All, Today, I have installed Microsoft Flight. After installing, I clicked on LIVE link to login,- I was authenticated and a screen popup came saying it is downloading my profile. After waiting 20 secs or so I got an error message: The live service maybe unavailable or there maybe an issue with your home networking equipment or firewall. I have troubleshooted this problem but cant find a solution. I have forwarded all the ports required for Windows LIVE games and have turned off my firewall and AVG. Still, I receive this message. Any help would be appreciated. My System: Win7 x64

For any of you who were waiting (including me), Flight and ALL its addons are on sale: http://store.steampo....com/sub/15467/ Enjoy. lk

P.S. They released new flight model for the helis. See the updates section.

Helicopters are aero-dynmically unstable, that's why it is hard to fly them. I wrote some comments on the game here: http://forums.x-pilo...k-what-i-found/

All, I have discovered something but some of you may have tried it. Take on Helicopters: http://takeonthegame...ia/screenshots/ Has anyone tried it? There's free demo I will try today. If it is a true heli sim, heck I will buy it and play that. I think they are using same weather engine as in Arma 3, but I could be wrong which looks like it uses Simul weather engine. Any heli pilot who tried please comment on the flight model. -lk Seems avims has some coverage on this here: http://www.avsim.com...light/Helo.html P.S: Looks like the flight model is between arcade and sim.

ATI cards currently have a serious issue with X-Plane that needs to be resolved. I have 3 monitors, ATI 5870 with Triple Head 2 Go, poor frame rates. On avg, no clouds with medium settings I get 15-20 FPS. In summary, don't expect too much unless you get maybe the Nvidia which I don't have.

Looks great! What are FPS in comparison to default Cessna in XPlane?

#1 Weather, real and customizable weather.#2 This one is just my desire: At least one jet or even a larger twing engine prop.

IMHO I would at least have a poll for the aircraft of interest and aircrafts that get most votes are the ones I would work on.Definitely not interested in this new bird,- give me something more current that's used in the real world today for a purpose.

Where's that setting exactly? Are you refering to view setting slider underneath CAT, HAVOC, etc.?The visibility of the horizon should be fixed but for now it means one of 2 things:1. Clouds are moving in2. The earth is flat.-lk

Sad, how come real and customizable weather is not on there, that's number 1 priority in my honest opinion.-lk

Do the clouds actually move in Flight? I haven't observed this but I see it in the video.

No way about MS Flight. Actually, I think it is a great oportunity for some 3rd party developers to get together and come with something. Heck, if my software skills where in computer gaming I would team up with my others and put something together, unfortunately I do e-Commerce and Accounting.Remember, Austin created X-plane up to 5th, or 6th iteration by himself. ;)In conclusion I was hoping everyone would at least +1 on the thought of having a union of developers create something that is better what is currently out there, and maybe, maybe ... probably a wishful thinking.

Yes and no. For example, should MS Windows of been marketed per functional feature? If yes, you could never afford it. I agree what you said but that doesn't justify neccessarly that you should divide each piece, run cost on it, and the sell entire package for the sum of all cost,- you would not be able to afford any software.I am software developer and I run my own company and I am also currently sub-contracted on another large software project. Yes, there's operating costs associated with development (what ever they maybe) but the point is that any software release should have a return on the investment. The company always eats up the cost of R&D work.Having said that I feel that with all the airports, aircraft, and scenery that has been released, the content is already there. Writing the framework, sim engine, and taking advantage of DX11 features is possible, is doable for an affordable price.

Guys, when you develop a product as an entire release, it doesn't work that way. You don't take parts of the sim (every aircraft, every airport, every river, etc.) and market them for a price but instead you deliver base functionality for a price.But point taken, and that's yet another reason why we will not see combined effort to have better Flight Sims. The 3rd party developers would most likely be unwilling to take this expense. That brings us full circle why MS decided what they have done with their sim.I did see a lot of people upset about this but at the same time no one questioned 3rd party devs and their pricing and their willingness to set an example by creating a sim,- yes I truly understand they are in different position but honestly if they really care that much they can do it and the profit would definetly be there (they would just not be making a killing that's all).-lk Nice little sim but there's no way I am going back to the dark ages. See my previous post for more clarification.

I am aware of the other sims, here are my brief comments:Prepar3d: Dated graphics for $500? No way.X-Plane 9: I have it, I play it, dated in all aspects.X-Plane 10: Lots of great features but has also its problems: Biggest for me is terrible FPS on ATI cards,- this is at higher end machine with reduced content, graphics. Btw, that platform is in and out of beta so I would not consider this as a release.Aerofly FS: Georgeous VFR switzerland,- that is it.I guess I was not clear with my post.What I meant is by alternative is new GENERATION of Flight Sim incorporating new ideas, features and up to date Graphics. Yes, there could be another sim coming out, and another, but was is the point if the results are not much different than what I saw in 5 years ago?If you want to see some really good examples, take a look at Arma 3 for example, no it is not a flight sim (I am not try to compare it to a sim) but you can see progress of that combat sim as compared to its previous predecesors. Same can be said with other game engines.

Just brief mention, I did read the interview and like many have said it was simply politician talk not trying to promise anything but say a lot of words, but that's not what this post is about.I feel, due to the fact that graphics libraries (such as OpenGL, DirectX) keep moving forward (due to advances in graphics hardware) there's always going to be a desire to see a better looking simulator. With all the 3rd parties out there and nice revenue that came from sim enthusiasts I don't see why they should not sit down together and release a competitor to Flight.Even if it starts out only as yet another Hawaii but as long they add content that is really missing from Flight like real weather and a jet-liner along GA aircraft,- imho would gain more attention of people who do try sims (kids or adults).I am sure 3rd party developers can produce even better looking content than MS dev team.For example:ORBX will do the Hawaii islandsPMDG will do the aircraftORBX,Aeorsoft, FS Dream Team do the airports on the islandsSimul for weatherOuttera maybe for entire global scenery (for future releases)? to do sim engine and framework?, maybe Aerosoft with creating new department and hire additional staffI am sure I did exclude many others but this is just to show how possible this is.Now, sadly, I think I will answer my own post:Reason you would never see this is a simple fact:The more people you bring together, the more disagreements are there.Brings to my mind how companies got together to create competitor to MS Office Suite. They had all the pieces to create a grest product but ... not agree on anything,- end result was: MS Office revenue and market share saw no competitor,- MS made a killing, more then MS Windows revenue.Feel free to add your comments to this post.

Airliner ofcourse.