basic ils

Using google earth as a measuring stick, and plotting a path around the globe on 71n, I get ~8000 miles. Something's amiss.

I understand this is your hobby (it's mine too) and maybe even your passion, but the hit to MS' balance sheet is insignificant and probably doesn't even register 1 tenth of one percent of MS' total budget. While the amount of money spent on Flight would be a great deal of money to you and me, so would their landscaping budget. And the reputation hit? Non existent, unless you only factor in the Flight Sim community.

If your cub has a switch to transform into Mega Maid, then I would commence Operation Vaccu-Suck. If that doesn't work, I'd go with dburne on this one. May the Schwartz be with you.

Sorry, 50 is correct. Still insignificant. Also, wasn't there a rumor or maybe even confirmation that Flight would be included in Windows 8? That might have skewed the 20-30 million user number. I could see where someone with a bug up their butt would decide to not include Flight with Windows 8 thus killing the whole DLC model and killing Flight with it.

Just my opinion, but the problem started with the market research. What was the number JH was throwing around? 20-30 million users? If the average user spent just $5 a year on DLC, what a windfall for MS. A 35 member team bringing in $100-$150 million a year in revenue. I could see why the project got green-lighted. When it became apparent those numbers were unrealistic, they decided to cut their losses. MS has ~135,000 employees. Throwing 35 of them at a relatively low budget project with the potential for huge profit margins is a no brainer. MS spends about $7 billion a year in R&D. Again, Flight was insignificant money wise.

In terms of Microsoft, this was not an immense project. MS has revenues of about $9 million AN HOUR or $20 billion a quarter. How many hours of revenue do you think the budget of Flight was? My guess is no more than 5 hours of revenue spread over 3 years. The project was immense for the team working on it but for MS, not even a blip on the radar.

Not sure why they would have to remove it from Live. Just release the SDK, let the 3PDs submit content, sell it through Live. Seems to have worked out well for other games. Rock Band releases at least 3 songs per week from Harmonix (and has for 5 years now) and another 6-10 per week from RBN. (I understand Rock Band was never an MS title, but the work to put DLC on Live for Flight is already done).

Sad day, not only for the Flight supporters, but for all flight simulation enthusiasts. Competition between companies only benefits the consumer. With one less competitor, the consumer will suffer. I applaud those of you who stood by Flight and continue to stand by it. Flight never offered me anything in the way of DLC that I desired, but I definitely saw the potential and was willing to be patient until the day DLC appealed to me. Apparently that day will never come and, for that, we are all losers, whether we paid for DLC or not.

and not really a Bush/STOL but was used/is used by oil companies in Alaska and Alaska Airlines and still some in service today. And if those 2 aren't acceptable, then I'll second the Baron and the Goose.

My post had nothing to do with icing or flying GA in icing conditions or whether you're a real pilot. My point was, your one liners taking stabs at the "unbelievers" is doing more harm than good. Just from today: "If you suspected icing in he kind of aircraft that are used in Flight, you would stay home and watch TV." "And I saw a dog tied in the front yard of a house on Halstead street in Seward today, and the people that live there don't even own a dog" "Apparently you did look long enough to see all the new challenges, scenery and airports. Might as well delete it then" " If you don't like Flight, don't Fly it." " Maybe they should have included an SR-71 and one of the retired Space Shuttles, so that folks wouldn't feel like they were duped" I've said my peace. Again, nothing to do with icing.

Really don't want to make this personal, but you seem to want to drive a lot of people away from Flight instead of inviting them in and encouraging them to explore exactly whats available to them. Maybe it's just me but most of your posts include a jab at those who aren't as thrilled with Flight as you are. Not quite troll-bait, but pretty close.

My simple answer is this. When FSX came out, It became obvious to me my computer (or anyones computer) could handle FSX, so I stopped following FSX and stayed with FS9. Jump ahead a few years when I had the hardware to use FSX on the most basic level, I was completely out-of-the-loop on tweaks, tips, advice, downloads, etc.. that I found it overwhelming doing searches looking for the info available. I promised myself to not let that happen again. So I will continue to follow Flight so as not to be left behind. edit: Quick example. I didn't purchase any of the VC-less warbirds. But I did pick up the free Red Tail. I immediately tweaked the cfg file to set the camera position to the faux-cockpit. If I hadn't been following the forum, I would have had no idea this would have been possible.

I guess my answer would be because we've been spoiled ever since FS4 and the potential of what lies ahead. 3PD made FS4-FSX a success and now we're relying solely on MS to provide us with what we need/want. For the longest time my homepage was that other flightsim site, and every morning I couldn't wait to see what was in the "newest files" section. And almost everyday there was something I would download and at least give a try. Some I liked, some not-so-much. With flight, there really hasn't been anything new since release. Now we'll have new scenery, but yet another VC-less aircraft. I'll be honest, I've paid $40-$50 on games that got really no play time at all, but they were genres I wasn't familiar with, so I really didn't know If I'd like them or not (I'm looking at you EA Sports.)

I get your point here. But you have to remember, some of us have been using flight sims since the Sublogic days and we know what we like and what we don't like. Personally, I'm not a fan of taildraggers or bush flying, but I can see why it appeals to a lot of people. Right now, Alaska would be a waste of money for me because I do not know what the future holds for Flight. I do not need jets or ATC or helicopters. A nice Dash-8 with VC and some AI would be nice though. So until flight offers me something I will enjoy, I'll stay on the sidelines. And if history is our guide, though it might be a brief history, I'll be able to bundle DLC on Steam for a reduced price, which will only increase my ROI. And don't get me wrong here. I'm not bashing Flight. It is what it is. I'm not a fan for now. But, I'll keep following Flight with the hopes it provides me with something I like. And once it does, I will freely throw money at it. And if it doesn't, well that's more golf for me. Win-Win imo.

To me it's an investment. And to everyone that's responded so far, it's an investment. You're just not seeing why. When you invest money in the stock market, you are looking for some sort of financial Return On Investment. When you invest in video games, your ROI is based on enjoyment. So, those who haven't "invested" in Flight yet, don't think the enjoyment they'll receive will justify the money spent. For a lot of us with many hobbies, we need to pick and choose where we put our money. And the money will always go to the hobby which will see the greatest enjoyment based on the money spent. That is an investment.