etheris

I believe Micro-transactions will be the future. If you look at companies like Google, Facebook, Twitter these are all internet giants propped up traditionally by online advertising. In particular, advertising still accounts for more than 95% of Google's total generated revenues. Much of the freemium content on the Internet (including blogs and forums such as this one) rely at least in part by ad sponsorship and advertisement generated revenues in partnership with Google AdSense. This paradigm is undergoing a fundmanetal shift to be replaced with the microtransaction business models of the future.I read an article a while back on how Google predicted the demise of the desktop as a popular platform within three years. It is obvious that the age of the desktop is over. We have moved on from laptops and notebooks to netbooks, tablets and smart phones. Eventually everything becomes a ubiquitous computational device and the only difference is form factor and presentation format. All our "stuff" will reside in the cloud, perfectly synced from device to device. Cloud based software as a service will dominant traditional client-server applications we will see the essential equivalent of dummy terminals (ie Google Chromebook, Kindle fire) become prevalent and gain mass adoption.There are only so many hours in a day. Time is one of the most precious commodities and it is truly a zero-sum game. There are opportunity costs to everything, you spend time doing one activity at the expense of something else. That is the nature of life. But the trend seems to indicate that the masses are spending more and more time on small form factor devices and less and less on traditional desktops or even laptops. If it is more convenient to check your mail on your phone, why would you bother to do so on the desktop computer? If you can do what you need to get done on the ipad, why would you need to do it on the laptop? As our lives get busier and more hectic and the world gets smaller and more interconnected, we need more casual, efficient and socially convenient ways of communication. This is the compelling reason behind the move towards mobile, smart phone, etc.So what does all of this have to do with the trend towards microtransactions? For the past decade or so, to a large extent advertising has subsidized the rise of the Internet and all the free content and open platforms and digital ecosystems that we have today. But all that is about to change. In the future, nothing will be "free", everything will be microtransactions.Google, Facebook, Twitter and other large internet and tech companies that owe its very existence to the lifeblood of online advertising surely already see the writing on the wall. You simply cannot have a generation of people switch from spending the majority of their online time on 19" inch desktop monitors to spending every waking moment on their beloved mobile 3" smartphone displays and still have any hope of generating the same scale, scope and volume of advertising revenues. True, smart phones and tablets/netbooks will never completely replace the desktop, but we as a collective society are spending less and less time on the desktop/laptop and more and more of our time and energy is being spent on much smaller form factor devices.This inevitably means the current ad sponsored paradigm of the Internet ecosystem will become extinct and die out, to be replaced by another means of existence. As smartphone become general purpose computational devices and its adoption and use becomes ubiquitous, it will replace traditional PC/desktop and become the primary platform for developers, for advertisers, and yes for the micro-transaction economy.This is why you see Google's battle with social networking site Facebook, also why Google is so invested in Android's rise, why Google is going into mobile, gaming, social, and why it ignited the browser and OS wars, first with its Chrome and then Chromium OS and Chromebook. Traditional online advertising paradigm as we knew it is dying. The future is in mobile, cloud, social... but instead of being subsidized primarily by advertising, they will instead be propped up by microtransactions.Due to the nature of the Internet and how easy it is for anyone to set up a website or a blog, we have seen an explosion of user generated content (not only blogs, forums and text but also video uploading like Youtube, Vimeo, etc) in a variety of mediums across a variety of platforms on the Internet. But there is an existential crisis in that advertisers always want to go where the numbers are. Traditionally in the past print media controlled the source. It was a strictly ONE to MANY relationship. There was ONE SOURCE, ie New York Times and a gazillion readers. Advertisers want to go where the eyeballs are and where there is heavy density in readership.With the decentralization of the Internet and the ability for anyone to start their own website and blog/forum... this quickly changed to a Many to Many relationship, diluting the monetization margin and devaluing information to the lowest common denominator. Content was not sold for what it was worth, but given away for what pitiful amount of adSense revenues that it could generate from pageviews. Simply stated: there were too much user generation content and too few eyeballs. The advertising pool was only so large and everyone was competing for the same piece of pie. This in turn has the inevitable effect of diluting profit margins of advertising models (tragedy of the commons) and as the monetization becomes too thinly spread out many of the ad sponsored business models either die out or survive by resorting to hybrid freemium models or by charging for content and utilizing microtransactions.This matter is farther made worse and compounded/confounded by the decline of desktop PC use in general and the rise of mobile devices. Suddenly the screen real-estate went from 19"inches or more to just under 4" inches. How could this advertising model of the Internet survive in the new era? It could not.In the future, content providers will generate revenue (through microtransactions) by the VALUE of the CONTENT that they provide, and not by the sheer number of impressions or clicks or pageviews and general readership and advertising popularity of their content. Conversely, we the consumer will no longer be able to "free ride" on the backs of the former advertising subsidized Internet ecosystem and will instead be compelled to PAY for what (information) we CONSUME. Nothing will be free anymore, the free lunch is over.This is also why Google is investing in Near field communication, micropayments and other similar concepts. Android was never about making advertising monies for Google, it was all about positioning Google to be the middleman's middleman... so that Google can be aligned with the new paradigm and position itself on the top of this new micro-transaction pyramid food chain. Instead of revenue sharing by taking a slice of the ads monies from adSense that ran alongside popular websites, in the future Google will take direct cuts, skimming percentages of the micro-transactions of countless sites, services, vendors, developers throughout its Android marketplace and Android based ecosystem.Basically, in a nutshell, the free ride is over. Expect to pay for everything in the form of micropayments and microtransactions. We also see this already happening with FLIGHT do we not? Just like the transition from Desktop to mobile was responsible for the demise of traditional free content on the Internet, the dumbing down of gaming in general has attributed to the 'walled garden' approach of gaming platforms, DLCs, in-game app stores, and micro-transaction models.Thus I predict there will never be a SDK for FLIGHT released by Microsoft. They obliterated that option the moment they decided to go this new business model approach of freemium/DLC. With Games for Windows Live and in-game app stores shoved down our throats and no option for a SDK, FLIGHT is as good as dead to our community. I hate to admit it, but there is a possible likelihood that it may actually be the reverse. It seems that the wall-garden has turned in on itself. FLIGHT is like "the thing" (the movie by same name) and wants to convert the simming community to arcade gaming. The simming community itself could be the victim of FLIGHT and this new age paradigm that we all find ourselves in. On the other hand, I don't think FLIGHT will succeed either. This microtransaction model will never work for FLIGHT because it can't capture and sustain the interest of the target audience long enough to sustain its own growth into perpetuity. Instead I project that FLIGHT will die by way of fading-irrelevance. MS played a big joke on all of us. We are really back to square one, when they first canned ACES in 2009. FSX was and still is the last simulator from MS. The future of flight simulation is not so bright. Ominous clouds are ahead. This is truly a sad era we have entered.

What I wish FLIGHT could have been: 64-bit simulation engine with native multi-core and multi-processor support Directx 11 and GPU optimized Scale-invariant fractal algorithms and procedural content generation support (see Outerra) Interplanetary Newtonian physics model to allow for high-altitude and space FLIGHT (see OrbiterSim) Incorporation of Blade element theory into its aerodynamic model (see X-Plane) Modeling of aerodynamic compressibility (aka sound barrier, sonic boom, etc) Realistic weather modeling and effects Realistic ground friction, lateral friction, skidding, aircraft hydroplaning, etc. Realistic hydrodynamics model (something akin to HydroEngine, etc) Incorporation or integration of a system similar to NaturalMotion's Euphoria for dynamic characters motion generation and emulation (so pax and flight attendants move around and behave realistically on the plane) In-game real-time WYSIWYG game editor on par with the free CryEngine 3 SDK. Built-in FBW (Fly-by-Wire) logic and integration and FBW API to allow anyone to easily create modern aircraft with plug-and-play FBW components and capabilities Autonomous auto-pilot logic to support the development of UAV/drones and other self-flying vehicles on the platform. (see ArduPilot) Hardware-in-the-loop simulation support Coded from the ground up to be a very modular, extensible, expandable hi-fidelity simulation architecture and platform for the entire FLIGHT community. Instead we got an arcade console game for 5 year old to collect gold coins and trinkets flying around on the island of Hawaii with a Honda on Wings.

Since MS announced FLIGHT coming out as free online download for all the play this Spring... who plans to develop anything for the FLIGHT platform? It is already clear that PMDG, Orbx, and many other large developers abandoned FLIGHT... just for kicks anyone gonna make a plane for MS?

The much hyped sports car with wings ICON A5 is going into production and will be unit cost of $139,000 USD (plus adjustment for inflation) and you need a Sport Pilot License which will set you back another $5,000The is a bit out of reach for the average Joe casual gamer, and yes even the typical Jane hardcore simmer...So, as disappointed as I am in the FLIGHT fiasco, I was still looking forward to flying the simulated ICON A5 in Microsoft's newly announced FLIGHT. It would not exactly be like flying the real-life ICON A5, but considering that the real-life plane costs $139,000 and the virtual ICON A5 in the FLIGHT simulator game is FREE, well that is about as close to "AS REAL AS IT GETS" as I'm going to come.http://www.iconaircr...soft_Flight.pdfProblem is, FLIGHT is not out yet. I applied for the beta but was not selected by Microsoft. I suppose all those ranting emails I sent to [email protected] didn't help my prospects nor increase my odds of being selected... So what's a guy to do?I kept searching on their site for more material with the hope that perhaps there would be a rental for the ICON A5, didn't find that but did come across a radio controlled RC replica scale model that ICON was selling on their website in conjuction with Horizon Hobby Partner.http://store.iconair...5-rc-bind-n-flyI got all excited for nothing. I was all ready to shell out $280 USD for this cute little ICON A5 rc flying Honda when I noticed that ICON Aircraft got word from their manufacter that they will be out of stock until at least the end of the month. Just when I was about to give up all hope, I scrolled down a bit more and saw that ICON officially recommends the Phoenix R/C Pro Simulator Software to simulate the rc ICON A5 for those who are impatiently waiting on their model replica.http://www.phoenix-s....com/models.aspBut then I realized... what in the HECK am I doing trying to purchase a rc simulator, to simulate the remote control scale model replica version of the ICON A5, just to simulate the experience of flying the virtual ICON A5 in Microsoft's new FLIGHT (but not simulator) GAME, which itself was meant to simulate the actual Real Life physical real ICON A5?I'd be simulating a simulator of a simulator? I feel like I'm in limbo.

I tend to be long winded but I'll make this one short and to the point. I will also preface this with stating that this is simply my own views, opinions and perspectives on the matter.Microsoft seems to have made a significant departure to the traditional Flight Simulation franchise. Two of the more salient changes that immediately comes to my mind is the fact that the base package (again in my view basically a DEMO) of FLIGHT will be FREE DOWNLOAD for everyone. Second, it seems almost certain that there will be no freely distributed open "SDK" for third party developers to use or even for the freeware community to publish at no cost. Third, Games for Windows LIVE will be an integrated and manditory system for those that wish for anything more than just the default island of Hawaii and the ICON A5 plane. Microsoft has stated that in order to get the second "free" aircraft, one must sign in with gamertag online... so it is safe to assume that any DLC purchases will also require Windows Live ID/etc...Microsoft, like any other corporation out there, is here to make money. As a corporation its sole obligation is to the stockholders and shareholders. So it is also logical to conclude that Microsoft's departure with FLIGHT was done with the intention of maximizing the monetary aspect of the game.I believe the reason they are giving the base package for free (essentially a free DEMO) and splitting FLIGHT into piece meal components with microtransactions and DLC... is because they probably project the vast majority of casual gamers will only purchase a few DLC that combined actually cost LESS than a full FLIGHT game would be...Think of it like a pyramid. The very elite simmers that spend thousands of $$$ represent probably tiny fraction of one percent of the entire possible audience base. Microsoft is actually trying to WIDEN its total audience reach by giving the Flight out for free and doing the DLC approach. The difference between this approach and a DEMO is that a DEMO is FREE but for anything more you would still have to pay "full price".... With this move, MS is likely targeting the people that WOULD be interested enough to download the DEMO but WOULD NOT go out and pay $65 for the full game. MS would only do this if it reasonably believed that this segment of the audience (those that will just purchase one or two extra planes, spend like 15-20 bucks instead of 65 bucks before getting bored) far outnumber those that would purchase the "full game" or those that are hardcore simmings, far outnumber both in terms of total users and total revenues/profit....So following this reasoning, one might draw the conclusion that MS true target audience is actually the most casual of the casual gamers... basically the bottom of the barrel and lowest common denominator...Thus this is the reason why MS can afford to spurn the hard core simming community and developers like PMDG, LEVEL-D, Orbx, etc... Because MS true target audience (those casual casual gamers that spend LESS than the price of a full game) don't really care about complicated 737NGX or the likes thereof...So I suspect that MS will simply make its own addons, and there will actually NOT be that much of a variety... for couple reasons... because their target market is the lowest rung of the pyramid scheme.... all MS has to do is hit the most saliently mass appeal aircrafts first. (ICON A5 being one of them already!) and provide the low hanging fruit.... In fact providing too much selelction is a bad thing, it lowers the ROI per aircraft/addon/dlc and it confuses the casual casual gamers.... MS knows that its true target audience is only going to spend like under $20 total for/on FLIGHT and probably download three or four of the most popular, fun, mass appeal aircraft... so it is not benefitical for MS to create every aircraft under the sun...This also translates into the following: only major cities will ever be created. Think, Tokyo, Las Vegas, NYC, etc.... all the everything in between will not be touched....Effectively, FLIGHT seems to be a crippled, handicapped game that would never become a viable platform for the real simming community.

The whole concept of an APP STORE evolved when smart phones first come on the market (namely the iPhone back in 2007) because it was an inherently simplistic and efficient way for the mass consumer to discover, install and use applications to extend and enhance the functionality of their newer more capable phones. The App store was a way to overcome the computational, form factor size, and bandwidth limitations of a smart phone and other tablet devics, it is totally unnecessary on the PC platform.. Because of the carrier's traditional control and tight grip of phones, and partially because of the phones small form factor, there had to be a more dumbed down way to install applications, hence the evolution of the APP STORE concept, which first applied only to phones, but now creeping its way into pads and tablets and yes even netbooks (Google Chromium OS, Chrome browser, and Chrome App Store)Another parallel can be drawn. Why has the PC gaming market (to large part) died to be replaced and displaced by its console brethren? Some people say because piracy is rampant on the PC platform and thus consoles, being that they are locked down tightly, prevented the majority of pirating attempts. So there is a natural instinct for developers to code for xbox and ps3 rather than natively for the PC platform. Another reason is the trend we are seeing where the common denominator keeps gravitating towards instant gratification, casual gaming, mobile and convenience, basically the masses are collectively asking for watered-down no-brainer experiences. Instead of loading up Photoshop to fix that red-eye, "there is an App for that"... Gamers no longer want to mess with installing patches, upgrading hardware or operating systems, going into the registry to fix some settings or editing some game configuration file... We have traded customization, ownership, control, privacy and security and self respect all in the name of "mobile", "social", "networking", "convenience" and laziness...So piracy and the fact that gamers want casual, dumbed-down, watered-down, lowest common denominator gaming experiences, cheap thrills and instant gratification have contributed greatly to the demise of PC gaming platform and the rise of consoles.Consoles, like that of smart phones, are essentially locked down computers serving specific purposes... although both are trying to become more general purpose (xbox wants to be living room entertainment center, smartphones are your mobile computer on the go) neither affords you the freedom, control, security, privacy and self-determination and customization ability of the traditional desktop PC platform. By their very nature, smart phones and consoles and the like (tablets, pads, netbooks, etc) are going to be severely locked down and extremely restricted... both in terms of the hardware, software, and also the licensing and legality aspects. You are basically leasing those devices, you have no ownership.Now lets come back to the point of all this. Traditionally the Microsoft Flight (Simulator) franchise has been a PC game geared towards only the PC platform. So why is it now coming out with DLC (a console tactic) and basically requiring us to log into a Games for Windows Live and Xbox 360 gamer-tag system? What's next, "Like us on Facebook" for an extra Prius flying machine? Why has Microsoft casualized, consolized and mobilized what is/was essentially a desktop PC simulator? I'll get back to this point later...But lets see it for what it is. The so-called "Free" base package of FLIGHT is nothing more than a GAME DEMO. How is FLIGHT any bit fundamentally different than the FSX DEMO? One tiny little island, a 1930's useless plane, and a joke of a Toyota with wings. Seriously? This is not a FREE game, its a restricted DEMO. It is actually a Trojan Horse with the sole intention of milking your wallet per every quart of gas, flight mile and parcel. I can just smell "monthly subscription" coming up on the near horizon!Microsoft is in the business of making money. They give away a free game (DEMO) so to discourage piracy and then consolize FLIGHT so it can sell more copies on the Xbox360 platform than it ever could on PC (mark my words, FLIGHT is coming out for xbox with kinect... pretty soon we will find out what it really means to deploy flaps) counting and betting on the fact that they will milk more out of the casual user that way than they could by charging $65 USD upfront. So in one fell swoop, Microsoft elminates the piracy issue, cuts out the retailer and distribution middle man, caters to the mass casual gaming audience, codes a basic shell of a game and pitches it to both the PC and xbox audience to essentially double-dip on what used to be exclusive PC territory... then lockes it down as if it were a mobile or console game and forces all third party devs to go through their FLIGHT STORE ... skimming and taking percentages from each transaction and making free monies off the backs of laboring developers... so its a win, win, win, win, win for Microsoft no matter how you look at it. Who made Microsoft judge, jury and executioner? MicrosoftFT is riding up platforms on top of platforms (Windows OS -> FLIGHT Game -> MS FLIGHT APP STORE -> Paid Third party Addons) and laughing all the way to the bank.Now if FLIGHT was developed FOR the Windows 7 PHONE, or for the iOS and Andriod marketplace (iPad game or Kindle fire app) or even strictly for the console gaming platforms then I would have nothing to complain about. But Microsoft is essentially pulling the rug from underneath our feet and retroactively bait-and-switched what was an exclusive PC franchise to now a console and smartphone platform with all the unnecessary restrictions and limitations that come with it. (see above for the rationale of app stores and DLCs in the first place! there is no reasonable excuse or justification for doing this cheap underhanded tactic for a PC simulation!)I can only conclude that Microsoft is doing this because their market research has shown that casual gaming/ console/ app store is where the monies are... Microsoft has abandoned the hardcore simming community and has zero intentions of ever releasing an SDK.Basically, it all boils down to how can Microsoft make more money. FLIGHT has nothing to do with actual flight, but everything to do with your hard earned money flying directly into the hands of Redmond.Thus, we are not the target audience for FLIGHT. FLIGHT is as good as dead to us. It is supremely ironic that Microsoft does NOT think of the simming community as large enough to be worth the effort of appeasing or catering towards (basically FLIGHT sold out to casual console mobile gaming) but DOES however think of the hardcore simulation community as a convenient easy target to milk easy monies. They approached PMDG, Level-D, Orbx, etc to try to rip off the devs and make money from us simmers of the backs of their (third party devs) hard labor (MicrosoftFT being the middle man that does nothing - FLIGHT is essentially a DEMO and empty shell - but gets everything...) MicrosoftFT is basically making the developers and the simulation community subsidizing the developement of FLIGHT and then selling it back to us for twice the money. Vote with your wallet. We need to all boycott FLIGHT, don't be tempted by the "Free" DEMO. MSFT is counting on that Trojan Horse tactic to lock us within the confines of their walled garden. The developers did the right thing by rejecting FLIGHT as a viable simulation platform moving forward. The community need to back up the developers that made flight simulation what it is today, and not back up some conglomerate that only cares about double and triple dipping us and milking us for all its worth.

I know Microsoft probably won't do this... but in a perfect world here is what it could do before the final release to fix FLIGHT:1. Instead of just giving the game away for free and then charging for subsequent DLC to make up for it (with is the same old same old model of xbox being subsidized by the console game sales and smartphones subsidized by monthly subscription and contracts, etc) Microsoft should OPEN SOURCE the FLIGHT like Google open sources Chrome browser, Chromium OS and the Android operating system. Then the "hardcore" community can fork off the main code and create its own variant of flight that is streamlines for realistic flight dynamics, weather, ATC, and remove all the Games for Windows Live, DRM, DLC, silver, bronze, gold star points and all of that other nonsense. Look at what Amazon was able to do with Android code and create its own Amazon marketplace and now Kindle fire is running honeycomb OS... If MSFT open source FLIGHT then devs like PMDG, Level-D, Orbx, etc could come together to create its own little customized Flight simulator as a streamlined platform for their own addons to better serve the hardcore community. By going the open source route MSFT will seal the fate of FLIGHT as the most widely used simulation platform ever. Long term, this is better than any short term profit.2. Microsoft should PAY us to fly FLIGHT. This is not as ludicrous as it may first sound. Amazon gives an app away for free (well they pay the developer) everyday to generate good will, word of mouth, and to get more people to use their marketplace. Hardcore simmers are still a tiny percentage (and always will be) of the entire "audience" for a product such as FLIGHT, but hardcore simmers are the "trend setters", and the most vocal of the simulation bunch. If MSFT want FLIGHT to succeed, it should not go around angering the hardcore simmers. MSFT should do what it did with "Live Search Club" when it tried to promote its LIVE search engine. People earned points by searching the web using LIVE and then you could redeem real stuff for free using those points. I believe even BING had a "cashback" bonus of similar nature. If MSFT really wants to promote FLIGHT, it should partner with PMDG/ Level-D/ etc and give the hard core simming community vouchers for reduced cost of PMDG /etc aircraft to help us more effortlessly transition from FSX to the new FLIGHT platform. MSFT pays PMDG/Level-D/Orbx and in return they bring down the cost of their new lineup of FLIGHT addons, the hardcore simmers all switch over from FSX to FLIGHT, this goodwill generates buzz and people start adopting FLIGHT once they see the trendsetters all switching over in masse, MSFT can write off the transition vouchers as an advertising expense, and win win win win for all. MSFT wins, Dev wins, Hard core simmers win, and FLIGHT as a platform wins so ultimately even the casual gamers Win.3. Microsoft can find creative ways to make money off the casual gamer that just wants to fly around aimlessly. But in the meantime, to keep the hardcore simmers happy and to prop up FLIGHT as a platform for its continued array of DLC to milk the casual gamers; it should offer its subsequent DLC, and terrain/texture/land ADDONS at ZERO cost to hard core simmers to keep these top echelon of FLIGHT customers happy so they don't transition to P3D or XPX competitors. MSFT is this close to losing the platform and then eventually the casual franchise too if it makes the same mistakes once more. How can Microsoft distinguish casual from hardcore simmers? MSFT can partner with the hard core third party addon companies and create a registry of all the users that have purchased one of these PMDG, LEVEL-D products and then sell its terrain DLC at free price to these members of the simulator communities. This will make the hard core community at ease and give them peace of mind to switch and transition from FSX to FLIGHT, thus compelling the third party addon developers to adopt and switch to FLIGHT as well. Basically the casual gamers should subsidize the hard core community! and by doing so, FLIGHT becomes entrenched as the defacto platform for the foreseeable future, further fueling the mass appeal of FLIGHT and of casual gamers.

Just to be fair, Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple are getting pretty evil these days too (just to demonstrate I'm not picking on Microsoft just to be picking on Microsoft) but I never thought MicrosoftFT would be going straight back to its old evil ways. I thought they changed... haha...PC is what MADE Microsoft what it is today, and now after all this time this is how MicrosoftFT gives thanks to its customer base by shafting us? (more on this later below... I'll explain in a second)There parallels are astounding.....Reading PMDG's rsrandazzo opinion on FLIGHT made me really dissappointed in both FLIGHT and Microsoft after confirming the suspicions that I've had all along...( http://forum.avsim.n...ghts-on-flight/ )Back then I was called a "troll" or FLIGHT "hater"... but then again... somehow "I TOLD YOU SO" just doesn't cut it...http://forum.avsim.n...93#entry2140793http://forum.avsim.n...87#entry2140787http://forum.avsim.n...le/page__st__50" By "onerous financial burden" are you implicitly referring to the possibility of a "Games for Windows Live" sort of app store marketplace that takes a 10% to 30% "cut" ?By "creativity strangling restrictions" are you perhaps hinting at the fact that MS FLIGHT will be developed on xbox360 and then ported over to the PC platform... then DRM'd to the hilt and MS will want to sell their own DLC's so they will severely lock-down the FLIGHT from third party addons? I wonder how realistic FLIGHT can possibly be when they canned the ACE team and are now going for MASS appeal, dumbed and watered down kiddie version with training wheels... xbox 360 and kinect controllers, GAMES FOR WINDOWS LIVE, etc etc... what will we be doing? flapping our arms in the living room while watching netflix?"-----What I find alarming is that Microsoft is planning the EXACT same greedy thing for the next version of Windows 8. Windows 8 will also have an "APP STORE" and basically taking a 30% cut from all the PC / Windows platform developers. So for example, Adobe will no longer be allowed to sell its Photoshop products on their own website or at brick and mortal stores like retailers Best Buy or even online on Amazon.com etc... Everything will have to be installed using the built in Windows 8 App Store embedded within the Operating System.Windows 8 App Store will be the only official way to install anything on your computer. And then you can expect prices of software to go up before MicrosoftFT is taking a 30% of everything. It is like a built in SMS/SCCM but tailored towards the residental home lowest common denominator users (just like how Xbox360 is handicapping the progress of gaming) except you are forced to use it and cannot remove.What is so ironic is that it was the OPEN nature of Windows that originally allowed Microsoft to quickly rise above Macintosh and Apple..... Now that MicrosoftFT has basically created two operating systems that can last forever (Windows XP/ Windows 7) it needs new revenue streams because it knows no one in their right mind would go out and upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 8... There is ZERO reason to! The ONLY two reasons they anyone would want to upgrade from Windows XP is for gaming because directx10/11 is not supported on XP... and the second reason is for RAM because of the 4GB limitation of 32-bit operating systems like Windows XP. Now that Windows 7 has solved these two problems, why in the name of Buddha would anyone in their reasonable state of mind want to switch from 7 to iPad interface metro copycat Windows 8? Exactly... If I wanted an adriod or an iPad I would up and go GET ONE. I don't need MicrosoftFT borg to convert my Desktop into a smartphone!Office 2010 (another one of Microsoft main monies streams) is "good enough" for the foreseeable future. And by that I mean basically forever.So Microsoft is scared and shaking in its boots and has to resort to greedy desperate tactics to scam more monies off of us average people...So what do they do? They take a playbook from arch enemy Apple and copy their App store idea. But the irony is the whole "app store" concept is ANTI-PC... so in one fell swoop Windows 8 operating system has killed the PC platform, shafted all the loyal windows/pc platform developers, and basically making you pay MicrosoftFT for the privelege of being a prisoner on your own paid and purchased for computer! They want to make the desktop another "tablet" and charge you and developers a premium for nothing at all! This is robbery and thievery and illegal and MicrosoftFT lobbyist probably paid off the FTC/ FCC/etc for them to allow MicrosoftFT to do this kind of bait and switch and stoop this low... MicrosoftFt, in the name of greed, has basically killed Flight simulator in favor for a dummied down sugar coated GAME that forces you to pay for each parcel out land that is outside of HAWAII and pay for every engine on an aircraft that is more than just single engine, even pay for the virtual Aviation fuel within the confines of the GAME. Now Microshaft is basically killing all the PC platform by coming up with this Windows 8 App store crap to shaft all the third party developers that make Microsoft what it was to begin with!Luckly, no one NEEDS FLIGHT, no one NEEDS Windows 8. We can and must all stand up to boycott this evil and vow to never pay a single penny to Microsoft for crappy restrictive trojan horse products again.

Is there any program out there that can let me capture my raw joystick and throttle /keyboard inputs (I have x52 pro) and record that (almost like a flight data recorder) and save it so that I can play it back on a different planes or even different version of flight simulators?

Is this true? I didn't see a link to a source. While I'm happy to know if it indeed is true, why would they support FS2004 when 737NGX is FSX only?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PMDG

I'm not trying to start a "flame war". Looks like there is some sort of unspoken but implicit self-censorship around here.. I am unaccustomed to these idiosyncrasies and the particulars of social norms within this community when it pertains to these sorts of things... I did not expect such a strong reaction or sensitivity to what amounts to me to be a valid compare/contrast... I had originally posted this in the FS9 forum but quickly people pounced on this accusing and alleging that I am intending to start a flame war... I posted this initially in the FS9 forum as opposed to the FSX forum for the precise reason of not wishing to offend any FSX folks and appealing more towards people who had many same opinion or inclinations on FS9. It seems like people who accuse others are more guilty themselves of the actual accusationsThis is not the case. I am really trying to discuss flight dynamics in terms of FS9 vs FSX and possibly in the future FLIGHT 2012.Even if this tread becomes locked, if anyone wishes to discuss this privately please PM me. I could care less about starting "flame wars" and really wished to discuss flight dynamics limitations in both FS9/FSX/ and the future FLIGHT 2012 and how they relate to each other and what impact it will have on third party addonHere is the original post: http://forum.avsim.n...istic-than-fsx/In case it is deleted/removed I have copy/pasted the below:In terms of flight dynamics... I have both FS9 and FSX, and I seldom fly the "stock/default" planes. I also have PMDG 744 for both version. Recently I was playing around with both of them back and forth (some other unrelated test I was doing) and realized the flight dynamics is in many way more "realistic" in FS9 compared to FSX. This seemed to be true in both the stock and payware addons. It is hard to exactly quantify but definitely there is a significant different to the way a stock/default Cessna flies in FSX compared to FS9. In terms of not only aerodynamics up in the air but also motion on the ground. The PMDG 747 for FS9 also flies more realistic than the FSX version and it almost seems like the FSX version is more fake/ watered down/ archade-ish.... I remember reading some articles/forums on here a while back when PMDG admitted that for their FS9 747 port to FSX that the 747 FSX flight dynamics had to get significantly tweaked to become "real" again compared to the FS9 version, but when I did a forum search nothing came up so I can't reference that article... Does anyone else realize this or has everyone just forgotten FS9 already?Will this trend continue into Flight 2012? What if eventually for business reasons PMDG is compelled to switch over to the FLIGHT 2012 platform and all the addons just become faker and faker in terms of actual flight dynamics and realism? Could the handicapps and flight dynamics limitations of FSX be the reason the PMDG737NGX has such a messed up flight dynamics on landing and approach? Maybe the 737NG (new) would be more real had it been coded in FS9?Also in terms of graphics... FS9 has a sort of ambiance about it that is lost in FSX. For some reason the graphics on FSX seem more "glossy" (for lack of better word) and eye-candy (in a bad way... not as in Crysis wow sort of eye-candy) and "fake"... And truth be told, on all but the absolute best hardware, the graphics in FSX actually turns out WORSE than FS9 because FSX was coded so inefficiently that you would have to suffer worse framerates and still have to turn the graphics down so much that you are better off just playing with FS9. FSX was coded for high GHz CPU that never came... instead it went the way of multi-core, parallel processors, GPU, 64bit, etc... and FSX cannot take advantage of any of this.

I was heart broken when I heard that Microsoft canned the ACES team back during the last recession / crash of 2008. While I'm happy that FLIGHT is basically more or less a reincarnation and successor... I have mixed feelings about this. It seems that the general bigger picture trend is that PC gaming is dying and giving way to consoles (xbox, ps3, wii, etc), and casual gaming on the tablet (ipad, kindle fire, etc) and small form factor gaming on mobiles and smart phones (what the heck is X-Plane doing making an ipad / iphone/ apple version of their supposedly ultra-realistic flight simulator? ) ... its just a shame really... I've always been a desktop type of guy and never really even liked playing games on laptops... Now I hear all this talk about a FLIGHT 2012. You know its gotta be bad when Microsoft drops the "Simulator" out of the name to appeal to the massess... its not like FS9/FSX was "hardcore" to begin with anyway... it was always the third party addons like PMDG et al that made Flight Simulator what it was really meant to be... Microsoft Flight Simulator was always the "addon" while the PMDG 747 etc was the "real package". But PMDG and other payware companies are structurally constrained by the underlying platform.. I have both FS9 and FSX, and I seldom fly the "stock/default" planes. I also have PMDG 744 for both version. Recently I was playing around with both of them back and forth (some other unrelated test I was doing) and realized the flight dynamics is in many way more "realistic" in FS9 compared to FSX. This seemed to be true in both the stock and payware addons. It is hard to exactly quantify but definitely there is a significant different to the way a stock/default Cessna flies in FSX compared to FS9. In terms of not only aerodynamics up in the air but also motion on the ground. The PMDG 747 for FS9 also flies more realistic than the FSX version and it almost seems like the FSX version is more fake/ watered down/ archade-ish.... I remember reading some articles/forums on here a while back when PMDG admitted that for their FS9 747 port to FSX that the 747 FSX flight dynamics had to get significantly tweaked to become "real" again compared to the FS9 version, but when I did a forum search nothing came up so I can't reference that article... Does anyone else realize this or has everyone just forgotten FS9 already? Will this trend continue into Flight 2012? What if eventually for business reasons PMDG is compelled to switch over to the FLIGHT 2012 platform and all the addons just become faker and faker in terms of actual flight dynamics and realism? Could the handicapps and flight dynamics limitations of FSX be the reason the PMDG737NGX has such a messed up flight dynamics on landing and approach? Maybe the 737NG (new) would be more real had it been coded in FS9? It seems like everything Microsoft does these days are all in the general direction of more and more "dumbed down"... just look at Windows 8 metro interface... and now we have FLIGHT but not simulator... Also in terms of graphics... FS9 has a sort of ambiance about it that is lost in FSX. For some reason the graphics on FSX seem more "glossy" (for lack of better word) and eye-candy (in a bad way... not as in Crysis wow sort of eye-candy) and "fake"... And truth be told, on all but the absolute best hardware, the graphics in FSX actually turns out WORSE than FS9 because FSX was coded so inefficiently that you would have to suffer worse framerates and still have to turn the graphics down so much that you are better off just playing with FS9 with settings all maxed out and on silky smooth frame rates. FSX was coded for high GHz CPU that never came... instead it went the way of multi-core, parallel processors, GPU, 64bit, etc... and FSX cannot take advantage of any of this.So effectively FS9 has better graphics than FSX and better flight dynamics. And in that case, what is the point of switching? I don't want to pay and go into the trouble for the privilege downgrading to a worse experience! I fear that FLIGHT 2012 will be another step in the wrong direction and we will all have to live with the pain. The point is... FLIGHT 2012 is definitely going in the wrong direction. Yes I know on the website they promised FLIGHT to retain full "fidelity" that we simmers have come to expect.... BUT Microsoft makes promises and breaks them all the time (a la Alan Wake, Intel hyped "multicore" processors to sell this game but eventually Microsoft made it a "VISTA" exclusive and then XBOX exclusive and dropped PC altogether...) It does not bode well that this FLIGHT 2012 is actually coded for the XBOX console and then simply ported over to the PC (look at GTAIV for example, the port was so inefficient that even on the highest PC hardware the graphics and framerates are WORSE than on the lowly xbox360!) Everyone is selling out even Crytek and Crysis once it was on multiply platforms just lost the "feel" it had when it was PC exclusive... its hard to describe but there was definitely a notable difference in the many subtle ways the game performed. Even the legendary John Carmack sold out and traded a mouse and keyboard for an xbox controller. In my opinion, its ironic and sad at the same time... a bittersweet reminder of the bygone PC gaming era. This FLIGHT 2012 is going to be meant to be played with XBOX360 controller and xbox kinetic. Basically that means to me its geared towards the watered down living room entertainment system. People who get bored of watching Netflix and then swap over to flapping their arms to fly some airplane to get some exercise... You know its no good when its "GAMES FOR WINDOWS LIVE"... and you get badges and awards for "playing" a FLIGHT (ex-simulator).. Anyone else feels like FLIGHT 2012 is a slap in the face to simulator fans and worse than not having it in the first place? Remember the good old days of PC fight simulator when you could simulate 99% of the Boeing 747-400 on a MS-DOS computer running Aerowinx that installed only takes up a couple of megabytes on the harddrive? It seems we are asked for more and more but getting less and less. I just have the general feeling that something is definitely not right and it could and should be so much better than this and that something has definitely gone very wrong. It feels like the simulator industry took a wrong turn somewhere and never got its groove back.

I have both FS9 and FSX, and I seldom fly the "stock/default" planes. I also have PMDG 744 for both version. Recently I was playing around with both of them back and forth (some other unrelated test I was doing) and realized the flight dynamics is in many way more "realistic" in FS9 compared to FSX. This seemed to be true in both the stock and payware addons. It is hard to exactly quantify but definitely there is a significant different to the way a stock/default Cessna flies in FSX compared to FS9. In terms of not only aerodynamics up in the air but also motion on the ground. The PMDG 747 for FS9 also flies more realistic than the FSX version and it almost seems like the FSX version is more fake/ watered down/ archade-ish.... I remember reading some articles/forums on here a while back when PMDG admitted that for their FS9 747 port to FSX that the 747 FSX flight dynamics had to get significantly tweaked to become "real" again compared to the FS9 version, but when I did a forum search nothing came up so I can't reference that article... Does anyone else realize this or has everyone just forgotten FS9 already? Will this trend continue into Flight 2012? What if eventually for business reasons PMDG is compelled to switch over to the FLIGHT 2012 platform and all the addons just become faker and faker in terms of actual flight dynamics and realism? Could the handicapps and flight dynamics limitations of FSX be the reason the PMDG737NGX has such a messed up flight dynamics on landing and approach? Maybe the 737NG (new) would be more real had it been coded in FS9?

Is there any addon - I"m not referring to FSRecorder or the likes - that is like a virtual "blackbox" for Flight Simulator 2004/X ? Basically if a flight crashes then we can go find the blackbox and recover and recreate it using the data it recorded for the last 30 minutes? Maybe it can record "cockpit" voice for those of us that have a mic?

Does anyone have a well-mapped X52 PRO profile for the 737NG in FS9 version that they could share/link to? Thanks