cstrosser

I have a feeling this stuff is just "fossils" from a previous era.

Let's be honest for a second. Many of the very serious flight simmers have spent a lot of money on hardware, addons, and software. I try not to think about how much I've spent on this hobby, but I get so much enjoyment out of it, I don't really care! At the end of the day, it becomes an investment of sorts. With that said, people who aren't satisfied with MS Flight will continue to invest and spend their money elsewhere. To me, that decreases the likelihood that someone will switch to a new simulator in the end. Look at the # of people still on FS 2002/4. To spend so much $$$, only to find much of it unusable, is a hard pill to swallow. The lack of backwards compatibility will inevitably be an issue with many people. In my opinion, being realistic about this is realizing that Microsoft changed their focus. I believe MS kept their message incredibly vague on purpose.

Check out XHSI 2.0. It's free and highly configurable. http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=12762Some examples (will take you to mine first :D): http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=50333&view=findpost&p=631589

I kept thinking, what game does this remind me of? That's the one! I have been TRYING to think of that title all night.-Chris

Like they say on the radio shows (modified for the web, of course)--"Long time reader, first time poster."When I first embarked on the journey of virtual aviation, I went straight for FSX. It was challenging, fun, and it made me more curious about the world, and especially about aviation. The lessons written by a real life pilot were equally enjoyable, and really helped me master the simulator. Then, I moved onto the complex topics and FSX accommodated everything and more. As I wanted to increase the challenge, FSX would let me. After I started using better hardware, which I require as a programmer, FSX stopped working as well. In fact, I couldn't finish a flight without enduring a crash. But... I *LOVED* FSX. I wasn't going to let a stupid computer crash stop me.I did the next logical thing. I went onto the forums and started asking questions. Dozens and dozens of people had the same problems. Even after two service pack installations, the problems were not solved. Then, I learned the ACES Studio was gone. Meaning no more updates to the most popular flight simulator. At first, I unwillingly went over to X-Plane 9; however, it wasn't long before I fell in love with the product. It had all the same functionality, a great community, and easy access for developers. Most importantly, it was still being updated and improved. Microsoft didn't lose me here though. I had my eye on MS Flight. I watched with eager engagement, perhaps a bit obsessively!Despite being a loyal X-Plane 9/10 user, I had high hopes for MS Flight. When I saw it was released today, I was so damn excited. I stopped everything to download the new-and-improved simulator, and give it a go. After tweaking my settings for "realism" and assigning my axes, buttons, etc., I gave it a fair shot.Sadness! Disappointment! The rumors were true. Microsoft Flight converted a simulator used by flight instructors, pilots, and aviation buffs into a game to be used by anyone, including my six year old niece. I mean no disrespect to the author of the opinion piece, but I got the impression Mr. Feliz-Tirado might have been in a bit of denial. Hell, I was in denial up until today, when I actually got a chance to try MS Flight.The conclusion stated: It is normal to resist change, even when beneficial. This is a common human trait and the reaction to Flight was to be expected. But there really is no reason to despair. Flight is a very good base for a complete flight simulator. It seems to be relatively trouble-free, highly extensible, and holds a lot of promise.To suggest that this is a matter of "resisting change," is a bit short-sighted. The author said it himself, "No Artificial Intelligence (AI) aircraft traffic, no Air Traffic Control (ATC), no Flight Planner, and no Real Weather. No worldwide coverage with 24000+ airports." MS Flight is a glorified arcade game... a 1/4-finished version of FSX with prettier graphics. FSX should have been their baseline. Even with FSX as a baseline, they still could have added the arcade-style gaming aspect.The MS Flight developers have said that this was a game designed for a mouse and keyboard. They also said, "The best thing about Microsoft Flight is the focus on the experience of flight, not about the act of operating an airplane. That's a fundamental shift. I can do things in the game that I couldn't do in real life." Yes, the "experience of flight" is very important, but so is the act of operating an aircraft. Most of us love aircraft that attempt to mimic the real deal. It's part of the experience. I've seen some aircraft designers create complex aircraft, but with functionality that allows them to skip to the flying part. This allows realism for those who want it, and the "experience" for others.With FSX and X-Plane, we can fly anywhere in the world easily. I don't remember if FSX was accurate, but in X-Plane we have accurate scenery and roads, allowing us to fly visual approaches that reference a freeway or a park. With MS Flight, you get Hawaii, and nothing more. The "Hawaiian Adventure Pack" is $19.99. Will California be $19.99? Will we have to pay $19.99 for each 10,000 sq. mile area? So, not only is it lacking functionality that would make it a simulator, but it seems like it will be cost prohibitive to many people.I had high hopes for Flight, but I'm sticking with X-Plane 10. MS Flight is probably going to be nice for a much different, less serious audience--plain and simple.