threedee

I think photoreal could become standard in the future. Much would rely on algorithms that do all the hard work, like image recognition based object removal and placement (cars, trees, ...) and getting data from national/city level databases.In dense forest no one needs exact tree placement and ground texture is mostly hidden under autogen trees, so in many places this saves space/bandwidth. Whole roads could be seamlessly replaced instead of removing cars. Space requirements could be less with streaming and maybe fractal compression. With smart algorithms it might be possible to estimate tree/building size from shadow (if not getting the data from db). Tree etc. types are generally known in many areas. There may even be data for individual trees in city parks. So, I think it's technologically doable in the near future and many useful algorithms are already in use in medical and military fields. Getting the data and really making it work is something else...(Mixing algorithms and art will give best of both and that's what we'll see in the future also)

I think releasing early has to indicate that they have funding for 1-3 years. Without funding it would have been too risky. It's almost like they are thinking "let's see what happens. It will give us direction".I think they may be planning for slow build-up: first see who buys and how much. Then keep the early adaptors happy and expand to new user groups. Very much like web sites are developed over time. Hopefully they have enough time to make it work. The current 40 strong team would mean something like 200 000 - 300 000 DLC unit sales per year to break even. That's roughly 100 000 - 150 000 active users/customers maybe. A lot less if they do really good dlc...Any money they manage to make now will likely give them more time to get it right. After couple of years no one remembers the Big Disappointment of March 2012 :-)

I have a mac mini (late 2009 model) + Win XP Boot camp. Flight works fine and performance is okay (mostly low/medium settings).

I think it will all depend on total money spend during first year or so. MS needs to prove 3PD that it's good idea to jump in with the terms they are giving. More money there is bigger cut MS can take (and set other conditions too). Speed of the process will depend on sales volume development over time (with big sales volume that keeps increasing it would be quick and easy...).Buyers would mostly benefit from 3PD competing against each other and MS wouldn't mind 3PD competing because they would get their cut anyway (and market size would stay same or increase). However, for 3PD competition is the big unknown with complex products, especially if the market gets big enough to attract new developers (who might have revolutionary ideas/methods/tools/...). I think the smart devs act more hesitant than they are to get better negotiation position :-)

See my sig :-) Feel free to copy...

Me too, on iPhone. Started yesterday, like others.

+1 for Twotter & skydivers! There are number of things I want in Flight before buying any dlc, but a twotter mission with beautifully animated skydivers would change my mind in a heartbeat. First 18 years of my life I lived within 5km from the local airport. The skydivers had a twotter. A little later in my life I just had to try it... Now 16 years later I can still vividly see the Twin Otter continuing forward as I fall away from it...The twotter sounds might be bit too much for me if they did it right (with the twin engines resonating in almost perfect harmony). I still get goose pumps when I hear it (and you can hear it from far away when they are climbing to 4km).I should try to sleep, but no hope after this time trip...

We are sold the world many times. First by MS with "better than FSX, but not perfect" level (I think what we have seen so far looks very good, but for example autogen & textures could be improved. I bet that this level was chosen intentionally). Then by Orbx maybe next year. Then by someone else doing it even more perfect with some algorithm placing individual trees based on aerial images? Then maybe paid upgrades? It will never end :-PLuckily anyone can decide what to buy :-)

I think it will be some variation of the best case scenario. I hope there will be a way to get in serious stuff done by dedicated hobbyists. Many marginal interest planes & places won't be ever done by commercial developers and it would be shame not to have that content. Then again, no one wants to see yet another version of some plane someone managed to model as their first try... (it's amazing how many flashlight apps there are in app store :-) )

I always use RWW. Often I first check weather on some of my favorite places, then pick the place based on the weather. Problem with RWW is that there aren't that many reporting stations (especially in Alaska...), so it's not that accurate. I would prefer better small scale weather simulation without RWW over the current REX/FSX RWW. Something like mountain valleys causing a change in wind direction would be nice. Seeing a fast jet cause spiraling turbulance in clouds would be awesome...With RWW it would be cool if they could take a satellite or radar image and put the raindrops "exactly" where they are in RW :-)

I got it to work quite okay by disabling "Enhance pointer precision" (in XP, also called mouse acceleration) and decreasing "mouse speed" until normal head movements wouldn't make the cursor touch screen edges. Now I am flying mouse in left hand and RMB pressed :-)Not the real thing yet, but now I can see the runway before final approach turn..(I'll reiterate my decision: I won't buy any dlc before TrackIR is supported by MS. There should be enough of us to make it profitable for them to do it asap...)

Yes, something like that I believe :-)Nowadays much of the sw development is done using some agile process. One of the things they teach product owners is how to minimize risks and give customers more what they want by releasing early and often. On top of the agile part of the process is the longer term roadmapping that is revisited maybe twice a year. What we are seeing now is based on their prerelease roadmapping. The roadmap will be adjusted and we should see the effects within 6 months.If they feel there is no risks in going 100% after their main target audience then that's what we'll see... Buying dlc, welcoming new simmers, enjoying Flight, etc. are all things we should and will do, but at the same time it tells MS that FSX users are okey with their plan. The side effect is that any 3rd party content, ATC, etc. might be delayed, UNLESS THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE STARTS ASKING FOR THESE.So, if anyone wants to see something from FSX in Flight, they must convince the target audience, i.e. the new casual simmers, not MS.One of the best ways to convince is to let people experience... Maybe we should collect a list of best youtube videos highlighting the FSX goodies in a way that makes new simmers want them?

I'll test asap, but here's something: disabling mouse acceleration in Win mouse settings might help in keeping view in sync.

Thanks g_precentralis! Have to say I am disappointed as I am pretty sure some of the things interesting for me won't be there. Well, I have FSX and who knows what has happened by the time MS would be ready to welcome other developers...I hope they manage to deliver goodies fast enough to keep the new simmers interested. I think the new simmers will pretty soon start asking for stuff they have seen in real life: big iron, military stuff, local airport & planes there, their home town, planes/places from movies, ... MS will of course hide all the complicated stuff, so the Flight missions can produce feeling of success without requiring any digging into manuals (and that's how they should do it, given their goals). I think (hope) they are wise enough to have a layer of complexity that can be accessed if so desired, so people get a feeling of depth in their simulations (like the checklist run automatically in the Stearman tutorial). Otherwise many tasks are going to look obviously way too simplified and that would take away the feeling of accomplishment.

Anyone know the origin of that info?