dilore

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. dilore

    A bigger picture of the new MSFS

    So the people at Microsoft who abbreviated their products MSNBC, MSN, MSDN, MSCA, MSA, MSRC etc were all wrong and you are correct, they should use a single 'M'. I see 🙂
  2. dilore

    A bigger picture of the new MSFS

    To my knowlege it is MS-DOS, MS Windows, MS Word, MS Excell etc, not M Windows, M Word... So it should be MS Flight Simulator, or MSFS. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Microsoft_Flight_Simulator 'FS' is not totally wrong either, we all use 'FSX' for Flight Simulator X. FS2020 seems not to be official designation, but I understand the intent.
  3. In that case, will there be any development in the MSFS scenery at all?
  4. When we are talking scenery we should talk about Bing Maps and not MSFS, because the latter is totally dependent of the former. I've seen elsewhere that there are 200+ photogrammetric cities in Bing Maps right now, the majority being in the US. Any upgrade of scenery (new photogrammetric cities in Europe for example) will solely depend on the development and budget of Bing Maps. It is my understanding that these cities cannot be done by satellite alone, one will need an airplane to fly around the city too. So this is not a cheap process. MSFS might have a strong incentive to have that accomplished, but does Bing Maps have the same incentive and budget for this? My biggest concern is Bing Maps itself, it has in no way been as successful as Google Earth, and MS might close it down in the future, similar to Edge. It that case I'll assume MSFS will be toast, they will never switch to Google.
  5. You should not talk about arrogance 😉. BTW, flight simming is not a game, it's a hobby that many of us have pursued for decenniums.
  6. My guess is that the French company is one of several subcontractors. BTW, there are an unusual number of french planes in the trailer. It would be interesting to know how many people from MS are involved in the project. If they are only a few this is not a good sign for the longevity of the project, or that MS is not fully committed at this stage.
  7. I don't know how much FS knowledge was left and is kept at MS after the ACES Studio was dissolved. What we see in the demo could be a conglomerate from Aerosoft, HiFi, Bing Maps and others, who knows. The important thing however is the longtime budget of the MSFS team. That they belong to a large software company specializing in Office and Windows is not much help if for example the teams of P3D, Aerofly and XP have larger budgets. We do not know anything about the budgets of course. And I am carefully optimistic, although the sim is not for me in the next couple of years as I mentioned in another post But to believe that MSFS is a top priority product in the minds of the MS leadership seems overly optimistic to me..
  8. Like with Lockheed Martin, a $100B company, it is safe to assume that MS will not put all it's net worth into their flight sim. It's also safe to assume that companies and their staff whose sole product is a flight simulation show more dedication to their product, are more agile in development, are more responsive to customers and have less overhead. They do not have the stamina to survive severe setbacks, but large companies on the other hand often lack the will in these circumstances (FSX, Flight, Edge - and hopefully not Bing because then MSFS will be toast). But if the will exists (over time), MS can certainly make a great product, the potential definitely exists. I second this.
  9. I want high fidelity GA aircraft (incl choppers), historical aircraft, good AI ATC and good European scenery and airports. Otherwise, if a new engine, and excellent US-centric scenery was my thing I would be using Aerofly FS2 already. Until the above is in place, I will not bother with MSFS, especially not with a subscription. Maybe many others will do the same, then this will affect sales, profit and in the worst case development effort (both MS and 3rd party). In the meantime P3D, XPlane and Aerofly will certainly do some catch up. Like others I really hope that MSFS uses a completely new engine. I also hope Aerosoft is already involved in MSFS. I have a high regard for their aircraft. This would shorten the process to get some high-fidelity aircraft into the sim. Regarding European scenery I am not so sure 3rd parties will be supported because I still believe this will be streamed, I wonder if I ever will see correct placed small non-ICAO bush fields, moving windmills, masts and a lot of POIs in Bing Maps. We'll see in a couple of years. MSFS certainly looks very promising. But so does Aerofly. . .
  10. If gorgeous scenery and US-centric 3D cities is your thing there is already a sim out there, it's called Aerofly FS 2. What's the hype about MSFS? Features that only exist in peoples' heads?