I just deleted the beta after spending about 3 hours with it between yesterday and today. I won't go into why, but the video link posted above speaks for itself. I sent a email to Microsoft that I dont have time to waste testing an arcade game. Nuff said!
Rob
_________________________
Intel Core i7-2600K Sandy Bridge 3.4GHz Oc'd to 4.8GHZ 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2000 (PC3 16000) ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti ASUS P8Z68-V/GEN3 LGA 1155 MB Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty CORSAIR CWCH60 Liquid CPU Cooler Rosewill BLACKHAWK Gaming ATX Mid Tower Computer Case SAMSUNG 27" 2ms(GTG) HDMI Widescreen LCD Monitor
What a major f*ck up this GAME is!! AND WHAT?? 3rd party people can't design add-ons for it!! The flight model shown in the video posted by the OP of this thread looks even less realistic than ARMA fixed wing flight model!! Only models the Hawaii islands instead of the WHOLE WORLD like the previous Microsoft Flight Simulators did!!!
I've been playing Microsoft Fligh Simulator since version 5.0 but I'll simply pass this Microsoft Flight GAME and I hope that Microsoft shoots itself on the foot regarding this GAME and that doesn't get any profit with this major f*ck up!!! Bye bye Microsoft!!
Registered: 12/18/03
Posts: 1418
Loc: Perth, Western Australia
Evil Flower;
Are you SERIOUS?
Have you ever flown the real thing by chance? I have no affiliations to anybody, but this is definately the end of Microsoft Flight Simulator, that's for sure.
AJ.
_________________________
Kindest regards,
AJ
"If you know the enemy and know yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt; if you know Heaven and know Earth, you may make your victory complete." - The Art of War - Sun Tzu
Lets assume that something like 1 on a million happens and that you're right that the Microsoft Flight game flight model is in fact good and what is shown in the video is something like a very early beta or even the player as the "dificulty settings" on "easy" but nevertheless this microsoft flight game does:
--> NOT ALLOW 3rd party add-ons (aircraft, scenarios, etc...) --> NOT MODEL the entire wold (while the entire world does exists the rest of world does not have textures and topography) --> Want to fly in an another part of the world?? You have to wait for microsoft to model it and than purchase it!!
The lack of these two features which were basically the most important ones in microsoft flight SIMULATOR are more than enough to classify this microsoft flight GAME as a major f*ck up!!!
Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 329
Loc: Eslöv, Sverige
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
@ "Bad Flower":
Lets assume that something like 1 on a million happens and that you're right that the Microsoft Flight game flight model is in fact good and what is shown in the video is something like a very early beta or even the player as the "dificulty settings" on "easy" but nevertheless this microsoft flight game does:
--> NOT ALLOW 3rd party add-ons (aircraft, scenarios, etc...) --> NOT MODEL the entire wold (while the entire world does exists the rest of world does not have textures and topography) --> Want to fly in an another part of the world?? You have to wait for microsoft to model it and than purchase it!!
The lack of these two features which were basically the most important ones in microsoft flight SIMULATOR are more than enough to classify this microsoft flight GAME as a major f*ck up!!!
Look, it was already stated that "the game scales down to allow WASD + mouse control WHILE retaining full procedures hardcoresim blabla for those who want it". We've even had a thread here confirm that "The FM feels way better than FSX". So how hard is it to tune the game to the lowest realism settings and then produce a video with which you can point and say "haha no SIM" (Because we all know fat nerds like to capitalise SIM like that just in case, you know, someone could confuse PC flightsims as being entertainment. No way, SIMs are dead serious man!) and get a bunch of reactionary grognards all worked up.
PROTIP: Any PC simulator is a piece of entertainment software, and thus by definition a game. Even DCS is a game, whodathunkit.
Besides, I used to play FS back when it was still SubLogic Flight Simulator and guess what, you had to wait for SubLogic to build "Scenery Disks" which you could then order and buy. So this move isn't any different. Besides, who cares about having the entire globe modelled if this means boring generic autogenerated areas? I'd rather fly over a piece of nicely modelled scenery that actually looks like the real thing. Besides, no 3rd party content? Who cares. You can still get that for FSX, and for the actual end user having only official addons means less installation problems, less problems with mod conflicts, less places to go to to find good stuff, centralized art direction, less variance in quality level. Which means we'll probably be able to buy our California or East Coast scenery for like $15 a piece instead of having to pay $100 to ORBX or whatever. So for anyone who isn't a hardcore simmer (pretty much about 99% of gamers) who spends $2000 on addons and peripherals and untold hours setting everything up all this user-friendlyness is a net positive. And to top it off, because the business model is F2P, this means individual addons will likely be cheaper since they're what drives the profits.
After watching the video and reading various comments on this forum as well as the beta forum I can see MS expanding the content as well as implementing features to make Flight just as enjoyable as FSX - for example stress reactions on the air frame during extreme maneuvers or collapsing gear during hard landings. All of these I can see being scale-able.
I will take a wait and see approach to Flight - I'm not ready to write it off just yet.
Besides, who cares about having the entire globe modelled if this means boring generic autogenerated areas? I'd rather fly over a piece of nicely modelled scenery that actually looks like the real thing. Besides, no 3rd party content? Who cares.
I care!! These are my 2 favorite features that FS have and it's these features that set the FS series apart from any other sim in the market and if I'm not mistaken the vast majority of FS players also care about these 2 features. You don't care? fine but I'm betting that you belong to a vast minority regarding this (of course I could be wrong but I doubt it )
Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 329
Loc: Eslöv, Sverige
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
I care!! These are my 2 favorite features that FS have and it's these features that set the FS series apart from any other sim in the market and if I'm not mistaken the vast majority of FS players also care about these 2 features. You don't care? fine but I'm betting that you belong to a vast minority regarding this (of course I could be wrong but I doubt it )
I get it that you care, but you are in the minority. I have a friend who loves FSX and has about $5000 worth of payware and peripherals and who operates a virtual airline in FSX. My dad (I gave my copy to him since it was too boring for me and SF2 is more fun) loves to fly GA around the world in FSX. So they're the same demographic as you are. On the other hand, for each of them, I can easily find about 100 other people who while having a passing interest in planes will invariably look at random FSX moment and say "That looks really boring".
So Flight is designed to appeal to those 100 people by emphasising the FUN of flying. Meanwhile it has also been designed to scale up so that it can be just as complex as stock FSX but with better physics.
Besides, what's so bad with a sim that can be flown adequately with WASD + mouse or an 360 controller? You can't seriously expect to have TrackIR, pedals, throttles and joysticks as a prerequisite to enjoying a game.
[quote=ricnunes] Besides, what's so bad with a sim that can be flown adequately with WASD + mouse or an 360 controller? You can't seriously expect to have TrackIR, pedals, throttles and joysticks as a prerequisite to enjoying a game.
A game no but a sim yes. To be honest I think MS created a game to appeal to the masses instead of to the small corner that is flight sims. This is a money maker not a sim. If you want a sim then it looks like X-plane is your only choice for now. Maybe ED will bring us a cicilian flight sim in a few years.
_________________________
"Whoever appeals to the law against his fellow man is either a fool or a coward. Whoever cannot take care of himself without that law is both. For a wounded man shall say to his assailant, "If I Die, You are forgiven. If I Live, I will kill you." Such is the Rule of Honor."
XBOX Live Tag/Steam/pCARS: Weaponz248 iRacing/RFactor 2: Jason Bader
Registered: 07/11/08
Posts: 71
Loc: Milton Keynes, United Kingdom
Looking at this on a more positive note, it'll certainly generate a lot of interest in flight simulators, and acts as the perfect entry level for people with even the slightest interest in flying.
If even just 1% of the millions of people who will try this go on to purchase a "proper simulator", it will generate a whole lot of revenue, which in the long run will go towards making our simulators better.
Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 329
Loc: Eslöv, Sverige
Originally Posted By: Weaponz248
A game no but a sim yes. To be honest I think MS created a game to appeal to the masses instead of to the small corner that is flight sims. This is a money maker not a sim. If you want a sim then it looks like X-plane is your only choice for now. Maybe ED will bring us a cicilian flight sim in a few years.
lol
Sim = game
Game = sim
All these PC sims are entertainment productions, and as such they are by definition games. They are not real training simulators, no matter how much the hardcore crowd wants to pretend they are.
Entertainment products are made to make money, and if you want to make money, it makes little sense to develop a product that requires you to have pedals, throttles, joysticks and trackIR to get any enjoyment out of it. Far more PC gamers have Xbox360 controllers than they have full joystick/throttle/rudder setups, so if Flight comes with native support for those, then all the better.
I have watched some videos and I don't think Flight is an Arcade. Most of the videos I have seen look like they are in arcade mode but in this video the plane has clickable cockpit which makes me think not everything is lost. I also want to see how much people will have to pay for each new scenery + new planes.
_________________________
Ignorance is the worlds greatest threat
Everyone is getting all up in arms about this. The fact of the matter is that it CAN scale up to sim standards. Its appealing to a large range of people, and that's what the flight sim community needs. I'm sick of people complaining about it being a game and not a sim or visa versa. At least its something, we don't get sims very often so we should just accept it for what it is.
It's a little different than FSX yes, but IMHO for the better.
Huh. MS Flight's fire will burn out before it gets lit. I'm going to go fire up FS9.
Edited by Tolwyn (01/06/1203:35 PM)
_________________________
My personal licensing agreement: In exchange for my hard-earned cash for your product, you agree to the following terms: No part of my hardware may be used as a mechanism to verify or reverify my economical patronage. My receipt will serve that purpose. If you disagree with this license, you may return my money to me, and I'll return your product.
I with ricnunes! This is a friggin' arcade game, man! Evil doesn't know what he's talking about! All that crap about Sublogic's original not having scenery. IT WAS THE FIRST ONE!!! The sim has evolved, man! What was good enough back in the 80s, is no longer acceptable.
We'll be keeping FSX going for a LOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNGGGGGGGG time.
_________________________
Flight Simulator X, Ghost Recon Classic, Rainbow Six/Rogue Spear, NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, GPL --- the best of the best! It doesn't get any better, folks.
The greatest developers of all time: Janes (Origin Skunkworks), Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, Microprose, Red Storm, Papyrus, Eagle Dynamics, Creative Assembly, ISI,and SimBin--the best of the best!
[quote=ricnunes] Besides, what's so bad with a sim that can be flown adequately with WASD + mouse or an 360 controller?
Huh? Say what? What is so bad? EVERYTHING!!!! It's not a sim if you can fly it or drive it with a gamepad. Go play with the kiddies.
_________________________
Flight Simulator X, Ghost Recon Classic, Rainbow Six/Rogue Spear, NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, GPL --- the best of the best! It doesn't get any better, folks.
The greatest developers of all time: Janes (Origin Skunkworks), Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, Microprose, Red Storm, Papyrus, Eagle Dynamics, Creative Assembly, ISI,and SimBin--the best of the best!
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 645
Loc: Frome/Bath UK
History repeats itself. I'm sure it wouldn't take much to dredge up the past forum posts about how FSX will be a game. I specifically remember when they announced the missions concept, there were howls of hate directed at MS. But now, FSX is apparently a gold standard simulator! Who'd have thought?
Short memories.
[rant] From MY perspective;
MS was supposed to have washed its hands of flight simulators forever when the ACES team was disbanded. Now they are releasing a FREE flight sim = win
The base system will be free = win
I won't have to trawl through a gazillion 3rd party addons and try to decide which is good/worthwhile = win
I expect I will not have to pay the nose-bleeding prices small 3rd party addon companies have to charge in order to stay afloat = win
Did I mention it will be free? = win
Just like FSX, if I choose I can turn off realism and fly it like an arcade game (which strangely doesn't magically make FSX a "game" in the eyes of many) = win
I can turn on bells and whistles to make it more complex and realistic = win
I'm not a fat four-eyed computer nerd with no other life other than flight sims and delusions that I'm becoming a real pilot so I don't have to invest a significant proportion of my time and mental energy getting entertainment out of Flight = win
I could go on.
The flight simulator business is a market. No-one has any entitlement to anything. You see what is on offer, decide what to buy and lay your money down. Once you've done that you should be entitled to getting what was advertised and if not you can then complain. If there isn't something you want in the market place....tough; either make it yourself, wait for it to be made or put up and shut up about it. When was the last time you went to the supermarket and found they didn't stock something you were after? Did you then go to the service desk and complain to them that they were selling out, that it was a conspiracy, that this had ruined your life and they are responsible for it? If you did, you need some counselling. Being the Internet however, allows many to behave like three year olds.
Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 329
Loc: Eslöv, Sverige
Originally Posted By: Plainsman
It's not a sim if you can fly it or drive it with a gamepad. Go play with the kiddies.
ORLY?
But it's a SIM if you can fly it with a joystick that has throttle + twist rudder, right? Unlike a 360 controller which almost perfectly functions like an RC controller used to, you know, fly real planes. I guess that makes all RC flyers ARCADE flyers instead.
Registered: 10/11/99
Posts: 1262
Loc: Leeds, England
Quote:
It's not a sim if you can fly it or drive it with a gamepad. Go play with the kiddies.
Utter bollox. And I mean that in a friendly way.
Armed forces have flown UAVs with XBOX gamepads. Controllers and input devices have NOTHING to do with the math or underlying complexity inside simulation games. I've flown Black Shark with a wireless 360 controller, does that make it any less of a sim?
We mapped the front seat gunnery controls of the Longbow Apache onto one (the real aircraft has more thumbsticks so it was kind of difficult to squeeze on) but the morphology is similar.
I think you meant to say, if it doesn't have differential equations, it's not a sim. I suspect it does though. You can take advanced flight models and apply lots of dampening to make them easy to use (even detect if the device IS a joypad and adapt the flight model accordingly).
History repeats itself. I'm sure it wouldn't take much to dredge up the past forum posts about how FSX will be a game. I specifically remember when they announced the missions concept, there were howls of hate directed at MS. But now, FSX is apparently a gold standard simulator! Who'd have thought?
Short memories.
Were those forum posts from people that have actually played the game?
I've played flight, i could care less about the NDA on this one because people need to know what direction this crap is going. It is a full blown console game. You could easily have this game on the xbox 360, and in fact i'd guess it'll show up there eventually. The planes are stiff and almost impossible to stall or make anything bad happen. To further prove the fact that this is a game and not a sim, the VERY FIRST mission in the game is to use some hot air balloons as cones and weave in and out of them to show you know how to steer the plane. My first impression was "i can't beleive how retardedly simple it is to fly this, it must be on simple flight model". So i went into the options to turn on all the advanced stuff. There really isn't any. There is ONE option that really toggles anything and after going back into the game i couldn't even tell the difference.
The graphics are only a slight improvement over FSX but that could change. All in all this "game" is nothing more than a cash shop for microsoft to nickel and dime everyone dumb enough to download this free to play travesty to the long and distinguished history of the flight simulator series. The cash shop for this thing is built right into the front end of the game. I can't fathom who this game is going to appeal to, the old FSX crowd is going to hate it as it's not moddable and isn't realistic and only has Hawaii which kicks out everyone that likes to fly the big jets. And the console crowds going to hate it because it's still "boring" there's nothing to shoot.
Registered: 04/09/07
Posts: 256
Loc: Fort Worth,Texas
I have been reading threads and posts about ms flight from the announcement on the release date. All I keep reading is from Dev's. that produce addon stuff for FSX. Each one is concerned (and knows)that flight will take away from there buying folks.So yes these Dev's. are going to knock the flight product. What gets me,is that these Dev's that produce addons for FSX won't build there own product to keep there funding going.
_________________________
NXZT Phantom case,core i7-975 oc 4.2,6gbcrucal ballistics ram at 1900 mhz,radeon HD5850 windows 7
I have flown FSX, IL2, Flaming Cliffs and be ready to hear that...Falcon BMS with the xbox 360 controller.
The gamepad IS NOT as accurate as a joystick but you still can fly it. With Falcon I was able to use the dpad and right stick to control radar azimuth and lock on planes and ground units.
Following same logic a real F-16 pilot is flying in "arcade mode" because he is using fly by wire
Also people using remote control similar to a gamepad for RC planes and they are decently accurate.
_________________________
Ignorance is the worlds greatest threat
The first parodia scene from the film"Bunker" for Microsoft Flight Simulator X, created by DReaperF4 August 10, 2006.Original removed for copyright infringement.
Registered: 04/09/07
Posts: 256
Loc: Fort Worth,Texas
I don't think people are understanding the point behind ms and flight.MS has already said there are levels of game play. This said I would assume that level 1 would be easy and the higher the level the more it would need to play it, like the highest level would include click-able switches and realistic flight controls.But this is what all the companies are doing today.A sample of this is DCS Black shark. It caters to both novice and hardcore playing.Even BF3 has a softcore and hardcore mode.
But at the end we get the core game for free and from there can make better judgment.
_________________________
NXZT Phantom case,core i7-975 oc 4.2,6gbcrucal ballistics ram at 1900 mhz,radeon HD5850 windows 7
Registered: 12/15/09
Posts: 1315
Loc: South East PA
Originally Posted By: flyboy77
I have been reading threads and posts about ms flight from the announcement on the release date. All I keep reading is from Dev's. that produce addon stuff for FSX. Each one is concerned (and knows)that flight will take away from there buying folks.So yes these Dev's. are going to knock the flight product. What gets me,is that these Dev's that produce addons for FSX won't build there own product to keep there funding going.
I very much doubt that they are really worried about all of their loyal customers ditching them for Flight. I'm sure MS will fail to resist the temptation to over-charge for POS add-ons in a market without competition. Will they get millions of DL's? Sure, the price is right for the base Flight software. Will they sell millions of dollars in add-ons? Probably not.
Most of those devs are upset because MS called them during Flight's Alpha,and shooed them away when they realized they could eat their lunch instead. In short: MS want's not just a slice, but ALL of the third party content pie, and killed the goose laying the golden egg to get it.
Also, according to a post from an Orbx dev, there's no sense in starting over, the FSX engine apparently is the best of it's type ever built. The reason it performs (relatively) poorly is because it was never shown the love it deserved. IIRC, they post said that Orbx had done the math, and it would require millions in start up cash to begin from scratch on a competing platform. With LM in a position to possibly go retail with Prepar3d anyway, why risk it?
_________________________ My Rig:AMD Phenom X4 955 Black Edition OCed@3.8 GHz/GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 AM3 AMD 890FX Mobo\ MSi AMD 6950 2GB \ 8 Gigs of G.skills Ram\Storage: WD Black 750 GB HDD\All held together by: Coolermaster HAF 932 case
Other Assets Deployed: HOTAS: Logitech G940 CH FighterStick/Pro-Throttle/Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals Wheel: Fanatec 911 Turbo S w/ Playseats Racing Seat.
Registered: 02/06/00
Posts: 3725
Loc: WA, United States
Mmmm. Fires up FS9 and FSPassengers, or FSCargo, and flies around.
Weeeeee! Still a great sim, and to me, still better than FSX.
_________________________
My personal licensing agreement: In exchange for my hard-earned cash for your product, you agree to the following terms: No part of my hardware may be used as a mechanism to verify or reverify my economical patronage. My receipt will serve that purpose. If you disagree with this license, you may return my money to me, and I'll return your product.
MS figured out that the only people making money with FSX were doing the add-ons so they want to make sure they get all that revenue. Thanks, but i will stick to FSX.
Without breaking any rules I can't say what it's like. But I am with it . It's not FSX, but I think thats been covered in just about every other post about Flight.
Hopefully it wont be like other times microsoft has engaged other companies, put them under an NDA and at some point stopped talking to them. More than once there has been a lawsuit when shunned company finds MS has copied their work thanks to all the talks they had under NDA.
Registered: 07/01/01
Posts: 1249
Loc: Vancouver, BC
Originally Posted By: HarryR
Without breaking any rules I can't say what it's like. But I am with it . It's not FSX, but I think thats been covered in just about every other post about Flight.
In support of Harry's observation, I'll re-quote myself from a different thread:
Rather than viewing Flight as a successor to FSX (or the MS Flight Simulator series in general), it's better to regard it as a separate but still valid sibling. It DOES lack some functionality that I really hope turns up in the final release (e.g. TrackIR support) but I'm actually finding elements of the overall game structure really compelling, engaging and fun.
Yes, I said "fun".
It's absolutely not going to satisfy the PMDG or A2A crowd just yet, but it's an entirely valid flight sim in its own right. FSX still exists and no one's taking it away from you. MS Flight is shooting for different goals and isn't actually too far off the mark from my perspective.
Perhaps the best way of looking at it is that MS Flight is Flaming Cliffs to FSX's DCS A-10. I appreciate that the analogy isn't perfect, but at least it hopefully gives another perspective.
MS Flight is not going to be for everyone, but it has its place and it's a perfectly valid one. I don't expect the waves of scorn and righteous indignation to stop any time soon (in fact I expect them to get worse and worse, because that's the nature of our passionate and divisive community) but personally think they're somewhat misguided and missing the wider point.
Just at the moment, I'm perfectly happy for the MS Flight beta to take its share of my free time from "full real" RoF, Black Shark and DCS Warthog.
I don't think people are understanding the point behind ms and flight.MS has already said there are levels of game play. This said I would assume that level 1 would be easy and the higher the level the more it would need to play it, like the highest level would include click-able switches and realistic flight controls.But this is what all the companies are doing today.A sample of this is DCS Black shark. It caters to both novice and hardcore playing.Even BF3 has a softcore and hardcore mode.
But at the end we get the core game for free and from there can make better judgment.
Absolutely none of what you say about "levels" is in the game nor is there any evidence of the framework to support it. The options regarding flight realism even are laughable, there's like one checkbox for realistic or arcade and another for prop effects which doesn't seem to do anything. You really need to think xbox game here, and i'm not exaggerating at all. You need to go over to avsim and read what some addon developers for FSX are saying about their "flight" experience. Yeah they have an axe to grind to some extent since flight is shutting them out, but the stories from two different companies are almost identical. If you want a high level sim that's realistic in the vein of FSX and the entire history of the microsoft flight sims, this then is not the game you are looking for as this is a cash shop front end with some arcade planes and some goofy arcade challenges.
Who knows this game might be a huge hit as PC flight sims are basically long sine dead and no one wants to play them anymore except us few die hards, but this game doesn't remotely live up to it's history and microsoft should be ashamed.
Basically if you thought pilotwings on the super nintendo was the best flight sim ever, then this is right up your alley. If your looking for something that could be a successor to FSX, then this is NOT it.
Registered: 04/09/07
Posts: 256
Loc: Fort Worth,Texas
Originally Posted By: AggressorBLUE
Originally Posted By: flyboy77
I have been reading threads and posts about ms flight from the announcement on the release date. All I keep reading is from Dev's. that produce addon stuff for FSX. Each one is concerned (and knows)that flight will take away from there buying folks.So yes these Dev's. are going to knock the flight product. What gets me,is that these Dev's that produce addons for FSX won't build there own product to keep there funding going.
I very much doubt that they are really worried about all of their loyal customers ditching them for Flight. I'm sure MS will fail to resist the temptation to over-charge for POS add-ons in a market without competition. Will they get millions of DL's? Sure, the price is right for the base Flight software. Will they sell millions of dollars in add-ons? Probably not.
Most of those devs are upset because MS called them during Flight's Alpha,and shooed them away when they realized they could eat their lunch instead. In short: MS want's not just a slice, but ALL of the third party content pie, and killed the goose laying the golden egg to get it.
Also, according to a post from an Orbx dev, there's no sense in starting over, the FSX engine apparently is the best of it's type ever built. The reason it performs (relatively) poorly is because it was never shown the love it deserved. IIRC, they post said that Orbx had done the math, and it would require millions in start up cash to begin from scratch on a competing platform. With LM in a position to possibly go retail with Prepar3d anyway, why risk it?
I understand what you are saying,about MS wanting all the money. But honestly MS (I'm no MS fan)has spent a large amout of money and time on a game they produced. In all honestly I think MS was very generous with FSX in the past,letting the 3rd party people make millions off a game MS created. I have read where MS wanted a "cut" in the 3rd party addon market,but the 3rd party market was greedy and said no.
_________________________
NXZT Phantom case,core i7-975 oc 4.2,6gbcrucal ballistics ram at 1900 mhz,radeon HD5850 windows 7
Registered: 04/09/07
Posts: 256
Loc: Fort Worth,Texas
Originally Posted By: swampthng
Originally Posted By: flyboy77
I don't think people are understanding the point behind ms and flight.MS has already said there are levels of game play. This said I would assume that level 1 would be easy and the higher the level the more it would need to play it, like the highest level would include click-able switches and realistic flight controls.But this is what all the companies are doing today.A sample of this is DCS Black shark. It caters to both novice and hardcore playing.Even BF3 has a softcore and hardcore mode.
But at the end we get the core game for free and from there can make better judgment.
Absolutely none of what you say about "levels" is in the game nor is there any evidence of the framework to support it. The options regarding flight realism even are laughable, there's like one checkbox for realistic or arcade and another for prop effects which doesn't seem to do anything. You really need to think xbox game here, and i'm not exaggerating at all. You need to go over to avsim and read what some addon developers for FSX are saying about their "flight" experience. Yeah they have an axe to grind to some extent since flight is shutting them out, but the stories from two different companies are almost identical. If you want a high level sim that's realistic in the vein of FSX and the entire history of the microsoft flight sims, this then is not the game you are looking for as this is a cash shop front end with some arcade planes and some goofy arcade challenges.
Who knows this game might be a huge hit as PC flight sims are basically long sine dead and no one wants to play them anymore except us few die hards, but this game doesn't remotely live up to it's history and microsoft should be ashamed.
Basically if you thought pilotwings on the super nintendo was the best flight sim ever, then this is right up your alley. If your looking for something that could be a successor to FSX, then this is NOT it.
I have not yet played the beta yet (on the list).Most can't really even say whats going on with the game unless they break NDA rules. I have been reading about "flight"from pretty much all the flight sim forums. As I have said the biggest complaints were from Dev's. I'm not bashing the Devs..I support them with large amounts of money spent on there addon products. But why criticize MS and there product just because you can't sell addons for it. People and company's criticize,and even bash others products for the sole purpose to keep the consumer from buying them. Very similar to politicians "mudslinging" tactics.
_________________________
NXZT Phantom case,core i7-975 oc 4.2,6gbcrucal ballistics ram at 1900 mhz,radeon HD5850 windows 7
I understand what you are saying,about MS wanting all the money. But honestly MS (I'm no MS fan)has spent a large amout of money and time on a game they produced. In all honestly I think MS was very generous with FSX in the past,letting the 3rd party people make millions off a game MS created. I have read where MS wanted a "cut" in the 3rd party addon market,but the 3rd party market was greedy and said no.
MS created the 3rd party SDK with the specific purpose of opening it up to 3rd party developers and they did not include any sort of revenue sharing license agreement thinking that the 3rd party products would sell more copies of FSX, and I suspect they have indeed made a ton of money selling copies of FSX that would otherwise not have been sold if people were stuck with the simple aircraft and scenery included.
The freeware and payware addons are the reason MS is still selling copies of FSX 5 years later even though they quit providing any patches or even paying developers to support it.
I personally own multiple copies since I got tired of having to do the phone call thing for activation whenever I reinstall the OS or upgrade h/w as a result of too many past activations, I own: 1ea FSX Deluxe 1ea FSX Acceleration 1ea FSX Gold
That also doesn't include the cost of Windows 7x64 which I did the upgrade to mainly to get rid of the FSX out of memory errors, so I bought an OS upgrade for FSX as one of the primary reasons.
Also there was nothing keeping MS from putting out quality addon aircraft or scenery themselves, so if they wanted a bigger piece of the pie I think it was theirs to take, even now if they put out FS11 with DirectX11 and multi-GPU support and some sort of adjusted licensing agreement that still allowed 3rd party developers to make a profit most of us FSX fans would go out and buy it happily.
We don't have all the background data, but I'm thinking that MS did not lose money on FSX, and I doubt the lack of 3rd party vendor licensing fees was the cause for MS to dump the ACES team and focus on a free-to-play simlite version of FSX, I suspect it has more to do with internal business "strategic alignment" within the company that saw all the game studios fall under the "Xbox" senior executive management and they closed many of the studios (ACES, FASA, Bungie, Ensemble) and re-aligned many of the titles to be more focused on the recurring revenue yearly release and DLC console type of model.
Of course that's just my opinion based on some of the articles and my experience working at humongous corporations, probably not worth $.02 :-)
I'm kind of in a wait and see on MS Flight. Everything I have seen on Xplane 10 has kind of made it a non-starter and the fact that it isn't getting much attention makes it even more of a non-starter.
The little bit I have seen on Flight shows impressive graphics. I obviously can't comment on the flight model but I have a hard time believing it was made worse than FSX.
Most everything seems to come down the business model and development of a sort of multi-player flight environment as opposed to the more traditional open approach. I can see value in keeping it "locked down" like it has been with the idea that everyone is using the same equipment and has the same scenery especially from the MMOFG perspective.
To me it is kind of like comparing Iracing and Rfactor. Iracing is closed source where you buy cars and tracks from iracing (or more correctly....rent them). Rfactor has a lot of generated third party freeware products.....some are very good some not so. The same applies for FSX add-ons....some are exceptional some are mediocre at best. It could be that MS is not wanting to have that kind of variability in their MMOFG.
Having the scenery and planes purchased piecemeal has some value for the consumer as well. Also it gives the developer incentive to develop some very detailed scenery instead of going generic and update it in the future as well. I don't doubt that they will have fully functional airliners and world wide detailed scenery ( with more popular areas and planes making appearances first). The plus side of it from a consumer is that you pay for what you want. For those that want to fly airliners world wide with detailed scenery then I'm sure you will be able to do it......its just going to cost you (kind of like racing full schedule of oval and road tracks at iracing will cost you a lot of money in track purchases). If you are interested in just flying a single engine plane in one physical area then you are likely going to have a much more economical experience.
Basically.......the more you want the more it is going to cost.....but in reality that isn't much different than those of us who have invested in add-ons and mods for FSX.
So basically, I'm just going to wait an see and probably try the free version when its released, see what is available with the add-ons and make my decision from there.....you can't beat the price (and any ranting or raving isn't going to get microsoft to change their business model for this)
Registered: 04/09/07
Posts: 256
Loc: Fort Worth,Texas
Originally Posted By: kludger
Originally Posted By: flyboy77
I understand what you are saying,about MS wanting all the money. But honestly MS (I'm no MS fan)has spent a large amout of money and time on a game they produced. In all honestly I think MS was very generous with FSX in the past,letting the 3rd party people make millions off a game MS created. I have read where MS wanted a "cut" in the 3rd party addon market,but the 3rd party market was greedy and said no.
MS created the 3rd party SDK with the specific purpose of opening it up to 3rd party developers and they did not include any sort of revenue sharing license agreement thinking that the 3rd party products would sell more copies of FSX, and I suspect they have indeed made a ton of money selling copies of FSX that would otherwise not have been sold if people were stuck with the simple aircraft and scenery included.
The freeware and payware addons are the reason MS is still selling copies of FSX 5 years later even though they quit providing any patches or even paying developers to support it.
I personally own multiple copies since I got tired of having to do the phone call thing for activation whenever I reinstall the OS or upgrade h/w as a result of too many past activations, I own: 1ea FSX Deluxe 1ea FSX Acceleration 1ea FSX Gold
That also doesn't include the cost of Windows 7x64 which I did the upgrade to mainly to get rid of the FSX out of memory errors, so I bought an OS upgrade for FSX as one of the primary reasons.
Also there was nothing keeping MS from putting out quality addon aircraft or scenery themselves, so if they wanted a bigger piece of the pie I think it was theirs to take, even now if they put out FS11 with DirectX11 and multi-GPU support and some sort of adjusted licensing agreement that still allowed 3rd party developers to make a profit most of us FSX fans would go out and buy it happily.
We don't have all the background data, but I'm thinking that MS did not lose money on FSX, and I doubt the lack of 3rd party vendor licensing fees was the cause for MS to dump the ACES team and focus on a free-to-play simlite version of FSX, I suspect it has more to do with internal business "strategic alignment" within the company that saw all the game studios fall under the "Xbox" senior executive management and they closed many of the studios (ACES, FASA, Bungie, Ensemble) and re-aligned many of the titles to be more focused on the recurring revenue yearly release and DLC console type of model.
Of course that's just my opinion based on some of the articles and my experience working at humongous corporations, probably not worth $.02 :-)
I understand why MS created the SDK and that addons would create more FSX sales. I have even said that the community created the next version of FSX. Most game developers in the past 10 years have not lost money or will develop a game that will not make money. I will say that the fall to the xbox is starting,this can be confirmed by the next OS windows 8.It will allow xbox players to play along side pc players. Even graphics cards are now being developed with a performance cap. But in all honestly MS wants to cash in on the add on market. And it must be pretty good for Microsoft to develop and support it with flight. I only have one copy of FSX and acceleration.
_________________________
NXZT Phantom case,core i7-975 oc 4.2,6gbcrucal ballistics ram at 1900 mhz,radeon HD5850 windows 7
Registered: 04/09/07
Posts: 256
Loc: Fort Worth,Texas
Originally Posted By: Brett
I'm kind of in a wait and see on MS Flight. Everything I have seen on Xplane 10 has kind of made it a non-starter and the fact that it isn't getting much attention makes it even more of a non-starter.
The little bit I have seen on Flight shows impressive graphics. I obviously can't comment on the flight model but I have a hard time believing it was made worse than FSX.
Most everything seems to come down the business model and development of a sort of multi-player flight environment as opposed to the more traditional open approach. I can see value in keeping it "locked down" like it has been with the idea that everyone is using the same equipment and has the same scenery especially from the MMOFG perspective.
To me it is kind of like comparing Iracing and Rfactor. Iracing is closed source where you buy cars and tracks from iracing (or more correctly....rent them). Rfactor has a lot of generated third party freeware products.....some are very good some not so. The same applies for FSX add-ons....some are exceptional some are mediocre at best. It could be that MS is not wanting to have that kind of variability in their MMOFG.
Having the scenery and planes purchased piecemeal has some value for the consumer as well. Also it gives the developer incentive to develop some very detailed scenery instead of going generic and update it in the future as well. I don't doubt that they will have fully functional airliners and world wide detailed scenery ( with more popular areas and planes making appearances first). The plus side of it from a consumer is that you pay for what you want. For those that want to fly airliners world wide with detailed scenery then I'm sure you will be able to do it......its just going to cost you (kind of like racing full schedule of oval and road tracks at iracing will cost you a lot of money in track purchases). If you are interested in just flying a single engine plane in one physical area then you are likely going to have a much more economical experience.
Basically.......the more you want the more it is going to cost.....but in reality that isn't much different than those of us who have invested in add-ons and mods for FSX.
So basically, I'm just going to wait an see and probably try the free version when its released, see what is available with the add-ons and make my decision from there.....you can't beat the price (and any ranting or raving isn't going to get microsoft to change their business model for this)
Yeah...I tried the x-plane demo and just could not get into it.
_________________________
NXZT Phantom case,core i7-975 oc 4.2,6gbcrucal ballistics ram at 1900 mhz,radeon HD5850 windows 7
Yeah me too, I'm actually pretty open minded and hope that Flight, XP10 and Prepar3D will continue to grow into the kind of sim that will pull me from FSX+Addons eventually, for now I am watching and waiting, though I will try Flight whenever it comes out and I will keep trying the XP10 demo when they update it and will probably give Prepar3D a try via that $10/mo thing when they release v2.0 with DirectX11 support.
Until people pay money for MS Flight (or an addon) and it doesnt live up to what was advertised, all this whining and ranting is just ridiculous.
Microsoft didnt sneak into all of your computers and delete FSX off of your hard drive and scratch your installation CDs/DVDs. Its still there for you to play (yeah, I said play. Its a computer game ). All the 3rd party folks can keep making add-ons for FSX. No ones stopping them. No ones stopping you from spending your money with them. No one is forcing you to try/adopt Flight.
And why wouldnt Microsoft want the revenue from add-ons? They saw how big of a market it is for FS9/FSX and realized there was more money to be made. I hope this doesnt come as a news flash to people, but companies exist to make money. A successful company makes as much money as it can and getting bigger and offering new products and competing and winning market share and expanding into new markets and making more money, etc If they make money by being unethical, then thats not cool. But theres nothing unethical about M$ limiting Flight to only allow MS addons. (Whether or not it ultimately hurts them or is good for them is TBD and really cant be commented on right now. It depends on the quality of addons they make and how well they sell.)
Registered: 12/18/03
Posts: 1418
Loc: Perth, Western Australia
Malibu;
Perhaps you should look at a bit of history of the FSX product. There was a ton of stuff left unfinished in FSX, things that the ACES team wanted to complete, but M$ cut the timeline on the team, chopped out ideas, and then fired the staff!
Given the 'management know better' mentality of todays workforce, M$ deserves to lose out. As others have said, MS could have put out additional aircraft etc, but chose not to. For me, I do not want to buy a product like FLIGHT, because like the majority of other real pilots who fly this 'game', I like to fly in my own areas. I do not want to be in a position where I have to keep buying and buying, just to make the new 'game' similar to the previous one when it came out of the box.
Yes, I have paid for third party add-ons, but said add-ons make it a true simulator experience, and are thus worth the money.
AJ.
_________________________
Kindest regards,
AJ
"If you know the enemy and know yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt; if you know Heaven and know Earth, you may make your victory complete." - The Art of War - Sun Tzu
Registered: 03/19/02
Posts: 10121
Loc: 3rd Planet, Sun
flight! is just what one would have come to expect from Microsoft - these are the same guys that released Windows ME after 98SE and Windows Vista after XP.
flight! is just what one would have come to expect from Microsoft - these are the same guys that released Windows ME after 98SE and Windows Vista after XP.
MS loves to release turds.
It's like Star Trek movies. Every other one was a goodie, but the movies in-between sucked.
_________________________
Flight Simulator X, Ghost Recon Classic, Rainbow Six/Rogue Spear, NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, GPL --- the best of the best! It doesn't get any better, folks.
The greatest developers of all time: Janes (Origin Skunkworks), Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, Microprose, Red Storm, Papyrus, Eagle Dynamics, Creative Assembly, ISI,and SimBin--the best of the best!
Perhaps you should look at a bit of history of the FSX product. There was a ton of stuff left unfinished in FSX, things that the ACES team wanted to complete, but M$ cut the timeline on the team, chopped out ideas, and then fired the staff!
Given the 'management know better' mentality of todays workforce, M$ deserves to lose out. As others have said, MS could have put out additional aircraft etc, but chose not to. For me, I do not want to buy a product like FLIGHT, because like the majority of other real pilots who fly this 'game', I like to fly in my own areas. I do not want to be in a position where I have to keep buying and buying, just to make the new 'game' similar to the previous one when it came out of the box.
Yes, I have paid for third party add-ons, but said add-ons make it a true simulator experience, and are thus worth the money.
AJ.
Amen AJ! All the pro-Flight, anti-FSX comments are so much bunk!
I don't get the super capitalists defending MS by saying they deserve to make money. You deserve to make money when you produce a quality product the market wants. If not, you don't deserve to make any money. Gone are the days of Henry Ford and his Model T. The old man responded to an inquiry from a prospective buyer for a different color than the standard black by saying, "Sure, you can get it in another color. As long as it's black." Such arrogance!
I'm sorry, but I don't believe for one second that Flight -which most devoted FSX players will shun- will spur the mass market to purchase endless add-on products. I don't believe it. Here's why. The "mass" market is a low attention span market. Play through "Flight" once (whoopee, Hawaii! It's so pretty! I'm flying! Okay, this is boring!) and it's back to the latest scripted arcade shooter for the young, and the latest crack-infused MMOG with social media components for the ladies and the older set. No way will they purchase add-on after add-on, bringing in the cash MS fantasizes about.
It's hardcore flight sim enthusiasts who will forever purchase add-ons, but only for a true SIMULATION, not a mass market game. MS will be sorely disappointed in the sales figures from this nefarious scheme. Trying to market this farce as equally appealing to the casual player "who just wants to fly" and the hardcore enthusiast is laughable. The odds on that happening are less than a pipe dream. The two markets are totally different.
Edited by Plainsman (01/10/1207:54 PM)
_________________________
Flight Simulator X, Ghost Recon Classic, Rainbow Six/Rogue Spear, NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, GPL --- the best of the best! It doesn't get any better, folks.
The greatest developers of all time: Janes (Origin Skunkworks), Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, Microprose, Red Storm, Papyrus, Eagle Dynamics, Creative Assembly, ISI,and SimBin--the best of the best!
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 645
Loc: Frome/Bath UK
Estimates given by the people at ORNX is that the flightsim addon buying population (all addons, not just ORBX) is, at the most, 40,000 individuals. MS figures are that in 2007, FSX sold 280,000 copies; Extrapolating that to the years it's been sold could give a realistic figure of about 400,000 copies sold. Thus, the addon buying punters represent at the most 10% of the business for FSX.
Flight will be free, so its uptake should be significantly greater than 400,000 units. I suppose MS is hoping that with the purchasing of addons actually integrated into the game and the game purposely limited to foster reasons to buy addons, just a relatively small percentage of addon purchases should provide sufficient revenue. If the addons tap into the collectable-mentality that many consumers seem to have, it might work out reasonably well for MS, but I can't imagine it being a stellar hit like an MMO.
Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 329
Loc: Eslöv, Sverige
Originally Posted By: Plainsman
Amen AJ! All the pro-Flight, anti-FSX comments are so much bunk!
So being pro-Flight means being anti-FSX now?
LOL
Quote:
Here's why. The "mass" market is a low attention span market. Play through "Flight" once (whoopee, Hawaii! It's so pretty! I'm flying! Okay, this is boring!) and it's back to the latest scripted arcade shooter for the young, and the latest crack-infused MMOG with social media components for the ladies and the older set. No way will they purchase add-on after add-on, bringing in the cash MS fantasizes about.
So explain the amazing financial success of the entire MMO market as spearheaded by WoW? Oh right, you can't, because you have no idea about how the MMO or F2P-with-microtransactions business models work. Hint: They're not "low attention span".
Quote:
It's hardcore flight sim enthusiasts who will forever purchase add-ons, but only for a true SIMULATION, not a mass market game. MS will be sorely disappointed in the sales figures from this nefarious scheme. Trying to market this farce as equally appealing to the casual player "who just wants to fly" and the hardcore enthusiast is laughable. The odds on that happening are less than a pipe dream. The two markets are totally different.
Here's a hint: Hardcore in marketing speak means the type of guy who would buy an MSFS title in the first place. Those people generally care more about appealing graphics and scenery than they do anal-retentive attention to aircraft systems. It does not translate to "superfat-wannabe-pilot-with-$5000-worth-of-PMDG-and-ORBX-addons-nerd". You people are in the minority, just get over it once and for all.
Only your particular minority crowd will forever purchase $50 add-ons. Normal users don't do that because it's simply too much money for too little content. But they might buy add-ons that are priced at $5 and up, which is how microtransactions are usually priced in the F2P model.
Registered: 12/18/03
Posts: 1418
Loc: Perth, Western Australia
Evil Flower;
I'm curious, have you ever flown a real aircraft?
_________________________
Kindest regards,
AJ
"If you know the enemy and know yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt; if you know Heaven and know Earth, you may make your victory complete." - The Art of War - Sun Tzu
Registered: 12/18/03
Posts: 1418
Loc: Perth, Western Australia
Something I forgot to add........
Yes, to some degree, FSX was not as polished as it should have been, and when it was released, quite a number of simmers were unhappy, BUT not so long after, Phil Taylor came forward and told the community how the 'executives' and bean counters had virtually not allowed his team to finish the product.
If you read some history, there were many things in FSX that were not finished. This includes additional functionality in the VC, additional VC 'clickspots', etc. In fact, you can see that the sim was rushed out the door purely by looking at something simple such as the 747 sound files were actually using the 737 sounds. I'm pretty sure that Phil Taylor and the ACES team did not want to push out an unfinished product. We can also qualify this by the massive improvements that recent add ons have made to the sim.
As well as this, seeing as code optimisation is usually one of the last processes in producing a product, the chance are that this was bypassed in the FSX development process as well.
I know that the likes of ORBX, PMDG, and LM will keep my simulator authentic and up to date, and probably just better and better.
Evil Flower; have you tried turning up the realism of your FSX? I can certainly say that after having a flight crew licence for 20 years, I have done flour bombing, and precision landings, but I have never flown my aircraft through the air collecting credits!
I rest my case.
AJ.
_________________________
Kindest regards,
AJ
"If you know the enemy and know yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt; if you know Heaven and know Earth, you may make your victory complete." - The Art of War - Sun Tzu
A casual game is going to convict dozens of companies out of business? By whom? Why order from Microsoft, and "Flight"? Why micropayments are cheaper to buy an addon that will be much better than any casual added that they believe? Your dream that rhetoric is the future casual and hardcore community and real pilots is condemned to die for the secrets of marqueting Microsoft. Unfortunately for him will never happen, why? because we prefer to keep a product than casual believe he's dead when he will die before the Flight. IVAO or Vatsim not going away, much less the great creators of addons even if it's released Flight XXI.
When it's about this MS Flight and the critics I have heard people are the worst I posted an excellent video showing the full realism flight procedures (clickable cockpit etc) of MS Flight and got deleted which means someone had to call them. There is always a traitor.
Edited by jt_medina (01/11/1209:58 AM)
_________________________
Ignorance is the worlds greatest threat
If we had to fly the real aircraft to give an opinion about any sim 99% of the forums would be deserted and this hobby we all have dead forever.
I will also add that, as a real pilot, not all real pilots feel the same way Fish Taco does. And by that, I mean different real life pilots enjoy different levels of fidelity in flight simulators. Personally, I prefer to save in-depth start up procedures and long cross country flights for the real thing. I fire up flight simlators to do things I can't do in real life (like fly way too low or blow stuff up). Not to say that there's anything wrong with Fish Taco's preference - I'm just saying it's not fair to imply that all real life pilots feel the same way.
Also, I think it's worth while to point out that discussions on SimHQ or AVSIM about what the flight sim market wants may be misleading. Sure, maybe 90% of people on SimHQ want a super high fidelity flight sim where you can do real flight planning and fly anywhere in the world, but that's because those are the kinds of people that hang out at SimHQ. The total population of SimHQ'ers that discuss FSX may actually only make up 2% of the people that purchased FSX. Maybe those other 98% would prefer smaller/fewer locations, but with better "eye candy", and those 98% want to pay $5 for a smaller add-on scenery area instead of $50 for something that includes areas they won't ever fly over. We just don't ever hear from those folks becuase they aren't here at SimHQ or AVSIM. Or maybe I'm wrong. I don't work for M$'s marketing department so I don't know.
Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 329
Loc: Eslöv, Sverige
Originally Posted By: FishTaco
Evil Flower;
I'm curious, have you ever flown a real aircraft?
No, and I cannot for the life of me see the relevance.
Originally Posted By: FishTaco
Evil Flower; have you tried turning up the realism of your FSX? I can certainly say that after having a flight crew licence for 20 years, I have done flour bombing, and precision landings, but I have never flown my aircraft through the air collecting credits!
I rest my case.
AJ.
Funny how you assume I'm some kind of champion of non-realism. FYI even on max realism you still have virtual hoops in several of the helicopter missions. I don't understand what difference it makes. If you don't want to collect coins in the air noone's forcing you to. But why demand that noone else can do it? It's their game to do with as they please, and if they want to fly geocaching around Hawaii because the game has such a feature, then let them. If they want to fly through progressively more difficult hoops in the air, then let them. Do you ever fly under bridges in FSX? Can't do that in real life, can we? Have you ever crashed and then restarted the sim? Can't do that in real life either, can we? So the argument that "coins in the air is unrealistic" holds no validity whatsoever.
The whole point of flight and race and subsims is to give people the chance to do things only a very few can ever do in real life. So if we do what the hardcore crowd wants and set the bar at PMDG (since that's what everybody talks about) then that just means we make the hobby that much less accessible to people.
The whole point of flight and race and subsims is to give people the chance to do things only a very few can ever do in real life. So if we do what the hardcore crowd wants and set the bar at PMDG (since that's what everybody talks about) then that just means we make the hobby that much less accessible to people.
So what? What is the problem with that? A brand new Porsche 911 Turbo is not accessible for 90% of the people on the planet unless they steal one. Should we cry because 90% don't have access to a brand new Porsche 911 Turbo? That's tough titty. Nobody really needs a Porsche 911 Turbo; nobody really needs a hardcore flight simulation from MS. Some people want them. They are tools for entertainment and adventure. Maybe they should make ocean cruises accessible to the masses. You know, charge 50 bucks instead of 5,000 or more. Give me a break.
Just because some things aren't accessible to everyone is, well, life. So what?
Edited by Plainsman (01/11/1203:33 PM)
_________________________
Flight Simulator X, Ghost Recon Classic, Rainbow Six/Rogue Spear, NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, GPL --- the best of the best! It doesn't get any better, folks.
The greatest developers of all time: Janes (Origin Skunkworks), Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, Microprose, Red Storm, Papyrus, Eagle Dynamics, Creative Assembly, ISI,and SimBin--the best of the best!
The whole point of flight and race and subsims is to give people the chance to do things only a very few can ever do in real life. So if we do what the hardcore crowd wants and set the bar at PMDG (since that's what everybody talks about) then that just means we make the hobby that much less accessible to people.
So what? What is the problem with that? A brand new Porsche 911 Turbo is not accessible for 90% of the people on the planet unless they steal one. Should we cry because 90% don't have access to a brand new Porsche 911 Turbo? That's tough titty. Nobody really needs a Porsche 911 Turbo; nobody really needs a hardcore flight simulation from MS. Some people want them. They are tools for entertainment and adventure. Maybe they should make ocean cruises accessible to the masses. You know, charge 50 bucks instead of 5,000 or more. Give me a break.
Just because some things aren't accessible to everyone is, well, life. So what?
It doesn't have to be accessible to everyone, but it does need to be accessible to enough people for the developer to justify spending money on it.
The whole point of flight and race and subsims is to give people the chance to do things only a very few can ever do in real life. So if we do what the hardcore crowd wants and set the bar at PMDG (since that's what everybody talks about) then that just means we make the hobby that much less accessible to people.
So what? What is the problem with that? A brand new Porsche 911 Turbo is not accessible for 90% of the people on the planet unless they steal one. Should we cry because 90% don't have access to a brand new Porsche 911 Turbo? That's tough titty. Nobody really needs a Porsche 911 Turbo; nobody really needs a hardcore flight simulation from MS. Some people want them. They are tools for entertainment and adventure. Maybe they should make ocean cruises accessible to the masses. You know, charge 50 bucks instead of 5,000 or more. Give me a break.
Just because some things aren't accessible to everyone is, well, life. So what?
- FSX without addons isn't completely a hardcore simulator in fact it can be "played" as an arcade, doing missions and using a mouse. - I do care if some things are not accessible to everyone...and that's part of the reason of the many problems of this world. But That's another story. - Having tried MS Flight I have to say you'd be surprised because in some aspects it's even better than FSX without addons. - As stated above create a simulator is expensive and needs to sell to as many people as possible so selling for just a few is not very wise unless MS wanted to charge $500 per license.
Edited by jt_medina (01/11/1210:17 PM)
_________________________
Ignorance is the worlds greatest threat
Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 329
Loc: Eslöv, Sverige
Originally Posted By: Plainsman
So what? What is the problem with that? A brand new Porsche 911 Turbo is not accessible for 90% of the people on the planet unless they steal one. Should we cry because 90% don't have access to a brand new Porsche 911 Turbo? That's tough titty. Nobody really needs a Porsche 911 Turbo; nobody really needs a hardcore flight simulation from MS. Some people want them. They are tools for entertainment and adventure. Maybe they should make ocean cruises accessible to the masses. You know, charge 50 bucks instead of 5,000 or more. Give me a break.
Just because some things aren't accessible to everyone is, well, life. So what?
So why are you #%&*$# about not getting a hardcore flight simulation from MS? Or are you just too intellectually impaired to realize the amazing irony in your frothing-at-the-mouth rant there?
However, for those of us who do not ride minivans to school like, given the content of your posts here, you evidently do, it is not too hard to see that a more accessible sim is a sim with a larger userbase and larger userbase means much bigger market for addons which need not be priced at ludicrous sums anymore. Because, you know - people are generally more inclined to buy stuff when it's cheap - hence why Steam Sales are always such a massive hit.
Let's downshift a little here alright. It's amazing that every sim/game that comes out it's always the same thing. The pessimist vs the optimist. After the sim/game is released one side claims victory until a couple of patches come out then those that like it stay while all the haters are never heard of again.
...it's all a matter of time.
_________________________
If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him. Sun Tzu
Hey Evil, stuff your insults where the sun doesn't shine. The MS franchise, starting with sublogic, has been around for almost 30 years and sold tens of millions of copies. That is hardly a failed franchise. It's Microsoft's greed that has set them in this doomed to fail direction. They've basically abandonded a long-time, loyal market segment. I'm an American, and that's typical of American companies. That's why you no longer see American companies prospering in the hardcore racing and flight sim market. They are always after the console masses. Making decent money is not enough. They want it all. They will sell bland junk if they think they can get extra customers. Then they fail, because their once loyal market segment abandons them. Thank God for the Russians.
There was a large user base for Donkey Kong and Mario Bros. So, should all games be like Donkey Kong and Mario Bros BECAUSE there is a large user base? What of those who prefer something a bit more realistic? Are they simply crap out of luck? Every game/sim isn't going to fit every game/sim player. So certain people here should stop blubbering on.
We've all seen a tiny few sims made to be accessible to more than one preferred style of game play. But the successful ones tend to have a hard core foundation (DCS A10, DCS Black Shark) with some accessibility for those who prefer less realism. Despite that noble attempt at egalitarianism in gaming, I haven't seen arcade console gamers flocking to the DCS sims.
On the flip side, I've yet to see the game created first with the masses in mind that came with sufficient scalability to make it equally appealing to the hard core crowd. Every such effort has failed, as will Flight.
The console crowd is a short attention span crowd. They have no interest in flying a plane around Hawaii that can't blow anything up. And most FSX players will sneer at Flight, and for good reason. I predict it's going to fail.
Edited by Plainsman (01/12/1204:48 AM)
_________________________
Flight Simulator X, Ghost Recon Classic, Rainbow Six/Rogue Spear, NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, GPL --- the best of the best! It doesn't get any better, folks.
The greatest developers of all time: Janes (Origin Skunkworks), Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, Microprose, Red Storm, Papyrus, Eagle Dynamics, Creative Assembly, ISI,and SimBin--the best of the best!
Calendar
Downloads
FAQ
Library
Multiplayer
News
Release Dates
SimHQ TV
)
Previous Topic
Index