Well, maybe it'd be more efficient to do some virtual flying in other offerings instead of complaining about one? I know, that'd be crazy. But more in line with my culture.

I think people expressing their displeasure with a title that is evolving as we speak is just fine. If you can tell from the title that it is going to be a post critical of Flight, you aren't required to read it.

The threads are probably in proportion of the quality of the sim. Take a look at say, Cliffs of Dover upon release versus A-10C. The thread counts (negative/positive) are usually quite representative of the quality of the final product. If Flight would like to see more positive comments in threads at SimHQ, I would suggest they put out a better product, or clean up their act with their current product.

If all you guys that are jumping up and down with joy over Flight feel so passionate about it, you are welcome to start threads with positive stuff about Flight to try to provide some balance to the forum. Personally though, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck..well..you know the rest.

Blaming the forum members for Microsoft's sins seems a bit ridiculous though.



BeachAV8R

Where in Flight's developers postings do you read that opinions can't change Flight's direction? I thought opinions were exactly what they were looking for..?

Huh? I quit reading your post after that one... My criteria for what makes a good sim does not include how much money it's making for Jack.

Thats an Oxymoron. There is NOTHING positive about flight

Sure there is, it has airplanes, um.. it has Hawaii..
..
..let's see
it has..
you can do touch and goes..
it has a MUSTANG! ..and a ZERO!
..um
yeah..

::golf claps::



Wait, what?

First off, you'll stop reading a post after you see one thing you disagree with?

Second, are you thinking I was saying "Man, BMS is awesome, I just wish I had to pay for it!"

Um....

At what point did I say BMS was a bad sim? I was simply commenting that in the current state of the Sim genre, one of our top-shelf titles isn't even a "published" software, but in essence a community mod of an aging sim. A very very very involved and complete mod mid you, but still a community effort.

The point being that we went from a time when sim's were what the cool kids call* 'the bee's knees,' to the community needing to keep a sim of the F-16 on life-support. If things were doing great, we'd be having this discussion in the pre-load chat room for Janes Fighting Falcon: Export Variants Expansion pack, while also lamenting how lame EA is for buying the exclusive rights to the name.




*The cool kids told me that's what they say....are they lying to me again?

First:
I never disagreed with it, I simply thought it totally unreasonable and perhaps erroneously thought the rest of your post would, in fact, be a rant. There's a lot of that going around...

Second:
No that's not what I was thinking. I was thinking that you believe a community effort to be unworthy of your time. Again, probably wrong after reading your response.
Well, sorta...


Finally, you never actually said it was a bad sim, but the way your post was laid out, DCS-A10 was great, the ones that followed led me to believe that they were descending in quality as the list went on. I mean, just look at where you have that comment. It's smack dab in the middle of a lot of negative observations.

To wrap it up, shame on me for not finishing your post (several beers had made me a bit hasty), because I just did, and while I still don't like the BMS comments, I do agree with your conclusion. I still remember the days of walking into Babbages or such and having an entire section of flight sims to choose from. I seem to recall going to the mall like once a month to pick up another flight sim (don't know if that memory is accurate, but I know I went often).

Amen Beach. Where do some get off that we shouldn't fully express our opinions about a product if that opinion is decidely negative? Perhaps in a totalitarian country or totalitarian culture, but most of us are not from one of those places.

MS made this "game," so they have to own it. Put something into the marketplace that's substandard and you'd better be ready for some reaction.

Over and over and over again, apparently.