Okay, I'm sure there's going to be a lot of these, but I'll be quick.

Flight is perfect.  Flawless, only flawless for what it is trying to be.  It's a game that looks good, runs great, and I can see how it would be fun to play if you have NO FS experience or knowledge.

For us though, it's terrible.  Too restrictive, expensive DLC, too easy, too intrusive, etc.

All I have to say is support it.  Not with money, just download it, play it for a bit, and show Microsoft you are interested, but you need more. 

I want to see the engine running it released as Flight Pro, with the whole world but barebones.  Let US create the content, it'll be great.

I'd have to agree... I think it's better than FSX, yet completely terrible in comparison. It does what it does, and I think it looks nice and runs well... But it's no sequel for us.


They went out to create a game to bring in the new generation, but forgot that they can easily dumb down 'mega' version for those guys whilst letting the fans carry on with what they do best.

I also agree. I've been Flight Simming for 6 years & I know that no third-party is a dumb idea.

If there was no third-party when we started Simming we would have given up in 6 months.

But I don’t think that Flight would support third-party, the layout is so different that the learning curve would be too steep for many.

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Feb 28^th, 2012 at 10:27pm:

Okay, I'm sure there's going to be a lot of these, but I'll be quick. Flight is perfect.  Flawless, only flawless for what it is trying to be.  It's a game that looks good, runs great, and I can see how it would be fun to play if you have NO FS experience or knowledge. For us though, it's terrible.  Too restrictive, expensive DLC, too easy, too intrusive, etc. All I have to say is support it.  Not with money, just download it, play it for a bit, and show Microsoft you are interested, but you need more.  I want to see the engine running it released as Flight Pro, with the whole world but barebones.  Let US create the content, it'll be great.

13 year vet and i agreed with you, we need to let microsoft know what vets like us need.

I would be interested to know what Pete thinks as he was an insider for a while prior to release and got to see everything from the other side of the fence.

Matt

+1   (9 year vet)

I'm wondering if MS is releasing Flight this way in order to avoid the appearance of the total clusterfvk that accured with FSX's release. If this is all that the development team has come up with so far, it will make FSX's 1 year + wait for SP1/SP2 seem like a day or two. SAD

Dave

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Feb 28^th, 2012 at 10:27pm:

Okay, I'm sure there's going to be a lot of these, but I'll be quick. Flight is perfect.  Flawless, only flawless for what it is trying to be.  It's a game that looks good, runs great, and I can see how it would be fun to play if you have NO FS experience or knowledge. For us though, it's terrible.  Too restrictive, expensive DLC, too easy, too intrusive, etc. All I have to say is support it.  Not with money, just download it, play it for a bit, and show Microsoft you are interested, but you need more.  I want to see the engine running it released as Flight Pro, with the whole world but barebones.  Let US create the content, it'll be great.

Absolutely! As I see it, Flight feels like a  game.  FSX feels like a simulator. Totally different ball game.

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Feb 28^th, 2012 at 10:27pm:

Okay, I'm sure there's going to be a lot of these, but I'll be quick. Flight is perfect.  Flawless, only flawless for what it is trying to be.  It's a game that looks good, runs great, and I can see how it would be fun to play if you have NO FS experience or knowledge. For us though, it's terrible.  Too restrictive, expensive DLC, too easy, too intrusive, etc. All I have to say is support it.  Not with money, just download it, play it for a bit, and show Microsoft you are interested, but you need more.  I want to see the engine running it released as Flight Pro, with the whole world but barebones.  Let US create the content, it'll be great.

You were able to put into few words what I struggled to say with many more.  Well done.  Concise and exactly what Microsoft needs to hear.  A Flight Pro version (with more planes and accessible DLC - read:freeware) would be perfect.

expat wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2012 at 10:13am:

I would be interested to know what Pete thinks as he was an insider for a while prior to release and got to see everything from the other side of the fence. Matt

I'm a freak for freedom and control - ME controlling what I do. How can I enthuse about a game telling me what to do  .... on any level?


I have to say I started a mission just to see what it was like ..... seemed to get locked into that mission --- then found I could not slew ... I have NO interest in flying along a digital coastline - I got bored enough with that back in about 1986 when I 1st started to use FS and decided time to see how to make an aircraft and explore the world (which mostly didn't exist)


I'm about as seasoned a FS user as you will find on this planet. I had BAO Flightshop before MS bought it. I used to make airports that didn't exist. I started a FS website called Simviation. I have even designed a few aircraft.

& now we have Flight -- which is purely built as a GAME. There will be no world. There will be no user input. There will be no jets. (& PLEASE - speculators -- realise this. I have heard it from the team. Clearly stated: NO WORLD. NO OPEN INPUT. NO JETS. ) This is not a game I will be using. That's about it.

For me the big - BIG downer is closed structure - meaning the only input comes from a tiny few employed people who will throw out a Carenado payware prop once every month or 2 for users to buy if they want & again play around Hawaii. & that's it ..... It's no surprise that MS went this way but it IS  a great shame. Very few companies like open input from users -- but I really believe it's the best way forward. Look at Android. I believe that will win over Apple in the long term.


I've read the menu at the Flight restaurant. I'm walking on to find somewhere else to eat ...... FSX will do fine again.  They have a BIG menu, lots of potential .. and I like it there .... :)

pete wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2012 at 1:07pm:

expat wrote on Mar 2nd, 2012 at 10:13am: I would be interested to know what Pete thinks as he was an insider for a while prior to release and got to see everything from the other side of the fence. Matt I'm a freak for freedom and control - ME controlling what I do. How can I enthuse about a game telling me what to do  .... on any level? I have to say I started a mission just to see what it was like ..... seemed to get locked into that mission --- then found I could not slew ... I have NO interest in flying along a digital coastline - I got bored enough with that back in about 1986 when I 1st started to use FS and decided time to see how to make an aircraft and explore the world (which mostly didn't exist) I'm about as seasoned a FS user as you will find on this planet. I had BAO Flightshop before MS bought it. I used to make airports that didn't exist. I started a FS website called Simviation. I have even designed a few aircraft. & now we have Flight -- which is purely built as a GAME. There will be no world. There will be no user input. There will be no jets.  This is not a game I will be using. That's about it. For me the big - BIG downer is closed structure - meaning the only input comes from a tiny few employed people who will throw out a Carenado payware prop once every month or 2 for users to buy if they want & again play around Hawaii. & that's it ..... It's no surprise that MS went this way but it IS  a great shame. Very few companies like open input from users -- but I really believe it's the best way forward. Look at Android. I believe that will win over Apple in the long term. I've read the menu at the Flight restaurant. I'm walking on to find somewhere else to eat ...... FSX will do fine again.  They have a BIG menu, lots of potential .. and I like it there .... :)

Amen.   8-)

And amen.

best,

.............john

multiprops wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2012 at 11:35pm:

Absolutely! As I see it, Flight feels like a  game.  FSX feels like a simulator. Totally different ball game.

Gran Turismo, Forza, etc are considered simulators due to their modeling of cars' systems and physics despite not having some free roam where you can drive around a city.  Flight is still a simulator, it has even better physics modeling for GA planes (and captures the feel of flying them better) than FSX.  I don't think anyone here wants to face the fact that Flight is running on an extremely solid and improved engine just out of rage over the lack of third party addons.

:-X

Zaku wrote on Mar 5^th, 2012 at 6:02pm:

multiprops wrote on Mar 2nd, 2012 at 11:35pm: Absolutely! As I see it, Flight feels like a  game.  FSX feels like a simulator. Totally different ball game. Gran Turismo, Forza, etc are considered simulators due to their modeling of cars' systems and physics despite not having some free roam where you can drive around a city.  Flight is still a simulator, it has even better physics modeling for GA planes (and captures the feel of flying them better) than FSX.  I don't think anyone here wants to face the fact that Flight is running on an extremely solid and improved engine just out of rage over the lack of third party addons.

We are not a mindless mob you know. We each have a valid point about why Flight is good or not good.

In my opinion Flight isn't a Sim & that is my un-baised opinion.

"Zach" , whatever - guess you don't see the lack of A.I. traffic - or Lack of being able to land on ships - or the lack of any ATC (air Traffic Control) , and how about those super cool "Whirly Birds" (helicopters) that just aren't there , or those Fighter Jets that magically disappeared and the it'll cost almost 20.00 a pop for other downloads . I dunno' I just don't ever see me end up with almost $1000.00 - 1500.00 dollars in just add on's for a sim (just add on's) !  Ahh, it is what it is !  "Junkkkkkk" !!

If there's any doubt about whether it's a game or not read this. Interview with Joshua Howard

Here’s a way to look at FS.

FSX & all the other Flight Sims before it are like Mozart & never gets old, but you can't expect to like it immediately.

Flight is like new modern shouty squawky groaning songs. You may like it for a wee while but after a month you get over it.

I really don't think MS give a monkeys what us flight vets want, otherwise they wouldn't have released the team that made the likes of FS9 and FSX.

This latest offering is a game, pure and simple.  Yes it looks nice but once you've taken the wrapper off it's as boring as hell to simmers.

Someone has eluded to this before but I think this is a cynical attempt to 'lure' in non simmers who like PS3 and XBox type flying games in the hope they get hooked and maybe go on to purchase add ons.

Just my two cents worth.

drtomkat wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2012 at 8:32am:

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Feb 28th, 2012 at 10:27pm: Okay, I'm sure there's going to be a lot of these, but I'll be quick. Flight is perfect.  Flawless, only flawless for what it is trying to be.  It's a game that looks good, runs great, and I can see how it would be fun to play if you have NO FS experience or knowledge. For us though, it's terrible.  Too restrictive, expensive DLC, too easy, too intrusive, etc. All I have to say is support it.  Not with money, just download it, play it for a bit, and show Microsoft you are interested, but you need more.  I want to see the engine running it released as Flight Pro, with the whole world but barebones.  Let US create the content, it'll be great. 13 year vet and i agreed with you, we need to let microsoft know what vets like us need.

Don't mind me passing by. I will be gone soon.

I only stopped by reading this and from my position of an adult FS user (18 years, yes, I started in 94, more or less) I couldn't but agree, but at the same time despair.

I agree that M$ could have made a serious version (pro or whatever) for users searching a simulator...

I despair because I KNOW how in M$ they reason, and KNOW they NEVER give their users ANY hear. Their position of power in the software world gives them the option to shoulder onwards even against the majority's requests. They've done it in the past, and with good success, because the users base have caved in to their will, so no reason to behave any differently.

I just hope this time they'll get EXACTLY what they deserve, for once.

To those of you who think differently, don't bother trying to disprove my words. Historical facts are and remain historical facts. Fangirlism or fanboysm should not be part of a serious discussion, as they only fog one's mind, polluting his or her opinion.