Travis wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 1:27pm:


This sums up my thoughts quite well ....

ryanyomomma wrote on May 26^th, 2011 at 4:30am:

Really ? Lucky guy. When CFS2 arrived, I was getting big performance problems in big aerial combats.

And when FS9 arrived, I had to install reduced autogen textures, and because it was not enough, I also had to install resized cloud textures. And finally I also had to reduce my AI traffic in the major airports.

pete wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 4:41pm:



A fortunate understatement... Faster computers = even more detailed models.. higher-res textures.. more complex systems.. even interactive scenery..

I'm noy sure there IS a practical limit to FSX's potential.. at least another decade's worth...

Well, I've been in the Flight Sim world since I was 8 (Back in the time of FS2002) But I only started developing planes for FS a few years later, when I was 12.
I never had good machines. My first computer barely handled FS2004 and when I got FSX in 2006 I had to buy a whole new computer, which was one of the best at the time and now it almost can't cope with FSX.
Anyways, when FSX was announced I made a HUGE mistake: I assumed that microsoft would include the SDK online, as they did with FS2004 so I bought the Standart edition... I kept making aircraft with the FS2004 SDK, but not for FS2004 (I lost the instalation CDs on a flood shortly before I got FSX). I then got the FSX SDK thanks to a friend who had the Deluxe edition.
But the important thing is, FS made me enter the 3D modeling and game developing world. So much that I now make models for many diferent flight/racing games.
If MS forbids the ability to mod Flight, I won't buy it. To me it would show a HUGE lack of apreciation to all of those dedicated people that spend time making add-ons for their games.

I'm still optimistic about the add-on issue, since i do not see how MS can prevent third party freeware add-ons without killing "Flight" from the start.

Besides, I'll be really honked off if they did have some built in "No unauthroized add-on" feature since I enrolled in a Maya orientated 3D modeling class, which starts next week.

Anyone know where I can buy a legit copy of Maya on the cheap?  ($3,500.00 is a bit steep!  )

Club508 wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 1:32pm:


Then I guess We can Make flightgear not only look better, But have miscellaneous stuff almost up to the m$fs standards. Won't be easy though

Well, I sure won't hesitate in moving on to FlightGear or X-plane if Flight ends up to be closed to modding. I actually have a bit of experience on FlightGear, on its earlier days, and X-plane seems like a sure bet on the next high quality flight simulator. Just give it a few more years and we'll see something awesome emerging from there.
This, of course, without giving up on FSX...

So much negativity...to quote as previously said.

Why would 3rd party addons not exist? Even for your run of the mill PC games out there today that are not in the least bit designed to be open source, there exists large volumes of addons (also known as hacks or mods) that are created by those users who are so inclined and interested in doing so. And those interested in adding the mods to their games drive the ambition of the developers to make the mods and to find ways to distribute them.

And to assume that the lack of a scheduled 3rd party addon system for Flight is what is going to kill the franchize....really? I think the existence of the addon community is driven by the users, not the producers. Most of us are here simply as leeches, and fewer serve as the peers (to put it in terms of file sharing, which is essentially what is going on here, but not in the illegal way).

If you all decide to turn your back on new versions of simulators (or games, however you feel you need to refer to the program), then the franchise will not fail like some predict that it will. It will decline in popularity just like FS 2004 and FSX did, and get cheaper in the stores. And some of you will in turn buy it at a cheaper price, because you would have justified that to your self somehow or another that it was ok for cheap, but not for full price. Then Microsoft will react to your boycott by counting the money from the last release, regardless of if it sold for full release price, or decreased on-the-way-out price (which still = profit by the way), and then evaluate what the selling price for FS12 will be. And the cycle will go on and on.

Keep one thing in mind in software development....the programs are not made with longevity in mind. Programs are written to sell for profit, to a market that decides that it needs a newer copy of the program. Some are happy using older versions (who still runs office 2003?), while others like free ware (who runs Open Office?), and others like the newest version and could care less about the old expired and unsupported versions (who runs office 2010?).

So quit your griping about Flight, and what it will and won't be. Those that design it know for a fact that they will sell copies, and that there will be detractors to the new program. There always are detractors.

And for those that threaten to jump to other programs (xplane, etc...) the developers of those other programs depend on your negativity to get your dollars. Always about the dollars after all. And what if they sell to another development company, or suddenly decide to jump ship and change their philosophy on game design? What if the driving market force isn't all of us and our desire for free stuff, but it's 14 year old kids with short attention spans and their own credit cards? Have you ever thought that way about how a software company decides what the next game should be like?

If you like FS2004....keep on keeping on. If you like FSX....see you in the virtual sky. I like that version myself. If you like flightgear, so be it. In the meantime, how about we all quit belly aching about what an unrealeased program can or can't do.

I think I strayed off topic slightly, and ranted abit, but what the heck...we're all here to listen to each others ideas after all.