I being saying Over and Over in this part of the forum(trying to see if by miracle some one up there M$ would come to their senses ),MICROSOFT FLIGHT SIMULATOR SERIES HAS BEEN THE MOST SUCCESSFUL IN THE HISTORY OF GAMES FOR COMPUTERS WHEN FREEWARE AIRPLANES MODELS CAME OUT AND SO WEBSITES DEDICATED TO THIS WONDERFUL GAME (at the begining mostly were mostly freewares)
I hate this New "Flight" ,M$ doesn't realize that MSFS previous success  was because this is a triple type of device for a computer

1) to play as a game
2)to Learn and simulates a real airplane flight
3)

To Design things sceneries , Airplanes and more

of course I'll repeat it once again they just think only in the money ,they release FSX with all the problems that still have ,none of the service pack fixed FSX-Sp1&2 ,and one of most outrageous thing sale the service pack 2 using the Aceleration "excuse" and say we will release the sp2 in 4 month who wasn't going to buy it?

service packs by law has to be free ,its to fix their bugs of their games or O/S, YOU already paid for the game,
EXAMPLE you buy a new Car and a day after the brakes doesn't work , companies has to fix it as a guarantee
the Invent the tale that the fire the Ace team because of the USA resesion that's BS was to avoid a sue.

,when FSX was release it Few people could export models using the FSX-SDK ,today almost every one can ,but they also not using it because any model can be Import back and any one can use others model , this was impossible back in FS2004 02 00

I'm not doing from now airplanes all the eyes of MSFS enthusiasts  are in this Flight , that after its release people slowly will return to FSX and FS9
or maybe will move to other alternatives (planex for example)

to me if this is the deal ,this is the end of this beautiful game ...

Quote from a previous thread:

Quote:


Actually M$FS/Aces have made quite a few errors when they have not listened to the prime users of their product. Think CFS3/ FS2000.

It's not about anything like default aircraft. It's about the core of the product, how it works, and what can be done with it to customise it for individual tastes - and to be able to do that freely and easily. That can only be done with the input of a huge community - not a few hired staff.

In a huge development program, no-one can expect a bug free release and it's natural that bugs/ errors will emerge when the users start to use it intensively.

However I really hope M$ have learned from the past and listen BIG TIME to it's long time users. They say they have done this with W7. Let's see if 'listening' is a new general M$ practice.

Strawberry Yogurt wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 5:48pm:

But concretely, what would be the downsides of a central marketplace for Flight addons ? I fail to see them, in fact...
Would that prevent payware devs to propose addons ? No.
Would that prevent freeware devs to propose addons? No.
Would that prevent noobs from posting billions topics about "how to install this or this" ? Yes, definitely.
So what's the problem ?

Quote:


BIG and to me, obvious problem. We don't want M$ to be controlling available products.

Control will stifle creativity big time for all kinds of reasons.

Do you think if everyone had to go MS Insider for FSX and FS2004 addons there would be anything like the community we have today? Not a fraction.  People want choice in the world.
And you can bet anything free would be in a 'buy 10 and get one free' situation.

None of our freeware designers would be involved I am sure.

pete wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 1:04pm:


You still haven't made comments on my previous remark.
Apple has a central appstore, and it's full of freeware.
Google (Android) has a central appstore, and it's full of freeware too.
So why would an MS appstore forbid freeware products ?

EDIT: don't get me wrong. Of course I would prefer to have multiple sources of addons. But I do not see the existence of an official MS appstore as a problem so far.

alrot wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 1:52pm:





alrot wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 1:52pm:

alrot wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 5:04pm:

Fr. Bill wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 11:57am:

Steve M wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 3:16pm:

Strategic.  If you hated FSX so much then so be it. Personally I like the challenge that MS FSX handed out to the public. And I admire all the people who spent thier time and effort to create freeware and publish all the how to threads.

You don't get the view if you won't climb the mountain.    

Daube wrote on May 14^th, 2011 at 5:51am:


I knew it ,Microsoft its Skynet 

I was going to post something else, but I can't get over how weird the newbie sounded.  I have this feeling that he never got hold of FS9, since he constantly referred to FSX, and I know for a fact that FS9 was a stable and good platform to work with.  In fact, when I found out how much of the system resources FSX consumed, I just stuck with FS9 and paid for a few quality payware products.

So it is true: there is no reason to think that Flight will be bad from the get-go.  Thinking that way is useless pessimism and only hurts the long-term goal of getting MS to listen to us.  If we want their attention, long-winded rants about how bad they have done in the past is only going to steer them away from this community to look where they are getting actual feedback.

That being said, I'm not sure about the way MS goes about dealing with freeware.  I have a feeling that they aren't going to simply do away with the creation of it.  It has been what has saved the last few installments.  Being able to mod your sim to exactly the way YOU want it has always been the biggest draw of FS, for me.  So I believe they will continue with this.

My main worry is the programs that are going to be necessary for creating addons.  In the past, we had Gmax.  It was the easy alternative for those of us who wanted to create addons, but didn't have access to high-dollar programs to do so with.  With Flight being a new beast from the ground up, I'm certain they are looking to utilize all the newest modeling techniques and gimmicks available.  So will they restrict modeling to Max or Maya, and the rest can sit and spin?  Or will they have some way to convert from, say, Blender or another free program?

Travis wrote:
Quote:


I agree with you 100 %!  Is there any way they can stop freeware development, short of actively spying on your compuer, and screaming "Ah-HAH!" if (for instance) you create your own add-on, and decide to "zip it" and e-mail it to a friend?  Imagine the backlash.


Quote:


I though someone had said Maya was somewhat compatrible with GMax, or at the least, was working on a way to export Maya to FSX.  At any rate, baring any catastrophic financial emergencies, I'm going to register at the local community college for a Maya class, and probably spend the bucks for the software (It appears there was a "sunny side" to my house being totled by a fire, after all!   ), and if I do well in that, they offer a course in Lightwave ( who's models can be converted for FSX; The "Type Nine Star Trek Shuttle" and the "Arkship Odyssey Shuttle" are Lightwave models), and probably spring for that software too.  After those two, I should be able to figure out what I'm doing wrong with GMAX.  Hopefully, by the time Flight comes out, I'll know the difference between a "vertex" and a "thingy in Gmax", and in *any* case, know how to do the modeling part of add-ons for both.

Make a note:  If I go insane while in school, it's because I went insane... or something to that effect.

This seems to be a hot discussion in many forums..especially after M$'s PR attempt with those magazine articles. They say central area... that can only mean the Games For Windows Marketplace. You pretty much need a Live account. It'll be surprising if M$ does allow freeware developers the opportunity to create and submit... but I'm not going to place my cards on that. I saw this coming as soon as I looked at their teaser site. The other thing is what was previously posted here. The graphics to performance ratio needs to be high and accessible to a vast array of computers at release date. I never had a lag issue with FS7, CFS2, FS8 and FS9. Then of course came FSX which I never was able to max it out until recently.

I wish M$ well on this project, and I will pay close attention to this situation, but my gut is telling me to hold on to that $50 - 60 and buy another addon for our legacy FS versions.

I’m surprised that no one has mentioned the issue of piracy!

In a perfect world, it would be nice if Microsoft helped the little developer could secure every dollar from every downloaded package. Then for those that try to get away with stealing, well their world would fall apart. Just imagine how funny it would be to see people’s game not working, their boxed key becoming invalid, causeing them to phone M$ or go out and buy a whole new sim all because they wanted to steal payware/limited distribution freeware.

I can’t see how they would do this to freeware, or lock access to only M$ employees. Some of our greatest airplanes have come from independent developers! Like others have said before, I sure hope that M$ doesn’t backfire, and create a game rather than a dynamic and changing world (Thanks to the talent of [most] freeware developers).

Strawberry Yogurt wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 5:48pm:

Ditto.  And I'll also be quite bored if they do.

Xpand wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 12:49pm:

Sounds EXACTLY like me except with repainting instead of modeling.

And I agree with that last part.

Boikat wrote on Aug 19^th, 2011 at 2:42pm:


If you are a undergrad or grad college student (or faculty member), check out AcademicSuperstore.com.  Not sure if they have it, but they might.

best,

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

I did not read all the replies but........
if there is no more freeware, I may pass on flight also.

It wont be the first time that greed (and greed is what it is all about IMO) sunk a franchise or product, etc and....... greed is often blind to the facts of what made a product sell well in the first place.

It would really be a shame all around if MS killed their own cash cow!

Well, we know modding will be possible since an SDK will be made, and there will be an online add-on store. The Flight team has even said they can't make all the add-ons themselves.

Well, i do know one possible positive.  Depending on what's in the Eula and liscencing and whatnot, even if they make it so you can't do add-ons, it may still be possible.  Like i said, depending on what's in the EULA and liscencing and stuff, hopefully, some people with atleast some basic game and software programing knowledge may be able to go into the game's lines of code and other programming and find a way to make it possible.  But like I said, it could require some programming knowledge.  I have created some computer games before and know some programming, but depending on how into Microsoft is on not letting people make add-ons, we may end up needing a proffesional or even someone from the company to get in.  I just don't know.

But I do know one thing, pegger is kinda right on some things.  Unless any of us work for or have good connections to Microsoft, there's not much else we can do but wait.  and hope.

I agree with Pegger.

And what makes you folk so sure that they did not listen to the community on FSX?

They have to balance what everyone wants with what is practical to program, and still have it run, even if its at 15 frames/sec. And every added feature and object takes many man hours to create. That is why the much larger public community is able to create so much more product in the same amount of time.

I have been watching people complain about the MS team for what is NOT in FSX, and read some of the ridiculous requests about what they want the software to do. Until software developers are able to add the IFM module to their products, you will NEVER get EVERYTHING.

I work in a totally unrelated software community. ALL software producers listen. But they take and jump on whats PRACTICAL, and put that in the software. Other things go to R&D for later versions, because the man hours it would take to make it all work right now in this version would cause the final price of the product to sky rocket.

Quote:

VTOL e.t.c

pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Last time positivity reigned, we had FSX... and this time around rumors are EVEN MORE dire.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Ah, but here's the snag... WHAT KIND of 3rd party addons are we talking about here?


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Sorry, hacks and mods are mostly ILLEGAL modifications... look only to some time back, when FS9 was The Sim and the quarrel with its NO-CD hack...

Do we have to go down from the actual free market to hidden conspiracy only because some egghead decided to let its power get to its head?

I think not.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Really!

Of course, if you're interested in a GAME OF PLANES... then whatever.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Could make a ton of examples of how wrong you are, but I'm not going to. Whomever has eyes to see knows how wrong this allegation you made is.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Why, thank you. Being called a leech is just the thing I love the most.

Love the way you tried NOT to include yourself in the bodycount.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


So we should buy even if it's crap? Not saying it will be, I said "even if", mind?

Twisted reasoning, yours.

That and... what you say MAY have a grain of truth... in a market with no alternatives. Look around. Alternatives to FS, or Flight as it may be, DO EXIST.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


So we should sacrifice OURSELVES to the high altar of OTHERS bank accounts, no matter is the software answer to our requests or not?

Moreover, we should buy REGARDLESS of our need... only because they took an afternoon off now and then to cobble together something THEY need we should buy without taking into account our requests at any levels?

Talk about twisted.

Longevity is not the matter in discussion, here. FUNCTIONALITY of Flight is.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


So, what you say is: Resistance is futile. You WILL be assimilated.

I can't speak for others, but for what regards me, not until my credit card is MINE.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


And on what do Flight's developers depend to get the same, then?

Resignation?


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Sure... but one thing is DESERVE them, to DEMAND them is just another thing.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Sure I did... that's why personally I DON'T WANT TO BE PART OF THAT POTENTIAL INVOLUTION.

They want my money? Better for them to deserve being paid.


pegger wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:53pm:


Personally, I think your reasoning above bases itself heavily on willing suspension of disbelief. As I see it, we ALL have alternatives still.

Be it ever so clear, if you read ALL my previous posts you'll see I am still moderately hopeful, but after the repeating of FS2K, five years ago (only definitively WORSE, as you can use FS2K with hardware sold in 2005 with not even half the problems people have using FSX with today's hardware), I've become and remain cynical.

I am all about waiting and see what will happen, but at the same time, I am all about a "plan B" as well. Because, if you WANT something, you better DESERVE it, and not hide behind marketing logics.

If they REALLY want to involute their software to satisfy people with shoot-em-up logics, it's ONLY NATURAL they will lose the ones that do not have that mindset, no?

If they really want to become power freaks and dictate all you can do with a thing you bought, it's only natural that someone used to the freedom of customizing of the old program structure will NOT follow.

The ONLY power we have is to vote with our wallets, refusing to pay for what we do NOT agree with... and you are practically working against this last power of ours... and you SHOULD be one of us too. Get your act cleaned up. You can do whatever you want with YOUR money... and so do we.

Pegger, your reasoning is sound.

No one is holding guns to our heads to force us to buy the product.

Some people just want the World for $19.99.

Club508 wrote on Aug 24^th, 2011 at 12:13pm:


Marketing. No other reason.
19.99, its less than 20.00. Sounds more appealing.
Marketing researchers have put all kinds of money into finding out what sounds most appealing to consumers.

And, if it is actually worth buying, then that's great, but how are we to know a product exists without hearing about it in the first place. Advertising. Get the word out on the street to all to hear (or see).

Word of mouth is good for some products. But market folk also assume that a critique (ideally positive) is attached to it in that form. But that only works for products actually released. In the case of FLIGHT, everything is still speculation.

Strategic Retreat wrote on Aug 24^th, 2011 at 11:39am:


Wow. I really have beaten off more than I can chew reading that one . But you do make sense.

Quote:


Pegger's reasoning makes sense. Strategic Retreat is just beating all that was said to death for having some bad experience with Microsoft in the past, I'm sure.  It's quite disappointing for someone to not have anything good to say about the future of a hobby that has been alive for 30 years, especially when this release has the potential to be the most successful version of the software yet. Even though FSX was the most successful, not everyone was happy with it. I'm not saying successful makes for quality, but it's just an extra plus to have the quality.

hyperpep111 wrote on Aug 24^th, 2011 at 5:24pm:


Thanks. Somehow, my brain failed to process half the letters in his username into text form.  It's been a long day. 

Pete, I very much agree with what you said. But I don't think that the world is moving beyond windows. It is still a very popular and widely used operating system. Yes, Mac and Linux are widely used, but I don't think the Windows OS is dying out, especially with 7.

And seriously, what is the point of spelling MS with a "$?" Do we spell Simviation "$imviation?" No.

BrandonF wrote on Aug 24^th, 2011 at 6:13pm:


I seriously do not think the world will move past Windows. It still has it's advantages. But It will be hard to make anything as revolutionary as XP. 10 years down the line and people still choose it over the "better" ones os. And I support Google so much. But they are learning that they cannot make everything for free. But I am Seriously considering buying a htc phone.
As I posted somewhere else: I wish that someone would create an Os which combines all the good of all the os's, leave out the bad and squeeze them into big pack.
But that is a cry not likely to be answered

Club508 wrote on Aug 24^th, 2011 at 8:02pm:


Well we better pick up where the topic left off.

Club508 wrote on Aug 25^th, 2011 at 8:28am:


But would it be legal in M$flight To build a plane for yourself? Or It would be nice to import fsx planes to "flight" cause it's a really popular practice now

Renè

Travis wrote on Aug 25^th, 2011 at 4:02pm:


Yep. That will be kinda sad cause there are some classic freeware planes that would be a lovely addition.


Renè

Boikat wrote on Aug 25^th, 2011 at 7:36pm:


Is Maya Good? 3,500 is pretty steep


Renè

Club508 wrote on Aug 26^th, 2011 at 5:00pm:


At 3,500 I wouldn't expect anything less. But let us not be led astray from the original subject.


Renè

WOW!!!  That's good!

Mine always turn out like [insert EXTREMELY bad word here]  [/insert EXTREMELY bad word here]  in GMAX.

Just remember... GMAX is free, and is provided on the discs for the game itself. Or, download it!

3ds max and maya have extended functions, and an extended version of the same interface, as GMAX. They also have the bonus of being able to render and use physics to auto-animate.

If you're developing for MSFS, you'll not need those features as the rendering is all performed by the game engine!

I think someone should open a Maya topic cause this is going a little off topic

machineman9 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2011 at 7:53pm:


Is it just me, or didn't an earlier version of MSFS have such a tool? like FS3 or FS5 or something.

Travis wrote on Sep 12^th, 2011 at 2:17am:


The export module for GMax=>FSX was released in FSX SDK 2 and FSX Acceleration SDK. I've been using it for the past few years...

A nice (and free) side-effect of Lockheed-Martin licensing ESP from MS is that they've compiled new export modules for Max 2010, 2011, and 2012. Now folks who wish to create content for FSX, or Prepar3D and have the latest versions of Max can do so.

Travis wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2011 at 2:11am: