Since they posted on their news page that they are hiring someone to lead the beta team, it wouldn't surprise me if they are almost ready for beta testing.

It seems that maybe the team isn't being so controlled by Microsoft this time. The website, for one, seems different than most Microsoft websites, so that's one reason I say that. Other than that, I don't know why I feel that way. 

Strategic Retreat wrote on Nov 5^th, 2011 at 10:25am:


Sorry, but I don't know if I agree with that. I've been using Windows 7 since the RC version, and have had very few, if not zero, issues. Was that the case with Windows Vista? Heck no. It was a nightmare. Same with FSX. It runs, but it is full of hidden bugs. Will Flight be the Windows 7 of the FS series? Well, Microsoft learned their lesson with Vista, so I would hope they learned their lesson with FSX, and it seems that they have. (i.e: they haven't released any screenshots of what they want Flight to look like, but what it does look like) No beta testing is fool-proof. There's always something that gets missed, but it gets to a point where there is too much missed. (FSX  )

Following after Flight Unlimited II/III, Pro Pilot 1/2, Fly!, and a few others, I purchased each of the MS Flight Sims as soon as they were first released; FS '98, FS 2000, FS 2002, FS 2004, (and FSX).
From memory I cant remember having any major problems with any of the first four versions, '98 to 2004, as each one appeared to be a gentle upgrade from the previous version (hardware-wise).
It was only with the advent of FSX that my hardware limitations soon were to be an insurmountable problem (vast expense!), and still remain so!
I could never figure out, (and still cant), why FSX put such an immediate heavy demand on my system, compared to the previous versions!

FS 2000 (with its excellent manual!) was a good upgrade from FS '98. FS 2002 was a fantastic upgrade from FS 2000, and it took me some time to finally get around to running FS 2004 on my computer, as FS 2002 was so good!
I have been running FS 2004 now since it was first released and I was, and still am, delighted with it. Maximum settings.
Unfortunately, for some reason, the hardware demand for my FSX means that I can never use it to its full potential, (whatever that is!).
I will, no doubt, purchase "Flight" as soon as it is released, as I did with all the others, and time will tell if I can run it to my satisfaction... ...!
But at the moment, I am in no great hurry, and continue to enjoy my trusty FS 2004, day after day!

Paul...A collector of Sims... ...!

Hagar wrote on Nov 5^th, 2011 at 6:27pm:


And to show that humans never really learn from their messing up, that wasn't the last time it happened too.

After all, it's only because M$ bailed out from FS11 that FSX is still around.

Strategic Retreat wrote on Nov 5^th, 2011 at 7:13pm:



Strategic, I will point to the last line you printed in the above.(I haven't yet learned how to quote a single line from a post) I have no idea what you mean by saying the completion of an FS11 would have finished FSX.

jetprop wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 7:23am:


I would have loved FS 11 if it was as tickly as Flight.... ....

A bit of simulated slap and tickle is always welcome... ...!

Paul...technically, sat in my chair... ...!

..... ....!

Strategic Retreat wrote on Nov 8^th, 2011 at 2:44pm:



I see now what you mean. As far as FSX goes it can be frustrating. I read most of the posts in the FSX and FS9 boards and both seem to have a fair share of problems posted.
  I can't imagine the work that goes into a flight simulater program, I simply don't know, but I would think paying attention to and reviewing every single byte programed is impossible. So, I look at FS9 and FSX as important stepping stones. I have often tried to imagine a way to make a sim that makes everyone happy and I keep coming up blank. I don't think it can be done.        

Steve M wrote on Nov 8^th, 2011 at 6:25pm:


Ah, but what kind of problems are we talking about here, huh?

FS9 is a VERY old program, almost 8 years ever since it got out, problems into adapting it to work with newer drivers, newer OS's, even newer hardware... those are to be expected.

FSX? It's six, almost, years old, but ever since day one to this very day, the problems discussed are always the same: lack of performances, in spite of six years of hardware advancements, and poor reliability, in the face of the two patches bombastically renamed service packs (Problems, these, that are about to be joined by the same afflictions of FS9, like adaptation with newer OS's, drivers and hardware, since FSX is pretty old itself too).

There is a small, not quite insignificant difference, you'll admit.


Steve M wrote on Nov 8^th, 2011 at 6:25pm:


This remembers me of some political promises about sacrifices for the future. "Sacrifice yourself today, that tomorrow..." Tomorrow what? We've been looking at every single damn release as a stepping stone ever since FS4 (at least I have since FS4, and other people from even before, I suspect)... when the hell will the real deal come?

Making everyone happy is mere Utopia. I would settle down nicely if they actually applied themselves seriously in trying NOT TO make everyone UNHAPPY, thing that I cannot believe they're trying to do at this very moment.

Quote:


And others only want to be paid for their time passed playing golf.

You know, with FSX there was a ton of hype. I remember salivating for at least a year over the pictures and features lists about FSX before its debut, I bought the Deluxe edition as soon as it was out and I was one that was shocked at how brutal it was on my system. That said, my current laptop can run it fairly well. But 2 months ago I threw FS2004 back on and shortly there after uninstalled FSX. FS2004 just runs so smooth on my system even though FSX can look better, flying is much more enjoyable in a smooth sim. That said, with Flight, I think I have learned my lesson and will wait another year after its release and after a system upgrade before buying it...unless I see evidence that it will work well on 1-2yr old systems.

Strategic Retreat wrote on Nov 9^th, 2011 at 10:28pm:


If software company employees play golf outside of the office, that is between them and their employers. It is not our place to tell them they may not. Their hobbies, sports, and their compensation is none of our affair.

Microsoft, for whom you seem have a dislike, has many popular and successful products. I do not need to post stats on market share. People here seem to know how to use Google (or even BING if you prefer).

back on topic.. after a wicked slice off the fairway...


And that's about all the golf terminology I know.