...but they finally added stalls! 

It doesn't matter what payware and freeware aircraft did.  They weren't done by MS and MS never had stalls correct in any FS.  I'm not 100% sure they're correct now, but at least they gave it a shot...

Ok, let's keep this lighthearted, shall we?  I'm not saying anything except there's at least one thing in Flight that has not been in past releases of FS. 

So many people here seem to WANT to hate Flight.  You want to know my impression?  If you're a Jet guy, you'll hate it.  If you're a GA guy, you might like it.  I like the fact that you can go through the start up procedures, think it's idiotic that they make you walk to the plane.  I've only played it for about half an hour, so give me time to form a proper feeling for it.

The bad part of Flight so far is not in the graphics or the dynamics, but in what was omitted from Flight Simulator (3rd party), the greedy MS marketing practices and the scripted game play.

Oh, and I like the heads up display as opposed to the hard to read tiny red text in past FS versions...

I'm hoping it gets better and gives you some free flight after the boring lessons...

alrot wrote on Mar 9^th, 2012 at 5:54pm:

Maybe they will. Maybe they are not done developing Flight to the point they want to release an SDK.

Maybe they saw what happened with FSX  and it's many versions of SDKs and said "not again".

Maybe they are taking their time creating Flight so they can do it right and fix all the bugs before the SDK comes out. We all might be part of a big Beta team.

Maybe they decided to release Flight the way they did to generate a revenue stream to fund continued development.

Maybe....who knows?

cheers,
Joe

WING Nut Wrote:
 " they should try to take advantage of that self made Community be grateful and proud of what without its purpose made by it self because of them and Instead to try to close it ,to join it ,and listen more to the people
they could win even more money like that  "


MS say that they have been dissapointed by some of the negative, unconstructive reactions from the simmers. There has been a lot of that, no doubt about it. You are right in saying that they should maybe reach out more to the established simmer community as it would, in the long run make for a better game. But there is no point in asking for the world as it is in FSX. Free third party add ons are dead. Never will happen again. They cant afford that and I think we should accept that reality, and find ways to constructively  influenze MS in making Flight something everybody, not just newbies would wish to use.

What John said, x2...

And it wasn't me that said that.  I think it was Alex... 

I got X-plane years ago. Not sure which version, but it was early on.
Thought it was ok at the time.
It didn't hold my attention though, and the next one I bought wasn't untill years later. That was Xp9.
Now I am addicted to making my own aircraft.
To bad MS never made it as easy to do. I messed with Gmax, and I can mess with an aircraft.cfg and all that real basic tweak stuff, but I never got it all put together to the level where I could make a 100% orriginal FS aircraft. With XP, I can crank a basic concept out in less than a day.
If only for that, XP will stick arround in my library...

Found this on Austin's blog the other day...

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this is Austin Meyers, the guy who brought us X-Plane...



Before you laugh too hard, the rocket is a mockup design to test the viability of a new space shuttle design and is designed to land with a kind of a primitive artificial intelligence.  The guy is a freaking genius...

The closest thing to pre release marketing for flight was to put out vauge, minimal information, primarily spread through FS fan sites, in a weak word of mouth campaign. 
They then left  simmers to jack up false expectations accordingly, and generate buzz as a result. All the while, even though they made statements to the fact that it was going to be mainly a game, they also made a point to loosely imply Flight was going to be tuneable in a fashion so that the more traditional "hardcore" FS people would be happy.  Some would say they outright declared it in fact.
Sure, and it is tunable to a point, but any of the remaining people from Aces, (or anyone who spent five minutes looking at any FS fansite), could have told them it was nowhere near what it would take to make anyone, but the most casual flyers, happy for any noteworthy length of time. If they had any notion at all about what they were working on durring the dev time, then indeed they knew all along that what simmers were hoping for was not what they were going to be selling.
They would have had to know long before release that the fansites were full of high hopes that Flight was not going to fullfill.
If MS is really going leave advertising to a FS fansite buzz campaign, and then sit there and say they didn't see the backlash coming, don't understand it, etc, then I can only conclude that they confused the FS fans for the common mushroom.
In other words they must have thought we were brainless organisms that prefer to live in the dark and are easily harvested.
Or they're just really, really, reeeeeallly out of touch with reality.
Either way.........

JBaymore wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2012 at 8:50am:



I will say its this one 

Cusance wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2012 at 10:54am:


wow!! I have never met a Microsoft Executive or Personnel before !!!

So what are you Looking In a site that its being created by Microsoft Flight Simulator Series if it wasn't successful enough?

You Little Game Its really bad and boring if we compared it to FSX ,Its like to tell a professional Tenis player to play Pinball


Wait..!! What ?? that It will become a simulator Once I spend $1.000 or more?
do u really think I'm that stupid?

Oh for god's sake.......

"When you run a business and drop a long-term successful product line that appealed to a specific market segment,....."  Meaning the product was sucessful to the SPECIFIC MARKET SEGMENT.  And it WAS sucessful.  Success is not merely measured by money... and the users don"t use THAT yardstick anyway.

The market segment does not give a rat's keester whether the product made Microsoft enough money.  They cared that it met THIER needs.

Tom Peters... marketing and business guru: "Perception is all there is for a customer". 

So when their needs were abandopned... worse... with all of the misinformation leading them on in the first place... OF COURSE they are not happy.

"Perfectly pleasant" does not seem to be poised to have a powerful impact into ANY market segment.

What division of the Microsoft corporation do you work for?   

best,

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

Re: Austin Meyers:

Quote:


Well, he *does* have a cat....   

ALROT WROTE >>> "..!! What ?? that It will become a simulator Once I spend $1.000 or more?
do u really think I'm that stupid"


I couldnt possibly comment on that.

Cusance wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2012 at 6:27pm:



I don't know exactly  what you are insinuating and probably and just in case I'm a stupid for not being English native speaker ,Its hard for me to find beautiful and properly  words to express myself as I wish In English

any how Time will say How stupid I was 

alrot wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2012 at 8:40pm:


I think it's your use of a . not a , that has caused the confusion. I assume you were meaning one thousand dollars not one dollar?!

matthewdev wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2012 at 8:56pm:


I'm not trying to defend myself  but In Spanish its backwards ,example if we are going to say six thousand dollars and 0 cents would be 6.000,00 we use periods and cents would be comas 

Cusance wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2012 at 3:55pm:

How was it misleading?

Can you give a specific example where they lied about Flight?

Did they ever promise AI?

Did they ever promise ATC?

Did they ever promise a whole-world model?

Since the first press release it has been known that Flight was not going to be FSNext.

If people have misinterpreted what they were told, how is that misleading?

FWIW, there are many experienced simmers who are enjoying Flight because they see Flight for what it is, not what it isn't or what they wish it was.

cheers,
Joe

alrot wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2012 at 1:01pm:


That makes things confusing!

Cusance wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 9:13am:


I know you didn't say those things, they are simply issues that have been mentioned ad nauseum in other threads.

Cusance wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 9:13am:

...and it does. Because it does not appeal to you does not give you the right to be spokesman for all experienced simmers. I have been simming since the early '90s so I think I am experienced and Flight appeals to me for what it is. I know that I am not the only experienced simmer who likes Flight.

Cusance wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 9:13am:

[sarcasm mode] Now that sounds like a winning marketing strategy to me! [/sarcasm mode]

Cusance wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 9:13am:

I am an experienced simmer and I did not expect anything from Flight in advance. We knew from the beginning Flight was not going to be FSNext, that it was something different. I am sorry Flight did not meet your expectations, maybe you set the bar too high.

Cusance wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 9:13am:

Again I ask, where? I have seen nothing misleading in any press release or interview other than "Flight will appeal to experienced simmers". I guess I can concede they should have said "Flight will appeal to some experienced simmers". Still not the best marketing plan, IMO.

cheers,
Joe

jetprop wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 5:08pm:

Nah, not defensive, just playing devil's advocate.

Flight needs no defense, it stands on it's own merits.

jetprop wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 5:08pm:

Maybe you should visit some other sights then.

Avsim's Flight forum gets 100's of posts a day and a bunch come from experienced simmers who are having fun with Flight.

cheers,
Joe

Camel_Moe wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 2:33am:

Exactly what I've been thinking. I've seen similar arguments with each new release of MSFS.* I never understood why otherwise sensible people can get so passionate about a piece of computer software. That's why I generally keep out of these discussions. I just sit & enjoy the banter.

* Have a look at the first comments in the FSX forum. /yabb?board=FSX/9600

Camel_Moe wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 2:33am:

Complainers will outnumber supporters 10 to 1, it's always that way.

Camel_Moe wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 2:33am:

...and you know all this because you work at Microsoft?

Your statement is just as plausible as me saying "Microsoft upper management was really disappointed with the direction ACES was taking Flight Simulator so they made the hard decision to scrap the Flight Simulator series, bring in a new team and start completely from scratch."

The only value of the Avsim poll is it gives us a snapshot of the opinions of the people who bothered to take the poll.

cheers,
Joe

JoBee wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 11:11am:


Pessimistic at best, convenient, often uttered by those whose game is getting the bashing, and even true in many cases, but by far and away not always that way.

JoBee wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 11:11am:



   Well, I'm starting to get the feeling this is "feeding the troll", but what the heck. The first part:
The vast majority of what support I do see, regardless of who is doing it, seems to be based off the notion that Flight will become "FS11", in a year or two.....

    That would be an example of personal opinion through careful observation of multiple sites, not limited to, but including Avsim, MS Flight's official site, numerous comment sections of numerous reviews, and various other gamer sites like IGN, and FS sites like this one. Basically I've been visiting other sites just have you have previously suggested to another member, and have been doing so since flight was first announced. Don't need a MS paycheck for that. Like I said, it's more of a recreational sport for when the arthrits keeps me awake, and like any sport, it's best to know the teams.

Now, the second part:
....and completely disregards the notion that FS11 is exactly what MS does not want to do. If it was, they wouldn't have canned Aces, wouldn't have sold the remains of the FS series to Lockheed, wouldn't have tried to pass Flight off as a "reboot", and nobody would be having these discussions because we'd be talking about FS11 instead.

    Well, lets see. Aces was working on FS11, and MS decided to cancel it, announced they were cancelling it, sold the remains of the MSFS as we know it to another company, and well, fired most of Aces, the only people on staff with a clue how to make FS as we know it.
    The end result is Flight isn't FS11. It's not even FS. It's just F, on purpose, and as MS has publicly explained, repeatedly, because they don't want it to be the next MSFS. They want it to be something new and different, and they stress "a game", not a sim.
   I suspect people aren't giving you the links to all this because your response to everything seems to be that anything you don't agree with is automatically rendered invalid regardless of evidence anyway. Kinda takes the motivation out of digging up the links. But what the heck, here is at least one of Josh Howard himself telling us that other than Flight otherwise supposedly surpassing FS in complexity of base simulation, they don't want FS11,  and we aren't getting FS11, the world, transatlantic flights, or much of anything else, save a few trinkets, that would make MSF into a MSFS: http://forum.avsim.net/index.php?app=ccs&module=pages&section=pages&folder=/AVSI...
What any part of my post has to do with the plausibility of any of your previous statements, i wouldn't dare to speculate. However, I've told you what MS/JH has said, as others have done before me in this thread, so unless you consider Josh Howard to be in the habit of saying implausible things, I do not believe plausibility in my relay of the information is the issue.
  On a side note,  I suppose firing Aces could have left job openings I could have applied for, but nope, not interested, so still not getting  a check from MS.

JoBee wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 11:11am:


   Spoken like a true politician. "It doesn't support my position, so the poll is wrong....."
    What it shows is exactly what I have previously stated. A majority of simmers are at best "sitting on the fence" or otherwise meh towards flight. If you want to argue that Flight's supporters couldn't be bothered to support it for the poll, that's your perogative, but one would have to wonder why they wouldn't. Indeed that would make the "sitting on the fence" crowd oddly motivated.
  As for the posts themselves, not what I would call overwhelming proof of a notable cadre of support. Today, as many days that I read Avsim, they are mostly trending towards the luke warm to somewhat critical side. I often get the feeling of vultures waiting quite frankly.
However,  I have not said that one cannot find simmers that like Flight. Indeed one can. What I have said is mostly I personaly find fence sitters, and people that have otherwise backed away to be in the largest numbers, and that a common theme is some kind of idea that despite MS/JH outright dissmissing the idea, Flight is going to turn into MSFS11.  Something they are actively trying to get through people's heads is not the plan.

It's great to see some intelligent debate about all this.

VERY welcome .... & much as I'd like to throw in my 2c I won't right now  .....

Differing viewpoints & freedom of expression is what a 'free world' is all about.


Keep up the great work guys! 

That's why I get the troll feeling, but hold on that for a second...
Here's the reason: You take one vauge PR qoute to throw back, and ignore the whole rest of the article that says exactly why your not getting the next FS from flight, probably not at all in fact, what the plans are instead, and even goes so far has to explain that most such desires the simmers express are in such a minority in relation to the plan as to be  almost totaly discounted on the spot.
Since almost everything people have been saying in relation to MS/JH's actual expressed intentions, the path forward from here on out, and the idea that we are not getting much of what people are still holding out hope for, if any of it, has in one way or another come from JH, it's not guesses and opinions. This all comes from post release interviews, trying to counter what absolutely was a mess of guesses and opinions before release. Guesses and opinions that were primarily due to MS overall hush hush about details combined with vauge statements that it would cater to the most experienced simmers and the like. Statements, that to much of the sim world, meant entirely different features than what were released, and features the have allready been publicly discounted as extremely unlikely to no chance at all.
   In just one aspect, in that interview alone, JH even tells us the planned DLC rollout as per data collected to date:
"I can say that our current approach is to deliver about an airplane a month, and 3 to 4 expansions a year, as well as a variety of other kinds of content at various cadences.", as well as later stating, "There are many magnificent places to fly on this planet, and over time we look forward to offering more and more of them, but don’t feel the need to offer all of them."  The latter when asked about creating the whole world.
  Yet many still seem to think we are getting the world, and in much less time. Many will support flight as long as they still think they will get such things, and many will support Flight only because they believe they will get such things. It's those that I often find myself scracthing my head over, given often times they also insist MS hasn't made it clear such additions are not where flight is headed, when quite the opposite, they have made it very clear.
Sure, MS may sway a little here and there on various points, but the problem is they've allready written off most of the community desires has being of minimal to no importance, and are working hard to make that clear going forward. From an overall market standpoint, it may be a valid course, but it doesn't lend itself towards a trend of supporting the desires of what they vocally consider a very small portion of the overall market, with desires they repeatedly state they don't think sync with the main market.
    So if it's not your intention to Troll, my appologies, but as you apparently can't understand how the rest of us can possibly know MS's plans, I am sure I am not the only one that can't understand how you could possibly have read anything that has come directly from MS without getting the message.
    Almost everything you want to know is right there. Burried a little in the PR "peace, luv, and the rabid minority don't count" in places, i'll grant you, but it's there. And they're pretty straight forward about dismissing much of what many are holding out hope for in the sim world.
    I'm not saying you have to agree with everything. There is a little room for some interpretation, and mabey a little hope here and there even. 3PD DLC comes to mind, allthough I'm not going to bet on the details just yet myself.
    But all that said, has it looks now, it's has if we showed you a picture of blue sky, and you just told us it were not true, you don't see any sky at all, and even if there is indeed a picture of sky, we're all just guessing it's blue. Switch shoes and tell me that put into my perspective, you wouldn't be a bit a bit suspicious of being trolled.

Hehe, anyway, has for the 1185 simmers thing, perhaps I should have said of the majority of simmers that cared enough about flight to form an opinion, and express it.
     That's the thing about polls, they're a sampling by nature. Still, a straightforward poll such as that is very good at showing trends. A positive way to look at it also is to note that the absolute negative demographic, the guys that absolutely refuse to touch flight, are very much a minority.

alrot wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 10:08pm:


lolololol

Quote:



Quote:


Quote:


So your saying people who don't like Flight are just making up what their saying. Spoken like a true Politician Joe.

"I don't like what their saying so it's not true."

We do have links but you would just ignore them.

rodericksnr wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 6:41pm:

There are 3 points that I and probably many hate:

Price:20 dollars for some islands and 2 planes?no way!If thats for every state then america will cost between 1000 and 2000 dollars!

The forcing:You HAVE to do the first 2 misions,you HAVE to connect to LIVE and you HAVE to wait for MS to make a certain aircraft,wich will probably never happen.

The limits:MS said they won't make the entire world,and if you still want a reasonable part of it,you have to be rich.


These are the main disapointments for me.

rodericksnr wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 6:41pm:


Sounds like you are not aware that the state of Alaska is in the works and there will be more after that.

They are releasing a new plane tomorrow, but it looks like another exterior model only like the Mustang.

regards,
Joe

andy190 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 11:29pm:


Wow, I have now been called a troll and a politician, at least I haven't stooped to calling people names yet.

Andy I am not putting words into anyone's mouth, I am trying to understand how people can say they were mislead about Flight  based on what I have seen.

And as far as ignoring links goes, I guess we will never know what I will do until somebody posts some.

regards,
Joe

JoBee wrote on Mar 27^th, 2012 at 7:53pm:



Unless somebody else called you a troll and I missed it, nobody has called you a troll.
There is a big difference in saying someone has the feeling they are being trolled, and outright calling someone a troll. Having a feeling means one is not committed to the position, and the mind is yet to be made on the subject.
Neither is saying someone speaks like a true politician, the same as directly calling them a politician. I can say "that orange ball looks just like a real orange", yet I am not calling it an orange.
Now then, seeing has the rest of this quadruple post streak seems to be directed primarily at other peoples posts, I'll leave the rest up to them.

Sorry guys, I was trying to be funny with the troll/politician comment. I guess I missed the mark on that one.

I don't care what you call me as long as it isn't 'late for dinner".

Quote:


What e-mails?

Quote:

Not at all, in fact if you re-read the entire thread you will see that what I am looking for is where Microsoft misled the simming community into believing Flight was going to be anything more than what it is. I have never questioned anyone's views, only how they were formed.

Quote:

Where have I said anything remotely like that?

Quote:

Sorry, I guess.....I think you missed by a mile.

cheers,
Joe

JoBee wrote on Mar 28^th, 2012 at 1:46am:


Here:
JoBee wrote on Mar 24^th, 2012 at 9:29am:


This is from this thread: /yabb?num=1332544319

andy190 wrote on Mar 28^th, 2012 at 1:50am:

If cusance has e-mails from Microsoft regarding what Flight would and/or would not be, and wants to forward them to me, I will be happy to provide an e-mail address.

Gravity is the number one cause of plane crashes.
The obvious solution is to make gravity illegal.
Congress however, keeps stalling the vote on the bill.
I am wary of taking my next flight untill they do.

Just sayin....

"Sounds like you are not aware that the state of Alaska is in the works and there will be more after that."

I know they are releasing Alaska but how are we expected to get there? Land somewhere in Hawaii catch a ferry to Anchorage and take off again? NOT!

alrot wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 10:08pm:


Pass some? I brought beer and I'm willing to share too.

This is even better than every Reality show I can remember.

Guys, please do go on.