Microsoft not out of the flight sim game after all...

[Krt_Bong]

MS Flight sims are just crap and FSX is on the top of the pile, even after Landscape and Aircraft add-ons it still doesn't hold a candle to just flying around in IL-2 for the feeling of flying that you should expect from a Flight Simulator. That is just my opinion mind you but with the current trend in computer gaming to give you a big tease to whet your appetite, release a barely finished product that has to be patched endlessly and then dangling DLC in front of you to keep stringing you along I'll probably never buy this particular product or for that matter anything that says "Windows Live" or "Games for Windows" on the package ever again "Fool me once.." as the saying goes.

[Dozer_EAF19]

Why would I want a Microsoft flight sim? X-Plane is getting good now. And the former MSFS third party developers are increasingly moving to X-Plane. The most satisfying FS experiences I had - flying IFR to real-world charts in an old jet airliner, talking in a quasi-realistic way to the air traffic controllers on VATSIM, can be done in X-Plane. I was never concerned with making the ground look pretty - the runway always looks beautiful at night!

What I'm really waiting for is for Nils to make a light airliner with the same quality of systems and instruments as his jaw-dropping BK117 helicopter. Had lots of fun with a HS.748 in FS9 but the panel of that BK117 stops me enjoying any of my old FS9 aircraft...

[Blackdog_kt]

I don't have FSX but fly it often when visiting a friend. While a lot of what you guys say and despise about it is true, i'll just say that it's enjoyable to me on a different level.

Sure it's buggy, heavy on the PC and expensive to bring to a decent standard.

On the flip side, the so-called DLC is not actual DLC furnished by microsoft, but add-ons mabe by small studios of hobbyists who for the most part are honest aviation enthusiasts. On my current amount of disposable income i'd be nuts to pay $20 for a single airport. On the other hand, the amount of data that needs to be bought by the add-on makers to make some of these packages is usually expensive, as it mostly comes from satellite photos and elevation data. So, while FSX is a product of microsoft, the 3rd party industry that revolves around it is not a plot by some greedy capitalists to dominate the software market. It's just a bunch of graphic designers, amateur or professional pilots and engineers that model planes as a hobby on their PC. If the resources needed to deliver a certain quality are expensive, then the add-on becomes payware and often enough expensive payware. There are however free add-ons that are still better than the stock FSX aircraft.

It has no DM, in many cases it doesn't even model what it can model (eg, some 3rd party aircraft have full complex engine management with consequences, some others simply state what to do but there's no consequence for straying from the operating limits) and the stock FMs are highly inferior to IL2. On the other hand, if i have access to 2-3 well modelled 3rd party add-on aircraft with corrected FMs and a localized scenery pack i can fly over my home town and the neighboring areas and it does look like it. Sure, houses are randomly placed and what not, but having flown a Piper Cub at 500 feet over one of the highway exits leading outside my hometown, i could instantly recognize the shape and contours of roads, hills and mountains. Of course that terrain add-on was payware and i didn't expect it not be, when the guys obviously paid for such high accuracy satellite elevation maps, even if they didn't want to turn a profit they would have to charge something just to break even.

At the end of the day, it depends on what i'm in the mood for. If i want to immerse myself in WWII history or even a fix of quick and dirty combat flying i'll fire up IL2. If i want to pretend i'm a millionaire with my own private seaplane, taking off from the local airport, landing in the harbor in front of the city's most regonzibale landmark to pick up my friends and take off again for a weekend on the Greek islands, i'll call my buddy, ask him if he's in the mood for a co-pilot on a cross country flight, get a few beers and pay him a visit. It's the kind of virtual experience and role-playing scenario that you have in mind at the given time that decides this for the most part and truth be told, sometimes i want to take a break from being a pretend WWII veteran and be a pretend rich guy with lots of time to spend on vacation trips with friends. I actually find that i alternate between the two and almost never fly both during the same stretch of time, FSX is simply for relaxing from combat while occupying myself with other things that are no less equally challenging sometimes. Sometimes it's easier for me to dogfight P51s in a Fw190 at 10km, than flying a DME-arc approach on one of the local airports at night with bad weather. It's just the old apples and oranges comparison

I don't own FSX but that's because i've been spoiled by what i've seen and the cost of suddenly bringing a stock installation to that level would be way too much. If it was a more well-rounded product out of the box, i had more money to spare on add-ons or i could get a bundle deal on some add-ons (yes, some really are that good to have because the stock game is in fact problematic in many regards) i would probably be flying it on my own PC about half the time i'm spending on IL2.

To make it short, FSX in general is not crap. Stock FSX is crap because MS released a buggy and unfinished product. A modded FSX with a reasonable collection of free and payware add-ons however, while not excellent, can be quite good and certainly above average and if you are picky about what to install it won't break your piggy-bank either. For example, my buddy uses some freeware mods that improve the look of Greek coastlines since we mostly fly island hopping in small aircraft, there's a 40Gb add-on depicting the entire country of Netherlands and it's totally free and so on.

That's why i'm excited to see what kind of capabilities SoW will have in regards to drawing in the civilian sim crowd. For every 10 payware add-ons and 10 low quality freeware ones, there's usually a couple of high quality freeware packages that are equal to or better than the payware ones. Since FSX is now an unsupported platform, it would be silly to let whatever 3rd party talent there is to go to waste. Much better to draw them in and have them working on SoW.

[Dozer_EAF19]

Blackdog, I agree completely. Every one of your posts seems to be excellently written. Are you a professional writer?

The civil flight sims (MS and X-Plane) shouldn't be regarded as a finished product straight out the box. They're more like a second operating system for your computer. A PC with Windows and nothing else is pretty stupid, using Notepad and Solitaire and Internet Explorer. Same with FSn and X-Plane. You need to invest the time and sometimes money in getting the specific software to do what you want to do. But a flight simulator with a load of stuff installed into it is a lot more fun than a PC operating system

The problem I found is - maybe I'm a bit too compulsive - I end up spending more time finding, downloading, installing, maintaining, and talking on forums about the addons than I actually would spend flying and enjoying myself. But that's my own bad discipline and inability to recognise the things I do and don't enjoy in life

[robtek]

As we are getting IFR, ok, rudimentarely, in 4.10 i am pretty shure that we will have NDB's and other radio-navigation aids in BoB:SoW.
From there it is but a small step to pre-war airliners like Ju52, Fw200, Ju G38, DC3, DC2, Ford Trimotor and so on.
As this game-engine will be used for the korean theater as well we will have jet engines an more IFR-aids, that might lead to super-connie, strato-ctuiser, comet, 707 and so on.
As third party developers are possible, i don't see why there shouldn't be a civil simulation with detailed maps, realistic FM and DM.
The world is wide open, and i hope it starts this autumn.

[Flyby]

I hope MS codes the new sim to make use of multi-core processors up front and not as an after-thought. I think FSX, FS2004, and other MS efforts have their place. They seem to have large followings, and companies make and sell add-on aircraft for them. I own FS2004, and it was kind of neat flying from a local airfield and cruising the area.

I liked CFS3. I liked CFS2. Both were/are beautiful sims, and there are plenty of 1% planes to add, and expand the enjoyment of these sims. CFS3 could have used coding for multi-core processors (if they were around). Perhaps a new effort on that front?

There are only a few producers of flight sims out there, and fewer still of combat flight sims. Room enough for all, and to each his own flavor. Combat flight sim fans are such a tiny market, I'd say any company trying it's hands must have a huge set to carry around. I respect that. That's my opinion. I'm sticking with it.
Flyby out

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by Dozer_EAF19

Blackdog, I agree completely. Every one of your posts seems to be excellently written. Are you a professional writer?

Not really. I just make long sentences explaining every little thing so that there's as little room for misunderstanding as possible, mixed with judicious use of the preview button for proof-reading

On a more serious note, i just happened to study/learn English as a second language when i was younger. From that point on, it was thanks to getting into flight sims and computers in general at the age of 12 that i had a constant reason to use the language daily (in written form obviously), instead of ending up forgetting it through lack of use.

[Dozer_EAF19]

haha, I find myself re-writing with shorter sentences in an effort to reduce misreadability!

[The Kraken]

FWIW there's some new footage on the site which apparently shows some in-game graphics:

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/

Nice but pretty much the same as FSX which shouldn't come as a surprise. Of course it's probably all WIP (maybe they'll still add DirectX 10 effects ) and who knows what kind of gameplay they'll come up with for their new "social gaming experience" customer group...

[KG26_Alpha]

Frequently Asked Questions
Q:
What is "Microsoft Flight?"
A:
"Microsoft Flight" is a new PC game from Microsoft Game Studios. The new title will be available on the Games for Windows – LIVE service and will bring a new perspective to the long-standing "Flight Simulator" franchise. From new game play elements and enhanced scenery and terrain to new aircraft and integrated content marketplace, it is an entirely new breed of virtual flight. The Games for Windows - LIVE platform sets the stage for all your virtual flight needs while connecting you to a global base of users, content and endless exploration. Microsoft Flight builds off its heritage of deep, immersive simulation and is redesigned to make the experience easier for virtual fliers of all interests and skills.
Q:
How does “Microsoft Flight” differ from “Flight Simulator?” Why the new name? What’s changed?
A:
With “Microsoft Flight” we’re approaching the virtual flight genre from the ground up, with the focus on the universal appeal of the experience of Flight. We believe the simplicity of “Microsoft Flight” perfectly captures that vision while welcoming the millions of existing Flight Simulator fans. The new “Microsoft Flight” retains the full fidelity simulation longtime fans have come to expect while offering all players a whole new look and feel, a wide range of new game play and challenges, persistent experiences and social connectivity.
Q:
How does Games for Windows – LIVE factor in?
A:
Games for Windows – LIVE introduces a new level of connectivity to virtual flight, enhancing both the social and game play experiences of the title. Content is updated virtually. You can fly solo or join an entire global flight community online. You can easily connect with and facilitate flight experiences with your friends. The addition of Games for Windows - LIVE creates an ubiquitous virtual world of flight that offers easy and engaging access to the magic of flight for all.
Q:
Who is developing “Microsoft Flight” now that ACES is gone?
A:
“Microsoft Flight” is being developed internally at Microsoft by a team that includes many of the same creative minds that helped deliver countless entries in the “Flight Simulator” franchise.
Q:
Why did Microsoft shut down ACES Studio last January?
A:
Microsoft Game Studios is always evaluating its business model to determine what is best for both gamers and the company. Many factors were considered in the difficult decision to close ACES Studio, but we feel the 2009 closure helped us better align with our goals and long-term development plans. "Microsoft Flight" is being developed by many of the same creative minds that shaped "Microsoft Flight Simulator," and we're excited about delivering a new take on this classic franchise.