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

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Thank you for considering my English good enough to pass as an American, but i'm actually Greek

Aieee! Yes I missed the 'your' part and read 'our', just skimmed it. I always thought you were American though....Strange that. Your English is superb btw......which should have made me suspicious anyway come to think of it. Kidding my Yank friends, chill!

On topic, does anyone know if the same team they fired back in 2009 are working on this, and have been rehired? The mind boggles. I hope they are not 'dumbing down' the title to appeal to the lowest common denominator just to make it more popular.....that would be a shame.

The fact they have dropped 'Simulator' from the title does not bode well methinks. Unless they are just trying to be 'Hip' and re-brand. I can see it now, a mission to rescue rapper 'Jay-Z' from a towering skyscraper inferno, and transport him to his next 'gig' in a Harrier Jump Jet. Get da kidz wit it!

[Viking]

So far I have bought most, if not all, of M$ flightsims and they have all, without exception, failed to impress me. Prove me wrong this time and I will be happy! We need more of this in order to keep the interest for this kind of software living.

Besides, if this leads to another “fight flight sim”, I am very curious to see how the Grumman “problem” will be handled.

Regards
Viking

[Meusli]

One Bullshot video does not give us enough to go on, but I like to speculate!
I think the one thing that Flight Sim X had going for it was the missions, they were fun and varied. This is where I think this is going, a smaller world with more detail and missions to complete in that world. It will make it more of a game than a Sim which is what happens when you get rid of your Sim related staff.

[IceFire]

I always felt that Flight Sim had the sim aspects of the navigation and ATC and that sort of thing down but flying always seemed kind of flat and uninteresting compared to IL-2 or LOMAC's flight modeling. When flying a plane like a Cessna, which I actually have a few real life minutes at the controls of, it never really felt like I was flying anything.

The scenery was nice anyways.

So I could hope for a more visceral flight modeling experience with the sights and sounds correct along with the feel of the aircraft. Even if it is a smaller world... that'd be ok. If they get the "flight" part of Flight done properly that'd be great. For the time being I sometimes just set myself up in some sort of aircraft in IL-2 and go sight seeing on some of the newer maps. You never know what you'll find flying around just enjoying the sensation of flight.

[Splitter]

There are two eagerly anticipated sims coming out in the near future: SoW and X-Plane10. It would be just like Microsoft to wait until these games are released, take all the good ideas contained therein, and release a sim of their own.

MS Flight Sim dominated the "flight sim" market for years. X-Plane was the "Apple" of flight sims in that it had a fairly small and very dedicated following. It's also a better flight sim, IMHO having played both (uglier, but the navigation and flight models are superior).

IL-2 garnered a huge following and took a big chunk out of MS's combat flight sim's audience.

Then MS laid off their flight sim staff. I had heard that Austin (X-Plane's owner) has tried to get them on board, but it didn't work out. It was either a money thing or a very long non-compete agreement. That's my guess anyway.

While I have come to love IL-2 recently (sorry guys, I was late to the game and had been dedicated to the Battlefield series lol), it's very apparent that the IL-2 flight models do not measure up to those of MSFS or X-Plane. It's just "too easy" to fly in IL-2 from a pure flight sim point of view.

Of course, X-Plane has been constantly updated so that would account for that impression. Unfortunately, MS Combat Flight sims stunk and X-Plane does not do combat sims for the PC/Apple market.

Those reasons are why I am eagerly anticipating SoW and hoping beyond hope that they get the "flight sim" functionality right (the graphics are good enough for me as they stand from what I have seen).

Those reasons are also why a company with huge resources, like MS, might try to jump back in with both feet. Put out a good flight sim (hah!) and then add a combat element and you corner both sides of the market.

Plus, to the best of my knowledge, many of the MS flight sim programmers are still out there. MS could take them back (might have already done so) and be working on their version of a flight sim right now.

Remember, MS is not known for their innovation. They are known to be very good at marketing and "improving" on other's innovation.

Now THAT, my fellow Americans, IS the American way .

Just my thoughts, be gentle.

Splitter

[AndyJWest]

...it's very apparent that the IL-2 flight models do not measure up to those of MSFS or X-Plane.

I've never tried X-Plane, but the MSFS flight models seem nothing like as realistic as IL-2s to me. The stall characteristics seem all wrong, and I've never seen a convincing flat spin in MSFS. Perhaps the latest aircraft are better, but it never convinced me.

Microsoft seem to be living up to their usual standards with their new promo video: all I get is a black screen...

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

I've never tried X-Plane, but the MSFS flight models seem nothing like as realistic as IL-2s to me. The stall characteristics seem all wrong, and I've never seen a convincing flat spin in MSFS. Perhaps the latest aircraft are better, but it never convinced me.

Microsoft seem to be living up to their usual standards with their new promo video: all I get is a black screen...

I would suggest trying X-Plane (they have a free demo, ten minutes of flight). The flight models are generally more realistic, but it depends on how much attention to detail the plane maker had when he made it. ATC is bland to non-existent. Scenery is fugly. Expansion packs are fewer and further between but do exist (free and pay).

The difference is the flight model engine. Nothing I have tried compares. But then again, all of the bad stuff (terrible ATC and scenery) take away from the software.

Splitter

[Tempest123]

"While I have come to love IL-2 recently (sorry guys, I was late to the game and had been dedicated to the Battlefield series lol), it's very apparent that the IL-2 flight models do not measure up to those of MSFS or X-Plane. It's just "too easy" to fly in IL-2 from a pure flight sim point of view"

Not really true in my opinion, I have some flying experience and of course MSFS is ahead in modelling aircraft systems and navigation, but as far a physics goes I think Il2 still has the edge. Now that being said, I'm not talking about add-ons such as accusim P-47/B-17 which are obviously much more in depth than Il2. I always wanted IL2 to be more of a study sim with more systems modelled and certainly a better CEM mode. Simple things like switching fuel tanks, or charging guns would be nice. From what I've seen TD has finally incorporated real navigation and airframe stresses, which will be great.

[Chivas]

That promo video is probably just another example of Microsoft bullcrap false advertising. Much like the FSX direct X10 screenshot and the CFS3 promo video.

I hope I'm mistaken, but they've had a very poor rep over the last few years. I did enjoy CFS1, but they went down hill ever since. Anyone that suggests Microsofts flight model with its "fill in the blanks" data is more realistic than the IL-2 series has got to be kidding.

[bf-110]

Opened the url,but didn´t see any content.So why all the enthusiasm?