FS10 in 4th quarter

[Craig.]

How is it FS2007 if its released in 2006

[simonmd]

Coz most products that are released towards the end of a year are called the next years model so they don't look out of date within a couple of months. Cars being a good example. FS2004 was actualy first realeased in late 2003 I believe. Anyway, FS 'X' is too good a name to pass up for the advertising people so i'm sure it'll be called just that.

[BFMF]

FS2004 was actualy first realeased in late 2003 I believe.

FS2004 was released towards the end of July, 2003.
FS2002 was released in either October or November 2001

[Craig.]

I am well aware of the way companies go about it. But in reality its still FS2006 if its released in 2006.

[Alphajet_Enthusiast]

Im hoping there'll be a surprise release tonight!  ;D
Huh? No, I havent touched any champagne...  :o

[Icelandair Pilot]

February 2006 Baby

[ashaman]

Im hoping there'll be a surprise release tonight!  ;D
Huh? No, I havent touched any champagne...  :o

What did you smoke then?

February 2006 Baby

Wow, february is in the fourth quarter of 2006?

I knew that nowaday a lot of things are different, but when I was young february was the first quarter.

Surrender and desist, unless M$ does surprise us all, it will be from october to december 2006.

And now, allow me to go out cavorting till the dawn.

Byez........

[Icelandair Pilot]

February planned.. was released from someone inside M$

[Bell206freak]

The February release date was given out in an article from PC Gamer in their December 2005 issue - it has a short piece on Flight Sim X.


Here's a link to a scan of the article. I found this on the C130 Sim forum.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?a ... &id=146773

[Gary R.]

Once again all the hype is eye candy related.  What about a new flight modeling system similar to X-plane's "blade element theory" ?  What about completely upgraded gauges instead of recycled FS-98 units?  What about FMC's in the airliners?  What about a default weather or storm gauge?  What about more complete ATC capabilities allowing emergency requests, altitude change requests, routing change requests (to get around that storm cell you see on the default WX) destination change requests and all the other things that pilots can ask ATC?  What about correctly portrayed and defined TFR's?  Go ahead, try doing an aerial tour of downtown DC.  You will also be treated to close up and personal views of an apache or an F-16 from Andrews.  What about correctly modeled microbursts on approach?  What about a ceiling altititude that extends higher than 100,000, say to Andromeda for instance???  lol.  Anyway, these are the really technical realisms that I know Microsoft will sidestep and hide behind their wonderfull  eye candy.  What's more, those of us with 32 bit machines won't  be able to run it.  I hope the computing public give's MS a big suprise and by and large refuses to allow themselves to have 64 bit jammed on their already overstressed wallets and starts going wholesale after Linux.  

[Craig.]

I must ask how is the 100,000 feet limit unrealistic? remember this is a simulation of civilian flight. Airlines and light aircraft. No aircraft can get to that height in that catagory so its realistic enough. Military/space add-ons are just that  :)

[ashaman]

Once again all the hype is eye candy related.  What about a new flight modeling system similar to X-plane's "blade element theory" ?  What about completely upgraded gauges instead of recycled FS-98 units?  What about FMC's in the airliners?  What about a default weather or storm gauge?  What about more complete ATC capabilities allowing emergency requests, altitude change requests, routing change requests (to get around that storm cell you see on the default WX) destination change requests and all the other things that pilots can ask ATC?  What about correctly portrayed and defined TFR's?  Go ahead, try doing an aerial tour of downtown DC.  You will also be treated to close up and personal views of an apache or an F-16 from Andrews.  What about correctly modeled microbursts on approach?  What about a ceiling altititude that extends higher than 100,000, say to Andromeda for instance???  lol.  Anyway, these are the really technical realisms that I know Microsoft will sidestep and hide behind their wonderfull  eye candy.  What's more, those of us with 32 bit machines won't  be able to run it.  I hope the computing public give's MS a big suprise and by and large refuses to allow themselves to have 64 bit jammed on their already overstressed wallets and starts going wholesale after Linux.  

To all your "what about" -- you should know already -- M$ will always answer with a "What about them?"

You're asking WAY too much from the poor simulator from Seattle... you're asking it to be a REAL simulator. :-/

(Note that I use this sim from FS4 and I'm not going to let it behind. This does not mean I'm not crashing down on the bull-heads in M$ like a thunderstorm for their poor job.)

I understand where are you coming from and, believe me your concerns mirror mine about FS. I'm not shooting you down (M$ does a wonderful job of it already, and without my help) but you have to understand that appearances are more important that substance, as far as M$ is concerned.

Wrong as it is, it's always been like that and I don't see it changing anytime soon. Why do you think I bought X-plane too?