Simviation Forums

[quote]Case in point.
Years ago I lived in a very small town/village. Population less than three hundred, out in the middle of cornfields.
Out of curiosity, not long after Wiki started becoming known, I looked up the town just to see if anyone had listed it.

Lol, Frankly, I changed it to "toilet surprise" just last week, but was promptly overridden by some dedicated experts who really know their feces.....

Lol, Frankly, I changed it to "toilet surprise" just last week, but was promptly overridden by some dedicated experts who really know their feces.....

In all seriousness, Wikipedia is referred by some as a virtual on-line Encyclopedia. I read somewhere that PC Pro created an article and purposely put errors in it, submitted it to Wikipedia, and within hours it was corrected. I would like to think this forum is a friendly discussion group looking for help or just information while not getting involved in worrying whether a post meets some sort of academia standard.

The way I look for new product information is first go to the source of the infromation. In the case of Microsoft Flight, go to the Microsoft Studio. Then if one desires, check several more sources which could or not be Wikipedia. This will give you a better perspective about the new product. In most instances, if it was Wikipedia, Microsoft would have already fed them their information and the only thing new would be their own characteration of the product. In my case, they referred to Microsoft Flight Game as Microsoft Flight Simulator Game which I totally agree. I have also found that Wikipedia has a very sophyticated consensus model with far more internal checks and balances than I first envisioned.

Having said all this and because of the apparent distrust by some in using Wikipedia as a source, I will never refer to them again in this forum.

I think it should be moved to computer games and software. I like your original post saying that the down side would be it would dissapear within the thread area as it is a game..........AND? Just my opinion

It's the 11th version of the Microsoft Flight Simulator series. Leave it where it is.

It's the 11th version of the Microsoft Flight Simulator series. Leave it where it is.

The flight simulator series is discontineud...

It's the 11th version of the Microsoft Flight Simulator series. Leave it where it is.

The flight simulator series is discontineud...

Your right, it is the 11th Flight Simulator Game they produced. So leave it where it is.

An interesting thought is what happens in a few years when Flight has brought out everything and starts looking a little long in the tooth.  Will we have to start all over again and buy the entire planet and planes or will Flight continue to evolve forever from what it is now?  I am not a defender or a hater of Flight.  I don't think it replaces FSX, but I am not ready to throw it on the trash heap either.  I understand MS wanting a fresh start, though I don't agree with the execution of it.  But if I get five years down the road and have to start again from scratch, I will be one highly pissed off flight (not the title) enthusiast.

I wonder if MS realizes that we DO have memories, after all...

First off, nothing personal towards Wing Nut. I am quoting your post simply as a launching pad to post some thoughts.

Will we have to start all over again and buy the entire planet and planes or will Flight continue to evolve...

Isn't that what we have had to do with every version of FS?

While a lot of addons have been backwards compatible, not all have.

And providing backwards compatibility was probably one of the primary reasons for ACES rehashing old code for new versions instead of starting from scratch. Was that their decision or Microsoft's?

How many complaints have been posted in this forum, and others, over the years complaining about ACES retaining legacy code and not utilizing the latest technologies?

I don't think it replaces FSX,... ...

It was never intended to do that. Anyone who thinks it was simply has not been paying attention.

...if I get five years down the road and have to start again from scratch, ...

Again, isn't that what we have done in the past?

Now we have the beginnings of a new flight sim.......erm, simulated experience, or simulator, that is not tied to code based in the stone ages of personal computing.

Is it FSNext? No.

Do I wish for a new full world, AI populated, ATC controlled with accurate airspace, terrain, flight dynamics flight simulator? You bet.

Do I want it locked to the performance-limiting core of the past, released before it's fixed, followed by Service Paks, each with their own SDK? No friggin' way.

I think that an important idea to remember is, unlike MSFS in which each version was released basically complete (then patched), Flight is in it's infancy and the potential for growth is unlimited.

Back to the issue of "is Flight a simulator or a game?", it's both. It is what you (the flight simming community) want it to be and what you want to get out of it. If you want to play like a game, go ahead, have fun.

If you want to use it as a flight simulator, you can, granted to a different level of immersion than FS9 and FSX,....so far. Personally, I find it very realistic, as I am a GA nut and former resident of Hawaii.

Thanks for reading.

cheers,
Joe

No, actually, it's not.

Wing Nut, where did you read that Flight's planes are in .model format?

From what I know it's all in .dll format.

Another thread on this board. 

I think the real point is not exactly backwards comparability of add-ons relative to how they work with MSFS.

[quote]I think the real point is not exactly backwards comparability of add-ons relative to how they work with MSFS.

[quote][quote]I think the real point is not exactly backwards comparability of add-ons relative to how they work with MSFS.