Not if it was based on the FSX codebase.Software architecture isn't called 'architecture' for no reason - there are a lot of similarities in between the fields. The main being design of complex structures, and that sometimes it really is better to throw EVERYTHING away and start again from fresh.It looks a lot like what MS is doing with Flight. Some assets are always kept - scenery data is easily reusable. Some assets have to go - the easily copyable (piratable) aircraft model system for a start!Lets face it - one of the BIGGEST problems with the entire 3PD economy is piracy. A previous commenter gave an example of his annual profits, and from what I have read over the years this is not unusual. Flight sim modding is still a cottage industry, prey to piracy as there is no inherent security built into the CODEBASE. Security relies on 'wrappers' and dll 'locks' - both very easy to circumvent. Google 'pmdg torrent' - 1.5x10^6 hits. A secure codebase can ONLY be built fromt he ground up - you can't 'tack-on' security like that, because at it's core, FSX needs unencrypted files to run.A cottage industry is exactly what indie game production was 10 years ago. Look at what Valve, the Xbox Marketplace and Apple have done for indie game writers. It is now a MASSIVE industry. It might still be carried out in cottages, or flats, or schools, but now it is a VIABLE industry, not just a hobby. The floor my office is on has 8 tenancies - every other tenant on our floor are APP WRITERS employing between 5-10 people each. Three years ago when we moved in here the building was deserted - we were the first tenants for years, we took it because it was cheap!Sure, MS want 30% of the return of a game on Xbox live, and presumably the same cut from Flight addons. (Where do people get the idea there will be no 3PD addons?), but compare that to the 'cut' 3PDs take from piracy - more like 70%? 90%?Hearing about ORBX and PMDG not reaching agreements was disappointing, but we know very little about the failed agreements. I don't think this necessarily means we wont see addons of their class for Flight, any more than EA not being a release partner for the Apple App Store resulting in no decent games on iOS. In a way, the lack of the larger 3PDs at launch is a GOOD thing - it opens up the field to smaller devs who may not have had the opportunity before.Despite what has been said, I'd be confident of seeing ORBX releasing DLC for Flight within a year or so. If not, hey, maybe I will have to explore other parts of the world.Artichoke. No-one has mentioned artichokes yet. Until now.

Yes, it would still have to have been re-written (hence an overwhelming project); and the detail on 3pds worked out, but it would have been easier for 3pds to get on board if MS could have shown them that with a new sim geared towards ALL of the market; everyone would have benefited. Anywho, I think you get where I'm coming from now.:-)

Just forget it, nothing will come out of it for us. Just forget it, its not intended as such.No whole world in DLC, just some islands, disconnected from other parts of the world.Its was a carefully mastered pr, lots of simmers went crazy on the little news what was carefully feed in bits.We read all to much in it, but I was sceptic in the beginning, as a lot of others who are rights as it seems now.The complete lack of corresponding with us from MS, here and in the beta forum is insulting.Aren't they proud on what they made? In other parts of the gaming industry dev's talk with their users.The MS suits are completly disconnected, as usual in big corporations, and Flight is heading for a go around, then another one and will fall from the sky due to lack of fuel.Some of us cant see it, and are remarkably positive, but the wish is the father of the tought, or something similar.But there is nothing lost, FS9 is still strong, FSX will be in a year or two when fast PC's are mainstream, we are the new Train Sim bunch here. Nothing wrong with that, it might look outdated eventually, but still works well.XPlane ? still a (too) long way to go. Saw the screenshots, but it will have to be much better to get FS9/X folks over en-masse.Just my toughts..I like to add, the benefit of using old platform, the new and newer PC's will allow us put in more and more demanding planes and stuff very day, and still have fluid performance, a bright future ahead captains, clear skies ahead!

Yeah, it's now apples and oranges at this point.

Still curious.

Oh, you're talking to me !?

Still curious.

I dont' see how you have 1,460 posts to your credit and still don't know who Francois Dumas is. No wonder your a Flight fan... :(

Edited February 9, 201214 yr by Dillon

I dont' see how you have 1,460 posts to your credit and still don't know who Francois Dumas is. No wonder your a Flight fan... :(

Please enlighten me ? Anything to Alexander ?RW aviation is my background so not very well up on all this simming stuff.Fred.

Edited February 9, 201214 yr by RYR738

RYR738 is only here from 2010, so thats it.Francois is not so much more in the picture as he used to be I think. Working behind the screens, and not so vocal anymore.. untill today!

Well, flight simulation is MY background (digitally since 1977), hence my text in my blog post ;-) Feel free to 'Google' me.

RYR738 is only here from 2010, so thats it.Francois is not so much more in the picture as he used to be I think. Working behind the screens, and not so vocal anymore.. untill today!

Yes, been too busy making a living (out of flight simulation to a large extent) to be around forums so much anymore.

RW aviation is my background so not very well up on all this simming stuff.

Hello FredAnd it shows :(

Hey Martin,The Icon is the aircraft that I often pick if I mostly want to explore the scenery. It can fly pretty slow (45 to 100+ mph), has great visibility, has a basic GPS/Moving Map, is fun and easy to fly, and is the only Amphibious aircraft so far.But you are severely limited in what missions, challenges, and jobs you will be able to do if you only have the Icon. The default Big Island is large, but I got tired of it (and just having the Icon and the Stearman) after about a week of flying. But I flew a LOT of hours that first week.My suggestion, try the free version of Flight and see how you like it. Then sign up for Live if you like Flight, so that you can try the Stearman. Then decide if you're willing to invest in the Hawaiian Pack, which includes the RV-6A (which is bit more aircraft, and gives you ILS). You really need the other islands to experience longer flights, and add more variety, and $20 is a pretty low price for any new game. I have paid $50 to $60 for games that I played for like a week, and either finished the game or became tired of it. I paid like $60 for X-Plane 9 (which never ran very well on my PC), and I probably now have more hours flying with Flight.

Arwen,How do you feel about Flight now that it is confirmed that it will never have the whole world?

@ Francois. Thanks for the info. It's just that I have not seen you around until very recently. Being a retired 737ng pilot I mostly use PMDG's NGX on the FSX platform.I am enthusiastic about Flight having used it for the last month but fear the MS will not take it in the proper direction.I really believe it's potential is huge but that remains to be seen.I am have been an ongoing beta tester for CAE's Tropos 6000 level-D software and tend to compare everything else to that.http://www.cae.com/e...tropos.6000.pdfhttp://www2.icao.int/en/TrainingRTOs/Industrial%20Visits/CAE%20Tropos%206000%20-%20Visual%20System.pdf Fred.

Hello FredAnd it shows :(

Is it that obvious ? lol

Edited February 9, 201214 yr by RYR738

A forum is for an exchange of views, both positive and negative, it's not up to you to say who can and who cannot post in it. Until the most recent preview I was mildly interested in Flight but wary of how it might turn out.

Yes, but a member here should be able to able to post a positive opinion about Flight without several forum vultures swooping in and ridiculing the post, with a bunch of nonsense.That sort of thing is what drives new people away. And when someone new comes here because they are interested in Flight, and if they do get up the courage to post something positive (like that they are looking forward to Flight), they are accused of being a "suspicious new member" or a "Flight ######." Too many people on this forum have nothing better to do than to post rude, insulting comments, competing to see who can get the biggest laugh at the expense of others.In my book, that is not an "exchange of views" . . . it is trying to force out anyone who posts anything contrary to the gang mentality that is so prevalent here.And that is wrong.

RYR just last week i went to a BBQ with some old friends from when i was flying UPS and we had a good talk about CAE .good to know someone like you its around here .

RYR just last week i went to a BBQ with some old friends from when i was flying UPS and we had a good talk about CAE .good to know someone like you its around here .

Cheers Tony !Fred.

Yes, but a member here should be able to able to post a positive opinion about Flight without several forum vultures swooping in and ridiculing the post, with a bunch of nonsense....Too many people on this forum have nothing better to do than to post rude, insulting comments, competing to see who can get the biggest laugh at the expense of others.In my book, that is not an "exchange of views" . . . it is trying to force out anyone who posts anything contrary to the gang mentality that is so prevalent here.And that is wrong.

Trust me. This is nothing compared to the atmosphere amongst military aviators or even amongst some of the more laid back commercial pilot community. We're passionate about our hobby and will pounce over every square inch of mediocrity.

Edited February 9, 201214 yr by Lawyer+Pilot

Well that will limit sales. There are only 600,000 qualified pilots in the USA.

If only 1/3 buys the Hawaii pack at 20$ then MS still makes 4m just with some islands.

Yes, but a member here should be able to able to post a positive opinion about Flight without several forum vultures swooping in and ridiculing the post, with a bunch of nonsense.That sort of thing is what drives new people away. And when someone new comes here because they are interested in Flight, and if they do get up the courage to post something positive (like that they are looking forward to Flight), they are accused of being a "suspicious new member" or a "Flight ######." Too many people on this forum have nothing better to do than to post rude, insulting comments, competing to see who can get the biggest laugh at the expense of others.In my book, that is not an "exchange of views" . . . it is trying to force out anyone who posts anything contrary to the gang mentality that is so prevalent here.And that is wrong.

I wasn't ridiculing you and of course you are entitled to your positive opinion. It certainly would be wrong for FMs here to try and shut out certain opinions. You've made some strong assertions about Flight's immersiveness and I asked you why it was more immersive than FSX with high end add-ons, in other words where is the big advance? The post you referred to didn't really enlighten me much, except you said you weren't a real pilot, which puts a question mark against your comment about how difficult the aircraft should be to fly with no aids selected. It's quite possible the extra difficulty is not realistic but simply to crank up difficulty for users who've completed missions on easier settings.I'm not trying to convince you your feelings about Flight are wrong, but given your enthusiasm for it I couldn't help wondering where that came from. Yes, I know none of us know how far MS will extend Flight, but I suspect it's highly optimistic to hope it might eventually end up as anything like a full world simulation or even as a regional simulation, like Flight Unlimited.