Flight News on 10 Minute Taxi

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsHpY3KEQBc&feature=player_detailpage#t=502sThe last few minutes of 10 Minute Taxi were dedicated to some "inside" info regarding Flight.Lets review what was said:

• No set focus on aircraft type
• Realistic physics engine set to be produced for higher fidelity add-ons
• Online store will help to prevent piracy for 3rd party developers
• New way of installing add-ons
• Runs of today's hardware, NOT tomorrow's
• Planned February 2012 Release

Thoughts, anyone?

[alainneedle1 97]

Online store will help to prevent piracy for 3rd party developersNew way of installing add-onsWell, well, well, about that, what thread again was it that somebody said that I was spreading rumours.....that's right this one.... http://forum.avsim.n...hink-of-flight/ post # 6. and my answer in post #12Have I not said that you will not be able to download your add-ons like before, piracy was a problem.....go to the store, pick what you want (Miami airport), have your CC ready including your customers #, approved, open your Flight sim and "voila" Miami airport is there without you having to do anything..... what was it again about spreading rumours..... so let me say...pfffff :( I've said something about 3 party developers been in bed with MS from the beginning... didn't I....hummm I think I did....what was it again, you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours type of deal...pffff again.Now how will you use your FSX add-ons with Flight, I've I said NOT possible...OK enough, you'll have to go back to all my old post to see what else is comming.....B) I'm just having a good time with you all.....but to be honest...it was all speculations.....right? :( PS: I forgot, long long time ago...have I said something about FSX reworked......:(

[SirDrexl 0]

Sounds good. Hopefully the add-on installer is able to work with the protection of the Program Files folders this time. They should also put any config files under the Users folder so they wouldn't be blocked from direct modification (plenty of games do this already). It would probably still be better to put it on a separate drive for performance reasons, but at least we wouldn't get all those topics about issues with it installed to the default folder.I wasn't expecting this until the fall of 2012, so it's a nice surprise (for me anyway) to hear it's coming sooner.

[Gibbage 199]

Well, well, well, about that, what thread again was it that somebody said that I was spreading rumours.....that's right this one.... http://forum.avsim.n...hink-of-flight/ post # 6. and my answer in post #12

Want a cookie? P.S. Dont brake your hand patting yourself on the back. Its not confirmed till MS says its so.

[alainneedle1 97]

Want a cookie? P.S. Dont brake your hand patting yourself on the back. Its not confirmed till MS says its so.

Is this your way of saying.....nevermind. :(

[n4gix 4,949]

We should believe unsubstantiated information because?Note that I'm not disagreeing with anything that was said, but how is it any more "reliable information" than that written by anyone here or elsewhere?

[JSkorna 137]

He has no more inside information than the rest of us. That is what I think.

[Tierborn 189]

He has no more inside information than the rest of us. That is what I think.

+1 I could make the same video and post by nightfall

[alainneedle1 97]

LOL

[Guest ShinyJetSyndrome]

I could make the same video and post by nightfall

Yes but do you go by the handle of ARCHAMMER?!?!Also make sure to put up a lot of VFR sectionals of random places on the walls behind you. It makes you look more "legit." He must be married if he can get away with that...He makes a good point about 3rd party aircraft prices though. It's hard to justify spending $60 on a plane when a real one goes for $100-120/hr.

[frankla 44]

Online store will help to prevent piracy for 3rd party developersNew way of installing add-onsWell, well, well, about that, what thread again was it that somebody said that I was spreading rumours.....that's right this one.... http://forum.avsim.n...hink-of-flight/ post # 6. and my answer in post #12Have I not said that you will not be able to download your add-ons like before, piracy was a problem.....go to the store, pick what you want (Miami airport), have your CC ready including your customers #, approved, open your Flight sim and "voila" Miami airport is there without you having to do anything..... what was it again about spreading rumours..... so let me say...pfffff :( I've said something about 3 party developers been in bed with MS from the beginning... didn't I....hummm I think I did....what was it again, you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours type of deal...pffff again.Now how will you use your FSX add-ons with Flight, I've I said NOT possible...OK enough, you'll have to go back to all my old post to see what else is comming.....B) I'm just having a good time with you all.....but to be honest...it was all speculations.....right? :( PS: I forgot, long long time ago...have I said something about FSX reworked......:(

I have never had issues with you regarding your statements that microsoft wants us to buy from their store. As far as I have been involved in these forums, most people have argued with you and Mathew regarding your STRONG statements that Flight is a dressed up FSX. Even your post that you are referring to above, is about how Flight will be a repackaged FSX. No where in this video, there is a suggestion that Flight is a dressed up FSX. If anything, above video, if true, gives more reason to think you and Mathew are wrong.1) They say, It must run on todays computers, not tomorrows. It then must be multithreaded. That means you can not use the existing FSX code which is really single threaded. (You can not squeeze any more performance from FSX code. They did their best with 2 SPs.)2) They want to offer a new flight physics for 3PD. I don't see how that can be with just a reworked FSX code.Consider above and tell me how you still think Flight is still just a souped up FSX?Finally, I want to say that I have a problem with the way you and Mathew state your positions: Condescending and all mighty Know it All. You find any opening in any thread to restate the same arguments over and over again.When people stopped going over the same arguments, you complained that nobody wanted to answer you. Now you are again trying to rub it in. Why can't we just agree to disagree until we know for sure. When we do, then lets promise to not rub it in like adults that we are.

[Tierborn 189]

"...........He makes a good point about 3rd party aircraft prices though. It's hard to justify spending $60 on a plane when a real one goes for $100-120/hr.

Sorry .. but thats sesame street logic. Ok, you need 4,500$ to obtain your license. You need hrs to commit to a real life flight, You will probably fly hundreds of hours in your 60$ plane. 100 hr in 60$ plane = 60$ and 12,000$ in your 120$/hr plane)_

[Chock 17,769]

He makes a good point about 3rd party aircraft prices though.

I don't think he makes a good point at all in saying the FSX iFly Boeing 737 NG is expensive, in fact it's bordering on nonsense. It was less than a tenner for people who already had the FS9 version, and fifty-ish Bucks for those who bought it standalone. Now fifty Bucks is not a drop in the bucket of course, but it's hardly a vast sum either (you can't have a decent night in the pub for that much). When you consider that you get the 737-600, 737-700, 737-800, 737-900 and a couple of BBJ variants as well all in that package, with their differing avionics, to me that looks like a steal. In fact, with the exception of the 700 and 900 ER variants, it's the entire NG range, and even without them it still works out at about ten Bucks per plane, so really the iFly 737 NG is more like the pantheon of great value than a pricey add-on. He should try Ariane for size, it's nearly twice that for one variant!Of course there are some overpriced FS add-ons for sure, but he could not have picked a worse example if hoping to demonstrate that.Al

[alainneedle1 97]

I have never had issues with you regarding your statements that microsoft wants us to buy from their store. As far as I have been involved in these forums, most people have argued with you and Mathew regarding your STRONG statements that Flight is a FSX rework. If above video is true and/or you believe in it, then both you and Mathew have been proven wrong. Follow my logic: 1) You can not squeeze any more performance from FSX code. They did their best with 2 SPs.2) They say, It must run on todays computers, not tomorrows. It then must be multithreaded. That means you can not use the existing FSX code which is really single threaded.3) They want to offer a new flight physics for 3PD. I don't see how that can be with just a reworked FSX code.Consider above and tell me how you still think Flight is still just a souped up FSX?

Let's start with this, Flight was announced last August right, so if the Febuary 2012 released date is real that give MS only 1 1/2 year to built a brand new engine, now let say that they started not to long after MS closed Aces that add up to 2 1/2 years for a brand spanking 100 % new engine right....not enough time for that.Question: . 1) You can not squeeze any more performance from FSX code. They did their best with 2 SPsWrong.... DX10 SP2 is a preview only, Flight using a fully fixed DX10 from the same engine will improve performance greatly, making sure that they will offload the CPU to the GPU (SLI) will also greatly improve performance... look below, do you see Flight using DX11 or DX9, .... it's DX10, now do you thing that the guys at Nvidia put that there (in the driver) just because they did not know what to do with their free time? Flight is nowhere to be found in SLI compatibility bits (DX10) in earlier driver, do you think MS needed it for testing? Question: 2) They say, It must run on todays computers, not tomorrows. It then must be multithreaded. That means you can not use the existing FSX code which is really single threaded.

it can be fixed.Question: 3) They want to offer a new flight physics for 3PD. I don't see how that can be with just a reworked FSX code. From MS... in PC pilot...1st Question - Has Microsoft Flight been designed completely from the ground up or does it include elements from FSX? Microsoft.....we're building from the ground up focusing on the "purist" simmer as well as a larger range of people with varied interests in aviation....we will take advantage of the expertise and existing elements of the existing FS code base and architecture where it fits.......after 30 years of evolving the same code base, it's time for a fresh look! Here is the important part, (I read taking advantage of FSX and building around it)... we will take advantage of the expertise and existing elements of the existing FS code base and architecture where it fits.......

[Chock 17,769]

We could just as easily argue that the 'it's time for a fresh look!' part is the important bit. They quite clearly thought it was, otherwise they would not have ditched ACES.Al