Webisode 7: Flight is not about the act of operating an airplane

[Guest jahman]

On Webisode 7

at 3:21, Kirk Hawkins, Founder and CEO, ICON Aircraft says:

The best thing about Microsoft Flight Simulator is the focus on the experience of flying. (It's) not about the act of operating an airplane. That's a fundamental shift.

There you have it, MS Flight is not about operating an airplane.Oh, and he did say Microsoft Flight Simulator! :LMAO:The mistake of course is a serious one and goes to the core of the appeal of simming.Simming is everything about operating an airplane, because operating an airplane is the psychological link between you and flying. If you don't operate an airplane you are just a passenger (or as Amelia Earhart aptly put it, "a sack o' potatoes", and she refused to continue flying unless she was put behind the controls).The thrill of flying happens when you're at the controls of the aircraft and you make the aircraft fly, then you fly because the aircraft has become a psychological extension of yourself.On the neurological level, your brain extends the map of your body to include the airplane. The neural map of your body and "add-ons" like the aircraft you're flying is what modern scientists believe is at the root of consciousness. A bigger map: More consciousness. No map: No consciousness, as in coma. (Reference: TED Talk on CNN - Unravelling the Mystery of Consciousness, here.)So there you have it, operating an aircraft (not the flying itself) expands your sense of self.Now this is not open to argument, for anyone and everyone having been both a passenger and a pilot (even with only one flight lesson in whatever aircraft) will be able to tell you the emotion of flying is tied to the the act of being the one doing th flying, and doing the flying means controlling the aircraft. Of course flying as a passenger is also enjoyable, but way, way less than piloting the aircraft.For any doubters still out there, forget about flying: Change the paradigm to driving a car. Would any gaming exec seriously think that a car racing sim would interest anyone if the car was to be controlled via a mouse? Ovsiously not!It's accepted that in addition to the car racing software you will also need to purchase a steering wheel, a stick shift and a set of pedals. So why is it so harrd for the Flight team to accept that flying an aircraft in sim, like in the RW, requires a yoke, throttles and a rudder?Oh, and for anyone believing "this is just something Kirk Hawkins said", well, yes, obviously, but consider that whatever he did say was previously scripted and approved by the MS Flight team leaders (except for the "simulator" bit that slipped in there).Finally, it strikes me the way most of these folks (but not all) act and talk in the video remind me of the folks that populate Wall Street (and we know what they are pa$$ionate about!) and are definitely not the types of folks I would have as friends. Quite unlike most of the add-on developpers, and of course fellow simmers here on AvSim, I might say.Cheers,- jahman.PS:There is nothing wrong with your flight simulator. Do not attempt to adjust the trim. We are controlling flight. If we wish to make it faster, we will increase your airspeed. If we wish to make it slower, we will slow your engine down to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the wings, make them flutter. We can change the PFD to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity. For the next hours, sit quietly and we will control your entire flight. We repeat: there is nothing wrong with your flight simulator. You are about to participate in a great adventure (in Hawaii). You are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from the inner mind to — The Outer Limits... of Flight Simulation. (Original video

.)

[sibtiger 0]

Oh, and he did say Microsoft Flight Simulator!

No he did not, you are just making this up or perhaps you need hearing aid.He said: "The best thing about Microsoft Flight to me, is the focus on the experience of flying."By the way, the mouse is the basic controller you need for flying, as in FSX. You can setup rudder and yoke in Flight.Also, a lot of people here at AVSIM were rather fond that MS put Mouse as Yoke function back in FSX. Edited February 7, 2012 by sibtiger

[Guest jahman]

No he did not, you are just making this up or perhaps you need hearing aid.He said: "The best thing about Microsoft Flight to me, is the focus on the experience of flying."

Well, what do you know, (after turning te volume up) your right! And I am getting to be a bit hard of hearing, especially with one ear where I had... well never mind. But thanks for pointing out I might need a hearing aid. (But don't worry, at some point in your life you will too! :( )

a lot of people here at AVSIM were rather fond that MS put Mouse as Yoke function back in FSX.

Nobody really cares what MS put back in: All the talk is about what they took out... from FSX.Cheers,- jahman.

[Gibbage 199]

Nobody really cares what MS put back in: All the talk is about what they took out... from FSX.Cheers,- jahman.

Last I checked, they didnt take anything out of FSX. Its still there, in FSX.

[sibtiger 0]

(But don't worry, at some point in your life you will too! )

True, but hopefully not for another 40 years or so. :( :(

Nobody really cares what MS put back in: All the talk is about what they took out... from FSX.

I was just trying to point out that flying with a mouse is nothing new to FS.

Last I checked, they didnt take anything out of FSX. Its still there, in FSX.

:( Edited February 7, 2012 by sibtiger

[Guest jahman]

Last I checked, they didnt take anything out of FSX. Its still there, in FSX.

Yes, that would be true, wouldn't it? What they didn't take out is still there.Cheers,- jahman.

[Gibbage 199]

I dont think Flight will replace FSX any time soon as a hard core sim. 3rd party makers made sure of that. Without 3rd party help, it will be almost impossible for Flight to catch up to FSX.

Edited February 7, 2012 by MVGibbage

[OzWhitey 3,353]

A lot of people here are focusing in a negative way on what's included eg improved mouse control, missions. As long as no one forces me to play like a gamer, i'm happy for those things to be there to increase the target audience and attract a new generation of simmers.What would worry me would be a move towards more game-like features eg the external-only P51. Hopefully it's not starting a trend.I liked the extension of consciousness post, btw. On a good day with the right software and hardware, fsx can capture the feeling of actually being there.

[xplanery 250]

The best thing about Microsoft Flight Simulator is the focus on the experience of flying. (It's) not about the act of operating an airplane. That's a fundamental shift.

I believe that this sentence means that they are not going to focus much on airplanes systems or apply for those who like to fly realistic modeled complex system simulations in FSX.

[Darth_Vapor666 54]

I believe that this sentence means that they are not going to focus much on airplanes systems or apply for those who like to fly realistic modeled complex system simulations in FSX.

They couldn't have put it any more clearly. Its official, the hardcore simmer was never among the target market. Nevertheless I will give it the 20-25 minutes it deserves. Then it's back to simulating 'the act of operating an airplane' on my beloved FSX.

[Mickel 42]

There's a loosly gelled thought rattling around (no looser than some of the other things been thrown around lately...);There's a disconnect between 'fly' and 'realistic modeled (sic) complex simulations'. You fly a Cub, you (and a crewmate and a bunch of computers) operate a T7. You fly a Stearman. You operate a 738NG. A lot of the screaming seems to be coming from the 'I want my fully modelled airliner, and, and, and, and I want it now!' brigade. There aren't actually many of those in either FS2004 or FSX - and none when they were first released. Many people would argue that's not flying - it's systems management. So maybe it is open to argument. Rightly or otherwise, MS have gone back to 'flying'. It's what a lot of weekend hacks do. I used to love it - 45 minutes of me, a yoke and a throttle (and a few other systems like lights and a fuel pump easily managed by one person). Who's going to point the finger at A2A and say they don't model the systems in their J-3? Good luck winning that. Are the 'systems' not modelled in the soon to be released aircraft? I'm sure the beta testers who don't have an axe to grind won't say. We'll see in a month. Don't latch on to the P-51 - that's the lame duck. MS's wording could have been better - but lets face it, wordsmithing is not a prerequisite for what they do for a living.Mike Dryden

[Silver_Dragon 411]

The problem, new blood go to play Flight and comming to "flight" on FSX, X-planes or other titles, and SURPRISE, the "reality" has no funny or playing...... fly GA has teach manuals, procedures and speak with ATCs.... the magic "disapear", sorry but that "funny" console gamming people never come to the reality fly. That no a negative posture, that is a reality of the casual vs harcore. The casual dont pass to a superior levels, come to fly and pilot a arcade GA to a biutiful scenery, not at "bored" flight with "bored" people and "bored" manuals.

[DAD 2,656]

They couldn't have put it any more clearly. Its official, the hardcore simmer was never among the target market. Nevertheless I will give it the 20-25 minutes it deserves. Then it's back to simulating 'the act of operating an airplane' on my beloved FSX.

well, while I agree that MS produced and posted that video the message is made by the ICON CEO and not someone from MS, I do not want to split hairs here but the ICON as such is probably not so much about operating an aircraft as it is really like driving a sports car, at least judging from the cockpit. so maybe the ICON CEO was rather referring to his aircraft and how it adresses the (inital) MS target audience but it does not necessarily mean that Flight as such does not also provide capabilities to really operate an aircraft.I will download and install Flight and I know myself good enough to tell you already now that I will also buy the Hawaii DLC and possibly the Maule. Yes, I'd be willing to go the DLC route BUT what lowers my enthusiasm or rather curiosity is the fact that there is still no time line from MS telling what is in the works or what they plan. I mean I do not expect a global roadmap with exact dates for continents or such. But before I start buying stupid points to buy additional content I want to know whether my investment is well put. I would not want to spend any more than probably for the Hawaii DLC if I do not see the light somewhere in form of some sort of commitment of MS. Unless MS comes up with some plan I will not invest more than max. 40 bucks if I need to fear that Flight indeed will be a failure and MS stops the project in the near (which can still be 2-3 years) future OR MS decides not to provide content for us 'hardcore' simmers. Reason is exactly what was stated here before, Flight is not an open platform anymore. If I decide to invest money I want to see benefits. It's like funding / investing in a startup. I want to see the business case before I 'heavily' invest so I do not need to fear that my investment is lost once MS decides in the near/not so near future to stop the project or keep going the arcade game road and add more colourful coins across Europe or elsewhere. So before there is a clear commitment from MS that they will do airliners, AI, ATC and other regions I will not invest more than some bucks to try out the product and have some fun flying time over Hawaii. I do not want to end up like a donkey and the dangling carrot what MIGHT come or may not. MS will hopefully clarify some of these points once Flight is released.just my 2 cents Edited February 7, 2012 by DAD

[newthog 0]

The problem, new blood go to play Flight and comming to "flight" on FSX, X-planes or other titles, and SURPRISE, the "reality" has no funny or playing...... fly GA has teach manuals, procedures and speak with ATCs.... the magic "disapear", sorry but that "funny" console gamming people never come to the reality fly. That no a negative posture, that is a reality of the casual vs harcore. The casual dont pass to a superior levels, come to fly and pilot a arcade GA to a biutiful scenery, not at "bored" flight with "bored" people and "bored" manuals.

Is what you're saying is all of the posters on this forum started out as hardcore simmers? My first "virtual aviation" experience was Pilot Wings on the N64! Then, I think, Combat Flight Simulator...then a whole bunch of different aviation games/sims. I have to disagree with what you've stated...I believe MSFlight makes virtual aviation more accessible again, so those starting out in the genre can crawl/walk before they have to run. Those who like the initial taste WILL try other products - some will go, but some will stay. Growing the niche market that is virtual aviation is critical if it is to continue - kudos to Microsoft for trying something new! Edited February 7, 2012 by newthog

[Rush1169 0]

There you have it, MS Flight is not about operating an airplane.

Taking a single sentence out of context is a poor foundation for an argument designed to convince people that Flight is not a worthy simulator. Not that I'm surprised it was done and you're not the first to do it in this forum, but it just comes across at another very weak 'bullet point' designed to take down the whole package. Why is it so hard to understand that the Webisodes are akin to TV commercials and tied to an overall marketing campaign? Why not take 1:16, "The instruments are the heart of the simulator aspect of Microsoft Flight" and run with that soundbite in the opposite direction? Surely you realize that you're watching a commercial tied to a marketing campaign aimed at entry-level flight enthusiasts and the quote you plucked out of a 4 minute commercial is just an out-of-context one-liner?I'll even continue down your yellow brick road and play along. "MS Flight is not about operating an airplane." What do you think those people in those videos are doing if they are not operating an airplane? What do you think the beta testers are doing? Just pressing a button and watching for an hour as the plane operates itself?Context is a very important concept to the entire discussion of Flight. One cannot isolate an individual observation and blanket the whole Flight project as rubbish. Opponents to Flight provide a continual barrage of individual elements that lack substance to draw a negative conclusion to what Flight is or is not. It becomes tiresome to argue each detail. On February 29th Flight will not be a drop-in replacement for FSX. I think *everyone* gets that. Next February it may be FSX is a ghost town or it may continue to be a bustling community of virtual pilots with Flight being a victim of wake turbulence at takeoff. With certainty, it could go either way.Obviously, "MS Flight is not about operating an airplane" is a marketing soundbite taken out of context and doesn't even make sense even taken literally.