Microsoft Announce Microsoft Flight

[mutley 4,487]

Press release:

Introducing

[allardjd 1,853]

Whoa - where the heck did that come from? I half-expected them to jump back in but not so soon. It may very well be that video is the only thing that exists at the moment, but certainly sends a strong signal of their intentions. I can't imagine this being seen as happy news at Aerosoft.

 

John

[ddavid 149]

It'll be interesting to see how MS get back into FS - FS-Eleven?

And who's the guy on the right?

Cheers - Dai.

[allardjd 1,853]

Look again, Dai. The guy is a girl.

 

John

[SEATAC 400]

Looks like the trailer to the Ameila Earhart movie from last year.

http://www.foxsearchlight.com/amelia/

[ddavid 149]

Doh!

Where's my spec's....

Cheers - Dai.

[mutley 4,487]

I can see this being an on-line flight simulator where you login to a very powerful server that runs the program, there would be a network of servers linked sharing environmental variables like real-world weather.

Being on-line you will already have hundreds of other people which can instantly be your AI and traffic, real traffic supplied by real people!

The only limitation would be your broadband speed, otherwise FPS issues will be a thing of the past.

This raises some interesting questions, especially for 3rd party addons?

Joe

[rob16584 42]

Oooh very interesting.

If this is based online through super-mega-dooper servers, 3rd party add-ons may become a thing of the past. Unless there is some way for us to have our own space on the server to put our 3rd party add-ons onto. I think that makes sense (it does in my head anyway. Although MS being MS, I think that there would be a pretty hefty yearly fee involved to be able to join in. If other users were to act as AI, that would raise the problem of ATC - there wouldn't be any because people would do their own thing and land where-ever they want. That would make it more like the old MS Multiplayer servers as opposed to VATSIM. Remember not everyone wants ultimate realism. As for Aerosoft being unhappy, I don't think it would be the case as if the MS version was to be soley online, then they are going after different markets.

Until we get more info we can only speculate!

[allardjd 1,853]

 

Interesting thought, Mut, and entirely plausible.

 

My first impression, and it remains, is that this is a conscious name change signifying a clean break from the Flight Simulators of the past. I'll be very surprised if all backward compatibility doesn't go out the window for this one and it will be entirely new from the ground up (no pun intended).

 

It's a two-edged sword, cutting deeply into the existing add-on industries, who might be left with nothing much to market except legacy add-ons for FS9 (less and less) and FSX. Those will remain viable for some time yet, but this will surely shake out the market. The other group being hurt will be users across the board who have varying levels of investment in FS9 and FSX add-ons and perhaps even hardware enhancements that will no longer have a role except in using the old apps. Some of the hardware will still work, of course, but some very well may not.

 

On the plus side, something akin to a clean break with little or no backward compatibility is certainly a necessary thing to do if a great leap forward in capability is to be achieved. Absent that, the next one will be more like the last one than it will be different, much like the relatively small increase in capability going from FS9 to FSX. I've never seen it in print, but I suspect some of the system load in FSX is the result of having to cling to some old, less efficient ways of doing things within the program to retain some sameness with FS9. If you can cut the cord to the last one, many doors open for the developer and this smells of that kind of thing.

 

On reflection, the things that the add-on industry might still be able to bring to the table may be aircraft and tools, e.g. enhanced panel instruments, flight planners and maybe things along the lines of AirHauler or missions that provide contextual situations that will work within the MSF world.

 

If RW WX is possible (even now) it may be that under this system the user may be able to choose between concurrent FS traffic (i.e. other users, as you suggest) or also RW traffic (only slightly delayed) from on-line RW flight tracking sites, which exist already. SimConnect looked to be the key to bringing that data into FS reality, but MSF, if constructed on the basis you suggest, could certainly make that kind of thing possible.

 

John

[mutley 4,487]

That's right Rob, only speculation, we may learn more tomorrow as they release more information at the show.

I am just making predictions based on what has happened in my industry, we run hosting centres with servers far more powerful than our customers can afford and yes they pay for the privilege. Recurring revenue is the name of the game now.

Joe

[mutley 4,487]

Good post John, I wonder where this leaves Xplane?

[allardjd 1,853]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20013915-56.html

 

More here, but not much more. It sounds like it's "close to alpha".

 

Quote

I wonder where this leaves Xplane?

 

I don't see any evidence that X-Plane doing much, but Aerosoft has to be pretty unhappy. They had an ongoing project, publicly announced, to write the next FS. This has got to be a hard blow to that.

 

John

[mutley 4,487]

Thanks John,

Close to Alpha probably best describes it's evolution. I still can't help thinking that "online" is going to be a fig factor.

One thing I am not keen on is the constant referral to game rather than simulation :blush: just so long as it is not an omen!

Joe

[hurricanemk1c 195]

I hope that it's not a full online game, just that there is multiplayer capability. I'd hate to see such talented people like Captain Sim, Aeroplane Heaven and JF go out of business

[SEATAC 400]

I hope that it's not a full online game, just that there is multiplayer capability. I'd hate to see such talented people like Captain Sim, Aeroplane Heaven and JF go out of business

My sentiments exactly!!

[allardjd 1,853]

If you think about RW aviation, there's not normally much interaction or communication between individual aircraft, except in military situations (there are a few other exceptions, but not many). They interact indirectly through ATC, but not much with each other directly. I expect that the interactive elements will mostly be a matter of seeing other traffic and that, in my opinion, is as likely to be computer generated random AI or AI based on RW traffic databases, as it is other MS Flight users coming into your field of view unbidden. You'd probably have a choice between the two or some combination of them.

 

At very least, if other users traffic becomes part of your MSF world, there will have to be ways to limit who you see, block who you don't want, or some variation on that theme. If not for that, some mad 12-year old is going to run amuck, thinking ramming into other AC or pulling onto a runway in front of landing traffic is great sport. What about the novice who is learning how to find his way to the threshold in a 152 at Heathrow in good WX while you are shooting an ILS to minimums with RW WX turned on? That won't work. MS can't let that happen and they're more than smart enough to understand that. To the extent that other users are part of the MSF environment, there will certainly have to be some compartmentalization features included to keep each of us from being negatively impacted by all the others. It won't matter if you're flying in Chad, but that's not where most of us fly most of the time. Maybe you'll be able to invite other pilots to be your "friend" - - - nah, anything like that would never catch on.

 

The intriguing part for me at this point is to see how they will handle ATC. It's poorly done now and if all the simultaneous users in the world are suddenly part of the environment, something will have to change drastically.

 

John

 

EDIT:

Further to this line of thought, it's only the imposition of licensing, training requirements, flight rules, ATC and all of that stuff that prevents RW aviation from being bedlam. The more I think about this MSF being an on-line amalgam of everyone, the more convinced I am that it will have to be rigidly compartmentalized. Training and licensing users to behave as they do in the real world is simply an absurd idea, so MS will have to find a way for each of us to be in his own little world with only those others who are playing by the same rules or who are known to us. I just can't see throwing everyone in the same arena and saying, "Have fun and play nice together..."

 

That's not going to happen, regardless of whether the software and hardware of today and tomorrow are capable of it or not.

 

JDA

[ddavid 149]

Maybe it'll be 'pay as you go' - a way for MS to recoup investment costs....

Cheers - Dai. :blush:

[allardjd 1,853]

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a pay as you go element to this.

 

John

[rob16584 42]

I very much doubt that I would join up if this is the way that they go with it. I already pay for my internet connection, I should have to pay more on top of that to be able to connect to a server to partake in my hobby

[allardjd 1,853]

There's a lot of life left in the two older versions yet and plenty of add-ons available. If MS holds true to form...

 

1) There will be sufficient value in whatever is offered to tempt many/most of us to go with it.

2) It's probably still a year and a half away from a commercial release if they're only beginning to hype it.

 

Interesting that this was done without the Aces Studio people. Last I knew about six of 40 were still left and they were going to have to find new jobs within MS or move along to greener pastures. One wonders how much of legacy FS look and feel, conventions, etc. will remain if this was done without the continuity that comes from having some "old hands" involved. Probably not much and all indications are that is part of their intent.

 

John

[hurricanemk1c 195]

Just to carry on with this, here's a YouTube video :

Looks good, but it also looks through the internet, as 'Windows Live' is Microsoft's Internet side, eg. Windows Live Messenger, a chatty-type thing

Linky if it doesn't work - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwB8GD8qnDA

[stu7708 244]

Windows Games Live doesn't automatically mean online gaming.

For example GTAIV:Episodes from Liberty City is Windows Games Live connected. But that only means that you can chose to store your saved games etc online so you can get hold of them if playing on a different computer. It also enables you to share your progress in the game through the Windows Live webpage. Sort of the same way as a Steam-game shows your progress by unlocking achievements by completing specific in-game tasks.

So it could be that it just enables you to brag about your accumulated flight hours and so on via Windows Live.

[allardjd 1,853]

Intel Launches Energy Efficient Chips

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2010 ... ent-chips/

"The features, based on Intel