150 replies to this topic

[wynthorpe]

FL050, on Jul 27 2011, 05:10 AM, said:

Makes no difference for me - I'm not switching and losing my add-ons for FS9, and no way am I re-purchasing all of the same add-ons just to upgrade them to Flight compatibility.

Oh dear! So narrow minded and living in the past. Move on!

[ncbaseball]

FL050, on Jul 27 2011, 12:10 AM, said:

Makes no difference for me - I'm not switching and losing my add-ons for FS9, and no way am I re-purchasing all of the same add-ons just to upgrade them to Flight compatibility.

You don't have to switch. I'm still a huge FS9 user, but I still plan on getting Flight and then using both.

[CaptainG37]

It's like saying "I'm not getting a new car because I spent a fortune maintaining my current one."
or
"We can't move because I spent a lot of hours cleaning and maintaining THIS house."

[-Dexter]

CaptainG37, on Jul 28 2011, 08:09 PM, said:

It's like saying "I'm not getting a new car because I spent a fortune maintaining my current one."
or
"We can't move because I spent a lot of hours cleaning and maintaining THIS house."

I agree.

Flight will have new addons on a new engine. Perhaps some [not-so-greedy] developers will offer free upgrades.

[CaptainG37]

-Dexter, on Jul 29 2011, 11:05 AM, said:

I agree.

Flight will have new addons on a new engine. Perhaps some [not-so-greedy] developers will offer free upgrades.

It depends on the work involved.  Too early to say now.  
I can say from experience, upgrading an add on is not fun.

[SwitchFX]

As a developer? Sure.

As an end-user? Apply a self-installing patch. Whoop-dee-doo.

Edited by SwitchFX, 28 July 2011 - 11:41 PM.

[Jetset]

If all add on's had to come through some sort 'app store' type thing, would they then not have been accepted by Microsoft as being compliant? And therefor shouldn't cause any problems.
I'm thinking the Wilco 737 PIC here, and it's ability to screw up your XML file and any subsequent aircraft installs.

[SwitchFX]

Jetset, on Aug 1 2011, 12:49 PM, said:

If all add on's had to come through some sort 'app store' type thing, would they then not have been accepted by Microsoft as being compliant? And therefor shouldn't cause any problems.
I'm thinking the Wilco 737 PIC here, and it's ability to screw up your XML file and any subsequent aircraft installs.

Possibly. My theory was to allow users of all levels to expand their horizons. Of course there are other theories some people have. One such theory is to minimize piracy. Another is to prevent users from editing files themselves byway of encoded files. Except the latter would slow game performance down because the files have to be decoded mid-game. Just a bunch of crap theories. At least yours makes sense.

[-Dexter]

SwitchFX, on Aug 1 2011, 03:58 PM, said:

Possibly. My theory was to allow users of all levels to expand their horizons. Of course there are other theories some people have. One such theory is to minimize piracy. Another is to prevent users from editing files themselves byway of encoded files. Except the latter would slow game performance down because the files have to be decoded mid-game. Just a bunch of crap theories. At least yours makes sense.

I agree with all of these.

If I may also add: Having an 'addon store' will reach A LOT more audience. Someone who buys FSX has no clue about addons (where to get them, how much they cost, how to install them, etc.) without doing their own research. If Flight actively advertises it's 'addon store' to the user, it will see a lot of purchases.

Of course, the downfall that I mentioned earlier regarding restricted modding still stands. I fear that Microsoft will only allow specific developers access to it's SDK, and forbid users from using addons outside of it's 'addon store'.

Edited by -Dexter, 01 August 2011 - 06:05 PM.

[SwitchFX]

Except the PC Pilot interview contradicts your prediction.

[Peter797]

Speaking of BF3, I know an Alpha Tester, and he had the opportunity of playing on one map in the Rush gamemode. He said there's no teamplay at all, just another bad company.....

Boo.....

And there's apparently 3D spotting, where you press Q or something and it shows the enemie's position. <----LOL

[-Dexter]

Peter797, on Aug 1 2011, 10:09 PM, said:

Speaking of BF3, I know an Alpha Tester, and he had the opportunity of playing on one map in the Rush gamemode. He said there's no teamplay at all, just another bad company.....

Since the alpha is over (ended August 1, wasn't able to get to Battlelog this morning), I can confirm that this is true SIMPLY BECAUSE the squad system does not work. The squad spawn does not work. There is no voice chat.

The alpha trial was testing EA Battlelog and server connectivity; not game mechanics. There was no team play because there were no team play elements added yet.

(I apologize in advance for the off-topicness )

Edited by -Dexter, 01 August 2011 - 09:19 PM.

[SwitchFX]

It's fine. I'm somewhat interested in Battlefield 3. If it turns out to be really good, I'll probably pick it up.

[ChaoticBeauty]

If you think the Battlefield 3 alpha is bad, at least did you give your feedback to DICE? I've seen numerous complaints for the alpha yet no bug reports to DICE.

[-Dexter]

Kaotika, on Aug 2 2011, 11:05 AM, said:

If you think the Battlefield 3 alpha is bad, at least did you give your feedback to DICE? I've seen numerous complaints for the alpha yet no bug reports to DICE.

Alpha testers were given a lengthy survey to fill out. I wrote a few paragraphs touching on everything I noticed.

[pyruvate]

-Dexter, on Aug 1 2011, 04:05 PM, said:

I agree with all of these.

If I may also add: Having an 'addon store' will reach A LOT more audience. Someone who buys FSX has no clue about addons (where to get them, how much they cost, how to install them, etc.) without doing their own research. If Flight actively advertises it's 'addon store' to the user, it will see a lot of purchases.

Of course, the downfall that I mentioned earlier regarding restricted modding still stands. I fear that Microsoft will only allow specific developers access to it's SDK, and forbid users from using addons outside of it's 'addon store'.

I hope that means that the prices of addons would drop, if they remain the same I wonder how much of the audience would actually buy addons that cost more than the base sim itself.

[wynthorpe]

pyruvate, on Aug 3 2011, 03:27 AM, said:

I hope that means that the prices of addons would drop, if they remain the same I wonder how much of the audience would actually buy addons that cost more than the base sim itself.

Lots probably! Look at Railworks on Steam.

[alainneedle1]

HAhaha tooo funny, a store, approved developers, add-ons directly downloaded to your Flight, some of FSX engine reused (as MS said), pay as you go, no backward compatibility from FSX to Flight, no more business as usual, can you all read my old post on this forum.

You are now talking about what I said will happen about 8 + months ago, I'll keep reading here from time to time.

[-Dexter]

alainneedle1, on Aug 4 2011, 09:05 AM, said:

HAhaha tooo funny, a store, approved developers, add-ons directly downloaded to your Flight, some of FSX engine reused (as MS said), pay as you go, no backward compatibility from FSX to Flight, no more business as usual, can you all read my old post on this forum.

Citation for the bold? I've read more than one interview about Flight which says it's a whole new engine. And I have read nothing about a PAYG system.

[Jetset]

alainneedle1, on Aug 4 2011, 02:05 PM, said:

You are now talking about what I said will happen about 8 + months ago, I'll keep reading here from time to time.

Is there anything else you would like us to talk about whilst you're here?
Might save you another 8 months.