77 replies to this topic

[AirFranceSST]

Either way I bet some developer would make that aircraft for Flight later on.

Send them a message, least you can do is try like everyone said.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

They didn't have the RG model in FS9 either. In reality, it wasn't a popular aircraft model. FS9 was also going with that Century of Flight nonsense where they put in a bunch of aircraft nobody ever really flew much.

FSX went for that "as real as it gets" theme where they wanted you to fly popular aircraft in a bunch of different scenarios, especially bush flying and extreme missions. The 182 had no major purpose in any of those.

It would actually take quite a bit of effort to make a 182 for Flight. Every aircraft has to be re-created for the new simulator. The same went for the FS9 > FSX transition. They had to redo every aircraft for graphics and performance.

You're only asking for one aircraft. It doesn't sound like much to you. Thousands of people are also asking for their own aircraft. I'm sure the 182S/RG isn't the #1 asked-for.

[AirFranceSST]

When a new sim comes out it takes a while for addons because developers have to study the new sim in detail.

I'm with Fate01, I think a default A380 has a better chance of being created but I'd say leave that to the 3rd party developers.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

AirFranceSST, on Aug 22 2011, 01:44 PM, said:

When a new sim comes out it takes a while for addons because developers have to study the new sim in detail.

I'm with Fate01, I think a default A380 has a better chance of being created but I'd say leave that to the 3rd party developers.

3rd Party always comes out with that stuff you want. The default Flight version will be garbage anyway.

If I were you, I'd spend more time trying to talk the 3rd party guys into developing the aircraft you want instead of the Flight developers.

Edited by Fate01_VUSAFS, 22 August 2011 - 12:49 PM.

[MikeMann]

The default FSX aircraft usually provide for great frame rates, but the quality of the aircraft varies greatly!

On the one hand you have the default DHC-2 Beaver which is the equal of the Aerosoft Beaver both in flight dynamics and appearance. On the other hand you have the default Bell 206 which I can assure you is not at all the equal of the Dodosim 206.

Regards, Mike Mann

[ChaoticBeauty]

As I said on a previous post, I can't afford add-ons. Carenado has both aircraft but buying both would mean paying the same amount as an FSX copy. I found some freeware add-ons that were buggy. They were ports of the FS2004 version made by 3rd-party developers, so I think Microsoft with some effort can port the plane to Flight without any bugs.

About the thing that thousands of people are asking about aircraft, you're right. By the way, isn't the 182 the second most popular Cessna airplane after the 172? I know it probably isn't the #1 asked plane, but I don't think the demand will be too low. What do you think?

Edited by Kaotika, 22 August 2011 - 01:13 PM.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

Kaotika, on Aug 22 2011, 02:13 PM, said:

As I said on a previous post, I can't afford add-ons. Carenado has both aircraft but buying both would mean paying the same amount as an FSX copy. I found some freeware add-ons that were buggy. They were ports of the FS2004 version made by 3rd-party developers, so I think Microsoft with some effort can port the plane to Flight without any bugs.

About the thing that thousands of people are asking about aircraft, you're right. By the way, isn't the 182 the second most popular Cessna airplane after the 172? I know it probably isn't the #1 asked plane, but I don't think the demand will be too low. What do you think?

That's not Microsoft's problem. They won't add extra work to their schedule because you can't afford add-ons. Not trying to come off as a jerk, but your finances are your problem. Microsoft isn't going to put in all the add-ons you want just because you can't pay for them.

Some add-on packages cost more than FSX does, which to me, is ridiculous and overpriced, but that's what they want to charge. I can't afford much of them myself, and some of them I just wouldn't buy anyway since I would probably only fly them once or twice.

After the 172, the 152 is the second-most popular Cessna aircraft in the single-engine prop category (real-world of course). It's cheap, easy to fly, and easy to maintain. The 182 is high-performance and you need to get rated for HP aircraft before you can fly it, something many pilots just don't do. The 182 is almost a luxury aircraft these days. For Flight Sim, I think the Cessna has taken a back seat as being underpowered and not as fun as the other aircraft (even though it's the most popular GA aircraft in the world), so they used the 182 as its big sister to show some muscle. But people continued to realize that the 182 and 172 are virtually the same other than their power and weight. Similar flight characteristics, similar cockpits, same seating, same appearance. Why have both for Flight Sim when you could have one Cessna SEP and one MEP?

[_NW_]

If you can't afford add ons why are you planning on spending your money to buy MS Flight?  

Stick with what you have and use the money you have set aside for add ons like Carenado's 182 for FSX..

[ChaoticBeauty]

Fate01_VUSAFS, on Aug 22 2011, 09:56 PM, said:

That's not Microsoft's problem. They won't add extra work to their schedule because you can't afford add-ons. Not trying to come off as a jerk, but your finances are your problem. Microsoft isn't going to put in all the add-ons you want just because you can't pay for them.

Some add-on packages cost more than FSX does, which to me, is ridiculous and overpriced, but that's what they want to charge. I can't afford much of them myself, and some of them I just wouldn't buy anyway since I would probably only fly them once or twice.

After the 172, the 152 is the second-most popular Cessna aircraft in the single-engine prop category (real-world of course). It's cheap, easy to fly, and easy to maintain. The 182 is high-performance and you need to get rated for HP aircraft before you can fly it, something many pilots just don't do. The 182 is almost a luxury aircraft these days. For Flight Sim, I think the Cessna has taken a back seat as being underpowered and not as fun as the other aircraft (even though it's the most popular GA aircraft in the world), so they used the 182 as its big sister to show some muscle. But people continued to realize that the 182 and 172 are virtually the same other than their power and weight. Similar flight characteristics, similar cockpits, same seating, same appearance. Why have both for Flight Sim when you could have one Cessna SEP and one MEP?

I know Microsoft won't care about the fact I can't afford add-ons and that's my problem, I'm just pointing that out to all the people in here who are suggesting to buy an add-on.

I personally prefer the way the 182 feels during flight and I think it's more fun than any other aircraft I have flown, but I guess the only thing I can do is hope Microsoft will add it.

HarryS_Truman, on Aug 22 2011, 10:00 PM, said:

If you can't afford add ons why are you planning on spending your money to buy MS Flight?  

Stick with what you have and use the money you have set aside for add ons like Carenado's 182 for FSX..

I'll make an extra effort to get it because it will have much higher value (also it will be a long time until it gets released). An add-on plane for FSX's price is ridiculous.

Edited by Kaotika, 22 August 2011 - 02:10 PM.

[_NW_]

Kaotika, on Aug 22 2011, 01:07 PM, said:

I'll make an extra effort to get it because it will have much higher value (also it will be a long time until it gets released). An add-on plane for FSX's price is ridiculous.

If all you want is a 182..  then stick with FSX and the Carenado 182.  The RG model is 20 bucks and the 182S model is 20 bucks.  

When MS Flight comes out, you can expect it to cost around $60...    and you won't have a 182 (and we don't know yet about backwards compatibility)

[AirFranceSST]

HarryS_Truman, on Aug 22 2011, 02:26 PM, said:

If all you want is a 182..  then stick with FSX and the Carenado 182.  The RG model is 20 bucks and the 182S model is 20 bucks.  

When MS Flight comes out, you can expect it to cost around $60...    and you won't have a 182 (and we don't know yet about backwards compatibility)

I wouldn't count on the backwards compatibility considering they decided to start from scratch with MSF.
The old FSX/FS9 engine we've known is gone I think. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[ChaoticBeauty]

HarryS_Truman, on Aug 22 2011, 10:26 PM, said:

If all you want is a 182..  then stick with FSX and the Carenado 182.  The RG model is 20 bucks and the 182S model is 20 bucks.  

When MS Flight comes out, you can expect it to cost around $60...    and you won't have a 182 (and we don't know yet about backwards compatibility)

The 182 isn't all I want. Most importantly I would like to see improved graphics and optimisation, but it would be very nice to have my favourite aircraft too.

Don't be so sure the 182 won't be in Flight. Cessna is a Flight Simulator partner so who knows, maybe they'll add their aircraft again.

AirFranceSST, on Aug 22 2011, 10:31 PM, said:

I wouldn't count on the backwards compatibility considering they decided to start from scratch with MSF.
The old FSX/FS9 engine we've known is gone I think. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Microsoft says it's a new engine but there's no real proof yet.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

AirFranceSST, on Aug 22 2011, 03:31 PM, said:

I wouldn't count on the backwards compatibility considering they decided to start from scratch with MSF.
The old FSX/FS9 engine we've known is gone I think. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

That's my guess as well. They're using an entirely different development group for Flight. Chances are they started from scratch and didn't even consider using the FSX engine with upgraded modifications.

They should have just came out with FS 2012 instead of "Flight." I think they over-extended the hype and presented little details on the whole project and we aren't going to be as impressed as they want us to be when it finally comes out.

[ChaoticBeauty]

Fate01_VUSAFS, on Aug 22 2011, 11:29 PM, said:

That's my guess as well. They're using an entirely different development group for Flight. Chances are they started from scratch and didn't even consider using the FSX engine with upgraded modifications.

They should have just came out with FS 2012 instead of "Flight." I think they over-extended the hype and presented little details on the whole project and we aren't going to be as impressed as they want us to be when it finally comes out.

I agree. I don't think there will be any major difference except an arcade mode.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

Kaotika, on Aug 22 2011, 04:44 PM, said:

I agree. I don't think there will be any major difference except an arcade mode.

Does that term really work for Flight Sim?  

[ChaoticBeauty]

Fate01_VUSAFS, on Aug 22 2011, 11:45 PM, said:

Does that term really work for Flight Sim?  

An arcade mode, not an arcade game. The same simulator features along with an arcade mode.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

Kaotika, on Aug 22 2011, 04:52 PM, said:

An arcade mode, not an arcade game. The same simulator features along with an arcade mode.

  You're losing me, son

[ChaoticBeauty]

Fate01_VUSAFS, on Aug 22 2011, 11:56 PM, said:

  You're losing me, son

?

[alainneedle1]

Fate01_VUSAFS, on Aug 22 2011, 12:31 PM, said:

They probably already have their hangar organized. Everyone wants them to put in the aircraft they like the best. They'll only put in what they feel like selling and what is easier to design. They generally use aircraft everybody knows about with a couple "interesting" little features that you're not so familiar with. If they have the same format as their Flight Simulator series aircraft, they'll probably have a few Boeing airliners, the Bell JetRanger, some Cessna, Beechcraft, and a few more GA aircraft that you're probably less familiar with. They could be working with some of the payware companies already so that there are aircraft available to buy once the game comes out. It would be a disaster if they didn't do so before launch time.

Microsoft probably won't even read your email. That doesn't mean don't try, but they have a way of doing what they want without consumer input.

As I said over one year ago they are.....that job is not available anymore.



Are you passionate about technology, games, entertainment, and software development? Do you want to be part of a team carrying on the legacy of Microsoft Flight Simulator – one of Microsoft's longest running entertainment franchises? Are you interested in learning (and testing!) how a single application can render the planet, simulate the world, and provide unique entertaining gameplay experiences? If you answered yes to any – or all – of these, then keep reading! This position may be for you!

Microsoft Game Studios is looking for a Software Development Engineer in Test (SDET) to join us in building Microsoft Flight (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/) – an all new entertainment product utilizing Microsoft's Games for Windows Live infrastructure. We are looking for an experienced candidate to work on our SDK (Software Development Kit) and tools pipeline, who is motivated to make a significant impact to our business, and drive great customer experiences - for our gamers, our internal developers, and our external development partners.

If you have the skills and the passion, want to work on a Games for Windows LIVE product, and are looking for challenge in a fun and fast environment, then you should join us!

What we offer:
• OWN the testing of the Microsoft Flight SDK! (Learn how we build the planet and simulate the world!)
• WORK with a highly-skilled, creative, and driven Test and product development team. Have fun while doing it!
• DYNAMIC fast-paced development cycles, small teams, rapid iteration, and strong feature ownership!
• COMMUNICATE with our passionate external development community. Help ensure we are delivering a product that delights our customers and meets their needs!
• DRIVE and develop our new test automation infrastructure, including ownership of how to best integrate with our SDK and tools pipeline!
• LEARN how to build and test games utilizing common industry tools and Games for Windows LIVE! Create fun!
• OPPORTUNITY to be creative in solving interesting technical challenges!
• EXPERIENCE in the video game industry!

Primary Responsibilities will include:
• Own the testing and quality of major features areas such as the Microsoft Flight SDK, the content tools pipeline, and the environment & modeling of the entire EARTH.
• Work with Dev, PM, Art, and UX leads to establish a quality bar that meets the needs of both internal and external parties. Be an advocate of building testability, security, and release criteria into product design.
• Contribute towards the overall test strategy and business direction of the team.
• Develop tools and automation to test the tools pipeline and/or environment features for the PLANET.
• Drive external feedback and quality concerns back into internal development for improvement of future releases.

A great candidate should have the following skills and experience:
• Experience shipping high-quality software on-time and end-to-end ownership of a feature across 1 complete retail product release cycle OR multiple, more frequent releases of a smaller product, such as web experiences or an SDK.
• Exceptional testing skills and a firm understanding of testing methodologies.
• Demonstrable proficiency with C# or C++ with solid knowledge of computer science fundamentals
• Proven success in utilizing test automation frameworks to generate quality UI or API-level automated tests
• Hands-on knowledge of the overall product development lifecycle and software test engineering components.
• Excellent communication, organization, and multitasking abilities
• Extreme passion for shipping quality computer games.

A BS or higher degree in Computer Science or equivalent experience is preferred.
Experience with game engines, 3D Studio Max, Maya, Direct X, or SQL is desirable but not required.

Edited by alainneedle1, 22 August 2011 - 04:24 PM.

[linux731]

According to Microsoft, the game will use the Games for Windows LIVE platform, allowing addons via the GameMarketPlace. So, they might release new aircraft via the MarketPlace.