-
Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:
- Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
- Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
- Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
- Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
- Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
- Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.
Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.
By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.
The next Microsoft Flight Simulator
- Thread starter Indian Eagle SJ
- Start date
- Messages
- 875
- Country
That would rock!!!
What gets me most, is if they plan (as they say...and I don't buy) to continue to support the current version (FSX) does this mean we can definitely expect an SP3 for FSX to fix all the known about problems? Seems to me that is the least they can do. That is what I want to hear from Microsoft. I want to hear someone there say they plan on fixing the known problems and bugs that still linger.
- Greg
What gets me most, is if they plan (as they say...and I don't buy) to continue to support the current version (FSX) does this mean we can definitely expect an SP3 for FSX to fix all the known about problems? Seems to me that is the least they can do. That is what I want to hear from Microsoft. I want to hear someone there say they plan on fixing the known problems and bugs that still linger.
- Greg
- Messages
- 875
- Country
I agree...I was just commenting on the post above and (imo line of crap) you find on fsinsider saying they will continue to support it.
- Greg
- Greg
n4gix
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 11,674
- Country
Honestly, I cannot understand why there is continued confusion on this issue. Just the other day, I posted a quote from Paul Lange, who is one of the principles involved with the completely new team that has replaced ACES. It cannot be "more official" than this folks!
I'll repeat the quote and can only hope people will actually read it:
Paul Lange made this post earlier at simFlight:
n4gix
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 11,674
- Country
You are not wrong at all. That is precisely what is meant. Just as MS will continue to "support" ESP1 until 2011.
- Messages
- 875
- Country
I did read it. Read it several times. Sound like political crap to me. Say a lot that actually says nothing. I was a master of it once when I held a public office. He doesn't say they are making a new version. He doesn't say they will make updates to fix problems in X. He says he can't say anything but they will do something. Like I said, I am reading the page at FSInsider.. to me, that page says loud and clear that they are NOT focusing on the PC games at all anymore. They are moving to be console based games company. That's fine... That is where I am getting my information. Not from someone that says they are an insider and posts on a board. Hell, he may be the vice president of MS for all I care. When I see his post on FSInsider page so that EVERYONE can read it that cares about FS, maybe it will have more credence. And again, he didn't say anything at all about FS or its future. Ask him to say this: There won't be another fs for the pc. There will be another fs for the pc. There may be, but we have not decided yet.
NONE of that breaks any kind of rules... It's called letting the customers, the people that pay your bloody salary, some information. What, is he or anyone saying that because we knew there would be an FSX several years before it came out, that destroyed the entire company??? Seriously...
Sorry, but it really bugs me when people say much that is really nothing at all. I got out of politics because I can't live my life that way. I tell the truth, or I say nothing at all. Just an easier way to live.
- Greg
PS: IMO, if you think he actually gave any information in his post, then you are reading into it just as much as I am reading into it that he says nothing and knows nothing. And I have a right to post on here as often as I want that I don't believe they will make another one, or support this one. I pray I am wrong. I hope with all I have that I am wrong. But I don't believe that I am.
- Messages
- 34,981
- Country
At the risk of stirring a storm, or being a kill-joy, I would say the following is true
As for me I am content to wait it out and get on with supporting what we do know about and that is FS9 and FSX.
Having said that I do find the speculation and so forth very interesting so please do not get cross with me for my particular views which are of course mine alone
As for me I am content to wait it out and get on with supporting what we do know about and that is FS9 and FSX.
Having said that I do find the speculation and so forth very interesting so please do not get cross with me for my particular views which are of course mine alone
- Messages
- 6,508
- Country
To add to Bill's quote's, head over to Phil Taylor's blog:
http://www.futuregpu.org/search/label/Aces
Back in February, he knew of the formation of 2 teams that funtionally replace the Aces studio.
Will there be an SP3 for FSX? I doubt it.
Will there be an FS11? I doubt it.
Will there be a NEW PC-based flight simulator from Microsoft? I think there will be.
...but as Bill suggested, this is rampant speculation.
Dick
http://www.futuregpu.org/search/label/Aces
Back in February, he knew of the formation of 2 teams that funtionally replace the Aces studio.
Will there be an SP3 for FSX? I doubt it.
Will there be an FS11? I doubt it.
Will there be a NEW PC-based flight simulator from Microsoft? I think there will be.
...but as Bill suggested, this is rampant speculation.
Dick
n4gix
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 11,674
- Country
FSInsider hasn't been updated since that notice was posted on 1/26/2009. There's no one there to update the website any longer...
Note that this notice specifically names Games for Windows - LIVE and not one word about "consoles."
http://www.fsinsider.com/news/Pages/AMessageFromAces.aspx
Further, this sentence is pretty definitive:
There's a very big difference between mere opinion and informed opinion...
Last edited:
- Messages
- 6,508
- Country
Here is the current level of support for FSX:
http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?mkt=en-US&q=fsx
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.aspx?dg=microsoft.public.simulators
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/results.aspx?pocId=&freetext=fsx
I would suspect any official work-arounds would come from the above links. I don't expect any SDK or service pack updates based on the past record of the Flight Simulator franchise, and the fact the Aces are disbanded.
This is the level of support now being provided for FSX... and it will not get any better over time, just as FS98 is still technically supported.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I speculate any future flying games will be dissimilar to the development environment we've had in the past... backward compatability being dropped.
In effect, future flying games would be a coding break from legacy development ( no more FS2002 groundpoly code, etc. ). FSX nearly broke backward compatability, and there is no reason at this point to continue it.
This is the link for Micosoft's PC gaming:
http://www.gamesforwindows.com/en-US/Pages/index.aspx
The current headline feature is the release of "BattleStations Pacific"... which contains elements of a flying game within a World War 2 gaming simulation. ( $49.95 on sale now ). This is a Windows Live! game, and has single player and multiplayer formats. I believe Eidios coded the game.
...so no, Microsoft has not abandoned flying games, or WW2 combat games, for that matter. Their statement of support for continued flying games ( made upon the closing of the Aces Studio ) has been proven true already.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Oddly, the combat simulator series is an example of what may happen. CSF1 and CSF2 were a part of the Flight Simulator series, with much of the code from FS98 and later FS2000 able to work in CFS1 and 2. They were part of the development cycle, as CFS2 clearly demonstrates with it's continuation of terrain coding, effects, continued use of resample, the introduction of gmax for objects, continuation of object libraries... and most elements of CFS2 ( other than combat and it's AI ) work in FS2002.
CFS3 was radically divergent, breaking all backward compatability. As a result, CFS3 could not be seen as part of the Flight Simulator "series", as it broke the conventions of backward compatability. Unfortunately, CFS3 was the start and end of a new franchise. I believe there was a CFS4 scheduled and canceled.
By leaving the Flight Simulator "family", CFS3 became orphaned by freeware and commercial developers, partly due to the sparcity of SDKs and their lack of tools. And partly due to the limited nature of it's terrain world. No elements of CFS3 work in the flight simulator series. At the time, I argued that CFS3 should have been named something different to avoid the suggestion of it being part of FS.
CFS3 does have it's adherents, and some fine addons have been produced. But these are overwhemingly user-based freeware projects.
A future non-combat Microsoft flying simulation game, which I believe is being organized now, does not have to share the fate of CFS3. Nor does it have to be tied to the 'engines' of the past.
A divergent path can be successfully accomplished, but close ties to the freeware and commercial segments of the hobby are needed. I stress 'freeware' simply due to the nature of terrain and airport design... it's not by chance that the most popular scenery design tools are freeware ( SBuilderX, FSXKML, FSPlanner, and ADE ). In the past, such tools were also freeware ( Airport for windows and Gound2K4 ). The basis of this website are tooling and information from freeware developers of tools.
To the new team:
If the new simulator being developed is not to be a continuation of legacy code, but is a new simulator, then by all means PLEASE name it something different than Flight Simulator. Don't remotely suggest it is a continuation of anything.
Dick
http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?mkt=en-US&q=fsx
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.aspx?dg=microsoft.public.simulators
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/results.aspx?pocId=&freetext=fsx
I would suspect any official work-arounds would come from the above links. I don't expect any SDK or service pack updates based on the past record of the Flight Simulator franchise, and the fact the Aces are disbanded.
This is the level of support now being provided for FSX... and it will not get any better over time, just as FS98 is still technically supported.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I speculate any future flying games will be dissimilar to the development environment we've had in the past... backward compatability being dropped.
In effect, future flying games would be a coding break from legacy development ( no more FS2002 groundpoly code, etc. ). FSX nearly broke backward compatability, and there is no reason at this point to continue it.
This is the link for Micosoft's PC gaming:
http://www.gamesforwindows.com/en-US/Pages/index.aspx
The current headline feature is the release of "BattleStations Pacific"... which contains elements of a flying game within a World War 2 gaming simulation. ( $49.95 on sale now ). This is a Windows Live! game, and has single player and multiplayer formats. I believe Eidios coded the game.
...so no, Microsoft has not abandoned flying games, or WW2 combat games, for that matter. Their statement of support for continued flying games ( made upon the closing of the Aces Studio ) has been proven true already.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Oddly, the combat simulator series is an example of what may happen. CSF1 and CSF2 were a part of the Flight Simulator series, with much of the code from FS98 and later FS2000 able to work in CFS1 and 2. They were part of the development cycle, as CFS2 clearly demonstrates with it's continuation of terrain coding, effects, continued use of resample, the introduction of gmax for objects, continuation of object libraries... and most elements of CFS2 ( other than combat and it's AI ) work in FS2002.
CFS3 was radically divergent, breaking all backward compatability. As a result, CFS3 could not be seen as part of the Flight Simulator "series", as it broke the conventions of backward compatability. Unfortunately, CFS3 was the start and end of a new franchise. I believe there was a CFS4 scheduled and canceled.
By leaving the Flight Simulator "family", CFS3 became orphaned by freeware and commercial developers, partly due to the sparcity of SDKs and their lack of tools. And partly due to the limited nature of it's terrain world. No elements of CFS3 work in the flight simulator series. At the time, I argued that CFS3 should have been named something different to avoid the suggestion of it being part of FS.
CFS3 does have it's adherents, and some fine addons have been produced. But these are overwhemingly user-based freeware projects.
A future non-combat Microsoft flying simulation game, which I believe is being organized now, does not have to share the fate of CFS3. Nor does it have to be tied to the 'engines' of the past.
A divergent path can be successfully accomplished, but close ties to the freeware and commercial segments of the hobby are needed. I stress 'freeware' simply due to the nature of terrain and airport design... it's not by chance that the most popular scenery design tools are freeware ( SBuilderX, FSXKML, FSPlanner, and ADE ). In the past, such tools were also freeware ( Airport for windows and Gound2K4 ). The basis of this website are tooling and information from freeware developers of tools.
To the new team:
If the new simulator being developed is not to be a continuation of legacy code, but is a new simulator, then by all means PLEASE name it something different than Flight Simulator. Don't remotely suggest it is a continuation of anything.
Dick
- Messages
- 875
- Country
Could NOT have said anything close to better than that. Very well written and I could not agree more with your views and conclusions.
Thanks Dick!
Thanks Dick!
I think half the problem with the most recent versions of FS were that many of the original authors had long since departed MS and there was an awful lot of the "core" that the Aces team had little understanding of, evident by the fact that each of the FSX SPs broke existing core functionality in some way or another whilst trying to add something else, and by the fact that by and large the majority of the "improvements" in FSX over FS9 were in MS core technology areas, like graphics engines, animations, internet play, etc. whilst flight physics, ATC, and anything actually "flight simulator" related were pretty much left well alone.
So, it doesn't surprise me that MS decided to pull the plug, sad though as it is.
Si
So, it doesn't surprise me that MS decided to pull the plug, sad though as it is.
Si
- Messages
- 6,508
- Country
Hi Si.
I had the inmpression through the beta process that the Aces had a very good understanding of the innards of the coding. There were suprises, but very solid in all.
With millions of lines of code there are going to be some errors... otherwise there wouldn't be the need for testing.
In the beta process, outside testers would find errors, but not all were fixed as there was always a "cost" of time and effort that needed to be justified. Sometimes things broke, and would not be fixed if they were a legacy item that was superceeded by newer methods.
I agree that many of the changes were visual, like a new terrain and photoreal system... and maybe some of the flight coding was not changed greatly. Hopefully, the new project will be open to suggestions from the community.
Something I've noticed is that we all have a different experience with FS9 or FSX. I have only the crudest piloting experience, and cannot understand the "heavy iron" simmers, and their need for systems realism. If an aircraft has more than a couple of pages of manual, it would put me to sleep. Gauge programming would just kill me. But I could stare at terrain code for hours and not get bored.
I'm sure a new simulator wouldn't satisfy everyone. When I think back, I believe FS2002 was perhaps the closest to being a universally satisfying upgrade... nobody wanted to go back to FS2000.
Dick
I had the inmpression through the beta process that the Aces had a very good understanding of the innards of the coding. There were suprises, but very solid in all.
With millions of lines of code there are going to be some errors... otherwise there wouldn't be the need for testing.
In the beta process, outside testers would find errors, but not all were fixed as there was always a "cost" of time and effort that needed to be justified. Sometimes things broke, and would not be fixed if they were a legacy item that was superceeded by newer methods.
I agree that many of the changes were visual, like a new terrain and photoreal system... and maybe some of the flight coding was not changed greatly. Hopefully, the new project will be open to suggestions from the community.
Something I've noticed is that we all have a different experience with FS9 or FSX. I have only the crudest piloting experience, and cannot understand the "heavy iron" simmers, and their need for systems realism. If an aircraft has more than a couple of pages of manual, it would put me to sleep. Gauge programming would just kill me. But I could stare at terrain code for hours and not get bored.
I'm sure a new simulator wouldn't satisfy everyone. When I think back, I believe FS2002 was perhaps the closest to being a universally satisfying upgrade... nobody wanted to go back to FS2000.
Dick
- Messages
- 34,317
- Country
But that might say more about FS2000 than it does about FS2002 .
When two years ago I gave a presentation about the progress of scenery design at the AvSim FanCon I included pictures of how the default and addon scenery had progressed. Based on these pictures we noticed that from FS2004 to FSX seemed a similar leap as from FS98 to FS2000. Of course we never know now, but it could have been that FSX is like FS2000, a step forward in the right direction, but not the most stable simulator yet.
.When two years ago I gave a presentation about the progress of scenery design at the AvSim FanCon I included pictures of how the default and addon scenery had progressed. Based on these pictures we noticed that from FS2004 to FSX seemed a similar leap as from FS98 to FS2000. Of course we never know now, but it could have been that FSX is like FS2000, a step forward in the right direction, but not the most stable simulator yet.
- Messages
- 259
- Country
FS-2000 was such a huge transition from where the program was before towards where it is today. Mesh terrain and bitmapped textures being just two of the big improvements that were made. People forget that while it had some real issues, it was also a big turning point.
Whatever happens in the future, I hope they continue with something. It would be nice (IMHO) to see the Flight Simulator name continue, even if it was completely incompatible with previous versions. Where's Bruce Artwick? Maybe we need the original master to come in and take control
I think Bill knows more than he's letting on. Can you at least tell us that much? Obviously you can't divulge secrets, but can you divulge if you have some secrets you can't tell?
Whatever happens in the future, I hope they continue with something. It would be nice (IMHO) to see the Flight Simulator name continue, even if it was completely incompatible with previous versions. Where's Bruce Artwick? Maybe we need the original master to come in and take control
I think Bill knows more than he's letting on. Can you at least tell us that much? Obviously you can't divulge secrets, but can you divulge if you have some secrets you can't tell?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 34,981
- Country
Perhaps he could but if he could and he did then he would have to kill you - or perhaps someone would have to kill him
- Messages
- 42
- Country
this is what it says on the fsx site
"About the Aces Team
1/26/2009
By now, many of you have heard that Microsoft has closed Aces Studio, the publisher of Microsoft Flight Simulator. This was not a reflection of the quality of the products Aces has developed, the sales performance of the games, or the quality of the team at Aces. This difficult decision was made to align Microsoft’s resources with our strategic priorities. Microsoft Flight Simulator X will remain available at retail stores and web retailers, the Flight Sim community will continue to learn from and encourage one another, and we remain committed to the Flight Simulator franchise for the long term.
Microsoft Game Studios is investing significant resources in many exciting and new areas of gaming and entertainment, including Windows games. We believe these future investments will push innovation, community, and collaboration to unprecedented levels and will provide more synergy with our ongoing investments in Games for Windows - LIVE as well as other Windows entertainment technologies. We have nothing specific to announce at this time, but stay tuned for more information.
We are humbled and proud of the passion and support that the Flight Simulator franchise has developed over its more than twenty-five year history. This includes you, the large community of flight simmers, as well as the vibrant third-party ecosystem that has developed around the game. We will continue to produce, sell, and support the latest version of Flight Simulator as we plan for future versions of the franchise. Thank you for your understanding of our decision and for your continued support!"
i guess there will at somepoint in the future a better fs
"About the Aces Team
1/26/2009
By now, many of you have heard that Microsoft has closed Aces Studio, the publisher of Microsoft Flight Simulator. This was not a reflection of the quality of the products Aces has developed, the sales performance of the games, or the quality of the team at Aces. This difficult decision was made to align Microsoft’s resources with our strategic priorities. Microsoft Flight Simulator X will remain available at retail stores and web retailers, the Flight Sim community will continue to learn from and encourage one another, and we remain committed to the Flight Simulator franchise for the long term.
Microsoft Game Studios is investing significant resources in many exciting and new areas of gaming and entertainment, including Windows games. We believe these future investments will push innovation, community, and collaboration to unprecedented levels and will provide more synergy with our ongoing investments in Games for Windows - LIVE as well as other Windows entertainment technologies. We have nothing specific to announce at this time, but stay tuned for more information.
We are humbled and proud of the passion and support that the Flight Simulator franchise has developed over its more than twenty-five year history. This includes you, the large community of flight simmers, as well as the vibrant third-party ecosystem that has developed around the game. We will continue to produce, sell, and support the latest version of Flight Simulator as we plan for future versions of the franchise. Thank you for your understanding of our decision and for your continued support!"
i guess there will at somepoint in the future a better fs