MSFS Franchise and LIVE

[RCAF_Gunner]

With the various press releases over the last couple of days some people feel reassured that the MS is committed to the future of the MSFS franchise. Fair enough, but with what little was said, there is one specific thing thrown into the statement that I believe is still cause for concern. It was the nod towards the future being the "LIVE" experience:

http://www.gamesforwindows.com/en-US/Live/Pages/AboutLive.aspx

While there are a few Windows PC "LIVE" titles already, i.e. not XBOX 360 LIVE titles, the nod towards the LIVE experience provides no reassurance that if FS XI is released in better economic times that it'll still be a largley single player centric, hard disk based, game that we would likely expect to see. I know many people enjoy flying online but I suspect the majority of FS9/FSX users play offline.

So, while the official press announcements provide the comfort of the Flight Simulator title likely living on into the future, the carefully chosen wording does hint at a shift in direction even if it's not to the XBOX 360 platform. Therefore, in addition to lending support to the Aces Team and keeping that talent together if possible, now is also likely the time to voice your concerns to Microsoft about a shift towards a largely or purely online gaming environment for Flight Simulator. As I said, while that shift would suite some, I suspect it wouldn't suite the majority.

Rick

 

[Quixoticish]

It's easy to misunderstand exactly what LIVE is and how it works. All of the LIVE games I've played have all been single player games through and through with multiplayer options for those who wish, such as FSXI is at the moment. All LIVE does is keep track of "scores", so for any future flight simulators rather than the medals and rewards that are granted upon completion of the missions they will be tagged on your LIVE profile as a form of "portfolio". LIVE also functions as a handy matchmaking service so if you see your friends online you can instantly join them in a multiplayer session.

LIVE is certainly a step in the right direction and will likely be a feature of almost all PC games in the future, be they single player or multiplayer. However stating that the future will be a LIVE experience is in no way saying or even remotely hinting that they will abandon single player gameplay in a move to replace it with something that is primarily a multiplayer environment.

In reality all it will mean is that your "scores" can be tracked online (hopefully important scores, and perhaps even an online logbook) and also that Microsoft can ditch the horrible Gamespy matchmaking and multiplayer interface and use LIVE in future for a much more enjoyable and seamless experience.

 

[Pepere]

Sounds like more dependency on MS? :faint:

David

 

[IanP]

I play games that are distributed and licensed online regularly, and (with the exception of the one MMO I'm currently using) I never play them against online opponents because to put it bluntly, the kids are massively better than me and it's embarrassing!

That doesn't stop me getting content from Steam or another system and using it. The downside is whether it will work without being connected to the internet. MS have made no secret of wanting their OS and Office software to be online and "on-demand". I don't, but I don't mind some of my entertainment applications being web-based or web-authenticated, as long as there are others I can use while the 'net connection is down.

 

[Quixoticish]

I play games that are distributed and licensed online regularly, and (with the exception of the one MMO I'm currently using) I never play them against online opponents because to put it bluntly, the kids are massively better than me and it's embarrassing!

That doesn't stop me getting content from Steam or another system and using it. The downside is whether it will work without being connected to the internet. MS have made no secret of wanting their OS and Office software to be online and "on-demand". I don't, but I don't mind some of my entertainment applications being web-based or web-authenticated, as long as there are others I can use while the 'net connection is down.

You can play the vast majority of Steam games offline. As long as your games aren't in need of any updates you can play them in "offline mode" that should kick in automatically if an internet connection cannot be detected. I would imagine that any further evolution of LIVE would be the same, although the number of people with always on internet connections is growing each year we're still a good ten to fifteen years away from a point where they will make it obligatory to have an internet connection to play a game (with the exception of MMO's obviously).

 

[fliger747]

I can't imagine trying to to FDE development with an online only "GAME".

Hey I still live in the last quarter of the twentieth century.....

T.

 

[dharris]

AND just what is wrong with ther last quarter of the century??? lolol

 

[srgalahad]

Windows Live huh?? a future that might not look that good even if it is a livable concept...

"As part of Microsoft’s restructuring plan to eventually shed five thousand jobs, the highest profile employee to get the chop is Chris Early, general manager of Games for Windows Live.
Venture Beat has contacted Early for comment but only receives an auto-response from his email saying his time as Microsoft has “come to a close.”
This decision obviously raises questions how how much longer the Redwood giant will continue to invest in the Games for Windows Live service."

http://www.videogaming247.com/2009/01/26/head-of-games-for-windows-live-sacked/

wonder how confident that will make people feel?

Rob

 

[jdhaenens]

But....they're committed to a Live Flight Sim Experience...who's lying? What did they know and when did they know it?

 

[Quixoticish]

Windows Live huh?? a future that might not look that good even if it is a livable concept...

"As part of Microsoft’s restructuring plan to eventually shed five thousand jobs, the highest profile employee to get the chop is Chris Early, general manager of Games for Windows Live.
Venture Beat has contacted Early for comment but only receives an auto-response from his email saying his time as Microsoft has “come to a close.”
This decision obviously raises questions how how much longer the Redwood giant will continue to invest in the Games for Windows Live service."

http://www.videogaming247.com/2009/01/26/head-of-games-for-windows-live-sacked/

wonder how confident that will make people feel?

Rob

To be honest I doubt it makes LIVE users feel anything really. LIVE is just a glorified stats tracker and multiplayer matchmaking service, in no way does it affect the actual playing of the game.

They haven't really got LIVE up and running. It's a non-starter on the X-box as I understand you have to pay for the privilege of the more advanced matchmaking features, and that's why it's not doing too well. Once more PC based titles support it (to my knowledge apart from the obvious Microsoft produced ones) the only major title thus far to support LIVE on the PC was Grand Theft Auto IV, and then only for stats tracking. Dawn Of War II is the only game I've actually used that integrated LIVE fully and it actually works incredibly well for arranging multiplayer games with friends. Once more PC titles support it I imagine it'll start to become more commonplace.

 

[Lionheart]

To be honest I doubt it makes LIVE users feel anything really. LIVE is just a glorified stats tracker and multiplayer matchmaking service, in no way does it affect the actual playing of the game.

They haven't really got LIVE up and running. It's a non-starter on the X-box as I understand you have to pay for the privilege of the more advanced matchmaking features, and that's why it's not doing too well. Once more PC based titles support it (to my knowledge apart from the obvious Microsoft produced ones) the only major title thus far to support LIVE on the PC was Grand Theft Auto IV, and then only for stats tracking. Dawn Of War II is the only game I've actually used that integrated LIVE fully and it actually works incredibly well for arranging multiplayer games with friends. Once more PC titles support it I imagine it'll start to become more commonplace.

Apple has something basically similar and also has MobilMe which interconnects 'everything' to everything. Its some neat technology. I use it for my iMac, iPod, and temp apple website. (practicing using their software for website creations).

Apple has something called car keys (I think thats it) which basically is a footprint signature for virtually accessing things/places.



Bill

 

[srgalahad]

To be honest I doubt it makes LIVE users feel anything really. LIVE is just a glorified stats tracker and multiplayer matchmaking service, in no way does it affect the actual playing of the game.

Once more PC titles support it I imagine it'll start to become more commonplace.

Actually I was thinking more on the investor/market side of "people" - tout a concept then fire the boss of it never looks good even in tough times.

Live users? I think a hefty percentage of the target market aren't going for a thoughtful time... it's the modern equivalent of rolling up high scores on a pinball machine in the local hangout. Besides, it's symptomatic of M$ concepts... good ideas that will be better when the OS / programs / entertainment / business / internet is controlled in Redmond. Smile as you bend over.

The last is my 'worry'. Before Gates retired he expressed the dream that eventually (sooner) it would be a world of internet hosted applications with no need for 'software'. I can't see how we'd have the individualization of our sims if the engine ran on a server in Fiji nor how we'd be able to play when the local ISP falls offline, or how we could sim out on the fishing boat (SatComs?? $$). You're right about pay-to-play now and I can see it only spreading as someone has to pay for all those servers and power.

In fact, what better way to get people hooked on the idea than thru games... and then go to work and use Excel Live. Some of the concept is good, and/or inevitable but once again the rollercoaster is driven by $$, not commo... errr... sense.

Rob

 

[Quixoticish]

The last is my 'worry'. Before Gates retired he expressed the dream that eventually (sooner) it would be a world of internet hosted applications with no need for 'software'. I can't see how we'd have the individualization of our sims if the engine ran on a server in Fiji nor how we'd be able to play when the local ISP falls offline, or how we could sim out on the fishing boat (SatComs?? $$). You're right about pay-to-play now and I can see it only spreading as someone has to pay for all those servers and power.

Have you ever used Steam? If you aren't familiar with it it does everything LIVE does and more, and eliminates the need to ever physically own software. And best of all it allows complete modding of various games if the game is designed in such a way as to support modding. Aside from some early teething problems it's an exceptional piece of software and definitely the way forward. It integrates score tracking and matchmaking and everything else LIVE does but also allows you to physically download your games rather than having to own/activate the disk. To be honest the sooner every piece of software goes with Steam the better, the only problem I can see is we'll end up having Steam, LIVE, Stardock, and a huge host of other software when competitors try to out do one another, and that will be a pain.

I'm afraid a world of internet hosted applications is indeed the future and we'll embrace it (quite rightly), in the same way we embraced the change from floppy disks to CD's, and CD's to DVD's, and I'm sure Blu-ray games will be along in the next 12 months and we'll embrace that as well. Next step? Do away with the physical medium and just get your games on the internet.

Edit : I've just re-read your post and please accept my apologies, I see you're talking about actually having no software whatsoever and running it from a server elsewhere like the old networks with dumb terminals running their software off the server, albeit in this case over the internet. I actually do share your concern about this but it's inevitable what will happen, the server will crash and a major lack of secondary servers will kill the service and computer users will vote with their wallets and opt for a competitors solution. I think this is perhaps something for the distant future, and nothing that we'll have to worry about with any immediacy.

 

[Cazzie]

My oldest has had X-Box Live for 2 years now, no doubt since the youngest jusy bought him an X-Box360, he'll have an account too. If uyou have teenagers, it is worth the $50.00/year in phone bills alone! Addison throws his headset on and plays and chats away with all his buddies and it doesn't tie up our phone!

Caz

 

[Quixoticish]

My oldest has had X-Box Live for 2 years now, no doubt since the youngest jusy bought him an X-Box360, he'll have an account too. If uyou have teenagers, it is worth the $50.00/year in phone bills alone! Addison throws his headset on and plays and chats away with all his buddies and it doesn't tie up our phone!

Caz

If you use broadband it won't tie up the phone anyway, you don't have to pay for LIVE to reap the benefits of this.

 

[IanP]

I use STEAM for a couple of things - along with RelicOnline (so I don't have to keep the COH disks in the drive) and play an MMOG. Unfortunately the "offline" version of STEAM games doesn't kick in automatically and, if you haven't taken RACE07/GTRe offline prior to losing the connection, certainly, it just reports "server unavailable" with an option to exit. At least it did last time I tried it.

And therein lies my concern, as has already been discussed. Gates and Balmer have both stated that the future they want is online delivery of applications and operating systems. Google have already tried it with office products and, thankfully, it flopped spectacularly. No realistic business I know of is going to bet their entire operations on one 3rd party website being accessable! Yet that's what they want.

Going back to my original paragraph briefly, if RelicOnline is out of contact, as happened to me briefly last night, I can throw a disk in the drive and play Company of Heroes or Opposing Fronts. I can install RACE07 Offline, as I have the disk (even though that demands I activate it through STEAM!) - I can't do that with GTRe...

Now if only there was an offline version of EvE...? (That's not the MMO I play, incidentally - I used to, but it got far too difficult to play casually).

 

[RCAF_Gunner]

... you don't have to pay for LIVE to reap the benefits of this.

Perhaps not now on the PC titles but to get the full benefit of LIVE on XBOX 360 you do have to pay (Gold Level). I believe this is the direction MS is trying to take us; that is, pay for some kind of subscription service for all game play whether it be offline or online ~ single-player or multi-player. It fits with other visions I've read about regarding products like Office and so on. So, yes, for now it's free but I suspect that is not the long term intent.

Do we really want to see our hobby turned into the equivalent of using a cell phone? That is, buy your device (software) up front then pay the corporation for every minute you use it (or in the case of non-use a minimum monthly charge)? Think of the charges people like me would rack up while spending endless hours "tinkering" to improve our experience or to give something back to the community. Perhaps MS wants the "real as it gets" slogan to mean one day it'll be as expensive as owing a real plane?

If the MS bean counters are trying to save money, why not bag the free LIVE services and leave game matching / score keeping to third parties that probably do it better anyway?

The posts I've seen essentially trying to defend their move in axing the Aces team just don't wash with me. Perhaps profits are not what they hoped for but a profit is a profit. Phil's latest blog indicates over a million copies of FSX sold. That ain't chicken feed.

If it was truly about shrinking losses common sense would be to lose the things that don't make a profit like Zune. Yes, yes, corporate strategy and all that but to me MS management needs to rethink their need to own / control everything in the micro-computing world and concentrate on what works in these tough times.

Further, when profits are in the billions, I think they can afford to keep the talent together and weather out the tough times. Small companies probably couldn't but MS certainly could. It's corporate / shareholder greed pure and simple.

Anyway, back on point, I still feel that if there is any slim chance of influencing longer term decisions, now is the time to send in feedback posts at the Games for Windows site to express the things you do or don't want to see happen to the MSFS franchise.

 

[Chuck_Jodry-VJPL]

World Of Warcraft is one game constantly in the top ten and has a subscription fee, i was impressed at the numbers of players .

My brother in laws family was addicted to this for some time , three kids one machine taking shifts , if there was a business model that was successful in gaming on the pc that was it , Vivendi was making a killing.

I fully expect M$ would try to get that sort of action , they are in business to make money and that games paradigm is a cash cow.

What Flying Game would have such a format ? combat flight .... take it or leave it , consoles are in and what works works , that kind of thing will come to pass . or my name isnt Orvill Redinbauker...

 

[IanP]

Where WoW has succeeded, hundreds of other MMOs have failed. Tabula Rasa folds imminently, which is just the latest failure by one company. Google's attempt at making office products on-demand online has failed totally. Microsoft's previous versions of LIVE for Windows have, rightfully, failed totally.

Online doesn't work yet. It really is that simple. The ISPs grossly oversell bandwidth, the infrastructure cannot support more and regularly fails. Take a look at Avsim recently, or GameSpy's FSX connection. Do you really want to bet all of your money on software that only runs online? I sure as [censored] don't!

 

[SkippyBing]

Put it this way, they can't sell you an online only flight simulator if you don't buy it.
And as Ian says there isn't the bandwidth to support the kind of overhead you need to do anything more than exchange user aircraft information, streaming scenery is a way off never mind anything else.
For some reason about every five years or so someone trys to sell network computing either with thin clients and servers or 'the cloud' possibly the worst marketing cliche ever, and about every five years it fails because it's always going to be faster to keep stuff on a local drive than one on a network.