You know what would be cool?

[Gibbage]

Wait...what?

Gee, why is it always about money with you guys?

Its not all about money, but it would take a massive orginized team to disect the source of FSX, and the only groups that have such a team are 3rd party dev's. I have been part of many free mods and such, and they take infinatly longer then people who are paid, because they have no vested interest in finishing. Its a hobby, and they take there time to do it right or there own way. I really cant see a free mod team being able to do anything with the source if they had it. Also, if there was some simple way to optimize the engine, dont you think Aces would of done it a long time ago?

 

[crashaz]

I still get a kick out of people who said the coding of FSX was done so carelessly. Such a pig of code... could have been so much better.. etc etc..

Beta Team members did have more insights.

DUH! FSX had to carry over a lot of legacy baggage!!

Before FSX people were screaming that the next version better carry over the capability to still be able to use FS9 objects that people spent so much money on purchasing. 3rd party developers did not want FSX blowing up their scenery or planes.


FSX could have had a ton of things... been performing very well now... but for legacy code. Cloud shadows... could have made it... god rays aka.. beams of sunlight thru the clouds... yep.... wave animation... affirmative.


I know there are a few software designers ( not referring to just FS software) here so they would understand.

We have a new project... we want all new great looking stuff and new fantastic features... but oh... you have to work with the old code and don't break anything that did work before.

Man talk about impossible to take advantage of the latest and greatest!!

Cloud shadows did not make it to SP1... because it broke something else.

Legacy code is a term we use in the business to refer to code that is still deemed vital and should work in some form or fashion with the new code.

FSX has a ton.

Yeah...

There were some damn fine and committed people working at Aces.... these people lived FS for a living! They loved talking FS as much as anyone here. I got to spend a week with them a few years back for DevCon and saw them many times @ the sim conventions. They wanted FS to be the absolute best.

Software developers are really idealists by nature... it has gotten me in some trouble sometimes. They always want to deliver the best.

In the end though the bean counters make the decisions... ACES was a... I hate this word.... cost center.

They made money... they had future plans... they had a fantastic team of dedicated people. In the end though... other 'cost centers' were given priority by the bean counters. Aces was the odd man out.

That had to be the greatest collection of knowledge on the planet dealing with flight simulation.

The real tragedy of the Aces closure is much of that talent is now scattered to the winds.

Those that are gone... some have probably ended up with other simulator software companies... some thankfully still are contributing to the community... we benefit from their talents. Some have gone on to bigger and better things.

Phew... I understand why FS kept behind the scenes for so many years... doing something you love and then being told wow what a piece of crap. That would hurt! Hell good thing they had Phil... Mr. Asbestos Pants!

No wonder why I never saw the guy smile LOL!!!


Only a handfull of people here could look at the code... the developers... and then it would be ah... BGL...ASM....MDL... see snippets of the code they would recognize and start playing around. Not the best way of handing code management to ensure someone's work would not break someone else's.


Keep that in mind when you complain about the software... or that it is just about money with them. Sure it is to Microsoft... but to Aces.... it was all about their lives.

Same love we have for the experience of flight.

 

[Bjoern]

I really cant see a free mod team being able to do anything with the source if they had it.

Believe it or not, there's still people out there with enough dedication, passion, curiosity and time to dive into the code without expecting compensation for their effort in form of $.

Dissecting the source code never is an obligation, but an option. Just like the SDK, we have the tools. What we make of them is entirely up to us.

Also, if there was some simple way to optimize the engine, dont you think Aces would of done it a long time ago?

Aces was under a certain pressure and thus didn't have the chance to make FSX as perfect as they wanted to (see Crashaz's reply).

Text

I would see the whole source code deal as a continuation of Aces' legacy rather than a pure "bug fixing fest".

 

[empeck]

We have FS9 and FSX. Both are great simulators. What I really regret is MSTS2 (besides closure of Aces studio of course). Right now there is no train sim that could compete with what TS2 could have been, and I don't think there will be. Auran is releasing the same game over and over again, and RS.com did the same thing - they took Rail Simulator, and released it again on Steam under new name. TS2 could have been to train simulator community what FS is to virtual pilots.

 

[gera]

We have FS9 and FSX. Both are great simulators. What I really regret is MSTS2 (besides closure of Aces studio of course). Right now there is no train sim that could compete with what TS2 could have been, and I don't think there will be. Auran is releasing the same game over and over again, and RS.com did the same thing - they took Rail Simulator, and released it again on Steam under new name. TS2 could have been to train simulator community what FS is to virtual pilots.

You are very right. I would have loved MSTS new version. I keep running my old one quite often and loved it very much but a new version similiar to FSX would have been great., specially the scenery.

 

[tigisfat]

Before FSX people were screaming that the next version better carry over the capability to still be able to use FS9 objects that people spent so much money on purchasing.

And it didn't. FSX, in it's final incarnation, Acceleration, shared virtually no compatibility, so I don't understand what you mean. When it first came out I used about one in every ten planes I had before, and now I use none.

Here's what insiders fail to understand. There are no excuses in the business world. You either deliver a product that sells as expected to and performs well, or you don't. There are few concessions for failure, and catering to a hardcore crowd is even harder. The simple fact of the matter is that FSX didn't sell like it was supposed to, and it didn't work well. It still doesn't, and the reasons don't matter at all. Subsequently, FSX didn't sell as predicted, and ACES wasn't meeting deadlines as Microsoft wanted them to. They were realigned, and that's all there is to it.

I hope they all found great new jobs, because it's a shame.

Keep that in mind when you complain about the software... or that it is just about money with them. Sure it is to Microsoft... but to Aces.... it was all about their lives.

It's sad, it really is; but that's how things go. My life is the military, and when I fail to perform my duties, it's LITERALLY people's lives. They took money for this product, so they're going to hear the brunt of it when people don't think it performs well. Why waste time being wishy-washy just because they loved their jobs? Are people that love their jobs with all their hearts to no longer be accountable? That'd be a nice world.

 

[empeck]

The simple fact of the matter is that FSX didn't sell like it was supposed to, and it didn't work well. It still doesn't, and the reasons don't matter at all.

Are you sure? There was few hints that FSX was the best selling version in FS history.

 

[txnetcop]

Tigsfat where do you get your information on FSX sales?
Ted

 

[jmig]

Are you sure? There was few hints that FSX was the best selling version in FS history.

That statement may be true? However, I wonder if the reason MS killed MSFS wasn't because of the expected sales of the new version looked dismal? How many copies of FSX are gathering dust on a shelf or hidden in a drawer?

How many kids bought the program tried it on their existing computer and quickly decided it sucked? They then moved on to games that worked better and faster.

How many casual users of FSX would jump through the hoops we do to get the program to run where we can truly enjoy flying? For us it is a simulator and a hobby. For most it was a game. A game that failed out of the box to meet the marketing hype.

I would be interested to know how many copies of "Acceleration" were sold compared to FSX. I bet it wasn't that many. MS executives took that as a projection of how many copies of FSXI they would sell and pulled the plug until times look better for them.

Just some thoughts and speculation. I have exactly "zero" knowledge and inside information on the subject. But, I did stay in a Holiday Inn the other night.

 

[txnetcop]

That statement may be true? However, I wonder if the reason MS killed MSFS wasn't because of the expected sales of the new version looked dismal? How many copies of FSX are gathering dust on a shelf or hidden in a drawer?

How many kids bought the program tried it on their existing computer and quickly decided it sucked? They then moved on to games that worked better and faster.

How many casual users of FSX would jump through the hoops we do to get the program to run where we can truly enjoy flying? For us it is a simulator and a hobby. For most it was a game. A game that failed out of the box to meet the marketing hype.

I would be interested to know how many copies of "Acceleration" were sold compared to FSX. I bet it wasn't that many. MS executives took that as a projection of how many copies of FSXI they would sell and pulled the plug until times look better for them.

Just some thoughts and speculation. I have exactly "zero" knowledge and inside information on the subject. But, I did stay in a Holiday Inn the other night.

It's fact that kids find FSX and FS9 boring as a whole. Take a look in last month's PCPilot magazine and Computer Pilot magazine at the articles trying to get kids interested in Flight Simulators that don't shoot something down
Ted

Hope ya enjoyed that Holiday Inn I stay at Court Yard and get more for my money LOL
Ted

 

[empeck]

I have zero knowledge too, but facts are that Microsoft wanted to keep the franchise, and new team is developing a 'game about flying'. Who knows what it will be.

 

[Xilence]

You also have to take in account that simulating a think like flying is no horsedoodoo. I can imagine it would've been quite a challange just to get a "normal" pc to perform in simulating as close to what a professional simulator does with a big room full of equipment.

I just hope MS doesn't turn the MFS-franchise into arcade with their commercial-orientated intentions :O

 

[Bjoern]

Are you sure? There was few hints that FSX was the best selling version in FS history.

Yep, I've got that impression as well.

FSX held itself quite well in the sales charts here in Germany.

 

[DaveKDEN]

they didn't can flight sim. they hit the reset button so they could make a significant change. the next version will be through windows live. that way they can have a hand in your pocket at all times, and control/eliminate the development of aftermarket add-ons

That's exactly what I'm thinking.

 

[heywooood]

thanks crashaz - that is what I had expected...the legacy demands of the community, while not ill intentioned, did cause Aces to make concessions in FSX that cost both performance and features.

From what I have seen to date - the FSX code IS being cracked as third party devs have unlocked or made better use of FSX code than was released as 'default' - by a long stretch.

that should only continue in earnest as now it seems that an "FSXI" is a remote possibility - or at least less likely than FSX was to the FS9 community when it was in its third party development heyday...

So what else is there to do BUT work away at FSX - unlocking features and altering effects until that one day when the next thing comes along - whether it be an M/S product or someone elses...this would seem to be a longer road with far more time for developers to work without having to fear the tag 'obsolete' or the community railing about compatibility ie legacy inclusion.

carry on

 

[stiz]

From what I have seen to date - the FSX code IS being cracked as third party devs have unlocked or made better use of FSX code than was released as 'default' - by a long stretch.

i wouldnt say its being cracked .. more of a case that people are understand the simconnect and are useing its potential

 

[CBris]

Visit Aerosoft's site - they are still discussing a potential new flight simulator and I think that is just the surface of the matter.

I wouldn't put it past Aerosoft to have one or two folks looking at code already.

 

[heywooood]

i wouldnt say its being cracked .. more of a case that people are understand the simconnect and are useing its potential

right - 'cracked' in the internet realm has a negative or outlaw connotation...what I meant was the other more traditional definition...cracked - like a sleuth cracks a difficult case - opened up to yield answers...solved if you will.

 

[tigisfat]

That's exactly what I'm thinking.

He's not speculating, we know for a fact that Microsoft built a new team and is making a flight title based on windows live.