element1108

WHAT THE HELL?!?! Now that is a teaser if I ever saw one ;). I know many are disgrunteled by the apparent "switch in focus" for ED...I simply do not see it as a switch in focus, more of a expanding their enterprise. Fortunately my adoration of all that is aviation will keep me coming back (supporting a company just for the support isn't something I'm interested in doing). But high fidelity aircraft modules in a combat setting is something I would gladly support.

Ohhh, clean, efficient thank you!

Honestly, I do love these "ambushes" ... no warning (well the manual was one indication it was nearing it's release)...BAM! Purchased, downloading....looking very much forward to what awaits.

What he said:joystick:

I'm a visual learner...although I'm happy with the screen shots (I'll never complain about screen shots)...I think to better grasp the written component a video demonstration of the prop system might serve me better ;) (worth a try). Thanks for the info

You're out of context :music_whistling: ;) I'm a dcs enthusiast, but see some context of the p51...not in the 100% realistic bar nothing context...but the context of a combat sim that gets played on a computer at home. Just because you can't see or understand the direction doesn't mean it's wrong? Does it?

Objectively speaking, that video explains nothing (and I love almost all Hitler spoofs, even on subjects who's views i don't agree with). I just didn't find his arguments all that clever in this one. It's basically the over debated theme of airframe vs airframe. We've had the same debate on rotor craft and fixed wing modern jets (American vs the world). The Fighter Collection who's probably funding the development of the pony has a number of air worthy warbirds (and cold war jets) at it's immediate disposal. According to the TFC webpage...there are airworthy: Bearcat Corsair Curtiss P-40B Gladiator Harvard Hawk Hellcat Mustang TF-51D Nimrod Spitfire V Spitfire XIV Staggerwing Wildcat these are currently being restored Beaufighter CR.42 La-11 Sea Fury Spitfire IX Spitfire XXII Thunderbolt P-47G That list doesn't amount to anything other than the fact it's easier to model and simulate when you have the real thing in your backyard. Hitler failed to mention that ;).

I guess immersion and it's relevance is subjective, I will be pretty immersed handling the pony and keeping everything running smoothly I'll most likely foreget where I'm flying and in what era. I've always wanted to see how modern planes would do vs wwIi birds....come the release I'll personally be able to fulfill part of that curiosity. I don't paint by numbers so then sandbox presented in this case has no walls or boundaries, only challenging opportunities for fun. Make believe and a form of adult imagination will always be apart of flight sims.

I'd be curious to see the numbers and if it was worth it for them to ditch the "simulator" to attract the casual flyer. I can imagine if someone wants to fly arcade they'll want some guns and action to go with it, but I didn't do the market research or take any financial risk so it's easy for me to say. It would cost more in development, but an already established sim demographic would have been lying in wait. Is tracker IR still not compatible?

Of course it would be short sighted for this advanced space race to limit their space craft to space alone....wings for the transition to planetary flight my friend ;). (Closest earthly example is the space shuttle) Not to mention they act as excellent weapon mounts. Now as far as their design sense...well much was left to be desired, but as a kid playing it...didn't really notice. :pilotfly:

Bossa NOVA!!!!!!....Chevy nova???? RADICAL!!!!!! -TMNT

Is there anything else in AeroFly to do other than look out the window in a frozen moment in time? no and while I'm at it there are no targets to kill, no AI to calculate, no weapons modeling etc. I'm not knocking AeroFly, it's a very nice looking flight experience no doubt, but come on. The two games offer completely different gameplay experiences and that is directly proportional to it's visual style and it's engine capabilities. There is more to a flight sim than graphics. That said, I guess the best way to really compare engines is to compare what each flight sim is capable of doing. A more adequate comparison IMHO would be RISE OF FLIGHT's engine or perhaps CLIFFS of DOVER. But what do I know, I hate comparing apples to oranges or apples to other apples. The strengths and weaknesses of each seem to somehow balance the playing field so there is no one dominant game engine. If it were that easy, there would BE only one game engine. I've already said too much, bed time ;)

I doubt there will be any indication whatsoever before release. Such as been the case the last few releases....ambushed (in the best way possible). I actually like not knowing exactly, not even seeing much of a ramp up. Just, one day check the forums BAAAAAAAAAAAAAM! ED IS PROUD TO PRESENT....or along those lines. For the 67th time....LOOKING FORWARD to this release!

"curled out" :megalol: brilliant!

Will be all over this.

:megalol: That was good for a morning laugh, especially the comparison to a WWII aircraft in DCS to Mario Bros. Today is going to be a good day! :pilotfly:

You're just being difficult for the sake of being difficult at this point. You're arguments are for the sake of contradiction <insert Monty Python "The Argument skit here>. If you can't see the entertainment value of sharing the P51 and A-10 and whatever DCS aircraft launches in the same environment...well I pitty you. You must have grown up without any sense of imagination or appreciation for anything anyone offered you as entertainment. (don't buy it, enough said. You're not going to convince ED "this is a foolish choice and they should quit right now". This is a computer sim, it's fantasy at the "core" so to call the P51 and A-10 compatibility a joke is to call yourself and those who play flight sims "jokers". We sit in front of a computer in our spare time and pretend to play pilot. PRETEND, because only a fraction of us in here are real life pilots and even less so are military pilots. Honestly you come here and continually spew your crap (while entitled to your opinion...you've stated it long ago) is pointless. I don't want to read through your crap to see what others have to say personally. -1 until you develop a little more understanding of the world existing outside your own. :megalol:

Believe it or not...never once heard of it. Not in ten bloody years...apart from the x series I had thought space sims were long dead. This is great!

It's an idiotic statement to the core. Why would he even go in record saying he doesn't like flight simulators...the "bringing the magic of flight to a whole new player base" really doesn't say much either. It's funny they have to basically rub it in the potential buyers face that this is not a flight simulator. Like flight simulators are lumps of $h** or something.

What the heck!?!?! How did this pass under my radar. Was a huge fan of the wing commander series growing up. Now it's up Laurance Holand to release an updated xwing series ;). Thanks for sharing, going to check it out.

If someone likes ARMA it's probably not the extreme case of blind loyalty. It's probably simply because they enjoy it. Despite it's flaws. I somewhat appreciate your cynical attitude though :)

Looks like it, please read the 51 FAQ, you'll get some of your answers there. the rest you'll get in existing threads and if you still dont like it, dont buy it. We don't need another opinionated "i know better than ED" thread. :T

Frankly I don't think they're out to make high fidelity add ons, just more scenery, nicely 3D modeled planes and challengaes/missions, but not to the fidelity depth of fsx's best developers. Nobody in ms flight market will spend $59 on an airframe, maybe some, but not the profitable margin vs development time required. Nothing about this title is retrospective of the current MSFS series so I can't imagine they're banking on that market to dish out. Ultimately I think (like so many things these days) this idea was focused grouped to hell, researched from the ground up on spending paterns of the casual, modern gamer. I don't see much in the way of flight sim enthusiast in the mix here. This is probably a title that would come with the next gen Xbox, with dlc purchases to follow so people can fly from their couch with wireless controller. (lack of fidelity reduces processor so would make it ideal for a console). Hollywood is guilty of this as well, they can sell stars and action sequences over a profound story any day of the year. Who knows, all I know (and no disrespect to those who like this title or will download it because is free) I have no intention of downloading it anytime soon/ever. Its not offerering anything that interests me and my limited sim time is better spent in the ka, SU or a-10 (and eventual 51 and impossible to learn fast mover). :joystick: I would be curious and open however to individual forum members honest opinions of he ame. What they like and dislike etc. My opinion is not written in stone by any means.

It's "dead" to us, but it's alive (and free) to game player base "X". X obviously because they are the unknown. When I watched the video, I could see the writing/notes phase needing to emphasize "you can play this with a mouse"...hinting to the fact you don't need an "expensive joystick" (I picked my first one up for $12 18 years ago and it changed how I flew early flight sims for the better. Anyway I'm not going to (outside my passive aggressive attitude on this title) whole heartidly dump all over this title. It's clearly not for the majority audience who frequent these forums (or who enjoy flight SIMS). Contrary to what the video says, we LIKE doing more than just flying around and looking at things/completing arcade type challenges etc. If I were 9 though I would eat this title up. FREE?!?!?! GET OUT!!! Look at those graphics. I would tire of it eventually and probably wouldn't pony up any additional allowance cash for "add ons"...but whatever. One last thing, they're probably not SDK'ing this because they saw all that potential money go to third party developers and not directly to MS when dealing with additional scenery, planes etc. This time they're going to keep their claws on the golden goose. Although it's more of a bronze goose, because it's a "sim light" product ;).

My god did the narrator say "increasing popular hobby?" We are on the up and ups gentlemen ;).:joystick: