VG247 Forum » The VG247 forum

1. DSB
   Member

   http://au.gamespot.com/news/microsoft-shuts-down-vancouver-kinect-studio-report-6388548

   Man, this actually makes me believe that there is some form of balance in the universe.

   Flight was just an incredibly bad idea from the beginning. I sympathize with the idea of letting just about everyone fly and opening up the genre to the public, but unless you cater to the total nerds (like yours truly) that actually wants to, you know... operate an aeroplane... then you really don't stand a chance at succeeding.

   The fact that it was really just a way to hawk overpriced piecemeal DLC just made it a total no-go. At least FSX provided a free market.

   I'll be over here playing IL-2, LOMAC or one of the DCS titles instead.

   They have cockpits and everything!

   Posted 10 months ago #

2. G1GAHURTZ
   Member

   So you didn't read Pat's rant in the VG247 story, then?

   Posted 10 months ago #

3. DSB
   Member

   No?! What's that?

   Posted 10 months ago #

4. G1GAHURTZ
   Member

   http://www.vg247.com/2012/07/26/rumour-microsoft-shutters-vancouver-kinect-studio/

   Posted 10 months ago #

5. DSB
   Member

   Oh, right!

   I guess that's the other side of the coin. They priced themselves out of the casual market while making anyone with an interest in sims fuck right off.

   Personally I just wonder if there ever was a casual market for this sort of thing. It's not that interesting to hover in the air, the real nitty gritty is managing the systems while you do it.

   I think it's niche in the true sense of the word. You have a small group of people who are willing to pay practically anything to play these things, and support the few developers that remain.

   But only as long as you produce something truly complex.

   I guess LOMAC could be considered the middleground. It's anything but complex, but it still does just enough to be interesting.

   Posted 10 months ago #

6. G1GAHURTZ
   Member

   I read the IGN review after seeing Pat's rant, and not really knowing much about the game.

   And as useless as IGN reviews are these days, they did seem to make a sensible point, in that the game had become casual enough for anyone to be able to actually land a plane within minutes of first playing it.

   The fact that Pat's kids apparently love the game seems to back that up perfectly.

   Does indeed just look like a mismanaged project all round.

   Posted 10 months ago #

7. DSB
   Member

   Perhaps surprisingly, it's generally not that hard to land and takeoff.

   Of course it becomes more laborious the more systems (and especially weather conditions) you simulate, but really it's all about taking it slow, watching your speed and trying not to make any sudden moves. It's harder to parallel park.

   The hard thing is when you have to improvise and keep an overview of your planes systems, which is often the case in a combat sim where planes get shot at. Which button forces the fire extinguishing system?

   I think it is a great idea to try and open it up, but I don't think it's smart unless you also cater to the core in doing it, because that's really where people are willing to spend money on this stuff.

   And it's really not that hard. Just make a bunch of preset commands that trigger the right systems without any hassle, providing the optimum conditions for takeoff, flight and landing, and you'll be doing it in no time. And then you just give the core the opportunity to do all of that themselves.

   I had a definite notion that the game was going to tank the moment I heard they'd added a plane without a cockpit model. Who asked for that? Who?!

   Posted 10 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.