The Big MS Flight Topic

[Sharrow 107]

AVSIM's pretty comprehensive review of Flight is out.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

AVSIM's pretty comprehensive review of Flight is out.

Now tell me if you agree with the review.

[W.Skinner 3]

Now tell me if you agree with the review.

I believe that was a good, fair review. I do agree that we can not make a full judgement on Flight until we see more DLC from MGS.

[Aerobird 11]

Flight is just that, not a simmer, but may it play a role in reqruiting future dedicated simmers? Only time will tell that! Having worked as a highschoolteacher, I noticed how youngsters learn more and more visually, being frustrated if they don't understand instantly. MS have adjusted to this, but I have spent hundred of hours reading manuals and testflying and finally LEARNED to handle the plane (more planes to come I assure you). It is that ultimate feeling of achievement that creates a dedication to the simming hobby. I will keep my FSX, but I understand that an upgrade of my simming software will rather come from X-plane and Aerosoft than MS. It is a pity MS with all its resources has given up the simming area for a flightgame.

[KarstenS 180]

Now tell me if you agree with the review.

I don't. I think the rview misses a crucial point: costs! It is one thing what people want, and it is a totally different one what people want to pay.

IMHO Flight mises what Online Games need. They have to keep the player in the game. They have to return often so that you can show them what they could do with a little money.

But why do people return to flight? To raise their experience? It gets boring after a little while. In the begining all this lessons can get someone in to the game, but then they need something else. In my opinion it is a little to obvious, how they want to earn money. For most Jobs you need a Maule. To get a Maule you have to pay. IMHO the wrong way. It would be much better to say: You get a Maule for free if you win this price or reach level eleven. If this looks to hard or if you want to get the Maule noiw, then pay for it.

Another way to hold them in the game: Multiplayer. Several people must work together to win an achievement, train together or something like this. They have to return to have fun, nothing else.

The problem is: In one or two months there are other exciting games that will attract people, then the Window of opportunity closes for Flight.

When I made the decision last October to terminate FSX, I already decided to give X-Plane 10 and Flight a chance. But I don't now what Flight would have to offer to tempt to spend another 20 Euro.

[tempelhof 44]

I would be thrilled if Aerosoft could bring some of Flight's game aspects to FSX as an addon. Something between African Airstrip Adventures (which is still on my things-to-buy list btw) and FSpassengers, but online with a career mode, multiplayer missions and such. Just think about the possibilities!

[LufthansaPilot 4]

Well the frames are very good indeed. I wonder whether there will be some programmers who will try to implement the FLIGHT engine into FSX to gain more fps.

[KarstenS 180]

Well the frames are very good indeed. I wonder whether there will be some programmers who will try to implement the FLIGHT engine into FSX to gain more fps.

I don't think that it is the engine alone. They now make some use of the GPU, but on the other hand a strict limitation of the Textures, no road traffic, no AI, but carefully planned textures and objects. This is no wizardry. In a way the changes that Lockheed Martin made were much bigger.

[newmanix 61]

That was a well said review Mathijs!

Your opinion mirrors my own!

http://airdailyx.blogspot.com/2012/03/and-now-my-own-first-impression-of.html

D'Andre

[Hiflyer 129]

A slightly different perspective (From MvGibbage over at AVSim)

!

[altstiff 28]

Why do all the Avatars look like they are latent homosexuals?

[simmerhead 7]

I'm trying really hard to like it, but after two days I've lost interest. Not because it is all bad, but the gameplay is just a big soup of randomness and I feel no immersion. Maybe I'm too old to get how things work in the "Xbox-age"... It isn't a good simulator and it isn't a good game. It's not even jack of all trades.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I believe that was a good, fair review. I do agree that we can not make a full judgement on Flight until we see more DLC from MGS.

More aircraft like the $15 Maule without working radios and autopilots? And without manuals to learn how to fly it? Only one model and a few fake repaints? 2d gauges? Are you waiting for DLC like that?

I'm not.

[alehead 126]

I agree Mathijs.

With respect to the avatar, this is not necessary to play the offline base package or demo. However, as soon as you want to add the PT-17 or any expansion pack, you will need an xbox live account. I have a Live!ID for technet and so on, you may understand how annoyed I was to have to expand it to an xbox live account and create the teenager on speed avatar.

Cool next time I log on to technet and the party sees my England football top, trilby wearing crackboy dancing around the online meeting screen!!!

You get assigned an avatar on xbox live, I believe whether you like it or not. As much as I believe that Flight is a simulator, it is not a simulator in the sense that many here and on other fora understand a simulator to be. It is definitely more than just a game.

My beef is with the awful clouds, a lack of real weather, bugs in the Stearman that should not have been missed in beta (temperature gauge readings, a strange shadowing of the 3d model against what represents clouds, I wish not to refer to those cotton wool balls in the skies as clouds.) and gameplay that will bore me within 48 hours. Oh, and the fact that my toe brake assignments on the Saitek rudder pedals are simply ignored.

All childhood diseases as us said in German. The question is whether they can be bothered to fix stuff I stead if hammering out premium DLC packages over the next months.

As it stands, I can have hours more fun in FSX, especially thanks to Aerosoft and the others. It is not about cost. It is about gameplay interest and longevity. A lot must come at the right price for Flight to be even a vaguely viable option as a replacement to FSX. Not that anyone stated at any point that Flight actually IS a replacement to FSX, more a complement.

Andrew

[pegase64 0]

Want hear something great about FLIGHT? I just heard from two nephews (13 and 15) they downloaded it and they loved it. I showed them FSX a few times and they never got it.

I don't completely agree with this ...

My grand-son is 6 years old. He plays very often with FSX, mostly from the outside, "I want to see the plane !" ...

So, I thought : " Flight is for him" ... well starting Flight , and he says " I want to see the planes ... "

So far, he looks at the hangar and : "It's only 3 planes " (I have Hawai extension)

then he chooses Icon and as usual fly from outside, after 5 minutes as usual, he wants to change and says :"Now, I would choose a big 747"

(in FSX, he likes to fly big jets or fast F18 )

"Sorry, we have not this article, sir !"

"OK, so I want have fun"

And as in FSX, he crashes the Icon ...

and surprise, after the usual jump, the game stops, flashing red alert, the gameplay of Flight ...

"Grand Pa, I can't cross the trees, buildings, and go fast on the ground !"

"Sorry, kid, there is no way in this game to "Ignore crashes and damages" , it's a simulator ! "

"It's not fun ... I prefer your old game "

And we have started again FSX

Pierre LFBE (sorry for this bad translation from a funny dialog in native french)

[Superpilotv2 5]

I had to use Wolfram Alpha to get that number!

By the way, an interesting review (warning, strong viewpoints) http://soldant.wordp...-flight-review/

That review really annoyed me. As being part of the AVSIM staff I feel personally attaced by the one who wrote that. Yes, we had some serious problems with some members almost going to Redmont an blowing everything FLIGHT related up! (well, that´s bit too drastic but this kind were the posts there.) That´s why Tom shut the Flight froum down till the 29th. So far everything is quite calm over there.

About flight I have to say that I tried it now 2 times and it slowly gets boring. You´ve only got these 2 slow planes (The grafic´s are nice) and your task is to fly from point a to point b to gain some points or anything else. That´s somehow logic but what to do with these "level" thing and these points? I just don´t see the idea behind this. If you could enable more planes with this I would really understand it but without it´s a bit lame.

And also the "Free Flight" mode (For god´s sake they left that in!) doesn´t really makes much fun cause everything which defines a GA flight (ATC, other planes, changing weather) isn´t there and it´s just veeery slow cuising over some static scenery. (Or do I just think it´s slow after I´m used to fly the NGX arround???)

The next downpoint is that I can´t really configure my stick with deadzones and so on. Thus the control isn´t that easy as it should be.

On th other side I appreciate this DLC and marked place thing (I know Mathjis won´t like to hear that cause if that will be the future, were will his job go?). It makes things quite clear and easy.

And FLIGHT still based on the "old" FSX engine (Or is the FSX core enginejust a bumped up FS2000 cause back then the introduced the acutal file structure?) and shows clearly how far that engine can be maxed out. The scenery looks far better than default FSX, so there´s a lot of potential still left.

That FLIGHT attracts a wider audience is confirmed: Since the 29th lots of new members have singned in the Avsim forums, most stating that the come though Flight to that. I remember one post of such an person how said that he had allways been interested in avation but FSX scanred him a bit with all what´s folloing with it. Then he gave Flight a try and after searching a bit more about the planes he cam along Asvim. That´s what i´m hoping for the future. Some new guys into that to let FSX grom and maybe (Hope will allways be allowed.) Microsoft might return with a loswer look on Flight.

But as long as they don´t come up with some serious content (ATC and so on) I don´t see a point for me to use it much.

[tempelhof 44]

I would be thrilled if Aerosoft could bring some of Flight's game aspects to FSX as an addon. Something between African Airstrip Adventures (which is still on my things-to-buy list btw) and FSpassengers, but online with a career mode, multiplayer missions and such. Just think about the possibilities!

Woohoo!! AAA 20% off today. Guess the Hawaii Adventure Pack has to wait another month or so...

[simmerhead 7]

That review really annoyed me. As being part of the AVSIM staff I feel personally attaced by the one who wrote that. Yes, we had some serious problems with some members almost going to Redmont an blowing everything FLIGHT related up! (well, that´s bit too drastic but this kind were the posts there.) That´s why Tom shut the Flight froum down till the 29th. So far everything is quite calm over there.

About flight I have to say that I tried it now 2 times and it slowly gets boring. You´ve only got these 2 slow planes (The grafic´s are nice) and your task is to fly from point a to point b to gain some points or anything else. That´s somehow logic but what to do with these "level" thing and these points? I just don´t see the idea behind this. If you could enable more planes with this I would really understand it but without it´s a bit lame.

And also the "Free Flight" mode (For god´s sake they left that in!) doesn´t really makes much fun cause everything which defines a GA flight (ATC, other planes, changing weather) isn´t there and it´s just veeery slow cuising over some static scenery. (Or do I just think it´s slow after I´m used to fly the NGX arround???)

The next downpoint is that I can´t really configure my stick with deadzones and so on. Thus the control isn´t that easy as it should be.

On th other side I appreciate this DLC and marked place thing (I know Mathjis won´t like to hear that cause if that will be the future, were will his job go?). It makes things quite clear and easy.

And FLIGHT still based on the "old" FSX engine (Or is the FSX core enginejust a bumped up FS2000 cause back then the introduced the acutal file structure?) and shows clearly how far that engine can be maxed out. The scenery looks far better than default FSX, so there´s a lot of potential still left.

That FLIGHT attracts a wider audience is confirmed: Since the 29th lots of new members have singned in the Avsim forums, most stating that the come though Flight to that. I remember one post of such an person how said that he had allways been interested in avation but FSX scanred him a bit with all what´s folloing with it. Then he gave Flight a try and after searching a bit more about the planes he cam along Asvim. That´s what i´m hoping for the future. Some new guys into that to let FSX grom and maybe (Hope will allways be allowed.) Microsoft might return with a loswer look on Flight.

But as long as they don´t come up with some serious content (ATC and so on) I don´t see a point for me to use it much.

Big difference between Aerosoft and Microsoft. For one, Aerosoft don't target young kids. Secondly Aerosoft operate in a competitive market which drive product innovation and customer interaction. Microsoft is monopolizing their market.

[KarstenS 180]

About flight I have to say that I tried it now 2 times and it slowly gets boring. You´ve only got these 2 slow planes (The grafic´s are nice) and your task is to fly from point a to point b to gain some points or anything else. That´s somehow logic but what to do with these "level" thing and these points? I just don´t see the idea behind this. If you could enable more planes with this I would really understand it but without it´s a bit lame.

Well, on the one hand: With the free version you only get a very limited impression of Flight. The RV-6 and the Maule are much better planes.

In fact they are a far step from the default planes in FSX or X-Plane 10. They can even compete with some of the better Add-ons in these simulators. In fact the missions even contain a very good flying school. Neither FSX nor X-Plane 10 hae something similar. I am not talking about thew first two pretty dumb missions, but as an example a mission where you have to get the RV-6 up to fifteen thousand feet. And you poassenger gives the advise that you will have to change the mixture.

But you are right, the pooints and achievement awards are pretty pointless. The big problems: Without real weather and a limited area it starts to bore after some time. So I expect that after a few months they will sell less and less areas and planes.

[alainneedle1 32]

I have Flight and the Hawaiian pack, I still use FSX, I can tell you right now that Flight is not a complete sim for hardcore simmers. On the other hand I can't imagine Orbx (and other devs) spending over a year 1/2 working with MS just for Hawaii, I mean seriously....how many 3PD does it take to cover Hawaii with their sceneries, how many 3PD does it take to make all airports in Hawaii.....do you see where I'm going with this?? Everything is there, locked but there...

Here is (below) a modified post I made on Avsim's forum...

Quote:...Here is my 2 cents about Flight, not everybody is upset at MS and it's not everybody that don't like Flight.

I see two kind of peoples upset at MS....the hardcore simmers who were expecting MS to have everything in Flight and more as FSX does OUT OF THE BOX (can't blame them)........the others are the 3PD (some, not all of them) who were left behind by MS shutting them down and others who will not be able to make addons (freeware or payware) for Flight.

Do you know of a sim with regular or to come updates .....that's right, XP-10 and PreparD3...so if this is good for them can it be the same for Flight.

3PD developers (some of them) are surprised (and scared) to see how many peoples are buying, posting good and fair reviews and comments about Flight, can we blame them, FSX is their bread and butter so if Flight does take off assuming that MS implement (and they will trust me on this one) Flight with what we don't see yet, like AI, car traffic (I see roads in Flight), airliners (I see international airport in Flight) and bigger area, a lot more peoples may slowly drift into Flight, buy more content and neglect FSX (addons wise).

This is only my 2 cents on why some 3PD are scared of Flight....

Be patient peoples.....Prepar3D is making improvements on their sim, XP-10 is also improving their sim....what do you think MS is doing with Flight as we speak....yes you got it....improving it. ...........end of quote.

[Hiflyer 129]

I now seen the moon (not sure the moon phases are right though) but even though I am on max settings and clear skies I have not seen a single star. The night sky is just a solid black here.

As the beta forum is still up, this has been reported as a possible bug, though what actually seems to be happening is that faint stars are being swallowed in moon glow.

[KarstenS 180]

Be patient peoples.....Prepar3D is making improvements on their sim, XP-10 is also improving their sim....what do you think MS is doing with Flight as we speak....yes you got it....improving it.

I must6 admit: I don't think so. Most of these changes would mean changes in the Core of the Sim. If you look at their cost structure I am pretty certain that they have a totally different agenda: Sell content.

Don't forget: They didn't earn anything till now. They might add some game elements or change the mission structure, but I think changes for the core engine are right now mostly bug fixes. FIrst they have to demonstrate to Microsoft, that they can earn their keep, that their business model works. Everything else is secondary.

They have to hold their users in the game.

[Hiflyer 129]

I must6 admit: I don't think so. Most of these changes would mean changes in the Core of the Sim. If you look at their cost structure I am pretty certain that they have a totally different agenda: Sell content.

Don't forget: They didn't earn anything till now. They might add some game elements or change the mission structure, but I think changes for the core engine are right now mostly bug fixes. FIrst they have to demonstrate to Microsoft, that they can earn their keep, that their business model works. Everything else is secondary.

They have to hold their users in the game.

This kind of assumes the core is even finished (whatever that means, in this context) which is an open question.

For instance, is the XP10 core "finished?"

[alainneedle1 32]

This kind of assumes the core is even finished (whatever that means, in this context) which is an open question.

For instance, is the XP10 core "finished?"

+1, I don't know why peoples are not getting it.....sigh

@ Karsten, do you really think that MS deleted everything from FSX just to keep Hawaii.....seriously....why did I say all there but locked...think about it for a sec., they are implementing Flight as XP-10 is been implemented or any other platform, adding stuff and making sure what ever they will add will work as good as possible...again, exactly like XP-10 is doing.

just think about this for a sec., MS was working with 3PD developers before shutting them down so from there what were the 3PD developers working on...Hawaii only....naaaaaa....MS can do that by themself right, so they had to work on something else...other regions maybe?

They were talking with PMDG, what for....to make a big tube to fly around Hawaii only...again naaaaaaaa.

So if you take a step back and look at the whole situation, what does make sense to you knowing that big house 3PD like Orbx were involved with MS before been shut down.....Hawaii only?

Trust me on this one, MS did not shut down 3PD just because they had nothing better to do, the problem with 3PD developers is deeper.

Hawaii is just the starting point, I'm not saying that MS will have all kind of DLC including North America in the next month or two but are we not buying small part of the world as of now for FSX, Antartica just to take this one, or airport from 3PD.....I know FSX is the whole world....if you ask me I like the idea that I can buy only places where I like to fly....some peoples are flying over Orbx scenery only, as far as I know Orbx does not cover the entire world.....

As for my post # 94..... it's right on target.

[KarstenS 180]

This kind of assumes the core is even finished (whatever that means, in this context) which is an open question.

For instance, is the XP10 core "finished?"

XP 10 has a different background. It is more based on Linux traditions, or even in current commercial buisness programming models. It is quite normal that customers who urgently need a new feature skip a better testing. This is something that XP does with its beta versions.

But Flight has a different problem: They have to face Judgement by Microsoft! Ifg they don't pass the whole project might be dismantled pretty fast. It is obvious that they promised their management that they would achieve much better results in the Gamers market, so they have to prove, that they can sell (!) 6their product to them. Hardcore fans can't help them.

AI planes contradict the purpose of a net aware program that you can use together with friends. Long distance flights need additional infrastructure that that you can't charge so easily and if you add the missions that you have to develop to teach a normal guy how to handle a Heacy Metal plane...

And if the rumours are true and the next project is alaska road traffic doesn't get a high priority either.