First Screenshots of Flight Published!

[BrandonF]

[quote]Keep in mind that these shots are bait - embellished beyond default to attract potential buyers.

[John Crouse]

I have read all posts here and have a couple of things to add, I have read and heard talk that Flight will not be backwards compatible with FSX add-ons so they can have a whole new engine that will be less taxing on average hardware systems. We as simmers can't have it both ways. As far as it being much better graphics than FSX thats just not the case with the add-ons such as was mentioned earlier. With REX-Overdrive and GEX and ORBX PNW scenery and some others the scenery is nothing short of awesome with good hardware such as i7 9... and 6 gigs of 1600 ram and a GTX460 or above GPU and some great tweaks availible here and a couple other sites you can achive great frames, smooth flight and outstanding graphics. I will take a flight at Tampa International and post a screeny that will look better than those posted by Flight. 

[John Crouse]

Here is 1 shot

[kev13479]

with all the addons for FSX today (e.g. REX) ... i dont see much difference :-?

[kev13479]

sorry, disreguard that, looks much better when i look at it for a while, but now your probably going to have to buy an amazing computer to get this at a decent frame rate.

[Rocket_Bird]

[quote]I have read all posts here and have a couple of things to add, I have read and heard talk that Flight will not be backwards compatible with FSX add-ons so they can have a whole new engine that will be less taxing on average hardware systems. We as simmers can't have it both ways. As far as it being much better graphics than FSX thats just not the case with the add-ons such as was mentioned earlier. With REX-Overdrive and GEX and ORBX PNW scenery and some others the scenery is nothing short of awesome with good hardware such as i7 9... and 6 gigs of 1600 ram and a GTX460 or above GPU and some great tweaks availible here and a couple other sites you can achive great frames, smooth flight and outstanding graphics. I will take a flight at Tampa International and post a screeny that will look better than those posted by Flight.

[Spindrift]

I strongly agree with the two previous posts, I can get the same quality visuals as your sceenshot John, only on my modest box it's running at about 10-15 fps... these early samples are still far away from the final development, and even if it wasn't, we'll achieve that same scene as we did in FS9 and FSX, the same way you just did, with add-ons.

the question here is not so much "How does it look?" as much as it is "How does it run?". I'll be very pleased to have a comprehensive Flight Sim run beautifully on my little (and moderately affordable) set-up.

ps. @RocketBird

[quote]TBH, I see a lot of great looking games nowadays that really don't need top-end hardware to run... games that look so real that I can almost touch my screen and feel whats there.

[Travis]

The problem isn't having a sim that runs great with a beautiful system, which those of you that have posted recently posses: the real issue is being able to run the sim on a system that is not dedicated to the sim.

I ran FS9 on my last system (which I no longer have) beautifully.  Nearly maxed, and it ran great.  However, I tried the teaser release of FSX, and had between 12 and 15 FPS, so I was not willing to even purchase the release.  Let alone the upgrades.  So I haven't been impressed in any way with the latest that MS has come out with.

But with Flight, I'm expecting (re: hoping) for some good things.  I know it's way too early to tell, but if they rewrite the basic programming, we'll get a much better game.  With legacy software, you get shackled into sacrificing quality for efficiency.  Not good enough . . .

[XxRazgrizxX]

Addons might make FSX look good too but whats the point. Sure for some FSX is great but it has a few problems

1. Addons can yes make it look good. Although of all the addons for FSX ive tried (GEX, REX, UTX...) It looks like a waste of money if the default Flight looks like the pictures suggest. Plus. MOST addons cost a decent amount of money.

2. FSX being so outdated is so under optimized for todays machines that one person with a Dual core might be able to run it better than someone else with a Quad core. Ex. I have a ATI 4870 1gb with a Phenom II X4 940 @ 3.2ghz with 8gb of DDR3....on MEDIUM settings....im lucky to get 10-15 frames a second. Its a total crap shoot and its because of poor optimization by Mirosoft.




And besides to have a DEFAULT sim look that good without any addons means more money in our pockets, and if its properly optimized it will run 20x smoother than FSX ever could have hoped. Which would mean you wouldn't need a super computer to run it.

I don't understand why some people cant have faith

[Daube]

[quote] However, I tried the teaser release of FSX, and had between 12 and 15 FPS, so I was not willing to even purchase the release.

[Al_Fallujah]

But I see a Maule in the screen shots.
That makes me happy.

Don't know what it is, but I like those little buggers.

[DaveSims]

FS9 with add-ons can look as good as FSX
FSX with add-ons can look as good as Flight

Imagine where Flight with add-ons will take us.

All I hope for is they take the time to make the program efficient, providing plenty of eye candy while being able to function well on the average machine, not a $4000 super gamer system.  It can be done, they just have to make the program run efficiently. 

I remember back to ten years ago.  FS98 ran great, FS2000 was a dog, then came FS2002.  I could run FS2002 great on a system that would barely get FS2000 going.

[Keep It Simple]

I don't think there is anyway FSX can look as good as Flight.

For one thing,

[Spindrift]

But I see a Maule in the screen shots.
That makes me happy.

Don't know what it is, but I like those little buggers.

Me too! Most Amazing yet Underappreciated fLight Equipment...

@ Davysims - Yes, just imagine where FLIGHT with add-ons could take us!

[smiley=beer.gif]

[John Crouse]

You guys amaze me, you bad mouth a great flightsim like FSX and all that it can do and yet say that Flight will be sooo much better when in fact we don't even know for sure that it will support anything short of a glorified online game.

Please do some research about how to make FSX all it can be with some simple tweaks and on a computer that can be built for less than $1500.00 and run and make FSX work amazing.

Microsoft left us high and dry once when they fired Aces, what makes you think its going to be any different this time!

Good luck with Flight your new wonderful sim, I will stick with something that works just great!