Leaked picture!

[Daube]

People should stop trying to see the sim as a final product.
The sim is just a platform, on which you are meant to install addons.

It's not MS's task to make everyplace on earth look beautifull and detailled. MS's task is to develop a system that allows any developper to create sceneries as easilly and precisely as he wants. That system includes a big variety of landclasses, the ability to read and display high resolution meshes and ground textures, the ability to read and display high amounts of autogen objects etc... Thanks to this system, you were able to get OrbX-style sceneries, or ultra-precise photosceneries, and other things that cannot even exist in previous versions of the sim.

It's not MS's task to provide Accusim-like airplanes. MS's task is to develop a system and an API that allow plane creators to simulate anything they want. This system includes various features like animations, flight model handling, APIs for communication with external programes, SDK, etc... Thanks to this system, you could get new airplanes with unmatched level of details and realism (VRS + soon TacPac , Accusim aircrafts, PMDG etc...) with again, stuff that could not even be imagined on previous sim versions.

What MS includes in the sim is pure bonus to start with, to help you discover the new sim, that's all. Default SABA suck just like 99% of the airports on the virtual earth, that's a fact. Another fact is that MS has created the sim in such a way that you can replace them.

Finally, when it comes to the amount of CPU power that will be required to run Flight, or XPlane10, or even the amount of money required to run FSX after the SP2, it's always the same story. If people would stop trying to push the settings to the max, they could get some nice performances and "nice-enough" visuals. How many times could we read complains like "if it doesn't run on max settings, then it sucks" ? How smart is that ? How many people actually tried to set the FSX settings on the same level of details than FS9 ?

Yes, you will probably need a 10 000$ computer to run Flight or XPlane10 on max settings at more than 10 FPS... Or you can just keep your 1000$ computer (or less, if you don't change the screen, keyboard, mouse, speakers, joysticks and I don't know what else again) and set the game settings a bit more wisely, trying to focus on the feaures instead of the visuals

[Slotback]

Everyone Marveled at FSX right before it came out, only to be let down on FPS and scenery that was a tiny bit better than FS9, it was, but not by much.

I agree. Actually I'll take it a step further. In my opinion, on the average mid-end gaming system of the day, FSX actually looked worse than a highly modified FS9 and ran worse. In my opinion, that was completely unacceptable. I'll tell you now, even the best computers of the day were probably not even capable of running FSX properly at the settings the screenshots were taken at. That and the DX10 picture was faked (remember this?) which was misleading. And I agree that it's misleading that they have screenshots of the few areas that have really good graphics, then say they have 24,000 airports which do not have this level of quality... however... with that said...

It is totally unreasonable for MSFS to have every single aircraft at PMDG quality, and all airports at orbx level, while still selling the sim for $60. We have addons because we can expand on what Microsoft did. We can make it better and far more realistic than vanilla MSFS.

[jetprop]

exactely

'everything can be improved' someone once said.(don't have a clue who)
fs is the same.
if the default isn't good then you can improve it so you have something to do.
they improve the standard game so its a bit it is easier and new possibilities open.

BUT i still think flight is going to be good,i just don't know about the performence.but i think i heard something about flight running in a different way from fsx.

[Steve M]

Exactly why I posted my last comment. The much maligned Microsoft will not be able to deliver a complete platform in Flight because of external pressures. On the other hand and contrary to popular opinion, I think FSX and Acc. were brilliant pieces of work that challenged simmers to climb to newer heights. People are still buying FSX to this day. And then they migrate to the forums for advice as I did.     

[alrot]

and contrary to popular opinion, I think FSX and Acc. were brilliant pieces of work that challenged simmers to climb to newer heights. People are still buying FSX to this day.

I agree too ,but its today when FSX can run decently and because of the add on developers who has perform and improve FSX in all its aspects
what I mean to say that FSX brought too many problems in the beginning that Both service pack didn't fix the root of these problems and many are still in it, and at one point many were like trying to hide it ,ahver you heard the " If FSX can't run well, Is your machine's fault" I wonder if M$ paid to those guys

I openly said now I love FSX more than ever ,I can't start any FSX model until I see if I can export my actual airplanes to the new "Flight" format other wise I would loose my work ..

I really would like to start a new or resume another citation but not until I see what's M$ will bring us
I think this company can't be such of idiots and do what the gossips says , as Bill Leaming says Maybe Flight Will be a nice surprise and maybe even will accept FSX Mdls too,who really knows?
No buddy knows for sure ,they would win much more money with this than Make a whole different way of modeling and make a closed games with M$ forums only that sounds more like rumors, Lets have a little faith ,shall we?    

[Boikat]

Even if MS shuts out FSX .mdl, there will always be FSX. It will still be around the same way FS2004 is still very much alive and kicking.

[Daube]

Alrot, I've got this bad feeling that you should probably test your exports for XPlane10 instead of Flight...
But I hope I'm wrong. The lack of consistent news about Flight is getting me more and more pessimistic, I have to say :/

[Capt.Propwash]

as far as 3rd party designers and M$'s control over how new products are released, M$ Flight App store for example only....... being that we the people are not owned by micro$oft and none of us are idiots by any means... Who said that we the people MUST upload our designs to THEIR download store (be it freeware or payware) and THEY control the app/download item from there.

[Boikat]

And besides, again, FSX, FS9, FS8... will not "self delete" from you HD when Flight is released. 

What Capt. P said is something i've also said before:  How is MS going to stop an independant designer from developing their own Flight addons and distributing them? No matter what they would try (if they were to try to prevent "unauthorized addons") someone would figure out a workaround within a matter of minutes or hours, anyway.

Besides, if they did manage to have some sort of "lockout" that prevented addons that could not be worked around, Flight will not be much of a success since *we still have the FS series*.  Coupled with faster computers, I don't see FSX or any of the other FS's going away, nor do I see any limits for FSX.

I'd be willing to bet that in five or six years, someone could create an animated "Mountain Banshee" from Avatar for FSX, and it would be fliable, with flapping wings and Na'vi rider, full articulation, and so on, and not kill the frame rates.

[Hagar]

[quote]What Capt. P said is something i've also said before:

[hyperpep111]

Exactly.

We have fsx, Look at all the modifications by striking software, HDEv2, EnB bloom e.t.c They've completely changed the fsx graphically. It's only a matter of time until we figure out how to put cloud shadows and water that changes with the weather. (e.g Stormy/rough water) and so many more improvements. So if M$ Cannot deliver, We can stay in fsx/9 and change to flightgear/Xplane. Mr. Ballmer should remember that in windows 8

[Boikat]

[quote][quote]What Capt. P said is something i've also said before:

[jetprop]

well...
i once made a mistake.
i once bought a second-hand fs 2002(wich we never installed) and then i found out fsx was out.
what a waste of money

[Hagar]

[quote][quote][quote]What Capt. P said is something i've also said before:

[Fozzer]

When it comes to On-line Multiplayer, I have always enjoyed joining in, in either Solo or Multiplayer Flights, for many years, all round the World, with all my friends, in FS 2002 and FS 2004 with all the ease, and instant free connectivity of FS Host...(or even personal IP address to IP address!).... ...!

With FSX, Multiplayer became a bit of a difficulty, (apparently), due to the MS insistence in using their own, complicated system for connecting to the Internet, which may be the reason why we see so little FSX Multiplayer activity, (including me), compared to FS 2002 and FS 2004?

The simple, drop-down, Menu system used to connect to On-Line Multiplayer in FS 2004 is so simple and straightforward, I see no reason to change it for future versions of the Flight Sim, (which included FSX!)...!

Paul....FS 2004...FS Navigator...and Multiplayer!.... 8-)...!