Pure Default Comparison

The latest and discontinued 'Flight' Game from Microsoft -

Pure Default Comparison

Postby Flight Ace » Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:38 am

I am one of those simmers that waited for a long time for FS-11, then we were presented with Microsoft Flight.
1.   Chaser MK-1 Full Tower ATX Computer Case
2.   Core i7 3770K 1155 Processor OC to 4.7 GHz
3.   ASUS Maximus V Gene Motherboard
4.   EVGA GTX580 1536MB Video Card
5.   16 GB C8 G.SKI
Flight Ace
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:59 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby Flight Ace » Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:17 am

"Now envision how these screens will look after reinstalling my complimentary Add-ons collected over the past six years?"

Here are three screens taken after adding a few add-ons, REX, UTX, and GEX (no Mega Scenery).

For me, the Cumu clouds and tropical water are fabulous.
Image

This is Honolulu International Airport come to life. There are nine aircraft parked at their gates, and three other aircraft to the right of me taxiing for takeoff (I'm flying the plane).
Image

Climbing out over the Hawaiian mountains with realistic terrain, sky, and water can't get much better than this.
Image

And in response to "Is it just me" Post .........NO. I don't know what the Microsoft's marketing intentions were but in a world of being politically correct, they goofed with this one.
1.   Chaser MK-1 Full Tower ATX Computer Case
2.   Core i7 3770K 1155 Processor OC to 4.7 GHz
3.   ASUS Maximus V Gene Motherboard
4.   EVGA GTX580 1536MB Video Card
5.   16 GB C8 G.SKI
Flight Ace
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:59 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby Thai09 » Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:12 pm

Awesome, just awesome!

I think we all will enjoy FSX more and more, and that
Last edited by Thai09 on Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thai09
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:47 am

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby andy190 » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:34 pm

Flight is designed for people who think FSX is too hard-core & difficult.

MS bargained on the fact that people who have Flight would prefer an easy to use game with ok graphics rather than a sim with great graphics that is very realistic.
Image

Intel Core i5-2310 CPU @ 2.90GHz, 6GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6450, Windows 7 Professional 64 bit, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro
User avatar
andy190
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1376
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:16 am
Location: Havelock North, NZ

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby ilikerio » Wed Apr 04, 2012 7:40 pm

The only thing Flight has to offer that FSX doesn't... Is crashes.
User avatar
ilikerio
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:09 pm

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby matthewdev » Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:30 am

Flight is designed for people who think FSX is too hard-core & difficult.


Well said. Exactly the same for car games vs sims. I play the car 'games' as I'm not hard core enough for the car simulators :D
User avatar
matthewdev
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:08 am
Location: Hobart

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby Flight Ace » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:18 am

Flight is designed for people who think FSX is too hard-core & difficult.

MS bargained on the fact that people who have Flight would prefer an easy to use game with ok graphics rather than a sim with great graphics that is very realistic.



Look at it this way, Microsoft is still printing and selling FSX while putting on the market a flight game aimed at those who, as you put it, prefer a package that is easier to manage and probably friendlier with older PCs. The end result is that most hard core Flight Simmers, like myself, will buy at least one package out of curiosity while a gate is opened to a whole new breed of customers. When one makes a comparison between the two and depending on a person's taste, the probable result will be buying FSX or MF, both being sold by Microsoft. How can they lose? What Microsoft did was to add an alternative product to FSX. Lets face it, what more could they have added to FSX in a FS-11 version that has not already been added by Third Party Software Developers?
Last edited by Flight Ace on Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
1.   Chaser MK-1 Full Tower ATX Computer Case
2.   Core i7 3770K 1155 Processor OC to 4.7 GHz
3.   ASUS Maximus V Gene Motherboard
4.   EVGA GTX580 1536MB Video Card
5.   16 GB C8 G.SKI
Flight Ace
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:59 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby jetprop » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:23 am

Flight is designed for people who think FSX is too hard-core & difficult.

MS bargained on the fact that people who have Flight would prefer an easy to use game with ok graphics rather than a sim with great graphics that is very realistic.



Look at it this way, Microsoft is still printing and selling FSX while putting on the market a flight game aimed at those who, as you put it, prefer a package that is easier to manage and probably friendlier with older PCs. The end result is that most hard core Flight Simmers, like myself, will buy at least one package out of curiosity while a gate is opened to a whole new breed of customers. When one makes a comparison between the two and depending on a person's taste, the probable result will be buying FSX or MF, both being sold by Microsoft. How can they lose? What Microsoft did was to add an alternative product to FSX. Lets face it, what more could they have added to FSX in a FS-11 version that has not already been added by Third Party Software Developers?


This could also be a marketing strategy.
They release a flight game,some of the newcomers might be interested in a more realistic sim or can't afford the packages,( ::))so,they look for an alternative:FSX,wich MS is still publishing.
So this would make us all happy,possibly more simmers on our side,MS gets their money even if the customers step up from flight.
Image
User avatar
jetprop
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1518
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 10:03 am
Location: a chair infront of a monitor.

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby Thai09 » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:38 pm

"Lets face it, what more could they have added to FSX in a FS-11 version that has not already been added by Third Party Software Developers?"

They could have fixed the terrible autogen and cloud popping + a load of other problems!

I think the suits pushed the product before it was actually completed..

Anyway, this is history now, enjoy what we have.

:)
Thai09
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:47 am

Re: Pure Default Comparison

Postby Flight Ace » Tue Apr 10, 2012 11:48 am

"Lets face it, what more could they have added to FSX in a FS-11 version that has not already been added by Third Party Software Developers?"

They could have fixed the terrible autogen and cloud popping + a load of other problems!

I think the suits pushed the product before it was actually completed..

Anyway, this is history now, enjoy what we have.

:)


Thai,

I believe you misunderstood what I meant by that statement.

I meant that FSX including the sum total of all improvements by Microsoft plus external sources is what I envisioned a FS11 to represent. And with the availability of GTX, UTX, REX, Mega Scenry, aircraft, vehicles, cities, airports, animals, birds - on and on, what is left to be added?

What makes the Microsoft Flight Simulator(FSX being the tenth release) so robust and realistic is that it has always been open to you, Me, or any entrepreneur anywhere in the world to add content. Because of this, over the years, successful worldwide software development businesses have emerged for the sole purpose of improving the product. Added to this are the many other individual contributers. This openness is missing with Microsoft Flight.

I don't know what you mean by your statement "terrible autogen and cloud popping + a load of other problems!". I have no problems with FSX or MF.

Now on another note, I have included my last add-on (Mega Scenry Earth) to Hawaai. Here are three screens that speak for themselves - the difference between Microsof Flight and FSX.

Microsft Flight
Image

FSX - This is how it really looks.
Image

FSX - The lower cloud covers partially Diamond Head.
Image
1.   Chaser MK-1 Full Tower ATX Computer Case
2.   Core i7 3770K 1155 Processor OC to 4.7 GHz
3.   ASUS Maximus V Gene Motherboard
4.   EVGA GTX580 1536MB Video Card
5.   16 GB C8 G.SKI
Flight Ace
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:59 pm
Location: Virginia


Return to Microsoft 'Flight'

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 90 guests