has any asked the ms flight requirements to run on the computer

[bombardier]

hello:
I did not see the list of requirements to run on the computer for this ms flight. if its anytthing like fsx I'll get it. I get good fps and everything is working fine with no glitches.  I just hope its made for use in w7. I do not know if fsx and all the planes I downloaded if fsx will work with w7. I do not know if there may be issues or errors or what ever would like to know and see what other members are saying about that and the ms flight.

please let me know thanks in advance

bombardier

[Steve M]

I'm sure Microsoft's Flight would be compatable with Microsoft's current operating systems. I really have no doubt! As far as system requirements, the minimums listed on the FSX box would hardly get you 5 frames per second so even when they release Flights minimums I would have to see it to believe it.

[Travis]

Careful there, Steve: showing your age . . . some of these kids don't remember black and white TV.  Hell, I'm sort of one of them.  If my stepdad hadn't had a small 12" B&W, I would never have seen a TV show without a color TV.

As for the requirements: I'm sure "F"( ) will be compatible with Win7 (if it's still the primary version at that point) as well as Vista if it's still around.  I compare Vista to ME, which was only in use for about a year before MS decided they had screwed up badly and released XP.  As for min requirements, I would take the current system specs that can run FS9 and pretty much double it.

[Slotback]

One of the biggest complaints with FSX was its enormous system requirements (for anything that was considered acceptable gameplay). On top of that, often a modified FS9 would look and run better than stock FSX. Given Microsoft isn't stupid, I would expect MS Flight to run reasonably well on the days mid-range hardware (slow quad core, 3gb RAM, GTX 460 in my opinion).


Of course, I could be completely wrong. But if I am wrong then that means Microsoft is stupid and doesn't learn from their mistakes...

[Rocket_Bird]

I would take the current system specs that can run FS9 and pretty much double it.

1 ghz single-core, 256 megs of ram, and a 16 meg video-card? I'll take that any day! 

Quite seriously though, I certainly hope Microsoft learned from their mistakes with FSX.  I'm running a pretty recent though modest system with a near-to-top tier video card, and I still can't max out FSX sliders in some areas.  It seems that you need a custom-built gaming rig with today's technology to accomplish that... and FSX was released like 4 years ago? 

If Flight runs even remotely as horrible as FSX on a mainstream computer, I'll probably end up holding my wallet for another quarter of a decade. 

[Travis]

Sorry, should have said "I would take the current system specs that can run FS9 well and pretty much double it."

[Northwest 102]

I have a pretty old computer myself (Dell built in 2003).  It's good enough to run Flight Simulator 2002 but not much over that.

When Microsoft Flight is released, what would you recommend me buying to run the program?

Mike

[Slotback]

[quote]I have a pretty old computer myself (Dell built in 2003).

[Northwest 102]

NNNG,

Thank you very much.  How do you judge processor speeds nowdays?  I'm not that old, only 27, but I've lost track of the race for speed long ago.  I know that running muliple processors is more efficient than running just one.  That's about it.  How much do you think harware will change before Flight comes out?  There's no release date yet right?

Mike

[BrandonF]

All we can do is speculate about what Flight will run best on. Until it's released and the community has time to experiment with it, we really shouldn't try and determine what kind of a system will run it.

@ Northwest 102: No, a release date has not been given, but many people guess that it could come out by December 2011/January 2012.

[Slotback]

[quote]NNNG,

Thank you very much.

[JBaymore]

But if I am wrong then that means Microsoft is stupid and doesn't learn from their mistakes...

Hummmmmm........ "Win ME"....."Vista"....... where does that put things?   ;)

best,

................john

[Travis]

I don't think MS is dumb, they're just overzealous.  They get a project to the beta stage and can't wait to show the rest of the world, so they ship it with an annoying amount of bugs in it, but figure they can shore that leak up after the release so that they get everyone dancing on their toes for the next update.  Meanwhile, we poor saps that bought the cargo are sitting around waiting for the updates and wondering where our processor power went . . .

But that's okay.  We (sorta) forgive you, MS, since you have brought us such righteous programs in the past.  And we are fully willing to admit that we are addicted and ready to have more s(t)im in our lives, as long as you provide a quality product.

Don't make us regret this decision in the morning: deliver the goods as promised!

[JBaymore]

I actually think the "premature release" syndrome is likely part of a strategic business model.  Why pay talented and expensive programming staff to spend $$ time in late beta testing stuff when you can get a huge field of people doing that totally for free. 

As long as it is not TOO buggy at release..... history has proven that many, many people will keep buying these kinds of Microsoft products, keep bitching about them, waiting for the patches and work-arounds, but then simply buying the next release again.  And repeating the cycle over and over.

best,

................john

[Northwest 102]

I often wonder if any Microsoft developers look into these forums to get ideas or feedback about their product?
Btw: 1000th POST!