Any opinion for quite a while will be pure speculation. I will continue to fly FSX until Flight is released and we can read some hands on reviews and see some real time game play video. That way there will be less disappointment if expectations are not met. Assuming Microsoft's intentions and plans are like reading Tarot cards.

Any opinion for quite a while will be pure speculation. I will continue to fly FSX until Flight is released and we can read some hands on reviews and see some real time game play video. That way there will be less disappointment if expectations are not met. Assuming Microsoft's intentions and plans are like reading Tarot cards.

Same here except I will also be waiting 12-18 months for the first releases of 3rd party addons.Mark.

Bill,I'm picturing the new Flight development team sitting in a conference room reading this thread and having a good chuckle, just like a group of kids after they've put some tape on a cats tail...Ted

Seriously,  what happens when you place tape on a cats tail... hopefully, I not the only one that doesn't have a clue.

Just watched new webisode and only one word comes to mind: fail.

Hey,I think that the new video looks quite promising. I particularly like the new shading, especially at the start with the trees(?) casting soft shadows onto the aircraft. Did anyone notice the reflection of the engine onto the prop? Dynamic reflections?I am keeping an open mind about this; I doubt the feature list has been frozen, and I am fine with that. I look forward to it's release.

I, too, thought 'wow', this looks almost identical to FSX.But Flight is still probably over a year away, and with solid competition coming up from the next version of X-Plane and maybe Aerosoft, I wouldn't write-off Flight yet based on a few seconds of video.Only real good thing I got out of that video is that if it is in fact something akin to an FSX SP3, then maybe the SDKs will be the same.You guys realize that if Flight is a complete re-write with a brand new SDK structure, it could take quite a while for us 3rd party devs to get up to speed with the thing, meaning that it could be a long time before you see the high-end addons that the people on this forum tend to like.Just remember how long it took a lot of devs to get up to speed with FSX, especially in the scenery department :( My two cents.

But given what most here say, that would not be a problem for the 3rd party devs as most simmers seem to indicate they will stay with FSX for a long time.The devs will apparently still have a ready FSX market while they "get up to speed with the thing".It is interesting though that quite a few of the current FSX users also said the same thing about FS2004 and how they would not move away (some even contemplating missing the FSX iteration entirely), but eventually they came around to the FSX world. Having used this franchise since SubLogic Flight Simulator Version 1, apart from the first 10 years or so, I have the distinct recollection that the same old story is repeated every time a new version is released.

You guys realize that if Flight is a complete re-write with a brand new SDK structure, it could take quite a while for us 3rd party devs to get up to speed with the thing, meaning that it could be a long time before you see the high-end addons that the people on this forum tend to like.

I think people would wait, if the wait was worth a while. I mean eventually they'll (MS) have to make the giant step and re-write the code completely if they'll want to stay on top of their game. Unless they'll start implementing changes with each upcoming release gradually.

I think I speak for most FS9er's. Looking at the video if 'Flight' is released running well on machines of the day (meaning I can buy a new machine and get pretty good performance out the 'Flight') this will be the version we upgrade to. The tables may be flipped as the FS9 crowd will turn into the forward movers and the FSX crowd will be like the FS9 crowd of today staying with the older technology. I can see the argument that what we're seeing in the video is not much of an improvement over FSX with add-ons (sounds like a familiar argument). By contrast 'Flight' is a big improvement over FS9 especially if they fix what what was broken in FSX. 'Flight' doesn't have to be a big improvement over FSX in the visual department. As long as the fix what's under the hood like better ATC, weather, and sim performance where we don't need to wait 3+ years for it to run reasonably well, we're sold...

<br />I think I speak for most FS9er's.  Looking at the video if 'Flight' is released running well on machines of the day (meaning I can buy a new machine and get pretty good performance out the 'Flight') this will be the version we upgrade to.  The tables may be flipped as the FS9 crowd will turn into the forward movers and the FSX crowd will be like the FS9 crowd of today staying with the older technology.  I can see the argument that what we're seeing in the video is not much of an improvement over FSX with add-ons (sounds like a familiar argument).  By contrast 'Flight' is a big improvement over FS9 especially if they fix what what was broken in FSX.  'Flight' doesn't have to be a big improvement over FSX in the visual department.  As long as the fix what's under the hood like better ATC, weather, and sim performance where we don't need to wait 3+ years for it to run reasonably well, we're sold...<br />

<br /><br /><br />I think that about sums it up! If you are an FS9 user the Flight video will blow you away. If you are used to FSX running Orbx PNW and some of the excellent addon aircraft available, the video isn't going to be all that impressive.

<br /><br /><br />I think that about sums it up! If you are an FS9 user the Flight video will blow you away. If you are used to FSX running Orbx PNW and some of the excellent addon aircraft available, the video isn't going to be all that impressive.

HelloDid not blow me away to be honest and I use both FS9 and FSX.

The video is way too short to form any kind of opinion, don't be ridiculous people.

The video is way too short to form any kind of opinion, don't be ridiculous people.

Who cares about how long it is? It's what it shows that matters. And what it appears to show is that this isn't a sim built from the "ground up". Maybe that won't be true in the end, but it's not an unreasonable conclusion to draw from the video.

Who cares about how long it is? It's what it shows that matters. And what it appears to show is that this isn't a sim built from the "ground up". Maybe that won't be true in the end, but it's not an unreasonable conclusion to draw from the video.

So it may not be built from the ground up, who really cares? FSX with liposuction ain't bad at all. I'd like to be able to run FSX maxed out on something like a 1090t or I5-750 without overclocking its nuts off, if Flight delivers on this, its again no bad thing.FSX is only FS9 in new clothes, and some aspects are worse than FS9, ignoring performance issues.

Who cares about how long it is? It's what it shows that matters. And what it appears to show is that this isn't a sim built from the "ground up". Maybe that won't be true in the end, but it's not an unreasonable conclusion to draw from the video.

No one ever said the sim would be built from the ground up, in fact no one said anything about the sim. We don't know jack sh..t about it at this point other than some short teasers.