MS Flight

[penta_a 432]

I think the idea is, if FSX (or previous simulators) were correctly coded, no one will waste his/her time trying to tweak to get it right (with a high end computer).code MFS correctly and let people enjoy there time flying instead of forcing them to tweak.thanks

[mgh 89]

I think the idea is, if FSX (or previous simulators) were correctly coded, no one will waste his/her time trying to tweak to get it right (with a high end computer).code MFS correctly and let people enjoy there time flying instead of forcing them to tweak.thanks

How do you (and others who make the same claim) know FS isn't correctly coded - do you have access to the source code?

[Guest veeray]

I can only think of one person involved in reverse engineering the binaries ....

[Guest]

I think the idea is, if FSX (or previous simulators) were correctly coded, no one will waste his/her time trying to tweak to get it right (with a high end computer).code MFS correctly and let people enjoy there time flying instead of forcing them to tweak.thanks

I agree, there were so many faults on FSX SP3 to lugh for a whole week. A tiny but self explanatory example ? Few bottons on the 737 and 747 3D virtual cockpit were not functioning...... after 3 SPs this makes me laugh a lot on MS skills...assuming they know the meaning of this word.Not to mention the fact that despiting FSX was released within 2006 it used no GPU power at all but only CPU power, single core ones BTW, even if in 2006 dual core had already been released since a while.FSX was one of the most bugged games of the story and only the passion of the simmers, modders, third party software houses ( example REX product ) rendered it a bit playable and enjoyable.MS owns the worst CV in terms of Flight simulation and the premises for Flight are even worst, this must be highlighted by fans since now, avoiding MS to use excuses when they will justify themselves to have released a crappy aracade game.Am I slightly harsh on that ? Nope mates, you will see in spring-summer 2012 when Flight is supposed to hit the shelves.

[Tierborn 191]

".........Am I slightly harsh on that ? Nope mates, you will see in spring-summer 2012 when Flight is supposed to hit the shelves."

Where did you get the release timing .. or did you just speculate?

[penta_a 432]

How do you (and others who make the same claim) know FS isn't correctly coded - do you have access to the source code?

I know because I bought a very advanced computer and yet I can not run a highly modeled aircraft (PMDG MD-11 or B747-400X) on it smoothly, (yes it does run default Cessna very very smoothly). I still get that slide show at busy airports with my computer (specification in my signature bellow). and that tells me when technology advances, FSX should get faster and better but nothing of that is happening.thanks

[mmann 72]

From a Microsoft business point of view the coding is near perfect! Good enough to get people to buy it and bad enough to get people to buy the next version.Regards, Mike Mann

[n4gix 4,955]

I agree, there were so many faults on FSX SP3 to lugh for a whole week. A tiny but self explanatory example ? Few bottons on the 737 and 747 3D virtual cockpit were not functioning...... after 3 SPs this makes me laugh a lot on MS skills...assuming they know the meaning of this word.

What "SP3?" Unless you're thinking that the addon pack Acceleration was "SP3," which it wasn't of course.All of the defects and/or omissions in the 737 and 747 are contained in the compiled ..._interior.mdl file and the embedded XML scripts, which none of the service packs addressed.

[mgh 89]

I know because I bought a very advanced computer and yet I can not run a highly modeled aircraft (PMDG MD-11 or B747-400X) on it smoothly, (yes it does run default Cessna very very smoothly). I still get that slide show at busy airports with my computer (specification in my signature bellow). and that tells me when technology advances, FSX should get faster and better but nothing of that is happening.thanks

Perhaps you should blame PMDG for badly coding its model, making it too complex for FSX on your system.It isn't Microsoft's responsibility to cater for any 3rd party's add-ons users may wish to install.

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

Am I slightly harsh on that ? Nope mates, you will see in spring-summer 2012 when Flight is supposed to hit the shelves.

Yes, you are being harsh.Honestly, after his stupid webisode joke, do you think the spring-summer release date is true? Microsoft hasn't given out any info on Flight. It's just speculation.Also, there is no service pack 3 for FSX.

[Chock 17,769]

Service Pack three for FSX is more commonly known as REX and Active Sky LOLAl

[Guest jahman]

Service Pack three for FSX is more commonly known as REX and Active Sky LOLAl

And there I was thinking SP3 was MS Flight...Cheers,- jahman.

[Chock 17,769]

You could be right, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.Al

[Guest]

Where did you get the release timing .. or did you just speculate?

That's not speculation.During last 30 years I learned how to gauge the release date with a good degree of precision after analyzing infos, press releases, videos, promos, demos etc....Two of the three videos have not been taken from the game , they are simply a cheap rendering exercise, made just to announce a brand new fashion game. The third video is clearly light years before a rough pre-alpha stage. I would dare to say that the code is compiled in the first couple of lines only.Told that, even stones would agree that it would be insane imagining a release before AT LEAST a year and a half. Maybe Fall 2012 would be more appropriate as forecast.In addition nowdays it is a common practice announcing a new game at least a year before the release, usually a year and a half it is the thumb rule if the marketing dept want to maximize the advertising effect given by media. The Witcher 2 for example has been announced a year an a half ago and it will be published on spring 2011. I am plenty of real examples like that and examples are facts, not opinions.The real huge difference is that The Witcher ( for example ) was a pretty solid game from a tech point of view, FSX was a crappy mess of bugs instead, even after the lastest Service Pack.

[penta_a 432]

Perhaps you should blame PMDG for badly coding its model, making it too complex for FSX on your system.It isn't Microsoft's responsibility to cater for any 3rd party's add-ons users may wish to install.

aren't we all seeking for realism that MS claimed but never delivered to a default airplane nor to weather or scenery?looking some where else (third party products) is the only answer, and to get it to work (near/close to OK) there has to be some (sometimes a lot) of tweaking, is this good coding?I never asked for a perfect product, but when something is advertised to be (AS REAL AS IT GETS), it must deliver or allow other products to deliver with out having the end user to keep tweaking and fine tuning.Thanks