New "Flight" Screen Shots

[Airbus Commander 563]

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/#Uploaded for the month of May 2011

[FS Hub 132]

http://www.microsoft.../games/flight/#Uploaded for the month of May 2011

Thanks for keeping me up to date! It toke me too long to see some new shots, so I did not take a look at that site often anymore.

[Devinci 0]

Looks nice. The waves and the shorelines are awesome.

[yyzflier 11]

Nice scenery. Is Microsoft Flight meant as an update to the Flight Simulator series or something completely new? Appears to be the latter.

[NoahBryant 26]

Looks great - that vid is really awesome. Really hoping it's really performs as well as it looks, but I'm an optimist.

[marijn747berg 1]

Sure looking good.It's a shame no-one knows whether good addons are going to be avaiable for Flight...

[mcbellette 145]

Can someone at PMDG tell us if you guys are "in the loop" on development? I realise there could be an NDA, but would it hurt to tell us simply IF you're receiving info not available to the public without disclosing what you are actually being told by Microsoft? Or do you know as much as we know?

[3-2-1-Now 126]

Looks like FSX with a face-lift to me.Has the flight model been updated? i.e. reflects the CPU power modern computers have and is actually a lot more realistic?If anyone from the MS Flight Team are reading - I want realism, not eye-candy. FSX was a joke.Best regards,Robin.

[wedgantilles 76]

Looks quite nice, I also think they get a much better aspect ratio than on FSX, sometimes I believe vegetations and buildings are not the size they should be compared to the plane :( I hope they reveal more information about it during the E3 that will takes place in less than two weeks.

[aceridgey 330]

as said above, doesn't look too far from FSX,

[Tabs 2,790]

Can someone at PMDG tell us if you guys are "in the loop" on development? I realise there could be an NDA, but would it hurt to tell us simply IF you're receiving info not available to the public without disclosing what you are actually being told by Microsoft? Or do you know as much as we know?

Can't say anything either way, sorry.

[michal 44]

FSX was a joke.

I beg to differ.Eye candy may be good or bad, higher resolution terrain is nice, it is not a 'joke'. Better cockpit lighting techniques are not a joke either.And flight modelling doesn't necessarily need more CPU power, as many 3-rd party aircraft in FSX showed you can get exceptionally good flight modelling with what you have today.

[pager94 4]

Looks like FSX with a face-lift to me.Has the flight model been updated? i.e. reflects the CPU power modern computers have and is actually a lot more realistic?If anyone from the MS Flight Team are reading - I want realism, not eye-candy. FSX was a joke.Best regards,Robin.

Robin, I agree. With REX, active sky, megascenery / Orbx, FSX still looks better than Flight.Best,David

[737freak 42]

What is achieved with FSX these days is nothing it was meant to do. Most features are just 'hacks'. Scenery designers use a lot of these tricks of hacks. The NGX is the first aircraft that gets the most out of our poor FSX.If Flight has a new engine with some kind of modern physics modelling and up to date graphics and lighting engine, I could be a lot better than FSX. Especially if it's an open platform, so developers can develop there stuff a lot easier.Just because FSX with addons looks better than Flight doesn't mean it's foundation is also better. The engine makes the game: look at BF3 and CoD MW3....EDIT:Read what 'Mir' from FlightBeam wrote a couple of weeks back:http://www.flightbeam.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=167

[Tracon 10]

I'm buying Flight either way. Looks good so far.