They haven't shown anything which conclusively proves it is the same either. It might look the same in a lot of ways

Yep, there is no conclusive proof one way or the other, however it looks identical to FSX (except for some fresh textures, and other minor changes) and therefore its highly unlikely that it is a new 3D engine. If it was a completely new 3D engine then it would look quite obviously different to FSX, just like the 3D engines of all the other flight sims I have mentioned earlier in this post look different to FSX.MS is spending its dev budget building a 'Flight Store' and adding some minor tweaks to the existing FSX engine, its not redeveloping Flight from 'scratch', IMHO.

Just curious, why is MS still using FS2000 style 2D clouds? Don't you guys think that it's odd that even though half of what a pilot see are the sky and the clouds, MS had spent very little effort on them by judging from their screenshots.Surely with today's DX11 Shader, Tessellation and AI Procedural generation technology we can come up with something better? I remember the old Jane's WW2 Fighters from 1998 had 3D Clouds.Also better haze layers would be nice, e.g. Inversions, pollution, radiation/steam fog, localized visibility changes with showers etc.

False assertion.FS2004 and FSX use the technology developed by Niniane Wang for clouds:http://niniane.org/clouds/So a potentially true assertion would be "why is MS Flight still using the FSX clouds".I say potentially true because it isnt clear, yet, what the rendering engine is/is not.

FS2004 and FSX use the technology developed by Niniane Wang for clouds:http://niniane.org/clouds/So a potentially true assertion would be "why is MS Flight still using the FSX clouds".I say potentially true because it isnt clear, yet, what the rendering engine is/is not.

1) Flight's clouds look identical to FSX/FS9 clouds. 2) It's very unlikely that a new 3D engine would use the same Niniane Wang cloud tech (her tech is circa April 2004, at bottom of your linked URL) and thus clouds in a new engine would not look identical to FSX/FS9 clouds.From 1) and 2) we can assert that Flight is using an enhanced FSX engine and is not using a new 3D engine.

Nice to see you here Phil, your opinion is always welcome.Do you have any potential opinion on what Flight can be from what MS has released as far as pics. and vid.?

1) Flight's clouds look identical to FSX/FS9 clouds. 2) It's very unlikely that a new 3D engine would use the same Niniane Wang cloud tech (her tech is circa April 2004, at bottom of your linked URL).From 1) and 2) we can assert that Flight is using the FSX engine and is not using a new 3D engine.

potentially using a variant of the FSX engine, that is all you can assert.all we can tell for sure is that it is not using FS2000 clouds, like the original poster asserted.is there new literature on rendering real-time clouds, beyond Niniane's?

potentially using a variant of the FSX engine, that is all you can assert.

Yes an enhanced FSX engine... not a completely new 3D engine (edited my original post and added 'enhanced')

Yes an enhanced FSX engine... not a completely new 3D engine (edited my original post and added 'enhanced')

We just want a good modern engine…we don’t care how they get there.The best game engines out there have deep roots...they're not new...they're called 'new'.Also content and engine are separate.It’s nitpicking, but let's not assume too much about the engine based simply on the content we see.If there were a new engine, the smartest strategy would still be to migrate the old content forward.Models and textures are very simple standard data...they transport well.

Yes an enhanced FSX engine... not a completely new 3D engine (edited my original post and added 'enhanced')

yawn.

yawn.

Curious as to why "yawn."

yawn.

Yes Flight is just enhancing (slightly) the existing FSX 3D engine, Flight=yawn.This is 2011, look what a 2 man indie team can do... Outerra http://outerra.com/

Curious as to why "yawn."

It's obvious....lolPhil is funny....potentially....

Curious as to why "yawn."

because this harping on is the engine this, or is the engine that - its boring.hence the "yawn".could we not try to tear it down at least until its published?

And the rudeness never ends...................

Yes Flight is just enhancing (slightly) the existing FSX 3D engine, Flight=yawn.This is 2011, look what a 2 man indie team can do... Outerra http://outerra.com/

please stop putting your words in my mouth. its unseemly.it was your insistence on harping on the engine that I was referring to with the "yawn". its boring. really, if you aren't impressed, why are you here? to repetitively dis the product?in my time, I have seen many technology demos. when someone actually ships a game using Outerra, then its worth talking about. until then, its a demo.

because this harping on is the engine this, or is the engine that - its boring.hence the "yawn".could we not try to tear it down at least until its published?

+1! I agree completely, Phil. It's pointless to criticize something like Flight when you haven't even tried it yet, which is why I have kept from doing so. I'm going to look at the positive side, unlike a few people here...you know who you are! :(