Ms Flight FAIL

[Chock 17,769]

Why would they not show us default?

For the same reason that car companies show the top of the range model on their adverts.Al

[alainneedle1 97]

Why would they not shot us default? The level of improvement between FSX scenery to Flight scenery is just as big as FS9 to FSX. I'm pretty sure we're seeing default scenery here in Flight.

Lets start with the fact that we all know MS will have a store for add-ons, from there lets say that the "unoficial" pic. with the USS Missouri is Flight default, one should expect to have Flight default looking like Hawaii all over the world right? I mean it's Flight default or it's not, can't be both. Does it make sense?? Would you cover Flight default as seen in the "unofficial" pic with add-ons? Would you spend more $ to have a better looking USS Missouri then the one seen in the pic?So if you think that this pic. with that kind of detailed dock + light and shadow effect is Flight default I don't see any need for a add-on's store and we know a store will open so what can it be?? About this theory, MS is showing us that after buying add-ons for Flight default you can make other part of the world, lets say Florida, look as good as Hawaii, ....pay as you go.....

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

Exactly. Hawaii is the example of what the rest of the world will look like ONCE you buy the add-ons. So, as always, they'll have the high detail areas, (hawaii) but also offer add-ons to make other parts of the world extremely detailed.

[Fsau 0]

I would put money on it not being a photo, the ship model and possibly the docks may have been rendered separately making it look out of place.

[alainneedle1 97]

Exactly. Hawaii is the example of what the rest of the world will look like ONCE you buy the add-ons. So, as always, they'll have the high detail areas, (hawaii) but also offer add-ons to make other parts of the world extremely detailed.

There you go, so if Hawaii does not look like the rest of the world how does Flight default look like?Bait and switch? They are showing us what is Hawaii enhanced with add-ons, where is Flight default?

[ErichB 3,651]

Good find

[c152flyboy 0]

so does anyone want to take a guess as to why MS would post this picture jsut to quickly take it down? Is it just to create this kind of online chatter about it? i can not think why else they would do this.

[alainneedle1 97]

so does anyone want to take a guess as to why MS would post this picture jsut to quickly take it down? Is it just to create this kind of online chatter about it? i can not think why else they would do this.

Exactly, they are not that stupid.

[ryanbatc 13,050]

It looks legit... it looks good to.

[poplar 39]

I agree that it looks legit and absolutely superb too. I hope scenery designers are pumping out this detail in conjunction with Microsoft. It seems their attention to detail is first class in my opinion.

[Chock 17,769]

There is no better way to get people chatting about your product than to create a bit of controversy, that's almost certainly why the pic was shown and then pulled. Look at all the crappy X-Factor-type TV shows, where they frequently invent some fracas between the judges or contestants in order to get it talked about.Al

[mmann 72]

The posting of the picture and then quickly removing it is typical Microsoft. Similar to when Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer announced that the next version of Windows would be called Windows 8 and then the company quickly corrected Ballmer's words in a company statement issued that very afternoon. It is always good to get a future product talked about.Regards, Mike Mann

[Guest ShinyJetSyndrome]

Regarding default scenery vs. add-on packages remember that Microsoft way back when during the days of MSFS 5.0 and FSW95 used to release payware scenery packages for New York, Paris, Tokyo, etc. That concept is certainly nothing new. I welcome it as long as there is some kind of reasonable worldwide "representative" default scenery in place on the same level of FSX.As for the battleship pic... I hope there's a tick mark setting to disable ridiculous small details that IMHO really don't belong in a flight simulator. I'd rather have my CPU/GPU power taken up by more AI traffic or more clouds.The shadows look nice though.

[Marcoh 5]

What does'st it mean, "Flight default" ?In FsX, some part of mesh are in LOD6 (africa) LOD7, or LOD9 (north america) but you can made scenery in LOD13 if you wantSome part have very poor design for coast lines, rivers, roads (still Africa) ans some parts are correctly designed (Europe, North America), but you can make photorealistic areas.Fews towns are betters designed whith tipicals objects, but many of towns have been completely redisigned by commercials add-on.There is 24000 airports but maybe only 1% are correctly designed, the rest is one runway and one tower.St Marteen was an enchanced area in FsX default, but flyTampa made a better commercial scenery.It's sure that it will be exactly same in Flight, and it's sure that the Hawaï is a "good design area". The rest of the world will be same or less good.So, there will be a lot of area to enchanced for add-ons designers.I just hope that there will be a little space in the "market-place" for free add-on.

[frankla 45]

Regarding default scenery vs. add-on packages remember that Microsoft way back when during the days of MSFS 5.0 and FSW95 used to release payware scenery packages for New York, Paris, Tokyo, etc. That concept is certainly nothing new. I welcome it as long as there is some kind of reasonable worldwide "representative" default scenery in place on the same level of FSX.As for the battleship pic... I hope there's a tick mark setting to disable ridiculous small details that IMHO really don't belong in a flight simulator. I'd rather have my CPU/GPU power taken up by more AI traffic or more clouds.The shadows look nice though.

Your comment about "ridiculous small details" interest me because for a while I have thought that if I were Microsoft, I would eventually expand the franchise from Flight to World simulator. I really would not be surprised if they indeed plan on doing it. All the basic programming is already there, so why not? In addition to Flight you can plug Train and Ship simulators on it, you can create site seeing/trip planing modes,commercial battlefield simulations locations, etc. You can create drives to and from locations. I wouldn't be shocked if they eventually created a world in which you could create characters in it. Off coarse be prepared to see product placement in this virtual world. But hey they do that in movies now and it doesn't bother me. Are we, flight sim enthusiast, going to be excited about a possible world simulator? We should. It would make sure that millions more people will use the program and that in turn will cause the development of the platform to continue way into future.