Ok JSKoma, after this little diversion between me and you, now back on topic. It is rumored that Flight will reproduce around 5% of Hawaii only , IMO it is too little even for an ancient biplane or a rusty Maule, do you agree ?

We've seen more then 5% of Hawaii in the screenshots and webisodes up to this point.That's just a silly rumor. Another Aerosoft zinger?The funny thing is the 10gb install is being touted as proof it's Hawaii only, but to me, the 10gb install is absolute proof it isn't. To what extent it isn't will be up for debate, but if it's 10gb (over 3/4 the install of FSX) just for the Hawaiian islands then it's going to be the most detailed sim ever.

And remember, no jets either.

The funny thing is the 10gb install is being touted as proof it's Hawaii only, but to me, the 10gb install is absolute proof it isn't. To what extent it isn't will be up for debate, but if it's 10gb (over 3/4 the install of FSX) just for the Hawaiian islands then it's going to be the most detailed sim ever.

FSX is a 15GB install, so Flight at 10GB is only 2/3 of that, and since the vast majority of the FSX install is dedicated to scenery and textures, the only way to shave a substantial 5GB off the install size is by eliminating content and/or reducing the quality. Looking at this another way, the only way to increase the quality of default FSX is by increasing the install size (anybody who has downloaded tens or hundreds of gigabytes worth of add-ons knows exactly what I'm talking about). Given the general high quality we've seen of Flight's Hawaiian scenery, it's easy to see how it could take up 10GB of drive space, especially if we're talking about the entire Hawaiian island chain. Keep in mind that a quality add-on of a smaller area can easily weigh in at several gigabytes alone. For example, the recently released Anchorage X is 3.2GB. Three areas like that, or roughly the size of Hawaii, and there's your 10GB.As I've said elsewhere, if Flight is a worldwide sim then it's going to feature generic, low-quality scenery for any part of the globe that isn't Hawaii. Get ready to buy official scenery packs for the rest.

And remember, no jets either.

Right, exactly, the whole world is there, but none of the planes have the range to get there...

As I've said elsewhere, if Flight is a worldwide sim then it's going to feature generic, low-quality scenery for any part of the globe that isn't Hawaii. Get ready to buy official scenery packs for the rest.

You mean what XP10 currently is? Unfortunately, if you are right the only place to go to is back to FSX.

You mean what XP10 currently is?

XP10 has generic graphics, but they are hardly low-quality.

XP10 has generic graphics, but they are hardly low-quality.

The videos shown on the forum today beg to differ.Large sprawling green pastures with generic repeating houses with a few high rises thrown in along with airports with no buildings appears low-quality to me.The shot of Manhattan and KJFK was laughable.To each his own.

The videos shown on the forum today beg to differ.

As I've noted elsewhere, there's a difference between accuracy and quality. While Manhattan may not look like real-world Manhattan, the quality of the graphics is actually very good.I think the difference between us is that I'm not a ###### defender of any particular sim, so I can step back and look at things objectively.

I completely understand you getting that impression.I promise you though, my reactions are more from pure disappointment in XP10 vs. fanboyism of FSX. I haven't booted up FSX in 3 months. Much like I did for XP10, I'm giving Flight the benefit of the doubt until facts come out otherwise. I was very excited and patient early on with XP10. But it is what it is.

As I've noted elsewhere, there's a difference between accuracy and quality. While Manhattan may not look like real-world Manhattan, the quality of the graphics is actually very good.

Funny you call bonchie a ###### defender and suggest taking an objective stance because I would take the above statement as a subjective defense of Xplane. Xplanes whole claim right now is that they are trying to recreate cities accurately from osm data, yet the result is extremely lacking as anyone can clearly see.What is it you mean when you say "quality of graphics is very good"? and at the end of the day does it really matter about "quality" if what you see out your cockpit is not convincing? The casual sim market is a race for immersion; the majority of users want to believe they are actually flying, have all the real world systems at their hands and be flying within a convincing world.This is why, at least for the time being I am in favor of land classes, because although it may not be completely accurate it creates a much more convincing illusion for the mind to believe.I see Xplanes current autogen placement system as a skeleton waiting to be fleshed out and it may grow into something truly impressive, time will tell, but in its current state it's not what I would call either quality or accurate.

The videos shown on the forum today beg to differ.Large sprawling green pastures with generic repeating houses with a few high rises thrown in along with airports with no buildings appears low-quality to me.The shot of Manhattan and KJFK was laughable.To each his own.

"To each his own".- what a silly idiom

Funny you call bonchie a ###### defender and suggest taking an objective stance because I would take the above statement as a subjective defense of Xplane.

That might be how you want to take it, but it's actually not. If we're talking about the quality of the textures, the lighting, the 3D clouds, and the overall the capabilities of the graphics engine, then X-Plane 10, objectively speaking, is a good looking sim.

The funny thing is the 10gb install is being touted as proof it's Hawaii only, but to me, the 10gb install is absolute proof it isn't. To what extent it isn't will be up for debate, but if it's 10gb (over 3/4 the install of FSX) just for the Hawaiian islands then it's going to be the most detailed sim ever.

I just don't get it. If Flight is gonna include the whole world at 10GB, then what did the following development teams do so inefficiently to require so much hard drive space for their simulators?FSX: 14GB for the whole world 6 years ago.AeroflyFS:24GB for SwitzerlandTake On Helicopters: 20GB for SeattleKind of sounds like microsoft used a magic wand to create graphics at such a high level of detail around the world in only 10GB of space. Oh yeah, and also improved weather, clouds, ATC, AI, added new missions, added new and awesome planes, etc., etc., etc. With such great advancements, sure is a shame that they have not shared any information from other parts of the virtual world. Probably because it is still so "early in development". (but wait, isn't there a beta just around the corner? hmmmmSorry to sound so sarcastic, but it seems pretty clear that 10GB is just too small, but who am I to say. Maybe it is big enough.

I just don't get it. If Flight is gonna include the whole world at 10GB, then what did the following development teams do so inefficiently to require so much hard drive space for their simulators?FSX: 14GB for the whole world 6 years ago.AeroflyFS:24GB for SwitzerlandTake On Helicopters: 20GB for Seattle

The quality and quantity of textures and sound files are a big variable in the install size.

We've seen more then 5% of Hawaii in the screenshots and webisodes up to this point.That's just a silly rumor. Another Aerosoft zinger?The funny thing is the 10gb install is being touted as proof it's Hawaii only, but to me, the 10gb install is absolute proof it isn't. To what extent it isn't will be up for debate, but if it's 10gb (over 3/4 the install of FSX) just for the Hawaiian islands then it's going to be the most detailed sim ever.

Aerosoft didn't come up with an own simulator yet so I can't support ( or go against ) them until I will see something, therefore I can't say nothing about them for the next upcoming 5 years at least, regarding the flight simulation aspect. Their airports are good instead IMO.Speaking about 10GB of installation.....well, take into account MS will load into Flight a massive amount of freaky missions ( collecting teddy bears at luna park, shooting the barrels, acrobatic retired men rescues, strawberry harvesting, flying into cones of soap bubbles, Santa's flights delivering Xmas presents, Jingle Bells's sound effects ... and so on.. ) so, many of the graphic textures will be dedicated to them.