Why I think flight will be another FSX

[vx4ever 0]

Dear Simmers, I was thinking all day today about the hundreds of dollars I have invested into FS9 for the last 3 years 679.32 US to be exact, but now I have come to start thinking, about my new reinvestment into FSX from my 2,000 computer to 364.00 in just 8 months in addons for FSX! No I feel no regret spending this money and many of my scenery's were transferable between both simulators but will it really be worth the investment into Flight? While I believe not because I think flight may be great because of the new coding and detail, how many will really upgrade to new computers, seeing that FSX has been out for over 5 years and people still refuse to upgrade gives me doubt and also the fact that many feel its a waste to re-invest when this is an expensive hobby anyways regardless if its flying for real in real life or being in front of a computer for modern technology. Whats ur take?

[Ben Cap 89]

Dear Simmers, I was thinking all day today about the hundreds of dollars I have invested into FS9 for the last 3 years 679.32 US to be exact, but now I have come to start thinking, about my new reinvestment into FSX from my 2,000 computer to 364.00 in just 8 months in addons for FSX! No I feel no regret spending this money and many of my scenery's were transferable between both simulators but will it really be worth the investment into Flight? While I believe not because I think flight may be great because of the new coding and detail, how many will really upgrade to new computers, seeing that FSX has been out for over 5 years and people still refuse to upgrade gives me doubt and also the fact that many feel its a waste to re-invest when this is an expensive hobby anyways regardless if its flying for real in real life or being in front of a computer for modern technology. Whats ur take?

Does anyone read the news articles?? THEY HAVE SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT THEY ARE PUTTING GREAT EMPHASIS ON PERFORMANCE...

[vx4ever 0]

Does anyone read the news articles?? THEY HAVE SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT THEY ARE PUTTING GREAT EMPHASIS ON PERFORMANCE...

Believe me I will be interested to buy and I believe in change and new is always better but many topics from size to area of photos are making me nervous!

[Guest jahman]

Does anyone read the news articles?? THEY HAVE SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT THEY ARE PUTTING GREAT EMPHASIS ON PERFORMANCE...

+1.Cheers,- jahman.

[Dillon 2,197]

I believe Flight will be another 'Flight Unlimited' covering one geographical area (Hawaii), that being said it should be good on performance.

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

I believe Flight will be another 'Flight Unlimited' covering one geographical area (Hawaii), that being said it should be good on performance.

The location it covers has NOTHING to do with performance, as the sim only loads the scenery so many NM around where ever you are flying at any given time.

[Mountain Man 142]

Does anyone read the news articles?? THEY HAVE SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT THEY ARE PUTTING GREAT EMPHASIS ON PERFORMANCE...

They pretty much have to say that because FSX running like a pig was a PR nightmare, so they're just telling customers what they want to hear. What game developer isn't quick to promise that their game will be the prettiest, most entertaining, and best performing game ever?

[simon747 185]

as long as it includes a 717 I'm happy:)

[Ben Cap 89]

as long as it includes a 717 I'm happy:)

continue wishing that it includes the 717 ROFL

[alainneedle1 97]

We’ve found the game runs well on low graphics settings with hardware meeting the following specifications:

• CPU: Dual Core 2.0 GHz
• GPU: 256 MB card capable of shader 3.0 (DX 9.0c compliant)
• HD: 10 GB Hard Drive space
• OS: WinXP SP3
• RAM: 2.0GB

It was also one of our goals to ensure that the game can run well with high settings on hardware that is attainable today. Based on our testing of core scenarios, the game runs smoothly on high graphics settings with the following hardware specifications:

• CPU: Intel® Core™ i7 960 @ 3.20GHz, AMD® Phenom™ II X6 1100T 3.3 GHz or better
• GPU: ATI Radeon™ HD 5870, NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 560 or better
• HD: 10 GB Hard Drive space
• OS: Windows 7 64-bit
• RAM: 6GB

As I can see the XP user will be stock with DX9, Vista and Window 7 user will probably enjoy DX10 maybe DX11 (check box), now about performance, start adding complex sceneries or airplanes and the fps will go down, as you can see MS said something about the LOW and HIGH settings...is there some EXTREMELY HIGH settings like in FSX....do you see where I'm going with this?

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

We’ve found the game runs well on low graphics settings with hardware meeting the following specifications:

• CPU: Dual Core 2.0 GHz
• GPU: 256 MB card capable of shader 3.0 (DX 9.0c compliant)
• HD: 10 GB Hard Drive space
• OS: WinXP SP3
• RAM: 2.0GB

It was also one of our goals to ensure that the game can run well with high settings on hardware that is attainable today. Based on our testing of core scenarios, the game runs smoothly on high graphics settings with the following hardware specifications:

• CPU: Intel® Core™ i7 960 @ 3.20GHz, AMD® Phenom™ II X6 1100T 3.3 GHz or better
• GPU: ATI Radeon™ HD 5870, NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 560 or better
• HD: 10 GB Hard Drive space
• OS: Windows 7 64-bit
• RAM: 6GB

As I can see the XP user will be stock with DX9, Vista and Window 7 user will probably enjoy DX10 maybe DX11 (check box), now about performance, start adding complex sceneries or airplanes and the fps will go down, as you can see MS said something about the LOW and HIGH settings...is there some EXTREMELY HIGH settings like in FSX....do you see where I'm going with this?

Good point! That was a good PR 'catch'. Sometimes words get shouted in what is NOT said, or end-play'ed around... Good catch! That went over on this guy....

[Guest jahman]

Good point! That was a good PR 'catch'. Sometimes words get shouted in what is NOT said, or end-play'ed around... Good catch! That went over on this guy....

Please elaborate. Thanks!Cheers,- jahman.

[dtrjones 356]

As I can see the XP user will be stock with DX9, Vista and Window 7 user will probably enjoy DX10 maybe DX11 (check box), now about performance, start adding complex sceneries or airplanes and the fps will go down, as you can see MS said something about the LOW and HIGH settings...is there some EXTREMELY HIGH settings like in FSX....do you see where I'm going with this?

DX11 (checkbox) LMAO! I seriously hope DX11 isn't a checkbox, I'm confident though we'll see an mature DX implementation which ever version they choose.Was FSX ever performant from day one in high ? I'm only now running high on my computer and I've got a i7 sandybridge. IMHO theres no doubt performance will be much better in this release, but if you (can) choose insane levels of details and want a smooth flight then good luck :)Cheers,Dave.

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

enjoy DX10 maybe DX11 (check box),

I know it's difficult, but use some common sence. FSX had the DX10 preview because it was UNFINISHED. There's absolutely no reason for them to include an unfinished DX version with a checkbox as they did before. It's not that close to FSX.

[alainneedle1 97]

PHouagnahahagnagnahah, I wrote the check box as a joke like DX10 was in FSX...seriously, here is the minimum requirement for FSX, how close is this to the minimum requirement of Flight, FSX default as very good performance with all sliders to the left and everything unticked with the minimum requirement.Minimum System Requirements

• Windows XP SP2 / Windows Vista / Windows 7
• Processor: 1.0 Ghz
• RAM: Windows XP SP2 - 256MB, Windows Vista – 512MB
• Hard Drive: 14GB
• Video Card: 32MB DirectX 9 compatible
• Other: DX9 hardware compatibility and audio board with speakers and/or headphones
• Online/Multiplayer Requirements: 56.6 kbps or better for online play

As I showed you before Flight WILL use DX10.