Will there be airliners?

[alainneedle1 97]

Each 32 bit application runs fine on 64 bit OS, even FSX runs fine on 64 bits.That is only a suggestion, it doesn't imply anything. Flight will be a pure 32bit game but it will run better on 64 OSs cause they are more stable.I see people having 6-8-12GB of RAM playing FSX. What a waste of RAM and money, just open the task manager when FSX is running and you will notice that it never goes beyond 2 GB of RAM occupation, maybe a bit more ( up to 3GB ) if many heavy addons are involved.

I know that as I have a 64-bit OS myself but you'r missing the point, if I follow your resaonning and Flight is a 32-bit application it does not matter if you have 6GB of memory, you can use XP 64-bit with 4GB and Flight will be more stable but MS said 6GB of memory on Window 7, why not Vista 64-bit with 4GB....do you see where I'm going with this...if been stable is the only reason why MS suggested a 64-bit OS XP SP3 64-bit with 4GB would have been good enough since Flight (like FSX) would not go beyond 2Gb of RAM occupation, maybe a bit more ( up to 3GB ) if many heavy addons are involved.The only other reason why Window 7 (32 or 64-bit) would be needed is for DX 10 (or DX 11).

[Marcoh 5]

The only other reason why Window 7 (32 or 64-bit) would be needed is for DX 10 (or DX 11)

Not the only.Flight can use more memory (than FsX) to keep (in memory) high textures for clouds, ground, objects (and all other stuff), and give a better view of landscapes.

[alainneedle1 97]

T

Not the only.Flight can use more memory (than FsX) to keep (in memory) high textures for clouds, ground, objects (and all other stuff), and give a better view of landscapes.

That's why MS as a requirement of 64-bit for the OS for using high settings as stiputaled in their news released on November 15 under Performance and Hardware.. http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/#news-performance_hardwareQuote from NickN.FSX is a 32bit application and as such even when run in a 64bit operating system memory amounts greater than 4GB will be of little use to FSX directly, however, when applied with a 64bit OS and i7 FSX SP2 (or RTM/SP1 with edited fsx.exe files) will be allowed access to a full 4GB with other processes and applications running along side having access to more (over and above). Therefore 6GB (3x2GB) i7 systems as addons and aircraft become more complicated will benefit FSX on a 64bit OS. If you switch to i7 you are far better off on 3x2GB than 3x1GB in system memory.

[fsxkitty 62]

Well not really because if M$ flight is going to be arcade game it has probably lots of stuff we did not see in FSX, lots of missions, stories, maybe you can even walk outside aircraft. That can make it to be 10GB even with Hawaii only.

But it isn't an arcade game...

[Jcannon 13]

But it isn't an arcade game...

Dont feed the troll.

[xplanery 250]

But it isn't an arcade game...

You cannot know that.

[RustyFlyer 182]

However, some of us with oodles of RAM may use our computers for a multitude of things...such as intensive 3D modelling, serious digital editing, mult-tasking between the two with many windows open simultaneously, etc. Some of us hate having to remove 14 GB of RAM each time we start up, and only wish to run, FSX...or to make our forum signatures more relevent. :PP :(

Each 32 bit application runs fine on 64 bit OS, even FSX runs fine on 64 bits.That is only a suggestion, it doesn't imply anything. Flight will be a pure 32bit game but it will run better on 64 OSs cause they are more stable.I see people having 6-8-12GB of RAM playing FSX. What a waste of RAM and money, just open the task manager when FSX is running and you will notice that it never goes beyond 2 GB of RAM occupation, maybe a bit more ( up to 3GB ) if many heavy addons are involved.

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

You cannot know that.

Yes, we "can know that." Microsoft specifically said it wasn't an arcade game. How could that be any more clear?

[demiboyx 2]

You cannot know that.

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/ Read the FAQ.

[xplanery 250]

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/ Read the FAQ.

Its full of useless text that does not say it being a simulator anywhere. And honestly its hard to believe that it would be possible to apply for mainstream when still keeping realism so it could be called a simulator. I have seen many game series getting ruined in eyes of original community because of simplifying it too much to make mainstream interested. To me this text sounds like they try to simplify Flight to make it better for mainstream which would make it like arcade game.

[Fsau 0]

...arcade game.

It says in plain text they don't need to make an arcade. You might have to widen your tunnel vision to see it though.

[Rimshot 1,143]

Its full of useless text that does not say it being a simulator anywhere. And honestly its hard to believe that it would be possible to apply for mainstream when still keeping realism so it could be called a simulator. I have seen many game series getting ruined in eyes of original community because of simplifying it too much to make mainstream interested. To me this text sounds like they try to simplify Flight to make it better for mainstream which would make it like arcade game.

Read again:Q:What is "Microsoft Flight?"A:"Microsoft Flight" is a new PC game from Microsoft Game Studios. The new title will be available on the Games for Windows - LIVE service and will bring a new perspective to the long-standing "Flight Simulator" franchise. From new game play elements and enhanced scenery and terrain to new aircraft and integrated content marketplace, it is an entirely new breed of virtual flight. The Games for Windows - LIVE platform sets the stage for all your virtual flight needs while connecting you to a global base of users, content and endless exploration. Microsoft Flight builds off its heritage of deep, immersive simulation and is redesigned to make the experience easier for virtual fliers of all interests and skills.Q:How does “Microsoft Flight” differ from “Flight Simulator?” Why the new name? What’s changed?A:With “Microsoft Flight” we’re approaching the virtual flight genre from the ground up, with the focus on the universal appeal of the experience of Flight. We believe the simplicity of “Microsoft Flight” perfectly captures that vision while welcoming the millions of existing Flight Simulator fans. The new “Microsoft Flight” retains the full fidelity simulation longtime fans have come to expect while offering all players a whole new look and feel, a wide range of new game play and challenges, persistent experiences and social connectivity.I think Flight will probably have difficulty sliders, just like FSX. So new players can set those to 'easy'.

[ViperPilot 81]

Its full of useless text that does not say it being a simulator anywhere. And honestly its hard to believe that it would be possible to apply for mainstream when still keeping realism so it could be called a simulator. I have seen many game series getting ruined in eyes of original community because of simplifying it too much to make mainstream interested. To me this text sounds like they try to simplify Flight to make it better for mainstream which would make it like arcade game.

Looks like the only way you will know 100% for sure is to be like the rest of the FS Community, and WAIT FOR THE PRODUCT TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC!Of course, the alternative is to do what so many others out there are doing; feeding the rumor mill with so much speculation, misinformation and innuendo that in the end, ego bubbles will be bursting all over the FS world.When Flight is finally released and on the shelves... and after many out there have spent the last months fantasizing, posturing and preening about their perception of what Flight is going to be... it's finally loaded on the HDD, up and running, and it turns out NOT what you had expected, dreamed, hoped, begged, cajoled and argued in a public forum about for over a year... THEN WHO'S TO BLAME?Going to run back here, and start blaming every Tom, Dick and Harry that posted in this Forum about why the product wasn't what YOU thought it should be? Well, ZIPPITY DOO DAA! Stand in line, and tell your sad story!Guess all of the speculation and "I know more than you do" attitudes served everyone in the end, didn't it?Anyway, just my humble, insignificant opinion.

[Rebel_Without_a_Clue 0]

Yep-instead of rushing out and buying just sit back and wait until the USER reviews start coming in. ( I don't pay any attention to magazine reviews as they're bought and paid for by the advertisers).The phrase "integrated content marketplace" does make one wonder though whether the speculation that MS will ship a limited (few aircraft and Hawaiian scenery) and happily sell you other aircraft and regions isn't correct.

[alainneedle1 97]

Looks like the only way you will know 100% for sure is to be like the rest of the FS Community, and WAIT FOR THE PRODUCT TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC!Of course, the alternative is to do what so many others out there are doing; feeding the rumor mill with so much speculation, misinformation and innuendo that in the end, ego bubbles will be bursting all over the FS world.When Flight is finally released and on the shelves... and after many out there have spent the last months fantasizing, posturing and preening about their perception of what Flight is going to be... it's finally loaded on the HDD, up and running, and it turns out NOT what you had expected, dreamed, hoped, begged, cajoled and argued in a public forum about for over a year... THEN WHO'S TO BLAME?Going to run back here, and start blaming every Tom, Dick and Harry that posted in this Forum about why the product wasn't what YOU thought it should be? Well, ZIPPITY DOO DAA! Stand in line, and tell your sad story!Guess all of the speculation and "I know more than you do" attitudes served everyone in the end, didn't it?Anyway, just my humble, insignificant opinion.

Nice word, we should use this word more often.