At a minimum, a simulator that out of the box will let someone learn the basics of flight with a Cessna, or let a more experienced pilot hop into the cockpit of a commercial jet and fly from L.A. to New York with all the navigation aids and basic ATC.

Pretty selective requirements. So, Flight does not qualify because the FREE core includes a Stearman, instead of a Cessna. And because all you get with the FREE core is the Big Island.

And a simulation so realistic that with some minor modifications, it can become an FAA certified flight training simulator. FSX did this via Prepar3d and X-Plane 10 already has that as an option.

It takes more than just a few minor modifications, based on what others have posted about this. So you must have purchased the X-Plane 10 Professional-Use USB Key (for only $750). Or you're going to Pay $500 for P3D.But you're not will to even try the FREE version of Flight. Amazing.

Not until it's confirmed that Flight will provide SDKs or some type of source code for the development of 3rd party addon software will I say that Flight has even the potential to be "good" or anything close to it. My opinion at least.

Edited January 20, 201214 yr by AWACS

But you're not will to even try the FREE version of Flight. Amazing.

The cost to buy computer software is insignificant. It's how much of my time I'm willing to invest to learn how to operate it, how to configure it to get the results I want, learning which keys to press to do what I want, configuring my yoke and other add-ons, etc. Almost every demo of Flight I have seen shows planes flying through obstacle courses in the sky or doing slalom through hot air balloons. And the write-up from Microsoft about Flight says you get a Stearman in Hawaii, and if you sign up with "Games for Windows - Live" you get the car-like Icon and a couple more Hawaiian Islands. Every Microsoft Flight webisode and screen shot collection for the last two months are labelled "Microsoft Flight's latest game trailer", "Get a first peek at the Microsoft Flight Game Play", "A first look at the Icon AS5 and various game play." If Microsoft doesn't take this product seriously, why should I spend time on it???And for everyone hoping that Microsoft will suddenly start treating Microsoft Flight as a serious Flight Simulation, here's a life lesson. You can usually predict what someone will do over the next two months by looking at what they did over the last two months.So I expect to see a super-duper slalom course in the sky add-on before I see an aircraft with IFR navigation abilities.

Edited January 20, 201214 yr by Larry Johnson

I've used FLIGHT several times now. Its pretty good at first but after a few hours I was done. I've been back to FSX for a week now

So that's where it ends does it? You Beta testers seem to forget that you are 'testing' a BETA. :(

The cost to buy computer software is insignificant. It's how much of my time I'm willing to invest to learn how to operate it, how to configure it to get the results I want, learning which keys to press to do what I want, configuring my yoke and other add-ons, etc.

Spending $750 for computer software is pretty significant to me.And X-Plane takes a LOT longer to configure than Flight. That I know from my own experience.

Almost every demo of Flight I have seen shows planes flying through obstacle courses in the sky or doing slalom through hot air balloons. And the write-up from Microsoft about Flight says you get a Stearman in Hawaii, and if you sign up with "Games for Windows - Live" you get the car-like Icon and a couple more Hawaiian Islands. Every Microsoft Flight webisode and screen shot collection for the last two months are labelled "Microsoft Flight's latest game trailer", "Get a first peek at the Microsoft Flight Game Play", "A first look at the Icon AS5 and various game play." If Microsoft doesn't take this product seriously, why should I spend time on it???

Just because MS is trying to attract gamers to Flight, doesn't mean that it is just an arcade game. I've already explained this MANY times here. I agree that MS should be promoting the simulator part of Flight, because it is very much a simulator, by my definition of flightsim.

And for everyone hoping that Microsoft will suddenly start treating Microsoft Flight as a serious Flight Simulation, here's a life lesson. You can usually predict what someone will do over the next two months by looking at what they did over the last two months.So I expect to see a super-duper slalom course in the sky add-on before I see an aircraft with IFR navigation abilities.

As I written many times here: Flight might surprise you.

As I written many times here: Flight might surprise you.

It could very well surprise me. But as long as someone keeps telling me they have a duck, I'll make the assumption they have a duck.

Have I ever said I have a duck (or that Flight was a duck)? You should trust me a bit, and at least wait for Flight to be released before you judge it too harshly.

Define "serious simulation."

I would define "serious simulation" as a realistic and compehensive simulation that has the possibility to be used as a tool for advanced training purposes. It may be that this training has an end, or it may just be the simulation of a hobby that one cannot pursue in real life. But "serious simulation" is no more a game than flying a radio controlled plane is. FSX is a platform that has the capacity to to offer serious simulation, being especially good at simulating aircraft instruments, systems and flight deck procedures, as we have seen with PMDGs products and A2A products for earlier piston engined aircraft. A game, on the other hand, is a form of play with goals and structure. It involves a player or group of players engaged in some kind of conflict, defined by rules, that results in a quantifiable outcome, and a scoreboard. You can play games in real aircraft, if you enter competitions with them - it doesn't mean that flying is itself a game. Now apply this to Flight. Clearly, as it stands now it is not a serious simulation. It is a game that has a simplified simulation in it. Rather like Grand Theft Auto, where you drive around in cars but the focus is on scoring points.When I read earlier that you said "Flight" would be the only sim that is going on your new computer, it made wonder if you've ever really tasted "serious simulation", for example, by taking an "Accusimmed" A2A P-47 for a flight around you local, custom built scenery that is accurate enough to Fly VFR.Yes, Flight might surprise us. It might relax it's current stategy for dlc and the prohibition of user customisation and freeware. That would be the only surprise for me. I mean, if I can't create and install my own local aerodromes in it, and custom landmarks etc, it's already lacking in one aspect of "serious simulation".

Have I ever said I have a duck (or that Flight was a duck)? You should trust me a bit, and at least wait for Flight to be released before you judge it too harshly.

I can say with certainty that Flight won't be going on my computer for a considerable time, if at all. X-plane will be, alongside my current FSX with all its add-ons(when I put my new hard drive in). I need to start familiarising myself with that simulator, even if it is still a bit shabby here and there. At least I know with X-plane, people will be making stuff for it without restriction.

Flight will be good..............to MS' wallet........actually, probably not. I highky doubt the DLC idea is going to take off for many reasons. We shall see. Time will tell.

With FSX and previous versions, MS gave us a sandbox to do what we wanted. You could play the missions, just fly a glider or do a transcon in a 747. With Flight, MS is dictating the experience. Want to fly from the USA to China? No you can't.

Flight will be good..............to MS' wallet........actually, probably not. I highky doubt the DLC idea is going to take off for many reasons. We shall see. Time will tell.

With you on this...

So I expect to see a super-duper slalom course in the sky add-on before I see an aircraft with IFR navigation abilities.

I think you may be surprised...

Why all the hate here for Flight? Don't bother to answer that, because I don't really care any more.You all think you know so much about what Flight is and what it isn't. You've made up your minds that Flight isn't good enough for you. After all, publicly stating that Flight is anything more than an arcade game, would tarnish your "Serious Flightsimmer" images. So why are you all hanging around here. Go play with your FSX or X-Plane games, if they are so great.As for me, I'm going to enjoy Flight and I'm looking forward to a long relationship with it. I've seen the future and it isn't FSX or X-Plane.

Edited January 21, 201214 yr by Arwen

Why all the hate here for Flight? Don't bother to answer that, because I don't really care any more.You all think you know so much about what Flight is and what it isn't. You've made up your minds that Flight isn't good enough for you. After all, publicly stating that Flight is anything more than an arcade game, would tarnish your "Serious Flightsimmer" images. So why are you all hanging around here. Go play with your FSX or X-Plane games, if they are so great.As for me, I'm going to enjoy Flight and I'm looking forward to a long relationship with it. I've seen the future and it isn't FSX or X-Plane.

With no SDK, the future for FSX actually looks brighter than ever until the entire community finds a replacement platform.You may as well call it the longest standing version, because that is the direction it's taking.