That's fare Bill... Can someone post something more serious please?

Unfortunately, no.....not without breaking their word to respect the NDA they agreed to.I am fairly confident however that even those who're beta testers aren't seeing everything either... :(

That's fare Bill... Can someone post something more serious please?

What would you like to know ?Fred.

What would you like to know ?Fred.

The more serious side of the sim. Cold Dark startup on the flight line and the ability to taxi to the runway for starters. True weather modeling pulling data from the real world (I doubt it can touch Active Sky but at least what's offered in default FSX/FS9). ATC, is there any? How well is PHTO, PHKO, and all the other local airports modeled. From what I'm seeing there's not that much of a departure from FSX in the scenery department. Seeing one island is all that's offered out the starting gate versus what was accomplished with the whole world in FSX/FS9, the big island should look fantastic. I mean every airport should be in high detail on the Big Island, every scenic detail within reason and tourist landmarks should be there. Many ships in the harbors should be present, in other words for one island it shouldn't look like FSX with Orbix scenery it should be on a whole other level. There's no excuse concerning scenery as only one island in the world is modeled. If we want to go with some comparisons look at what was accomplished by FSAddon with the Fjords area of Alaska in FS9 and the same area by Orbix in FSX. Flight is newer technology than that so Flight should be a sight to behold (scenery being it's main selling point since everything else was gutted). I'm not seeing this in all the presentations we've been shown.

Edited February 6, 201214 yr by Dillon

There's no excuse as there's only one island modeled here...

That is clearly not the case here.

@Dillon.If you want to know how good the scenery and detail is just go to Google Earth and take a look at all the islands.That is exactly what it looks like in (the unmentionable). The level of detail is simply stunning. Even the trees sway in the wind.I have taken screenshots in the top-down view and Google Earth and they are almost indentical.Fred.

Edited February 6, 201214 yr by RYR738

The more serious side of the sim. Cold Dark startup on the flight line and the ability to taxi to the runway for starters. True weather modeling pulling data from the real world (I doubt it can touch Active Sky but at least what's offered in default FSX/FS9). ATC, is there any? How well is PHTO, PHKO, and all the other local airports modeled. From what I'm seeing there's not that much of a departure from FSX in the scenery department. Seeing one island is all that's offered out the starting gate versus what was accomplished with the whole world in FSX/FS9, the big island should look fantastic. I mean every airport should be in high detail on the Big Island, every scenic detail within reason and tourist landmarks should be there. Many ships in the harbors should be present, in other words for one island it shouldn't look like FSX with Orbix scenery it should be on a whole other level. There's no excuse concerning scenery as only one island in the world is modeled. If we want to go with some comparisons look at what was accomplished by FSAddon with the Fjords area of Alaska in FS9 and the same area by Orbix in FSX. Flight is newer technology than that so Flight should be a sight to behold (scenery being it's main selling point since everything else was gutted). I'm not seeing this in all the presentations we've been shown.

While I'm obviously not Fred, I cannot resist chiming in here.But it is tough to know where to even begin, without breaking the NDA. Ok, here goes:Some of what you feel that Flight needs to meet your qualifications of a "serious sim" is already in the beta . . . and some isn't, but that doesn't mean that it might not be added later (either as a beta update, or as DLC). Despite what many here seem to think, no beta tester knows exactly what the released version of Flight will be exactly like yet.And you're very wrong, in your statement that "everything else was gutted" from Flight. Where did you even get THAT idea?The funny thing is that you're insisting that the Big Island has to have MUCH better scenery than any FSX 3rd party add-on scenery . . . even though Flight (the core platform), two high-quality aircraft, and the Big Island of Hawaii are going to be given away totally FREE ... while you have to OWN FSX and you have to then BUY the addon on scenery. Perhaps it is time to get a reality check here. Flight's promotional video clips show what the scenery on the Big Island looks like . . . and I'm pretty sure those were not made on the highest settings.Oh, and Flight has more than just the Big Island. That is just all the scenery that will likely come with the free download. Any other scenery you'll just have to pay for.

Edited February 6, 201214 yr by Arwen

While I'm obviously not Fred, I cannot resist chiming in here.But it is tough to know where to even begin, without breaking the NDA. Ok, here goes:Some of what you feel that Flight needs to meet your qualifications of a "serious sim" is already in the beta . . . and some isn't, but that doesn't mean that it might not be added later (either as a beta update, or as DLC). Despite what many here seem to think, no beta tester knows exactly what the released version of Flight will be exactly like yet.And you're very wrong, in your statement that "everything else was gutted" from Flight. Where did you even get THAT idea?The funny thing is that you're insisting that the Big Island has to have MUCH better scenery than any FSX 3rd party add-on scenery . . . even though Flight (the core platform), two high-quality aircraft, and the Big Island of Hawaii are going to be given away totally FREE ... while you have to OWN FSX and you have to then BUY the addon on scenery. Perhaps it is time to get a reality check here.Oh, and Flight has more than just the Big Island. That is just all the scenery that will likely come with the free download. Any other scenery you'll just have to pay for.

Are you one the beta team?

Are you one the beta team?

What do you think?

Or maybe Flight has no serious side and beta testers have seen it all?Flight is not going to be successor of FSX as we know it, as a whole Earth including simulator. However it might have or might not have also simulator side, just not in whole Earth.

Or maybe Flight has no serious side and beta testers have seen it all?

What is that supposed to mean?

, just not in whole Earth.

How do you know?

Edited February 6, 201214 yr by sibtiger

What is that supposed to mean?

Its supposed to mean that what beta testers have seen could be everything Flight has to offer, and so far they have seen nothing to point it out as serious simulator according to all leaked information that some beta testers have submitted outside this forum.

How do you know?

Because flyawaysimulations article clearly said that Flight team is not going to develop whole world this time, but just smaller areas that they will then make in high quality.

Edited February 6, 201214 yr by FScamp

Its supposed to mean that what beta testers have seen could be everything Flight has to offer, and so far they have seen nothing to point it out as serious simulator according to all leaked information that some beta testers have submitted outside this forum.Because flyawaysimulations article clearly said that Flight team is not going to develop whole world this time, but just smaller areas that they will then make in high quality.

The first part of this statement is not true at all. Beta testers have NOT seen everything thing that Flight has to offer, because Flight is still in development.And you're basing way too much on leaked information by a few disgruntled beta testers, who played Flight for like 15 minutes and were more interested in try to appear cool to their online buds, by bashing Flight (which for some twisted reasoning, has apparently become a cool thing to do). Flight is BOTH a game and a serious simulator. Yes, the PR/media focus so far has been mostly to attract gamers . . . which I personally feel has been a horrible decision by MS, because of the way that it has turned off a large percentage of the flightsim community, and there is a serious side to Flight that is not even being featured. Eventually MS will release more on the simulator side, but they have already released some indication that Flight is a LOT more than just an arcade game . . . many here just keep ignoring it. From the Jan 4th Fligh Press Release:"In “Microsoft Flight,” players view the world from above in a visually stunning and realistic representation of the earth, complete with region-specific weather patterns, foliage, terrain and landmarks. Players can choose to take the helm using highly rendered, accurate cockpits and authentic piloting procedures, or simply use their mouse and keyboard to control the plane in an exterior view. More experienced players can tailor the flight controls to match their skill level, making “Microsoft Flight” easy for beginners while still challenging for the most accomplished PC pilots."

Edited February 6, 201214 yr by Arwen

Well probably they had that kind of information available about FSX before its release, yet you really cant say that FSX default planes would have accurate cockpits and authentic pilot procedures. No, addon developers created those aircrafts that truly meet that marketing speech. But now there is no SDK available this time for public. If they only modeled whole earth, allowed good third party support and released SDK then it would work out very well by itself, but now I am not very sure about that.

yet you really cant say that FSX default planes would have accurate cockpits and authentic pilot procedures.

But we are not talking about FSX here.

But we are not talking about FSX here.

And tell me one reason why Flight would have accurate cockpits and authentic pilot procedures?