I along with plenty other, who actually do have a PPL don't really feel the need or motivation to explain flight dynamics

Who said anything about "as close as it can get"?But you have my full and complete attention Bill, should you decide to explain... because I just had a blast flying touch and goes at a dirt strip with the Stearman for the last hour + or so.Rob OsborneCFI / CFII / MEI / MEII - A&PEdit:Some of you nuts who expect an FAA six axis Level-D Sim (something you'd find @ Flight Safety) from a PC game really need to rethink what it is you are purchasing.

Rob OsborneCFI / CFII / MEI / MEII - A&P

I got my PPL in 1972... I too have had a blast (although yes, I do have problems with FLIGHT too - blurries, grey buildings, GUI that needs a lot of work, etc.). Thanks for the post Rob! Balance is a good thing.

The GUI is a typical XBox 360 game UI.

1) Maxed out entirely, visually it maintains the look and feel of FSX. For all the hype, I expected more than FSX.1

I have to disagree on that. Autogens are drawn to much greater distance that in FSX and they look way better and more credible. If you slew to the same position in FSX, the scenery just looks like a mess when compared to Flight.

The GUI is a typical XBox 360 game UI.

So?The scenery is pretty, the Stearman sounds nice, and the missions are entertaining for now. It's exactly what I was expecting, but more enjoyable than I assumed.It won't be getting much of my attention, but it's kind of neat.

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by ZachLW

because I just had a blast flying touch and goes at a dirt strip with the Stearman for the last hour + or so.

since day one in the beta i had a blast doing the same thing too . Im happy that this time around it takes some time to find the fields if you are not familiar with the area.

The GUI is a typical XBox 360 game UI.

Well that explains it then. Don't own an XBox, don't plan to buy an XBox, and they will have to bury me with my joystick in hand, peddles glued to my feet, and my throttle firmly stuck to my other hand... Long live real controls! :LMAO:

I have to disagree on that. Autogens are drawn to much greater distance that in FSX and they look way better and more credible. If you slew to the same position in FSX, the scenery just looks like a mess when compared to Flight.

The size of the taxi signs at the airports (Lihue, Kauai for instance) are outlandishly large. However, the textures and autogen do look good out in the country - there is no doubt that she's a looker in certain areas.

Well that explains it then. Don't own an XBox, don't plan to buy an XBox, and they will have to bury me with my joystick in hand, peddles glued to my feet, and my throttle firmly stuck to my other hand... Long live real controls! :LMAO:

I guess I won't challenge you to a round of Tiger Woods PGA Tour golf then...

And of your just going to shoot back, "well that's your opinion", then we have nothing more to discuss.

I like Flight, and in my opinion it does a number of things better than FSX and X-Plane, I've been using flight since Jan 5th, and I'm still enjoying it (and still am using it way more than FSX and X-Plane, but I hopped back and forth between the three during beta testing).From my first day of beta testing, I fought hard for ATC, and AI traffic (which I MUCH prefer over multiplayer), and Real World Weather. I'm still hoping that these features will eventually be added to Flight.I am not a real pilot, but have used flightsims for as long as I can remember, and I have been a passenger. I'm also a gamer, and make huge overhaul mods for some very popular role playing games. So I get games pretty well (including flightsims). We had a number of real pilots in the Beta, and a number of the Flight Team are real pilots. And Flight's flight modeling was rated very high by most of them. Sometimes I think the problem is that some pilots expect too much in a flightsim. No matter how well a flightsim is done, you are still sitting at your computer, looking at a monitor, without any real seat-in-the-pants feelings of flight. I'm not a pilot, but I have been driving a car for a long time . . . and NO driving sim models the feel of driving my car in real life. I also raced sailboats, and I have tried sailing sims . . . not even close to the real thing,Flying an aircraft in a flightsim is not the same as flying a real aircraft . . . but I don't expect it to be. The best we can hope for in a simulator is to be immersed in the flying experience. And I get that when I use Flight. For me, flying in Flight is more immersive than flying in FSX or X-Plane (even without ATC and AI aircraft). On my 5-year old PC, I'm getting an average of 30 to 50 fps . . . in FSX I get roughtly half that (in rural areas, with AI traffic disabled). When I land at night in Flight, my landing lights actually work to light my way. Stalls in my RV, Stearman, and Maule (from what I understand about stalls), are actually done realistically.And the sounds are very good. The wind sound increases when you lower a flap, or lower the gear, or open the cockpit. When you bump over a rough runway, you hear it (and you almost feel it, if you have the head bobbing effect enabled). When you're on the water (in the Icon A5) you hear the water lapping against your aircraft.I think any flightsim is only as good as you make it. Flight works for me. I'm hoping it will improve, as it it far from perfect, but I'm enjoying what I have in Flight so far.

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by Arwen

One other critic-I've been to the islands multiple times (my step son lived there).Anyone else think the vegetation looks more like California than Hawaii? (bought the $20 add on)

I think this will be a winner for Microsoft for achieving one thing: Exposing many new non-flight sim users to an easy to use intro to flight. Who can tell whether it will hold their interest? However, I know that the full force hard core sims have turned people (including me at first) completely off to simming because of the complexity. It took me a while to really figure out fs98 and pro pilot in order to just get a plane running and take off, not to mention atc, nav, approaches and landing! New users need to be eased into flight. This is a step in that right direction, IMO.There are pros and cons as with any product, but I'm happy for the strengths and opportunities presented, while hoping MS addresses the weaknesses and threats.GraphicsPros: Autogen is much better than default FSX. It looks like there are some photo-real textures under some of the city sections.Cons: I thought I saw flat cars on the photo-real, just like on any bing image. Clouds are a little 2-d after flying with AS2012 for two months.Performance:Pros: This baby sails on my i5. Night and day from my present FSX install. However my FSX install is running a ton of add-ons.Cons: Flight modeling. I'm not a rl pilot, and maybe it is just different than FSX, but it does seem "floaty" even with stability turned off. Is it that every flight model in FSX was wrong, or maybe Flight needs to be tweaked?Gaming Aspects:Pros: The missions, as in FSX, will ease a new pilot into the various skills it takes to control and land a plane.Cons: Once in free flight, well you only have vfr Hawaii and caches. Now a gorgeous vfr Hawaii it is, but missions and caches won't hold the interest of "gamers" or "hard-core simmers", and the lack of variety will not hold the interest of hard-core simmers. Hopefully DLC is released fast-n-furiously.Sounds:Pros: I hear more wind and brake noises than I did in FSX. However with the release of A2A Accusim for all aircraft, FSX has more realism(potentially with the add-on).Lighting:Pros: Lighting is better than FSX overall. Better shadow and cockpit lighting as well.Controls:Cons: trackIR is really a must for me. It is so awkward to go back to the hat switch!Think of it as Global Nuclear War has eradicated life on all of the planet except for Hawaii. You could fly to LA, but you might die of radiation poisoning. Hawaii's not looking too bad now, huh?

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by gtrbarbarian

Just looked at your site Arwen... mostly at the pics as it is late for me. Well worth a second (more in-depth) look.Also, I happened across a statement you made: "Because of this, I come across as sort of an airhead, even though my IQ is well above normal."Never, in all your posts that I read during the beta, did this ever come to mind (the airhead part)... you need to put thoughts like that "out your head". Some things I did not agree with... but one could tell the posts were well thought out and the person writing seriously involved in testing.If I knew you I'd say... "you go girl". So instead, "kudos" for the work you put in.-Rob O.

Anyone else think the vegetation looks more like California than Hawaii? (bought the $20 add on)

Well Geof... that thought never came to my mind... I was a Hollywood Marine based at Kaneohe-Bay for the rest of my tour (minus the WestPacs).I guess I am not that particular... just looking for everything brown in the winter and green in the summer. :-P

Just looked at your site Arwen... mostly at the pics as it is late for me. Well worth a second (more in-depth) look.Also, I happened across a statement you made: "Because of this, I come across as sort of an airhead, even though my IQ is well above normal."Never, in all your posts that I read during the beta, did this ever come to mind (the airhead part)... you need to put thoughts like that "out your head". Some things I did not agree with... but one could tell the posts were well thought out and the person writing seriously involved in testing.If I knew you I'd say... "you go girl". So instead, "kudos" for the work you put in.-Rob O.Well Geof... that thought never came to my mind... I was a Hollywood Marine based at Kaneohe-Bay for the rest of my tour (minus the WestPacs).I guess I am not that particular... just looking for everything brown in the winter and green in the summer. :-P

Me too-moving to California in a few weeks ):