Okay,I spent 45 minutes with it (Vans, Stearman, ICON)...In a nutshell, Flight has enjoyed two transformative medical procedures:1) Plastic surgery - looks greatThe aesthetics are wonderful and I really get it that people are wowed by this.2) Lobotomy - feels dumbNearly everything that I heralded as captivating and progressive is gone - no real weather, no air traffic, a very reduced set of options, a very reduced world, an arcade look and feel, challenges that are not, no slew, no starting at parking, no ATC, no helicopters, etc. etc. NO SDK...I certainly see the potential to get casual folks interested, but this reminds me of the introductory flight that is often promoted to get people to take up flight training. Such introductory flights are usually casual and meant to convey the joy of flight. However, as one moves along in flight training, the serious topics come about.Now that I have empirical evidence, I would suggest that MS Flight is a glossy fashion mag that lacks anything approaching depth. I can say that the flight modeling "feels" good in all three aircraft I have, but it isn't a drastic improvement over FSX.I would not say that the gains overcome the costs at the moment. However, if I get the "missing" things back, I suppose I'd be willing to be financially "fleeced" to obtain them along side the nice improvement in visuals.P.S.I see that Adam Szofran is still involved - he has innovated much in the franchise along the way.

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by ahuimanu

I see that Adam Szofran is still involved - he has innovated much in the franchise along the way.

And there might be a message there...

And there might be a message there...

Life is too short for subterfuge, please sketch a roadmap in your blog or something Tom...

I think thats a fair review of Flight to a hard core simmer. Introductory flights have lead to many great pilots.