I was on the beta from the beginning. At the onset, other beta testers attacked me for suggesting the typical disclaimer about epilepsy and said I had "brain damage" or was suffering from a "mental disease" and this person wanted to know "where is the moderator when we need one?" Seriously! (I did a little research to find this guy spends a lot of time searching for sex partners, all the while bragging about how "well endowed" he is. So basically, he "is"...I mean "has" a big..you know what! LOL)So, for me, this was the general behavior from a lot of beta testers. So whether or not any "real" value came from those involved is hard to say. I was pretty fed up with the lack of maturity and professionalism from the group as a whole.Okay, back to why I started this post. I am a big fan of FS. Have been for a long time. I will try to say positive things, and not-so positive things. And this is just my opinion, and is in no way a reflection of the product.My NEGATIVESI am not a fan of the LIVE membership at all, so this is the first turn-off for me. I don't really participate in any multiplayer environment, whether driving games or flying, or air traffic etc. So, that part of the product doesn't really interest me. And that's okay, I don't take advantage of that feature and probably never will.But, with that being said, free flight mode is very lonely. You can fly all over the islands completely isolated and alone with no fear of running into any other aircraft. I guess that's a good thing. But the FLIGHT world is very emply without other aircraft about. The #1 suggestion in the beta was environmental air traffic control. That would at least give the illusion that you are not the sole survivor on the planet after some apocalyptic event; which is why there is no one else in the sky.So, that leaves me with the only way to enjoy the game is through missions and challenges. For me, they are cheesy. But that's just my opinion. Flying around to take photos, or deliver someone to eat a $100 hamburger does not get me real excited.My POSITIVESI find the overall design is absolutely beautiful. It runs extremely well on my system, which tends to stutter frequently under FSX. So that is definitely more enjoyable.The weather systems look much better, way more realistic.Geting into the air is much easier. It doesn't take a lot of flying expertise/knowledge to truly experience flying.Looking around is fairly simple, and the scenery is well rendered and accurate.As a developer, it is intriguing to fly around and try to figure out how this is put-together from an engineering perspective.BOTTOM LINEI may not be the target demographic to make this product successful, but that doesn't mean it isn't good, it simply means I will not enjoy it as others will. I don't enjoy Gears Of War, but millions of others do. And hardcore simmers might say this is going to be a flop. But, just because it might not attrack the serious flight sim enthusiast, doesn't mean its going to be a flop.What really constitutes a flop? the amount of revenue it generates? Or a following? I think FLIGHT will succeed in both. It just may not be the revenue or following created by the hardcore flight simulator fan as defined today.

Interesting: "....It doesn't take a lot of flying expertise/knowledge to truly experience flying."what is experience flying? without knowing what are you doing?But you've rasied good points just this was a little strange for me.thanks

Let me add that MS continues to state that this is "just the beginning" and that more enhancements will follow..I, for one, am really disappointed that the Maule autopilot which was inop during the beta is still inopin the release version.. how hard would that be to fix?Also, I agree with the OP that Flight gets pretty lonely, pretty quickly. I'm looking to team up with a flying buddyto see if that transforms the experience, but having some life on the ground would surely help also!

I just landed at a few dirt strips near Hilo. One thing I would have liked to see is a few planes parked somewhere around the field. Would make them more realistic and easier to find.

I have to agree that gets pretty lonely . I think that this time MS idea was to try and see if they can replace AI traffic with a actual pilot in the controls of the other traffic .when it comes to the online experience there has to be a more organize way to flight online to avoid walking into a session and getting chase by another pilot all the time . During the beta i did mention that it may be a good idea to have another session that allows more than 16 pilots and also that to have acces to this biger session the pilot should have gone thru some simple type of training before he can have permission to enter this session . I love the idea that all the time instead of having AI traffic we have a actual human behind the controls of every other aircraft we interact with in flight . How nice it would be to enter multiplayer in a non controlled airfield and use the unicom to report your intentions ??????? .

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by rtodepart

I've never bought anything on X-Box / GFWL before, so today the experience was all new to me. I thought it might have worked like Steam where you just pay for exactly what you are buying. But then I found out I had to buy 2000 points to cover the Add-on pack. There was therefore a bit of "sticker shock" when I realised I had paid $33 for this add-on, though obviously my account is in credit for 400 points.But then again, I personally feel I am getting more play value out of this first add-on than any comparably priced third party FSX add-ons, so in the end I am pretty happy with it, though I am clearly going to need to regularly put funds aside for scenery updates.Although personally I find there is enough to keep me entertained for the time being (I am easy to please admittedly and my chronic pain limits my computer time anyway), I share your sentiments that there is likely not a whole lot to maintain the interest of normal people at this stage. I agree it is rather lonely at the moment but I would be amazed if there was no add-on in the future to at least partially address that.

I find your thoughts to be some of the more balanced ones I have heard.Some of the other threads I have read however leave me shaking my head a bit. For instance, Many have complained of DLC prices, yet as an actual fan of Hawaii, I have brought many scenery's within the FSX ecosystem for that area.Totaling up the cost of those various airports (which are all included in the flight Hawaiian islands package) there seems no factual comparison at all.Which brings up another thing I have heard about. "Default quality" planes. Yet again, looking at the included planes, the details are incredible, and seem on par with many FSX craft people pay happily for, but.......Meh.I just want to say I much prefer balanced reviews like yours even if I disagree with the conclusions, rather than simple rants, which leave me hungering for concrete details of exactly why some feel FLIGHT! to be lacking, so I can understand better.

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by HiFlyer'

I think that If one takes the time to look into flight with a positive view it does not take alot of time to see that the room for more heavy stuff its there already . like i mention before its just the first day lets wait and see.

I was a beta tester too and my view on it is if it brings a new generation of Flight Simmers into the hobby then it did its job. I started Flight Sim when I was 12 and I am 40 years old now. The first releases by SubLOGIC were far more simple compared to FSX today. MS Flight is easy to get into for that user just starting out and that is great for a new user into Flight Sim.Hopefully one day their will be more challenging aircraft to fly in MS Flight as it develops further. But every release of MSFS to date has always had very basic default aircraft to start.Scenery, weather and performance is great so two very enthusiastic thumbs up from me in that catagory....Enjoy Flight everyoneCheers

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by ytzpilot

I was a beta tester too and my view on it is if it brings a new generation of Flight Simmers into the hobby then it did its job. I started Flight Sim when I was 12 and I am 40 years old now. The first releases by SubLOGIC were far more simple compared to FSX today. MS Flight is easy to get into for that user just starting out and that is great for a new user into Flight Sim.Hopefully one day their will be more challenging aircraft to fly in MS Flight as it develops further. But every release of MSFS to date has always had very basic default aircraft to start.Scenery, weather and performance is great so two very enthusiastic thumbs up from me in that catagory....Enjoy Flight everyoneCheers

Very well said!

I too was an early beta tester and my thoughts mirror ytzpilot, as my life experience is very similar. I started simming at age 11, I'm now 32 and enjoy it every single day I have some spare time. There is no other game in the world that has captivated me for such a period of time and if new blood is brought into the world of simming, then we will all benefit, as the market share of simulation goes up and other companies will jump on the wagon to get a slice of that juicy pie.Will I ever use MS Flight? No, it is too simplified for me to enjoy more than the scenery and graphics. But I sure hope a bunch of kids jump on it and get into this hobby. The single biggest negative of MS Flight is the Windows Live experience. I use it with Batman Arkham City too, and I hate it as my connection isn't awesome, so when my connection is down, I simply can't play.

The single biggest negative of MS Flight is the Windows Live experience. I use it with Batman Arkham City too, and I hate it as my connection isn't awesome, so when my connection is down, I simply can't play.

Unlike Batman Arkham City though, Flight can still be "played" even if one's internet connection is down. Actually, it can still be run when one's internet connection is up, but still remain disconnected from LIVE entirely! :Nerd:

I was a beta tester too and my view on it is if it brings a new generation of Flight Simmers into the hobby then it did its job. I started Flight Sim when I was 12 and I am 40 years old now. The first releases by SubLOGIC were far more simple compared to FSX today. MS Flight is easy to get into for that user just starting out and that is great for a new user into Flight Sim.Hopefully one day their will be more challenging aircraft to fly in MS Flight as it develops further. But every release of MSFS to date has always had very basic default aircraft to start.Scenery, weather and performance is great so two very enthusiastic thumbs up from me in that catagory....Enjoy Flight everyoneCheers

Good perspective. I certainly became addicted to flying because of my childhood introduction to FS in all of its 10 by 10 grid sopwith camel glory. I remember reading an early review of it from a pilot who said he thought real flying was easier given the early limitations of graphics and controls. Now, 30 ish years later, I'm a licensed private pilot and airplane owner who still plays around with FS since I'm never going to be airline pilot and I enjoy the detailed add-ons. I'm not the target audience here either, but I certainly would download it and fly around Hawaii for free to try it... Not going on MS Live. I don't even do online with FSX. (Online flying groups tend to get annoyed when you use the "pause" feature while dealing with kids/wife/outside life...) If some 10 year old gets hooked on flight because of this "game", then I'm cool with that. The kids these days (shakes cane) do like online gaming - a lot. Most video games now are essentially nothing more than scripted tutorials so you can go online and play. So, if MS wants to push this into an XBOX Live kind of scenario, that makes sense even if us old-timers (removes dentures) are non-plused. Sounds like people do like the way it looks and runs, with the limitations already noted, so at least worth a few minutes playing around.

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by realpilotsimpilot

I was never a beta tester (didn't apply), but overall I share the views of the OP and others here regarding MS Flight.While I have been quite negative on this subject, I always knew that I would download it on the first day and try it out. I did this earlier in the certain knowledge that I will soon be un-installing it as it does not do what I want it to do at present, but I wanted to see for myself if it looks good and performs well on my system. Well, it does both. In a way I was hoping it wouldn’t as that would mean I could just forget about it. In fact, it will probably perform better if I install it in a more regular place. At the moment it languishes in a sandbox (i.e. a virtual machine) on my slowest hard drive, with all sliders maxed out. Even so, FRAPS tells me I am getting around 60FPS, and my own eyes have yet to detect a stutter. So, my congratulations go to everyone involved. You have the beginnings of what promises to be an excellent product.But like I said earlier, I WILL soon be uninstalling it. The sandbox makes this virtually instantaneous and complete – including registry entries and anything that would otherwise be left behind. My reason is as stated: at present it does not meet my requirements. The two things I need most are high quality aircraft with deep systems simulation such as PMDG et al, and the whole world simulated in reasonable quality with at least as many airports scattered around as FSX has. I suppose the latter is really two things, but to me they go hand-in-hand. Once these two basic requirements are met, even if only by purchasing upgrades, I may be tempted to re-install Flight and start parting with real money. Also, this would be a true performance test.Microsoft should take note of what I was doing while Flight was pouring down into my sandbox. I planned a flight with FSbuild from Christchurch, New Zealand (NZCH) to Pegasus Ice Runway (NZPG) at McMurdo Station, Antarctica, after manually editing the required files to include the latter. Then I started Active Sky 2012 to set real world weather, then FSX, selected the PMDG MD11F, did the fuel calculations and other stuff with TOPCAT, and finally got my FS2Crew co-pilot to flip switches and keep me company. On another day I might have used VATSIM, IVAO, Radar Contact or PFE, but not today. My flight is currently saved at about the half way stage until I resume in a day or two. When I do, I can look forward to landing in Aerosoft's superb Antarctica scenery. From there, I will go Via the Falkland Islands and Ascension Island to any of the numerous high quality airports I have for my native UK. Along the way, I shall admire lots of scenery on different continents.When I can do the above with Flight, it will return to my PC, and could well replace FSX. I like the quality of Flight, but it is not yet enough, and MS can keep the gold coins. I hope it will fulfil its potential, and it certainly has lots of that, but until then it is gone.However, like the OP, it has got me interested enough to check back every so often to see what developments have taken place. But Microsoft executives are kindly asked to bear in mind that I need the complete package to be available before I spend any money on it.

Edited February 29, 201214 yr by tipitout

Unlike Batman Arkham City though, Flight can still be "played" even if one's internet connection is down. Actually, it can still be run when one's internet connection is up, but still remain disconnected from LIVE entirely! :Nerd:

My bad for not explaining myself well enough, as usual! Yes, I was specifically talking about Batman, but I just don't like Windows Live at all, much for the same reasons I don't like Steam or any other content manager--I'm just not ready to go down that route, I enjoy having a box with my DVD in it far too much still. I'll probably evolve instead of being left behind but not yet.