FLIGHT Gameplay. Do you like it?

[simmerhead 885]

Like most of you I’ve spent the last two days playing FLIGHT. Since I’ve been playing close attention to both official and unofficial info and media over the last year and a half there weren’t that many surprises. If I were to rate the game it would end up somewhere in the middle of the scale. Not great, but not bad either.Ironically and surprisingly I find FLIGHT to be a better flight simulator than a game. The gameplay seems a bit chaotic, but am I missing something? Is there a goal with the game other than increasing the level of the character? It feels like a big soup of aerocache hunts, challenges, missions and jobs. Some of the missions borders to realistic flying while others are just pure arcadish fun, yet they all count and add to your characters experience level and throphy collection.I’m all for freedom in games – open games are often the most fun IMHO – but it would be nice with some overall goal(s). A game like Grand Theft Auto comes to mind. It is a game that balances nicely between being pure fun and a gangster simulator. You can drive around just for fun with complete freedom, or you can go back into character and play the game.What I really miss in FLIGHT is an overall sense of purpose. For starters I’d like to see increased customization options for your character to personalize him/her, and the ability to have multiple characters so friends and family could try the game when they visit without ruining my statistics.Also it would be nice to have a completely separate free flight mode that didn’t add to your characters statistic. I was making a small video of the Icon crashing. That got me the “recless throphy”. That is not the kind of award I’d like to add to my statistic after having just spent an hour getting a perfect score for landing the Kaydet.Most of all I miss career/campaign modes that let you go into character and fly a set of missions/challenges that have a common theme or level of realism. As of now I use FLIGHT much the same way I use Angry Birds. I open it for a quickie, but don’t see myself spending entire evenings playing it.On a positive end note I very much like the aerocache concept. What I enjoyed most with FS98-FSX was learning about the geography of the world. The aerocaches does a nice job showcasing real world locations in the scenery. However I wish a little more info about those places were stores in FLIGHT rather than me having to look things up myself on the Internet.

[newthog 0]

well said! you touched on quite a few topics that I love about Flight - aerocaches let me learn more about where I'm flying, Flight does (to me) seem like a sim with a game added, the bit of direction that is offered to have goals.I also agree that it would be nice to have a progressive structure to it - like "leveling up" in an RPG? For now, though, I'm just having fun getting to know the various aircraft capabilities, and flying over the Islands. Having spent a lot of time there, it's great to see some of the detail that Microsoft has put in to recreate the experience...

[juvat 0]

For what it is, I liked it ok. That game for windows I didn't care for. The Icon aircraft was nice. Runs ok on my oldee-but-goodee desktop. I can't say as to appearance because I dialed down some settings. With the settings I did run it on, it looked good.Frames seemed smooth. It recognized my joystick. When I closed the game, I uninstalled the gfw and win live exp. Haven't tried to see if MSFlt will run without those though; probably not I expect. Will I ever replay-likely. Will I purchase any of its dlc-not likely.jimbFound an Icon Aircraft for FSX which I'll flt check one day.

[simmerhead 885]

For what it is, I liked it ok. That game for windows I didn't care for. The Icon aircraft was nice. Runs ok on my oldee-but-goodee desktop. I can't say as to appearance because I dialed down some settings. With the settings I did run it on, it looked good.Frames seemed smooth. It recognized my joystick. When I closed the game, I uninstalled the gfw and win live exp. Haven't tried to see if MSFlt will run without those though; probably not I expect. Will I ever replay-likely. Will I purchase any of its dlc-not likely.jimbFound an Icon Aircraft for FSX which I'll flt check one day.

But what about the gamplay? :)

[DrMarble 0]

The game has potential for sure. Graphics are smoother and better than FSX for instance. However world size and gameplay is not at the level of FSX yet, emphasizing yet since looking through some of the config files in the user data directories show some promising features. But for now we have to do it without ATC, auto pilot, rudder trim (very annoying when flying with cross wind and having torque settings switched on) and some other stuff a FSX fan would definitely see.

[Guest]

Well, I personally like the balance as it is. If it had some sort of complete careermode I would get the idea I would have to do that or it would give the impression that it's game with an ending. I like it that's it's a sim with some added stuff to keep you going. For me (but that'sjust me) the balance is just right, really. I've played games where you had a career or 'real story' you had to finish and those games also had a free roam possibility. I never really liked the free roam part because it would get boring quickly and as soon as you did a mission or something, you were really out of the free roam and into the (scripted) game. I never liked that. MS Flight is exactly what I want in that regard. A free roaming game with things to do if you want to without having the idea you have left the free roam world.Of course this is all very subjective.

[simmerhead 885]

Well, I personally like the balance as it is. If it had some sort of complete careermode I would get the idea I would have to do that or it would give the impression that it's game with an ending. I like it that's it's a sim with some added stuff to keep you going. For me (but that'sjust me) the balance is just right, really. I've played games where you had a career or 'real story' you had to finish and those games also had a free roam possibility. I never really liked the free roam part because it would get boring quickly and as soon as you did a mission or something, you were really out of the free roam and into the (scripted) game. I never liked that. MS Flight is exactly what I want in that regard. A free roaming game with things to do if you want to without having the idea you have left the free roam world.Of course this is all very subjective.

Good points Jeroen, and I agree completely with some of them. I really wasn't thinking of a "movie storyline game" that can be played from start to finnish. I was thinking more of linking various missions and challenges togehter into many small careers/themes/stories.F.ex. I could sign up as a student pilot and though various challenges earn a pilots liscence, or I could get a job as a transport pilot and get a series of missions themed around transporting goods and livestock, or I could be hired as a coast guard pilot and do a series of SAR missions. These kinds of campaigns would not be the entire game, but complement the freedom that allready exists.

[Guest]

Good points Jeroen, and I agree completely with some of them. I really wasn't thinking of a "movie storyline game" that can be played from start to finnish. I was thinking more of linking various missions and challenges togehter into many small careers/themes/stories.F.ex. I could sign up as a student pilot and though various challenges earn a pilots liscence, or I could get a job as a transport pilot and get a series of missions themed around transporting goods and livestock, or I could be hired as a coast guard pilot and do a series of SAR missions. These kinds of campaigns would not be the entire game, but complement the freedom that allready exists.

Ah, yes, that would be nice indeed. We have that somehow now already, but instead of a license you get a level...

[Attila 2]

Do I like Flight's gameplay? No.This is in fact the biggest beef I have with Flight. It is as ambiguous and undefined as the MS promotional info for it. It makes some sense, because even MS doesn't know what it wants Flight to be - and it shows.Flight is neither a good flight simulator nor a good flight game. This is the real problem. It is good at nothing. It is a hodge-podge of features and half-implemented features tossed together that come off as badly designed and half finished, completely devoid of polish in most areas.What is the logic behind having to click on each airport to find the one with a specific ICAO code, instead of picking it from a list. Why is there no way to start from a parking position? Why does it have to be a chore to find a job that I might want to fly? Why is there no list of jobs for all of the airports? What is the point of doing any of these jobs? Why is there no career where I would have a reason to fly efficiently - perhaps earn money to buy fuel and repair the plane, which would nicely lend itself to in-flight failures. Why is there nothing interesting to do, besides sight-seeing at tree-top level or do some repetitious and pointless tasks?Where is my flight log-book? Where is my kneepad with v-speeds and limits? Where is the documentation for the planes?I have a thousand questions of this type and when I sum it up, Flight is a below-average game and far below-average simulation at a price-point that is way too high for the mediocre implementation.$15 for the Maule without an autopilot and documentation? Really? $8 for the hull of the Mustang? Really?How are all these new players ever going to learn to fly when there is hardly any info in Flight about how to fly? Flight is far more a game than a simulator and it is a bad game at that. Fly a 200+ nm trip over water at 140 kts to deliver some overweight cargo? That's the game? Yep, that's it.

Edited March 2, 2012 by Attila

[Ben Cap 89]

On a positive end note I very much like the aerocache concept.

Aerocaches really keep me going on trying to get higher xp. I really enjoy the way that it indirectly "forces" you to explore new areas of the island.

[fenixtucu 0]

Although its novelty, and its nice graphics (some of them, because clouds are awful), etc. ... generally speaking, I didn't like Flight much.

Do I like Flight's gameplay? No.This is in fact the biggest beef I have with Flight. It is as ambiguous and undefined as the MS promotional info for it. It makes some sense, because even MS doesn't know what it wants Flight to be - and it shows.Flight is neither a good flight simulator nor a good flight game. This is the real problem. It is good at nothing. It is a hodge-podge of features and half-implemented features tossed together that come off as badly designed and half finished, completely devoid of polish in most areas.What is the logic behind having to click on each airport to find the one with a specific ICAO code, instead of picking it from a list. Why is there no way to start from a parking position? Why does it have to be a chore to find a job that I might want to fly? Why is there no list of jobs for all of the airports? What is the point of doing any of these jobs? Why is there no career where I would have a reason to fly efficiently - perhaps earn money to buy fuel and repair the plane, which would nicely lend itself to in-flight failures. Why is there nothing interesting to do, besides sight-seeing at tree-top level or do some repetitious and pointless tasks?Where is my flight log-book? Where is my kneepad with v-speeds and limits? Where is the documentation for the planes?I have a thousand questions of this type and when I sum it up, Flight is a below-average game and far below-average simulation at a price-point that is way too high for the mediocre implementation.$15 for the Maule without an autopilot and documentation? Really? $8 for the hull of the Mustang? Really?How are all these new players ever going to learn to fly when there is hardly any info in Flight about how to fly? Flight is far more a game than a simulator and it is a bad game at that. Fly a 200+ nm trip over water at 140 kts to deliver some overweight cargo? That's the game? Yep, that's it.

I agree with Attila. The fact is that Flight does not incorporate nothing new to the scene. As a game, I get bored really quickly, and as a sim... well, of course It is not one.

[aentwis 61]

Of course it is a simulation. Which flight game allows the use of checklists to start up the aircraft? Now, we can argue about the level of that simulation, but a simulation of flight it is and will remain...Now on to other points...The first thing to go, as on FSX when I first installed that, was that music... never liked GUI music in any game I have ever looked at...After the "forced" tutorial flights, which are understandable (though I cannot stand the voiceover), you get to the free flight mode if you want. The look and feel is generally FSX, though the ground textures are of course an improvement. I prefer the sound in FSX. It is hard to judge how the water and clouds compare to out of the box FSX, as I use REX for textures now...I unlocked the Stearman (the process of which I personally find to be annoying, though I am sure anyone with an XBox or similar will be fully aware of how this is supposed to work. I don't like it at all for a number of reasons, some of which are IT-security related...) and flew from Hilo for a bit.One of the first things I noticed is the temperature gauge is haywire. It redlines within seconds of starting... though I believe this bug has been mentioned here on avsim, I would have thought that should have been picked up by the Beta testers...I also see a graphics glitch around the entire aircraft, which is hard to describe. I would have to post a shot of it... Around the Stearman there appears to be some form or shadowing of the airframe projected onto clouds...The general shadowing on the aircraft airframe I find a nice improvement, as well as the cockpit navigation capabilities with the mouse. However, there is simply not enough to wow me "in game" into buying addon packs...When I picked up FSX for the first time, I knew what the market was, what the potential was, what was already available. I waited until PC capabilities were enough to run it smoothly enough for me to run higher end, more demanding addons.It will be some time before I purchase anything for Flight, if ever. With the current state of play, there is not enough on offer for me.It was a daring move by Microsoft to turn a new leaf and head for pastures (and markets) new, and of course not without controversy, but we know that Microsoft and co love controversy...For all those "haters" and naysayers out there: you have to try it to make an opinion that is at least vaguely objective. Only then can you be taken more seriously. It would be so easy to criticize and whinge about what it can't do. It is too early to say for final, and anyway, it is not any where near as bad as some here would say.I would like to see the ability to incorporate real weather à la Active Sky or REX. Fixed scenarios just won't work once you can fly any distance more than say 30-50nm, particularly in a mountainous island environment...There is no problem in Flight that cannot be fixed probably. It is just the question as to whether MS wants to fix what some see as problematic... Then again, we see that with FSX and a number of developers' work too, no doubt...For all those enjoying it, good on you and hope you continue having fun. Flight is not for me currently, I see no reason to "invest" in expansion of it, when I can put the cash to much more use in my existing FSX install in the form of an addon aircraft or airport, or utility for that matter...CheersAndrew

Edited March 2, 2012 by aentwis

[g_precentralis 191]

I disagree, I found gameplay is great but simulator value is limited (for now). Of course, we can speak about simulator on different levels, some simulators target for "how well is flight model simulated", some others are great procedural simulators, some others aim at combat deployment... I think we can talk only about flight models right now, without serious Wx, ATC, traffic, AP, charts of any kind, AFM, MCC, ME...

Edited March 2, 2012 by g_precentralis

[Attila 2]

I disagree, I found gameplay is great but simulator value is limited (for now). Of course, we can speak about simulator on different levels, some simulators target for "how well is flight model simulated", some others are great procedural simulators, some others aim at combat deployment... I think we can talk only about flight models right now, without serious Wx, ATC, traffic, AP, charts of any kind, AFM, MCC, ME...

Actually, I don't think we can talk about flight models at all.The reason is that even people who say they own the same plane cannot agree about certain characteristics of the planes in Flight. Add to this the varied experiences people had with FSX and when was the last time they actually flew the same plane in FSX as they fly in Flight.Then there is controller quality and setup. In Flight, it is not possible to adjust anything and for all I know someone posting about flight model is using an xbox controller and someone else is using a yoke to fly the RV.Flight model can be better measured by flying by the numbers. This kind of comparison has not been done. With the limited capabilities of Flight and the aircraft we now have, there is no way to measure many things. The feeling of flight is as subjective in Flight vs FSX as it is with FSX vs XP.I have never flown any of the planes in Flight in real life, but I have seen them fly and I do have certain expectation from different types of planes. Many people seem to think that the harder it is to fly, the more realistic it is. In some cases, perhaps, but that is not the rule.Unless someone puts out numbers on verifiable performance, we are only going to have an improperly defined set of conditions and gut feelings with a high dose "I know better than you" thrown in.

[OHN 1]

I absolutely love the "gameplay", just been on a wonderfull flight with a cameraman in the RV. Starting up the plane using the nice checklist and just listening to the sounds is amazing. I dont have more time writing, im off to buy the maule so i can deliver some passengers and cargo, see ya online.

Edited March 2, 2012 by OHN