In-depth Flight thoughts after several days

[peterb 0]

Well, having reached level 9, having bought Hawaii and most of the available planes, and having logged a few hours in the virtual air, I think it's time to give my perspective.There's a particular cry that goes out on gaming forums whenever any sort of sequel is released. The cry can be reduced to the phrase "They dumbed it down!" Deconstructing this, what it really means is "They changed some difficult or unforgiving aspect of the game such that more people will want to play it." It's the gamer version of "Oh, that band was really awesome until they sold out." In the music context, "sold out" means "has made music that more people want to listen to."With Flight, Microsoft has made a flight simulator that more people are going to want to play. They've made a flight simulator that more people are going to be able to play. I think this is a great thing.From a high level, here's what Microsoft has done with Flight compared to Flight Simulator X.The graphic engine is completely new. Usually this sort of change is evolutionary, but in Flight's case, it's revolutionary. Specifically, rendering has moved into the 21st century by being moved primarily onto the PC's GPU instead of being CPU-bound. This has a huge number of effects, beginning with "It looks generally better," continuing through "and runs at higher resolutions on the same hardware" and moving on to "with extremely high frame rates compared to FSX.Second, where FSX gave you the entire world, with comparatively low detail, to fly around in, Flight has taken another tack: they've started with the Big Island of Hawaii for free, and made the entire Hawaiian island chain available for download as a purchase. But the positive side of this tradeoff is that the islands exist in a comparatively fleshed out form. Even flying at extremely low altitudes, the scenery is detailed enough that it feels much better than FSX, to my eyes at least.LIkewise, where FSX gave you approximately 7,142,528 different models of aircraft to choose from, Flight gives you two (for free), and makes 3 more (at present) available for purchase.Flight is structured in a very game-like, as compared to sim-like fashion. Yes, you can fly around on your own with no restrictions, or you can run 'missions'. Some missions require particular aircraft (this, by the way, is what some people complaining about the aircraft choice might not have noticed. The Maule, for example, has a price tag not because of the bitmap of the plane, but because it's effectively selling access to the cargo missions.) The missions I've run so far have run the gamut and have been fun and engaging - I particularly enjoyed a coast guard Search & Rescue mission to find a lost kayaker, for example.Furthermore, taking a page from Grand Theft Auto, Flight has a large number of 'aerocaches' hidden throughout the islands; finding them awards you with experience points, the occasional achievement, and bragging rights. The aerocaches are a good way to engage in some virtual tourism, since many of them are located at interesting sites around Hawaii.In what's an interesting decision for a flight simulator, you can get out of your plane and walk around. The world - at least so far - is fairly sterile, so this is more of a curiosity than a major selling point. But it suggests obvious areas for further expansion if Flight takes off.The user interface is quite streamlined, working best with a flightstick but also being perhaps the first Microsoft sim to be plausible with a mouse and keyboard. This will no doubt infuriate purists. But they can get off my lawn. Flight also bravely steals the best ideas from non-flightsim games. For example, there is a "Fly to next waypoint" shortcut that jumps you straight to the next interesting thing in a flight. This is not something one would want to use all the time, but it's nice to have it available when you need it. (Compare this, from a user-interface perspective, with FSX's pretty-much-unusable time compression feature, and you can see how much more thought went into usability).Obviously, this usability comes at a price: I seriously doubt that anyone is going to be learning to fly a real airplane by playing Microsoft Flight. But that's clearly not the market they're trying to sell to, and as a kibbitzer I can't say I disagree with their decision. In the long term, I don't want to be confined to just Hawaii, and for me personally the success or failure of Flight as a platform will hinge upon the extent to which new areas to explore are rolled out.To those who feel that the existence of Flight is somehow a personal affront, all I can say is

• Microsoft is in the business of selling software.
• The existence of Flight doesn't take away your functioning Flight Simulator X
• Microsoft doesn't "owe" you FS XI, XII, or MCMVII.
• No one is forcing you to buy Flight.

"If I'd asked people what they wanted' date=' they would have said a faster horse." -Henry Ford[/quote']Flight is a bold experiment to see if, instead of trying to address the expressed desires of the existing flight sim market, Microsoft can expand it. It's an attempt to focus on quality over quantity, on accessibility over detail. Microsoft is essentially making a wager. The wager is that by focusing all their efforts on the features that they think 90% of the potential customers of flight sims want, they can safely ignore the 10% of the market that wants more 'hardcore' features. My personal opinion is that Microsoft is going to win this wager. But, of course, only time will tell.

Edited March 3, 2012 by peterb

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

Quote:"To those who feel that the existence of Flight is somehow a personal affront, all I can say is

• Microsoft is in the business of selling software.
• The existence of Flight doesn't take away your functioning Flight Simulator X
• Microsoft doesn't "owe" you FS XI, XII, or MCMVII.
• No one is forcing you to buy Flight. "

This is well said. FSX is still there for all of us to enjoy.I also start up Flight once a day or so and fly the RV6 around one of the Hawaiian islandsin various weather conditions. While I avoid the gameplay, I look forward to some Multiplayerwith buddies and just the feeling of flight (no pun intended)....and then, I go back to my RV7 with an RXP GNS530W in the panel, and fly around the PNW area..Lets see what MS turn Flight into.. they've got some ways to go before I would consider removing FSX from my machine!

[Attila 2]

To those who feel that the existence of Flight is somehow a personal affront, all I can say is* Microsoft is in the business of selling software.* The existence of Flight doesn't take away your functioning Flight Simulator X* Microsoft doesn't "owe" you FS XI, XII, or MCMVII.* No one is forcing you to buy Flight.

There was no need for you to include this in your post. Clearly, you are just trying to fan the flames here.However, since you did include these words, just remember them when the next DLC that comes out is not to your liking or is not up to your expectation or whatever. I will expect you to practice what you preach.

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Hello Peter,Welcome to AVSIM. I hope that you will find enjoyment and an online flight home here.Kind regards,

[peterb 0]

There was no need for you to include this in your post. Clearly, you are just trying to fan the flames here.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

However, since you did include these words, just remember them when the next DLC that comes out is not to your liking or is not up to your expectation or whatever. I will expect you to practice what you preach.

I will try to restrain myself from writing angry forum posts from a position of extreme entitlement, yes.

[NismoRR 191]

Well written review and the points you're making are spot on.

[japascoe 98]

Obviously, this usability comes at a price: I seriously doubt that anyone is going to be learning to fly a real airplane by playing Microsoft Flight. But that's clearly not the market they're trying to sell to, and as a kibbitzer I can't say I disagree with their decision. In the long term, I don't want to be confined to just Hawaii, and for me personally the success or failure of Flight as a platform will hinge upon the extent to which new areas to explore are rolled out.

No edition of Flight Simulator was ever intended as a flight training device (barring the commercial spin-offs that have evolved into P3D). However beneath the game structure of Flight there is a very solid flight simulation engine with which provides (as far as I with my 0 RW flying hours can tell) the most realistic flight dynamics of any MS flight simulation product so far. Some of the challenges may be arcade-like, but the actual flight model most definitely is not.

[peterb 0]

Hello Peter,Welcome to AVSIM. I hope that you will find enjoyment and an online flight home here.

Thanks, Stephen!One thing that didn't make it into my review is that in the list of things that are now 'missing' from Flight, the most obvious to me (as an amateur) is the 'flight tutorials' from FSX. As far as I'm concerned, that's the single greatest loss.Obviously, people who are used to flying IFR or big-body airliners in their sim will have their own perspective.

No edition of Flight Simulator was ever intended as a flight training device (barring the commercial spin-offs that have evolved into P3D).

My perspective on this is very specifically skewed because I've spent years playing war-games, both computerized and otherwise. As the market for war-games has shrunk, the "detail oriented" folk became a larger and larger percentage of the market. One of the demands some of these people have is "realism". This leads, eventually, to SSI's The Campaign For North Africa which has so many rules that no reasonable human being can play it and still have fun (most-cited example: the game's Italian troops required additional water supplies so that they could make pasta).I view Flight as an attempt by Microsoft to intentionally and consciously reject the flight-sim-grognardy demand that flying a virtual plane consist of all the parts of flying a real plane, including the parts that aren't any fun. You can see that they're still trying to find the right balance - for example, I think the "Go through the checklist, or just press this button that does it for you" decisions are an example of where they're trying to split the difference.

However beneath the game structure of Flight there is a very solid flight simulation engine with which provides (as far as I with my 0 RW flying hours can tell) the most realistic flight dynamics of any MS flight simulation product so far. Some of the challenges may be arcade-like, but the actual flight model most definitely is not.

It sure doesn't feel particularly 'gamier' than any other sim I've played - but since I have never piloted an actual plane, my opinion on this issue in particular is probably not very useful. Edited March 3, 2012 by peterb

[NWarty 0]

The graphics engine is completely new???...

[peterb 0]

The graphics engine is completely new???...

From an engineering standpoint, yes. It might not look that different in a static screenshot, but rewriting a graphics engine to run on the GPU instead of the CPU isn't a trivial task. And that's 90% of the reason that Flight's framerate is so good.

[MattM1121 1]

Hi Peter,I've never been a fan of "Take it or leave it" in business. There are such things as loyal customers. Myself being one of them for nearly 30 years.I feel that I have been brushed aside. I've been a FS customer for many years and have certain expectations about the simulation. MS has made it clear that this "game" is going in a different direction.I would not say this is a "...revolutionary..." situation but rather evolutionary. This "game" is evolving into a social computing and gaming environment. This is an Xbox game. Nothing more at the moment.This warrants two types of reviews in my opinion. The "simmer" and the "gamer". My knee jerk reaction to the game is one star for simmers and 4 stars for gamers.But, who knows what the future brings. Maybe later DLC and add-ons will bring some for hard core users back.I did, however, really enjoy flying through the fog. The effects were really nice. Now if I could just find a way to implement ICM...But, Peter, I'm glad you like the game. People like both of us will hopefully keep the franchise afloat.Thanks and have fun,-Matt

[tf51d 284]

However beneath the game structure of Flight there is a very solid flight simulation engine with which provides (as far as I with my 0 RW flying hours can tell) the most realistic flight dynamics of any MS flight simulation product so far

You do know, that "very solid flight simulation engine" as you call it, is FSX don't you?

[NWarty 0]

That's what I was inferring

[Cruachan 705]

Hi Peter,Your post and follow-up has to be one of the most accomplished expositions of this evidently contentious issue and I applaud you for trying to bring some perspective to a topic that seems to have caused so much acrimony in the flight sim community.I still have FS9 and FSX installed on my hard drives and it is very unlikely that I will be removing either anytime soon for they still continue to offer a level of complexity and realism as yet unrealized by Microsoft Flight. Like you, I feel that is likely to change and, quite clearly, this will depend on how Flight is received in the coming months and the level of enthusiasm expressed by its supporters for further development.What appears to have been forgotten amidst all this ire are the years, yes years, of toil and effort we, in our relatively small community all invested in FS9 and FSX to 1) make them both work acceptably and 2) to produce simulators which, in the end, managed to approximate the familiar and not so familiar conditions and behaviour experienced in the real world. That has been no mean achievement and yet many of us appear bitterly disappointed that Microsoft Flight is not going to replace either of its predecessors in the forseeable future.Yes, I appreciate that there is this strong sense of betrayal felt amongst those flight sim diehards because, arguably, we were led to believe that Flight would be the logical successor to FSX from the word go, but this has proven not to be the case. Like you, Peter, I can understand why Microsoft have chosen to change direction on this occasion and I suspect that had this not occurred a successor for FSX would never have been developed. It would have been just too costly with the very real prospect of little in the way of sensible financial returns.There was a great deal of criticism levelled at FSX following the initial release and only the huge pressure brought to bear on the development team eventually produced a better performing sim. That pressure, in the main, came from the flight sim community whose collective voice was successful in bringing about some positive change. However, we are relatively few (although growing all the time) as compared to the huge numbers that actually purchased the sim and quickly abandoned it soon afterwards. How many of those disappointed and disillusioned souls knew of websites like AVSIM and how many were aware of all the third party development going on behind the scenes? Ask yourselves, if such third party development had not occurred how many of us would still be following this hobby by running FS9 or FSX? Precious few, I wager. To my way of thinking, this is one of several reasons why Microsoft have chosen this time around to make a significant shift in direction in the hope of capturing a much wider and enthusiastic audience. Who knows where this might lead in the longer term?Yes, Flight is different and I, for one, find that very refreshing and, yes, pleasantly surprising and potentially quite exciting. Were it not for Flight appearing on the scene it was quite likely that I would have ditched this hobby in favour of something else. I blame FSX for this shift in attitude. In the days of FS9 it was fun as we all struggled to correct and improve. These challenges were accepted as being all part of the hobby. However, to be faced with more of the same in FSX was just a pain in the derriere. We have stalwarts like Nick and ******* to thank for encouraging the faithful not to break ranks. Those two, along with a few others, can take well deserved credit for saving this simulator.The other hugely significant factor contributing towards the salvation of FS9 and FSX has been 3rd Part Development. It must be one of the best kept secrets in this world of ours how their fantastic contributions have utterly transformed FS9 and FSX into very impressive and convincing simulators. However, to exploit its potential to the full, FSX must be running on very capable hardware. Evidently Microsoft recognize these factors and, along with the revenue issues, have decided on a sea change shift in direction this time around. I think this has to have been a very sensible, if not inevitable, approach if flight simulation from Microsoft was to survive at all. It may not be to everyone's liking but I believe we will all be winners in the end.Microsoft Flight has the potential to grow into a very impressive product. Release Candidate 1 is a very solid and stable platform on which that growth can begin. It is an impressive looking game and, at its inception, I found it installed automatically, the GUI is intuitive and user friendly and there are no performance hassles! What could be better for a fledgling simulator?FS9 and FSX continue and that has to be welcomed. Once customized, they both become very impressive simulators. Many are saddened by Microsoft's decision to exclude Third Party Development for Flight but, for now, I see this as something to be celebrated. Why? Quite simply because they can continue unhindered with their wonderful support for FS9 and FSX, without having to reinvent the wheel and without the very real threat of demand for their products drying up. This might well have happened had the decision been made instead to develop a full blown simulator at the outset coupled with the exclusion of 3rd Party Contributions in favour of DLC directly from Microsoft.I say again, we are all winners here. I suggest the time has come to relax and offer our support for Microsoft Flight along with the several other worthy flight simulators currently undergoing development. You never know, Microsoft Flight might even rekindle my enthusiasm for flight simming and a return to FSX. I have much more potent new hardware now with Windows 7 Professional 64bit and it is very likely that FSX would run perfectly well with most of the bells and whistles should I decide to install it. Meantime it lies dormant and neglected on my old XP Home based system. Microsoft Flight could change all that :)Mike

[LuisFelizTirado 33]

Thank you , Mike, I enjoyed reading your comments and i hope that others did as well.Best regards.Luis