move back ??? don't understand why it has to be one or the other.

I don't see much replay value in Flight.There's the novelty factor at the moment. Once that wears out, the kids will move back to their favourite shoot em ups. The other day I logged in and all everyone was doing was crashing into one another. Fun? Yes, for 15 minutes. I didn't know what to do after that.

move back ??? don't understand why it has to be one or the other.

I've moved back as well. For some Flight fills a gap in their needs and wants, for others it was a step in the wrong direction. It doesn't have to be one or the other, but what's wrong if it is? Flight and FSX are two very different products and it's not that strange that people will favour one over the other. I tried really hard for a week to like Flight, did all the missions and challenges, tried a few jobs, went hunting for aerocaches. I wantet it to be good, but the gamplay isn't for me. No fun and no sense of real achievement, and free flight feels strange with no AI or ATC chatter.

MS Flight is a totally different product. Pretty much arcade for the kids and the frail ...

I guess that makes me one of the frail... for a kid I ain't any more :(

FLIGHT has a lot of potential and e.g. the flight dynamics have definitely improved over FSX, but as long as MS isn't providing more interesting airplanes and sceneries (I prefer my SoCal photoscenery over FLIGHTs Hawaii a lot), or even better allows 3rd party developers to sell their planes, I stay with FSX..

@ Pieke:Childhood an old age is about the same IMO...Both ages usually wear diapers, and can´t talk clearly + a variety of other things! :(

move back ??? don't understand why it has to be one or the other.

It is simply a statement to show that I tried Flight, did not find it that satisfying, am not intersted in spending more money. Perhaps I should have said "returned" after a short hiatus.

I guess that makes me one of the frail... for a kid I ain't any more :(

You crack me up this morning Bert!

I installed Flight too. Its a different product for young newbies who could potentially become hardcore simmers and may move into FSX.When I read that intersting post by a school teacher in the Flight thread, I thought it was neat that its a good product to get youngsters started. I too have tried installing FS9 on some youngsters PC to get them on Flight simming..but it never went anywhere. But something like Flight is a low hanging fruit for them to get started.But Flight is totally a different product.Manny

Welcome back, I honestly don't see how anyone who has invested a large some of money as many FSX users have can possible fall for what is in my opinion a money grab. How long before MS leave this project unfinished and move onto something else just like they did with FSX.Bryan.

I hear you, but in all fairness FSX is the result of 25 years of continued development... Too bad they didn't want to end on a high note.

MS Flight is a totally different product. Pretty much arcade for the kids and the frail but that's ok, some of them will gradutate to simmers like us. That will boost our community and, from what I can see. that's one of the most powerful things about fsx.

Like Bert, I too must be one of the frail... but I really look forward to 'gradutating' someday, but studying all this ciphering is making my head hurt...

I use bothFlight is really outstanding for dusk scenario in inclement weather. The sun shining from time to time through the cloud and the lighting effects on the windshield, dashboard and on the ground scenery is much better than fsx. I also prefer the flight model witch is really the base of any good sim. The vasi and runway lighting is also much more realistic as well as the runway textures so you dont see airport from 20 NM which never happen in that in real world unless you are really in line with the runway. Landing light do project lighting on ground and objects so you really got the real effect of approaching a runway in the night. Flight bring me what is closest to a real flying experience on those conditions. Add to that the very good sound effect and i definitively prefer it for dusk or limited visibility flying. And it is smoother than fsx witch also bring better immersion as you are not distracted by stuttering.Then I prefer fsx for all the others functionality that flight does not integate yet.For me none of them win across the board. Flight beat fsx to the ground in some scenario and fsx beat flight in some others.

If I want to watch an action movie, I'll stick on a Micheal Bay DVD, whereas if I want to watch something artistic, I'll watch maybe an Akira Kurosawa DVD. You can have both and can be in the mood for either. It is the same with Flight and FSX in many respects, however, where this analogy is concerned, it might be worth looking upon Flight as though it was a director's first attempt at a movie; with time it will expand and improve, unlike Micheal Bay's artistic abilities, which probably won't LOL. However, that does not mean he is not good at what he does, like Flight is good at what it does; Flight and FSX are horses for courses.Al

I use bothFlight is really outstanding for dusk scenario in inclement weather. The sun shining from time to time through the cloud and the lighting effects on the windshield, dashboard and on the ground scenery is much better than fsx. I also prefer the flight model witch is really the base of any good sim. The vasi and runway lighting is also much more realistic as well as the runway textures so you dont see airport from 20 NM which never happen in that in real world unless you are really in line with the runway. Landing light do project lighting on ground and objects so you really got the real effect of approaching a runway in the night. Flight bring me what is closest to a real flying experience on those conditions. Add to that the very good sound effect and i definitively prefer it for dusk or limited visibility flying. And it is smoother than fsx witch also bring better immersion as you are not distracted by stuttering.Then I prefer fsx for all the others functionality that flight does not integate yet.For me none of them win across the board. Flight beat fsx to the ground in some scenario and fsx beat flight in some others.

Same here - they both satisfy me , and I get entertainment from both , in different ways.I personally am glad I have both on my system.

FLIGHT has a lot of potential and e.g. the flight dynamics have definitely improved over FSX,

In what way is the flight dynamic better in Flight compared to FSX?

I'll keep my eye on Flight, but for now it will just mostly sit idle on my HD. I really don't care much for the adventures and challenges in Flight as I like provide my own imagination to create flights. I learned to fly and navigate back in the early 80's with the Sub-Logic Flight Simulator by Bruce Artwick. Essentially it was the same as MS fS2. I have stayed with MS FS and evolved along with it's improvements till this day. Stripping 90 percent of the content and functionality from FSX to make flight is not advancement in my eye.If MS adds significant functionality to Flight in the future they may lure me back, but MS has given little indication as to their true intentions so call me skeptical..