In my opinion IGN tells the truth, good review. Flight will never be another FSX kind of simulator, thats for sure, you do not release an arcade game and then build real simulator from it like some speculation says. But will it be good game? Only time will show that. But as far as I can tell there is not very big market for civilian flying game that is not very realistic. But on the other hand Flight probably does not require very many DLCs bought to make money, it seems to be pretty low scale project and uses many ways old technology from FSX which of course reduces costs of its making.

To me what has to be considered is how much enjoyment you get out of a particular product (game/flight sim in this case). I have bought and flown flight simulators ever since my first Atari computer and Sub Logic flight sim. I had Falcon 4.0, many versions of Flight Simulator and up to X. I have bought many many add ons for Flight Sim X. I bought and gave away X-Plane (10 I think <shrug>).I also have DCS A10 and purchased my X52 Pro controller specifically for that "game".The bottom line is that I do not have the time to spend every waking moment to learn every little switch and pre-take off procedure just to get an A10 in the air. The bottom line is that no matter how many switches and controls they give me I still am sitting in my home at my desk looking at a computer screen. All the complexity means that if I don't have 100's of hours then I will never truly be able to "fly" the simulator like it is suppose to be flown. The same was true for Falcon 4.0. Therefore, no matter how hard I tried, the true "simulators" collected virtual dust.I have logged 100's of hours on Flight Sim X. However, even with all the best Mega scenery packs and everything else it just never quit felt like I was truly flying. It was good, and left X-Plane feeling like a joke to me, but it always felt "choopy" . It felt like a computer program trying to simulate the real world; it never totally grabbed me.Yes Flight is in it's infancy and yes it has a long way to go. But, it feels a lot more like I am actually controlling an airplane. Like I am actually flying over the Islands. I find I have more time into Flight in such a short period than I ever did in MSFS X over several months. And I have probably already put more hours into Flight then I have in total on DCS A10. And is this not really what it is all about?I enjoy Flight and I look forward to what the future may bring. I hope they continue to bring this new flight simulator to it's full potential. For me it may very well be the best flight simulator ever. And trust me when I say, I have tried many if not most of them.I give it a solid 8/10 for flight feel and scenery detail at this point.... 9.5/10 for potential.... and since I did not realize it had even been released until I went and looked for it, I give Microsoft's PR and Marketing 1/10.I like Flight and I hope that reviewers who either do not like the genera or do not give it a through enough test to truly understand it, do not influence what may well be the brightest future of any product for our beloved hobby. IGN should not have published that review without venting and realizing that the reviewer just "does not get" civilian flight simulators.

as far as I can tell there is not very big market for civilian flying game that is not very realistic.

In what ways do you feel Flight is "not very realistic?" Please be specific.

Arcade game? Oh my... here it comes again. I do not thing that having unrealistic mission in fairly realistic flight game (in its narrow scope) does make the game arcade. It's like saying that Jade Empire is just a stupid action game because it has few simple air shoot-them-up missions - it's a fallacy. BTW I really like those missions, and it's actually first time I really tried to master cross-wind landings, among other things.BTW I would rate the Flight as a 6-7 with potential to be 8-9.

In what ways do you feel Flight is "not very realistic?" Please be specific.

Well, my idea of very realistic is simulator with planes that have systems overall simulated as well as on A2A or PMDG planes in FSX. No plane in Flight can so far come near any A2A product for example.Surely it has some realism aspects like flight dynamics which surely are better than in most flying games, but no complete system simulations.

realizing that the reviewer just "does not get" civilian flight simulators.

Can Flight be called a simulator?I would say that Flight does not simulate all aspects of flying too well.

It felt like a computer program trying to simulate the real world

Well thats what simulator usually is, a computer program trying to simulate some thing as close to real world as possible.

Flight could have been very succesfull if the "masterminds" behind all this really had gave it a thought, too bad they really look like a big joke now, im not saying its bad if you really like flying, its just not good at all seen from a gaming view point. There need to be a career mode, just having xp makes no sense at all, what is the point with this xp anyway. Maybe they thought oh the big mmo´s have xp lets do that also without any idea what to do with it, you dont even unlock other missions or planes. Do they really think gamers are that stupid, it certainly looks like it

Well, my idea of very realistic is simulator with planes that have systems overall simulated as well as on A2A or PMDG planes in FSX. No plane in Flight can so far come near any A2A product for example.Surely it has some realism aspects like flight dynamics which surely are better than in most flying games, but no complete system simulations.Can Flight be called a simulator?I would say that Flight does not simulate all aspects of flying too well.Well thats what simulator usually is, a computer program trying to simulate some thing as close to real world as possible.

If you are going to quote me, PLEASE quote me entirely, not para-phrasing to make it look different...."I have logged 100's of hours on Flight Sim X. However, even with all the best Mega scenery packs and everything else it just never quit felt like I was truly flying. It was good, and left X-Plane feeling like a joke to me, but it always felt "choopy" . It felt like a computer program trying to simulate the real world; it never totally grabbed me." The line in respect to my usage had a differences meaning... in other words, it felt more like a computer program than a simulator.... flight, to me feels more like true flying dynamics.

Also, by using DLC model they can keep adding on and adding on, in shorter iterations. Not have to wait to have, and market an expansion pack. So they got the basics correct out of the gate.... excellent flight dynamics and extremely good scenery graphics to fly over and around in. Some solid aircraft.... and some missions to keep you busy and using the simulator (and I do mean simulator). Yes it does not simulate all aspects yet, but it very well could in the near future.They could add content to the XP system, why not.... they already give you a paint pack by completing the tutorial and unlock other paint schemes by completing certain things.They should and probably will add a more dynamic environment and add more simulation elements in the future. But they got the basics right at first.It runs extremely smooth... all seems to work without little to no bugs.... I only wish other "high profile" products were released in such a mature state.Also, many MMOs are released with "planned content"... for example LoTR did not even have level 50 spells until over six months after release... and SWTOR, which is one of the most popular MMOs, came out in December.... well Legacy experience, that you build and build has no purpose now, but will have some functions attached to it in a few months. This is definitely the DLC content model, and leaves it wide open to add and add and add over time. As a professional programmer I can tell you in no uncertain terms, it is the new model of software development, and is highly recommended by Microsoft in all aspects of professional software development. MS has published several books detailing this programming model.

Can Flight be called a simulator?I would say that Flight does not simulate all aspects of flying too well.

Thanks for your answer! I do not understand one think - you seem to advance that not having a scope broad enough prevents Flight to be a simulator. But I do not think that really follows - you have a very good ATC simulator, that doesn't emulate the flight too well - but that doesn't make it not being a simulator. Narrower focus doesn't preclude possibility to simulate. Not simulating all aspects of flying too well seems to me the same way - that it doesn't automatically make Flight not a simulator. It can make it a narrowly focused simulator though - which is what the devs have been saying for a long time. Flight is focused on the very act of flying with small aircrafts - not communicating with ATC, not planning your flight, not operating big airplane to fly by wire. I think it is a shame that it wasn't marketed clearly enough in this way...

Flight could have been very succesfull if the "masterminds" behind all this really had gave it a thought, too bad they really look like a big joke now, im not saying its bad if you really like flying, its just not good at all seen from a gaming view point. There need to be a career mode, just having xp makes no sense at all, what is the point with this xp anyway. Maybe they thought oh the big mmo´s have xp lets do that also without any idea what to do with it, you dont even unlock other missions or planes. Do they really think gamers are that stupid, it certainly looks like it

You do unlock missions. It's not that different from major multiplayer FPS such as COD.

Flight is a simulator just as much as FSX is, and both are also games, and both also include arcade features.In my opinion, Flight actually simulates the feeling of flight better than any other civilian flightsim I have used (including X-Plane and FSX).And FSX simulates the procedures of flight much better, since Flight does not include ATC or the ability to file flight plans.Neither sim is perfect, and neither one simulate all aspects of flying realistically. Technically neither FSX nor Flight are flightsimulators, based on the legal definition.I am not going to permit this thread to become a Flight bashing thread. And I will not allow any further posts that state that Flight is just an arcade game, as that is just baiting others.

You do unlock missions. It's not that different from major multiplayer FPS such as COD.

With the only difference, that you unlock the missions in general on the side. There is nor real challenge behind it. First you cahn't do these missions, so you do something else, after a while you have the necessary rank and you suddenly see, that you have to buy the Maule to do this job...I think there is the fundamental difference to payware in many MMOs. You are always in a situation where there is only the way to pay for the new aircrafts, or areas. While this is good enough for us simmers, for many people who have to look much more at their money this simply means that they stop playing the game. There is no other way to get the new aircraft. The ranks and experience points have no real meaning.There are no competitions where they could win a Maule for example.The program in the background was a simulator and in its core Flight is a simulator with a slightly simplified user interface and a few missions attached.Even after they cut some of the extras so that they have now a more or less sterile world. .

Well, my idea of very realistic is simulator with planes that have systems overall simulated as well as on A2A or PMDG planes in FSX. No plane in Flight can so far come near any A2A product for example.Surely it has some realism aspects like flight dynamics which surely are better than in most flying games, but no complete system simulations.

Fair enough.On the other hand... it was when FS gradually shifted from being focused on "flying simulation" to focusing on "systems managment and procedures simulation" that I lost interest in FS. I'm finding Flight refreshing in it's back-to-basics approach to systems and procedures while focusing on actual hands-on-stick flying.

Well, my idea of very realistic is simulator with planes that have systems overall simulated as well as on A2A or PMDG planes in FSX. No plane in Flight can so far come near any A2A product for example.

No plane in the default FSX can come near an A2A or PMDG offering either, does this mean that FSX is not a simulator either? Nope, of course not, so what we need to do is give it time, all that fancy stuff from PMDG and A2A took years to show up in FSX. What is more, if you go back to 2006 on Avsim, when FSX came out, you may recall that many scenery developers were whining and moaning about the fact that it would supposedly be impossible to make add on airports for FSX because it had a round earth model. Well, look how that particular complaint's veracity turned out.Al

Flight could have been very succesfull if the "masterminds" behind all this really had gave it a thought, too bad they really look like a big joke now, im not saying its bad if you really like flying, its just not good at all seen from a gaming view point. There need to be a career mode, just having xp makes no sense at all, what is the point with this xp anyway. Maybe they thought oh the big mmo´s have xp lets do that also without any idea what to do with it, you dont even unlock other missions or planes. Do they really think gamers are that stupid, it certainly looks like it

You are being rather negative with your "masterminds" comment and perhaps should rethink that last sentence...As pointed out, levelling up via XP is very obviously required to access missions. If you don't know that basic fact you clearly have not actually played flight for any significant length of time.

No plane in the default FSX can come near an A2A or PMDG offering either, does this mean that FSX is not a simulator either? Nope, of course not, so what we need to do is give it time, all that fancy stuff from PMDG and A2A took years to show up in FSX. What is more, if you go back to 2006 on Avsim, when FSX came out, you may recall that many scenery developers were whining and moaning about the fact that it would supposedly be impossible to make add on airports for FSX because it had a round earth model. Well, look how that particular complaint's veracity turned out.

Yeah thats true, but the problem is that as long as Flight is not open for third party developers we wont see that kind of aircrafts for it.