As a 'video game' and compared to state-of-the-art games like NBA2K12, Skyrim, Assassin, Battlefield, GTA, etc, I think a 5.0 is generous . . . as a flight simulator its an 8.5 that will grow into a 10.0

What? I've crashed - now have a few to my name, mostly on coin chasing for ten minutes now and then. Interact with other pilots via ATC? What sim allows that out of the box? Even the almighty FSX ATC doesn't really 'control' traffic. Oh no... you can't scare the locals by buzzing a street. Umm... good. Another nothing review.Mike

As a 'video game' and compared to state-of-the-art games like NBA2K12, Skyrim, Assassin, Battlefield, GTA, etc, I think a 5.0 is generous . . . as a flight simulator its an 8.5 that will grow into a 10.0

I hope your basing this out of a 100

as a flight simulator its an 8.5 that will grow into a 10.0

And the same way the reviewer threw out a random 5.0 how in the world do you come up with an 8.5 when comparing to the features in other "sims?" Call a spade a spade and be realistic. By inflating it to be better than it is you do no more justice than deflating it to be worse than it is. Personally as in my other review I would give it about a 7Decent graphicsGood performancelimited expand-ability to datefunBut as it stands right now,No full world, no AI, no heavies, no atc, still no darn rain effects, poor controller support it is at absolute best a 7.0 as a simulator. Don't let MS think what they gave us is above average because it isn't, let them know they better work darn hard to grow this and fill in all the missing variables if they really want it to succeed. I am not a half empty or half full guy, I am an ex-engineer so take emotion out of it, look at the facts and evaluate the situation in front of you. Do you really think this is 85% of 100% complete sim?Not saying it can't be fun and doesn't have positives as listed above but I have to politely disagree with your assertion this is an 8.5 heading for a 10. It is at best a 7.0 heading for an unknown AS WE STAND TODAY.

Been a member there for more than 10 years and buy just about every major release title, their reviews are spot on.

Except Flight was never meant to be a "major release title" like COD or Battlefield or such.

After having tried Flight myself, I tend to agree with all these reviews that gave an average score. I find that IGN are usually rather objective, they don't often stick out as "strongly opinionated", and gamespot (only giving 7/10, which is not so great) has an excellent track record at meticulously looking at all aspects. I share with them a concern for the lack of depth, the axing of the whole world representation (newcomers to sim always asked me first "can I fly there, or there", and with Flight you can only disappoint them), the dead world with no ATC and no traffic - in fact I'll stop here because my list is long but it will only repeat what has been written in many places elsewhere. The review on simhq summarizes my issues with Flight pretty well.In terms of review, all in all, the current average metacritic score is only 65 http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/microsoft-flightand regardless of what it means, the bean counters are VERY sensitive to metacritic score, with average under 80 usually meaning a very hard time for the developpers to get further funding for a franchise. Seeing that, I wouldn't be optimistic about how Microsoft might react to the release of Flight.In the end, it doesn't matter what I think of it anyway, noone here knows the crucial variable: how many Flight DLC are they selling and will it make Flight profitable (I might have bought some, but not without TrackIR. And some statement about 3rd parties and access to modding would help too - give me back customisation, freeware and lots of addons to chose from). These are the numbers that will make or kill Flight (but remember that the low metacritic scores will already have dinted the bean counters willingness to pour money in Flight) and who knows what they are (I might be pessimistic but I smell a disaster). Anyway, that's enough speculation from me, we'll only really know about all of that in one or 2 years I suspect.

And the truth shall set you free. About time someone publish the truth, exactly why this game will fail with it's current path.

While I don't speak with ANY authority, want to know some more truth? For those that are hoping Flight fails and Microsoft then turns their developmental efforts towards FS11, don't get called to do a drug screen! Whatever you're smoking will show up as a positive!Like it or not, Flight is the future for Microsoft. And it's the only future for Microsoft's franchise. Let's hope it does succeed, so that down the road it's development will have progressed far enough for the disenfranchised to consider it for their "serious/hardcore simming" endeavors.Just my opinion, of course.

I have to politely disagree with your assertion this is an 8.5 heading for a 10. It is at best a 7.0 heading for an unknown AS WE STAND TODAY.

Dont worry, my 8.5 score is just my personal opinion and is in no way official or applicable to anyone else :). I want a convincing flight model and Ive finally gotten a much improved FM. I'm tickled.

I question IGN's reviewer. It seems he didnt fly anything but the demo. No radio's? No animations? Really? No way to talk to other aircraft?

These are nondiscriminatory “As is right now” reviews of Flight… hard to dispute with its inaugural vanilla release. I would expect this to be the typical review… nonetheless it should only really matter what’s in it for you... each individual has their own standards to critique against. Individual critics are playing off the legacy of what was and comparing it to what is. If Microsoft decides to step on the gas and turn it up a few notches, these first inspections will be meaningless.-rjetster

Been a member there for more than 10 years and buy just about every major release title, their reviews are spot on.

I have also been there for a long time, and Imo not all reviews are spot on. He seems biased....

Totally agree, sometimes its hard to hear the truth. :lol:

"Truth" in this context also has two sides, his side and my side .No way I would give Flight as it is now a 10 , but 5 is not correct either.

Like it or not, Flight is the future for Microsoft. And it's the only future for Microsoft's franchise. Let's hope it does succeed, so that down the road it's development will have progressed far enough for the disenfranchised to consider it for their "serious/hardcore simming" endeavors.Just my opinion, of course.

And a very good one.And that really is a long way from where we were just a few years ago.Remember when MS disbanded the Aces Studio? What late 2008 or early 2009? At that time, pretty much the large bulk of us, thought FSX was the end of the line for MS and any type of flight sims. The MSFS franchise was over. That was it, the lights were turned out, the doors were closed. We were hoping someone else would pick up the gauntlet, or maybe even the Aces team would form their own. Those were some dark days in the civilian flight sim world.Fast forward to 2012 - we now have a least, a new form of flight sim from MS, albeit one that took a path many long time users wished they had not taken, but we do have a new one by MS - a core product, that at least gives some hope, and has some potential, for eventually continuing the legacy of the MSFS franchise. And a core product that at the least, is attracting some new blood as evidenced by what we have seen here, and even attracted some of the aforementioned long time users.The future for civilian flight simulators, is at least a little brighter today than it was 3 short years ago.

Thought the reviewer was pretty straight up on his thoughts, but what really gave me a chuckle was some of comments on their board:"It's a flight sim. How much fun could you possibly have when you're just flying around aimlessly?""Why on earth do they make joystick systems in the $200-$300 range, but then only have crap simulators???""I'm only in if I can fly a dragon, just sayin'..."toooo funny :LMAO:

So many ignorant people in the comments section; a lot of people passing judgement onto this game without even playing it. Oh well, that's the world we live in.

Regardless of what you think of Flight, the rest of the world views it much the same as this review. The MS advertising and PR department is fully to blame for this. This is the impression people get when they try the game. Once that impression is given, not many people will spend the time to find out if there is more, especially when there is no indication that there is more.The planes in the free game do not have radio navigation. The nav frequencies are hidden and not at all obvious to locate, just like the game manual, which by the way is rather useless. There is very little indication of what the future holds, either in scenery, planes or functionality.If a person whose job it is to review the game is going to give Flight only this much of his time, what can you expect from people who have a wide range of gaming interests and are not casual flight simmers already.The re-emerging theme in many reviews is that Flight fails at interesting people who have had no interest in flying games and that Flight fails at interesting people who enjoy serious flying. That leaves only the people who already have an interest in flying and rather spend money on Flight instead of FSX or have enough time and money to spend on both.

This is my first post in the Flight forum, but I have read the content for many months prior and have owned every edition of MSFS since inception. Like many of the members here, I was disappointed by the abrupt change of direction taken by Microsoft with Flight. I did try it, but quickly saw that this was nothing like the prior editions of the franchise, and that I would continue with the FS and the great range of aftermarket products that are available for it. I feel very sorry for the third party developers that have been abruptly disenfranchised by MS, but perhaps there enough are others like myself out there to keep them going. I did buy an add-on for my sim over the weekend as a token "we're still out here and need you" gesture.I thought the IGN review was spot on. Flight is a lifeless entity. It kind of reminds me of one one of those Earth after People episodes where the infrastructure is there, but the living beings are absent. I think the flight models are poorly done, as well. I won't go on... the reviewer said it all.Personally, I would like to see Microsoft sell the franchise to an interested developer, much the way they acquired it originally from someone. At least flight simulators are a developed niche market, something Flight is not likely to ever be able to claim. Games are a console products. Consoles can run them perfectly for a fraction of the cost of a high-end computer. Honestly, are you really going to spend $2500+ for a PC system to run the likes of Flight? You can be pretty sure that the wizards in Bellevue are viewing the tepid results of their newest endeavor and perhaps coming to the same conclusion.