Well. I must be the only one who don't like cockpitless planes then.

 

No your not, in fact I stated in my reply earlier that I just don't buy them, then I don't worry with them.

Now should Flight migrate to all cockpitless planes then that would be a different story - I would migrate away from Flight - but I do not see that happening. We have planes with virtual cockpits now, and undoubtedly there will be more.

I never said liked cockpitless planes. :D I do understand why they exist, and I know a lot of people do like them, and they're a good moneymaker for Microsoft to help fund further development.

 

Flight News had a mention of one of the developers getting a really good time on one of the challenge courses in the Zero. I wouldn't have expected it to outperform the RV, but it may very well do so. Interesting.

 

I already knew from WarBirds experience that there was no way a Mustang could turn with a Zero, which has been mentioned in the forum. This isn't quite enough to get me to buy it though. :)

 

Hook

Flight is just a game, not a simulator, therefore it will never replace FSX/9.

 

I certainly would not get into a debate over what makes a simulator versus what makes a game, much of that relates more to individual customer perception versus a defined reality.

Flight was not intended to replace FSX, or FS9 - two different products that do different things, and I enjoy both.

 

I will say though, last time in Flight I shot an ILS landing in the RV in heavy fog - and last time I flew a job in the Maule strictly by the checklist, it sure seemed to simulate GA flying fairly well to me, but then I am not nor have I ever been a pilot in the real world.

As for the A5, I think you can put up a hefty deposit to reserve one, and pay the balance when they start production. They've been testing for quite a while now...shouldn't be too much longer. I want one. But...I'm not John Travolta.

I am not and will never be interested in planes without a VC. I like to pretend that I am flying and afaik no pilot flies behind his plane. In fact, I don't even care at ALL how the planes looks from the outside. In FSX I never left the VC (apart for taking a few screenshots, although I usually create screenshots from within the VC). Some people love to look at little details on the outside of planes (flew wing anyone?) but I couldn't care less. I have to say that now I can get out of the plane in Flight, it IS nice to do that after landing and see the outside of the plane, but during flying... I couldn't care less.

 

 

I'm one of those people. The exteriors are what I usually notice first. If it's metal & rivets, then it needs detail IMO. I'm enjoy recreations of older airplanes, because you don't see them often. The more that the creator puts into them, then the more they're worth it to me. Besides, I've also flown a lot of R/C, and an outside view is easily handled. I do that often. In fact, I sometimes feel that an outside view is more realistic. I see a lot more of whats around me, than being limited by a single monitor , and having to pan around. In a real plane, especially such as the RV with a bubble canopy...........I see a lot more, a lot quicker. I figure it takes about six monitors (cockpit view) to see what I actually see with quick glances.

 

Yet................I doubt I'd buy the P-51 or Zero. I once bought a Captain Sim airliner shell just for the excellent detail. But I'd rather be in the cockpit much of the time, for basic simming.

 

L.Adamson

Flight is just a game, not a simulator, therefore it will never replace FSX/9.

This doesn't mean you can't get some fun with it tho.

 

FSX/9 are just games, not simulators, therefore they will never replace Flight.

This doesn't mean you can't get some fun with them tho.

 

Sorry Gabriel I couldn't resist.

 

Cheers

jja

I have said it before. Why are the fastest, most complex aircraft, retractable gear etc, going to the kids to play with? I would buy them in a minute if they had a full cockpit. I just don't get it! Not seeing the pig picture.

Flight is just a game, not a simulator, therefore it will never replace FSX/9.

This doesn't mean you can't get some fun with it tho.

 

Funny thing is that I have never simulated flight as much as I have done in MS Flight... I mean, MS Flight made me learn all about VOR and approach plates, something I never bothered about in all my years of virtual flying. Well, I bothered about them but there was no need to actually learn it all. But Flight almost forced me to learn all that! I even bought rudder pedals for Flight, after flying for some 25 years without them. Talking about added realism and simulation...!

 

I understand why people say Flight is a game etc. but it's very subjective and it all depends on what YOU make of it. To ME Flight is a awesome looking sim... Simple as that. Again, I understand people may not agree but that's mainly because they would like to see other things or more things simulated, but what Flight DOES offer can be used as a sim if you want to.

And I really look fwd for the smoothness while I do some mountain flying in the Alska, in the RV6, or the Maule, or, the new high-wing to be released ;-)

Funny thing is that I have never simulated flight as much as I have done in MS Flight... I mean, MS Flight made me learn all about VOR and approach plates, something I never bothered about in all my years of virtual flying. Well, I bothered about them but there was no need to actually learn it all. But Flight almost forced me to learn all that! I

 

Same here, and the reason was simple; FSX had become more of a tweaking tool than a flight sim.

 

It seemed like I spent nearly as much time monitoring frame-rates and fiddling with the CFG as I ever did flying, and for many, any big, impressive new scenery was cause to go do more tweaking, or to go buy a new graphics card/processor. (Or even a new computer!!)

 

Flying sorta got lost in the endless effort just to get the Sim running smoothly in the face of more and more ambitious 3rd party addons.

 

With FLIGHT, most of that suddenly disappeared, leaving behind the unaccustomed sensation of just being able to take off and go; free to discover (or re-discover) long neglected cockpit skills after years of being lost in tweak-land.

It has me hooked, I am spending way to much time here! Alaska should be fun.

Of course it's smooth. That should be no surprise whatsoever. The graphical fidelity is relatively awful compared to it's contemporaries. If it wasn't smooth it would be absolutely criminal.

Please check your screen for something obstructing your view! Or... maybe some problem with your graphics card???

 

Hope you find your way across it and be able to really enjoy FLIGHT's exceptional graphics, physics and gameplay!

 

 

 

Of course it's smooth. That should be no surprise whatsoever. The graphical fidelity is relatively awful compared to it's contemporaries. If it wasn't smooth it would be absolutely criminal.

Please check your screen for something obstructing your view! Or... maybe some problem with your graphics card???

 

LOL +1...

Please check your screen for something obstructing your view! Or... maybe some problem with your graphics card???

 

Hope you find your way across it and be able to really enjoy FLIGHT's exceptional graphics, physics and gameplay!

 

+1 indeed. If someone calls Flight awful then he probably didn't really check it out.