Is Flight made using any of FSX files?

Of course it is! You can spot many similar textures if you look around in the sim as well as the Flight installation folder. And I'm sure textures aren't the only thing they used from FSX.

Of course it is! You can spot many similar textures if you look around in the sim as well as the Flight installation folder. And I'm sure textures aren't the only thing they used from FSX.

 

I believe that they only used some ground textures and a few buildings from FSX. Everything else is from scratch.

I believe that they only used some ground textures and a few buildings from FSX. Everything else is from scratch.

 

Not only do I slightly doubt that... but I seriously doubt that. By about 10,000%.

Not only do I slightly doubt that... but I seriously doubt that. By about 10,000%.

 

Meh, you're say. But what I mean from scratch is that they either actually did it from scratch or they took some FSX textures and upgraded them.

I suspect there's a lot of legacy code in Flight. Not that it will hurt anything. They've upgraded most of the important stuff considerably.

 

These days, nothing is written completely from scratch. One of the major benefits of object oriented programming is the resuability of the code. Of course, a lot of that reused code will be enhanced or optimized.

 

It's really a non-issue.

 

One of the worst things you can do is start completely from scratch. Netscape tried it and got burned. All that legacy code with all that overhead... it's also debugged, which is where most of the overhead comes from.

 

Hook

Didn't they License Microsoft ESP to Lockheed Martin?

 

One question: Does License mean that you grant permission? So Microsoft granted permission to Lockheed Martin to use Microsoft ESP, but Microsoft is still the owner of Microsoft ESP? So they upgraded that?

OMGBBQ32, I think you're overanalyzing it. Do we even know what the real differences are between FSX and ESP, besides Microsoft licensing restrictions?

 

You may assume that whatever legacy code from FSX/ESP is in Flight, it's the latest version.

 

Flight is still a new product, no matter what it may have under the hood. Upgraded flight model, upgraded terrain rendering, although if you look closely you can see evidence of FSX. It really doesn't matter. Lots of optimizations. Lots of calculations offloaded to the GPU. Most of the individual weather effects are brand new. Basically, lots of improvements, but not all features implemented yet.

 

Hook

Didn't they License Microsoft ESP to Lockheed Martin?

 

One question: Does License mean that you grant permission? So Microsoft granted permission to Lockheed Martin to use Microsoft ESP, but Microsoft is still the owner of Microsoft ESP? So they upgraded that?

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/369278-what-exactly-did-lockheed-martin-do-with-fsx/page__fromsearch__1

or they took some FSX textures and upgraded them.

 

good you clarified because that does not mean "from scratch".

 

I think I'll park on the ramp next to Ed and say "not even close".

ok. I'm proud of that. We learn from mistakes.

I believe that they only used some ground textures and a few buildings from FSX. Everything else is from scratch.

 

Don't confuse the "art assets" with the actual "program code." They are two completely separate topics...

1. Most of the "art assets" are retained from FSX.
   
2. Most of the "program code" is entirely new.
   

Bill, I see far too much of the original file structure still in place, albeit hidden, for it to be "entirely new". First, to write a flight engine would require years of work... not months. Second, the visual elements of the 3D world are almost spot-on to what was released in FSX which means the rendering is probably the same FSX rendering for the 3D world. While they added SpeedTree, FSX would have easily supported the use of SpeedTree without a great deal of rewrite.

 

Sorry, but I believe this is indeed a trimmed-down version of FSX with a whole lot of clean-up done.

Bill, I see far too much of the original file structure still in place, albeit hidden, for it to be "entirely new". First, to write a flight engine would require years of work... not months. Second, the visual elements of the 3D world are almost spot-on to what was released in FSX which means the rendering is probably the same FSX rendering for the 3D world. While they added SpeedTree, FSX would have easily supported the use of SpeedTree without a great deal of rewrite.

 

Sorry, but I believe this is indeed a trimmed-down version of FSX with a whole lot of clean-up done.

 

 

Meh, it might be, but we won't know until more scenery is available to us.

Bill, I see far too much of the original file structure still in place, albeit hidden, for it to be "entirely new". First, to write a flight engine would require years of work... not months.

 

Ed, they did take several years... not just a few months... How much work would be required to shift most of the operations to the GPU?