Looks like Megascenery Hawaii, but that was only 1 island.

Indeed it looks good from above 10.000ft like all photosceneries, but for low and slow i think Flight is better.

Much more detail on ground.

For the clouds in Flight: Good weather clouds are ugly, bad weather clouds are very impressive and you immerse into them.

At the basic levels FSX Hawaii and Flight have their pros and cons. At the basics w/ FSX I'm talking the addons most EVERYONE gets. GEX and FSGenesis (UTX actually makes Hawaii worse and I disable it when flying hawaii)

 

Flight Hawaii:

Like - The vegetative landclass (read: The Mountains) were done exceptionally

Like: Airport detail

Dislike: Urban / Special landclass is awful and empty feeling

Dislike: What is there of the urban / special landclass isn't sharp in texture and colors are drab and dull.

 

FSX Hawaii:

Like - Urban and Special landclass is exceptional, colorful and crowded and sharp textures. (GEX)

Dislike: The vegetative landclass (mountains) is awful. It's a swath of a single color (green) and trees. FSGenesis adds a lot of definition to them but they are still boring as far as textures.. Non mountain bare areas I do like better than flight. Fields etc..

Dislike: The major International airports are "meh" and even considering FSX is focused on the world and not just Hawaii every other states major airports have more detail. Hilo looks like it's one step away from being a farmers field.

 

For GA though I like FSX hawaii better because the urban areas are well detailed, sharp textures and crowded.

Just let me show how Hawaii appear in FSX B)

 

You're comparing a $30 flight sim to something that cost what? Isn't there ~$200 tied up in that screenshot alone? FSX and Flight are not the same, oddly enough.

Those shots are nice but I'd like to see some low and slow shots with that scenery.

 

I am not a city flyer and never liked flying above cities: I still don't like to do that in Flight because then the cutting off of scenery is so obvious. I wish cities would blend more into the surrounding. And I will NEVER ever get used to roads cutting thorough houses and buildings. It's one of the reasons a like bush flying more.

 

I btw agree with Bill about the vegetative landclass, or well, anyway, I mean the textures underneath trees/forests. In FSX, even with Orbx, those textures simply are flat photographs of forests with autogen sticking out of it: I always hated how bad that looked, again even with Orbx scenery, where the used photographs looked out of proportion. But in Flight the ground textures look like ground. And the trees are simply growing on it. (The great new shadows do wonders there too btw.) I am very curious how Alaska will look in that regard (since it has way more forests afaik. And way more dense too.)

Have you ever seen a fisherman practicing his hobby in Flight ?

 

It would be a nice spot him just to break the monotony of flying dozens of minutes over green carpets.

 

Have you ever seen him in FSX ? Nope, but Flight is a very low altitude flying game so you are supposed to get in touch with life forms.

 

I would also appreciate to spot a humpack whale or few swimming dolphins while I am always obliged to transport boxes of imaginary Guinea pigs.

 

This is boredom, much more than flying at FL 180 calculating fuel reserves and dealing with the FMC.

 

Into Flight the nature is like the one reproduced in Matrix, cold, artificial and digitalized into a dead world.

Dislike: The major International airports are "meh" and even considering FSX is focused on the world and not just Hawaii every other states major airports have more detail. Hilo looks like it's one step away from being a farmers field.

 

Having flown into Hilo before... Nah, I won't go there.

Still, not bad for version 1.01 of a game that's going to be improved over a long lifetime.

 

Nah, most likely they will be only adding more areas and planes to Flight instead of making any major improvements. And so far nothing indicates very long life time for Flight.

I apologize again for posting jet pictures, please MS be gentle in your reaction.

 

You are clearly provoking with all these pictures of jets, present in FSX but not in Flight.

The next time please avoid this bad attitude, and post images of, I don't know, gliders, trikes, helicopters... ehm, oops

 

A.

You are clearly provoking with all these pictures of jets, present in FSX but not in Flight.

The next time please avoid this bad attitude, and post images of, I don't know, gliders, trikes, helicopters... ehm, oops

 

A.

 

:Just Kidding:

Nah, most likely they will be only adding more areas and planes to Flight instead of making any major improvements. And so far nothing indicates very long life time for Flight.

 

What do you base that on?

 

There were a lot of comments during beta that indicated many features were still being developed, and some had to be removed until they were finished. There's no reason these features will simply be dropped and the development costs to date simply thrown away.

 

As for Flight's long life, you'll have to estimate the buying habits from reports and screen shots from multiplayer.

 

A major difference between Flight and FSX is that Flight is still in development while FSX is not. It doesn't look like LM is going to pick up the ball and run with it in P3D any time soon. I wouldn't mind being surprised on that last point though.

 

Hook

Just let me show how Hawaii appear in FSX B)

 

I think it is quite embarrassing

 

I apologize again for posting jet pictures, please MS be gentle in your reaction.

 

 

 

 

 

Like others have said -

 

- That's one island for $14, where Flight is giving you all the islands and an aircraft for $20

- That one island doesn't look nearly as nice at lower altitudes. Especially the urban areas with no autogen or custom objects.

“BTW, REX Essential for FSX is coming and it will hit hardly the cheap clouds of Flight.”

 

IMO those Flight clouds are simply dark and look cheap. They may seem different due to the background sky.

 

This evening I will make some screenshots of the skies in Flight at daytime (because you can't really see the clouds in dawn etc.) to see if I am really right or not about Flight being so much better, because obviously love can make a man blind...

 

Well, I have to agree: you are right. Although the clouds are awesome to fly through and the overall 'feel' of them in the game is great, it's pretty hard creating a screenshot with clouds that do look at least a little bit okay... I think that about two themes come up with clouds that are fine with me at daytime. The rest just sucks big time. During dawn and dusk (and night) they look awesome pretty quickly due to the colors and lighting, of course. (Of course the themes with rain and (heavy) fog and so on look awesome, but you don't really see clouds in those themes.)

 

As I said I always used low res REX clouds in FSX so what you see on the screenshots below comes pretty close to what I am used to, but you won't get anywhere near those HD-clouds (if you want to, that is: I wouldn't because I still don't like those either!) in Flight. And I don't even dare to post screenshots of the other themes... (I already feel brave posting these, haha! ) But again, when you are flying they do 'work' pretty well. Flying through the clouds is really something different compared to FSX and a lot more immersive.

 

Conclusion: don't use Flight if you want some pretty looking daytime screenshots...

 

Maybe that's why I like to fly during dawn and dusk and heavy weather: to avoid those awful clouds...

 

 

 

Flight compared to / with FSX.

 

Yes, FSX with tons of add ons is super when flying B737 or whatever from A to B.

But, and but again. Nothing whatsoever I have seen, (yes, I am a hard core simmer, have the most) compares

to Flight at low level.

 

For the past 20 years, before reirement some years ago, I earned my living as a helicopter pilot.

Mainly powerline inspection, videos, aerial photos and other stuff at low level.

 

Flight did wake me up again, so detailed in bushflying, I love Flight, almost as IRL.

 

Two different fruits, "Flight is for the masses", as told somewhere.......

 

Goran

Besides, presently we have the option to use both.

Maybe in the future Flight offers all FSX plus add-ons has; if not, we can always move on to whatever suits us.

 

In the meantime I enjoy BOTH.

After posting my screenshots above I wondered why I didn't like them... Of course it was because I took them over a big city, above which, as I said earlier, don't really like to fly... So FS9/FSX-ish.

So I moved my plane to another island (still using the same unorthodox viewpoint) and made these screenshots. They already look a lot better imho. I have to remember to NOT take screenshots above cities anymore. And now I will continue my flight but now in the VC (as I am used to) and somewhere around dawn or dusk...