Definitely getting the P-40.

Let's not forget, even with the 3x 'arcade' planes, Flight is still a fantastic foundation for a simulator and MSFT has demonstrated they are taking the simming side of it more seriously than we had first thought. No, it doesn't have all the simming stuff, but when I load up FSX, position myself at Hilo, set some winds and IFR conditions and compare it within the limits of Flight, FSX feels very dated, simple, and 'flys' like in slow-moition

 

Poppycock!!! or what ever the kids say these days, Flight is no more a foundation for a fliightsim then I am the King of England. :)

Poppycock!!! or what ever the kids say these days, Flight is no more a foundation for a fliightsim then I am the King of England. :)

How do you mean?

Poppycock!!! or what ever the kids say these days, Flight is no more a foundation for a fliightsim then I am the King of England. :)

 

Nice to see someone still use LSD 8P

How do you mean?

 

Again this is only my opinion, I don't flight will ever be more then it iis right now, as one member said its out there in no mans land, not really appealing to fight simmers and not really appealing to the gaming crowd, I truly believe they are going to drag this out with the warbirds and the no cockpit airplanes until they re coupe there investment and then just let it die a slow death.

 

Nice to see someone still use LSD 8P

 

I never knew it went out of style :LMAO:

Poppycock!!! or what ever the kids say these days, Flight is no more a foundation for a fliightsim then I am the King of England. :)

 

I have to jump in here, because I totally disagree with your allegation that Flight is not a foundation for a flightsim. From what I have seen, its foundation is actually pretty solid (better than FSX's in many ways).

 

What matters to me (and to most others here) is what MS builds on that solid foundation. That is the unknown at the moment . . . which is what is driving so many of us a bit crazy. I personally would be much happier if MS just gave us some kind of a game plan here. If they have not real plans to make Flight into a more comprehensive flightsim, then they should really tell us, instead of stringing us along.

 

As a long time supporter, I am not yet ready to give up on Flight (goodness, we don't even know yet if the next aircraft will be a Deluxe version or another Basic version), but I'm not going to be patient forever.

Flight is sat in no-mans land at the moment. It doesn't appeal to the simmer market OR the gamer market.

 

I downloaded it on my kids PC. "Played" with it for a couple of hours and never went back...............

 

Unfortunately that is just your kids. Making a generalization based on limited first person accounts does not really make it a fact. There have been plenty of previous posts where someone's kids or students liked Flight very much. As of April 9th, Flight still ranks 3rd in Top Live Titles, just behind Age of Empire Online and GTA IV.

I truly believe they are going to drag this out with the warbirds and the no cockpit airplanes until they re coupe there investment and then just let it die a slow death.

 

Ah, I see. If you're right, you're right. It seems very unlikely that in the last month they've gone from an initial product release to resignation. Planes are the 'spice of life' in a flight game and, as seems to be established, they're just pumping out a few easy-access, quick-to-develop planes they literally have on hand. If one were to strip FSX down to just what is found in Flight, it's apparent that Flight is much better at flight and it's that obvservation that makes me believe that MSFT didn't spend that much time making it so much better just to please the 'arcade gamer' crowd, as I really don't think gamers would care. If Flight really were all about cockpitless warbirds, it would seem silly to include such great weather and flight model and VORs and ILSs. . .

Is it too much to ask to just be informed where are they heading and at which pace.

 

Actually Howard was quite clear about the timetable in the interview to Avsim: one plane every month and a scenery every three months. And for now they are respecting the plan, with the Zero and the new P-40. As some of us already wrote, considering the pattern, its is likely that many of the monthly planes will be without cockpit.

For what concerns other general features, the attitude of Howard toward the requests by simmers doesn't seem indicating much desire to develop more sophisticated characteristics, as ATC.

 

A.

Unfortunately that is just your kids. Making a generalization based on limited first person accounts does not really make it a fact. There have been plenty of previous posts where someone's kids or students liked Flight very much. As of April 9th, Flight still ranks 3rd in Top Live Titles, just behind Age of Empire Online and GTA IV.

 

what?

 

I am talking about ME playing it for a couple of hours on my kids PC. Not them. They were not remotely interested. I wouldn't dare download it on my FSX box.

 

Not with all the 'live' services it installs.

 

My son does love Birds of Steel though...............

 

My point here still remains. If you want to fly warbirds without a cockpit from chase view, there are many other options besides FLIGHT.

BTW After being pessimistic a bit today in this topic and others about the future of Flight, I did a short flight during dawn this evening and had a close look at the shadows or better said the light in the VC... All my negative feelings were washed away by the awesomeness of Flight's graphics, hahaha!!!

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/371043-there-is-even-sunlight-on-the-windows

All my negative feelings were washed away by the awesomeness of Flight's graphics, hahaha!!!

 

Lol, glad to hear as you were starting to sound bummed somewhat.

I agree, I flew a job early this morning at dawn, from a small aiport on one of the other islands to a small airstrip I had never been to, and looking at the graphics was just wow, this thing is really beautiful.

 

For all the critisisms, I don't think the graphics department can be faulted much, especially with the great performance that comes along with it. I was monitoring my fps at the time during this flight and my frame rates stayed from a low of 45 fps to a high of 60 fps - which is as high as they can go as I run with vsync on.

 

As far as the new aircraft coming, I sincerely hope it has a cockpit otherwise I will have to pass on it - but what I am really looking forward to , is seeing what we get with Alaska. Being how they are about to drop another dlc airplane on us, I have a feeling it may be another month or so before we see Alaska, but hey that gives them more time to maybe add more stuff.

 

The Flight team really did a good job on the graphics and performance aspect of Flight, and I understand the code can be further optimized for even better performance as more content is added. Now what I would really like to see, at some point in the future, is DX10 graphic support.

Unfortunately, when A2A have such a superbly realistic P-40 - with a VC amongst the best ever seen - which the one in Flight is unlikely to match in any regard, I don't think some prettier tree graphics over a very limited area will be enough to make me prefer it to one with unmatched realism which I can fly anywhere I like in FSX. For me, it will merely serve to highlight how very limited the depth of Flight is, and that's a shame, because the Maule shows what actually can be done with Flight when compared to FSX.

 

Al

Of course it is going to be limited, when comparing to FSX and also to a high quality payware aircraft add-on.

Flight will always appear limited to something like FSX and add-ons, comparing apples to oranges really.

I may be one of the remaining few, but I do maintain confidence that we will see more depth coming in Flight, and I look forward to seeing what that entails. Not tomorrow, but weeks/months and hopefully years down the road.

 

Now for my true warbird excitement, I launch either IL2 1946, or IL2 Cliffs of Dover, awesome sims!

deleted..Sorry, I'm in the wrong forum.

 

RJ