Reflections & Shadows

[HiFlyer 9,359]

Bumped into this on the web.

 

[CoolP 283]

Very nice mood on that one. Pure, in a positive way.

[Air1 136]

That is exactly what I love most about Microsoft Flight. I can never tire of it! I will take the eye candy every time, beautifully  done.

 

Steve

[HiFlyer 9,359]

The thing is, I'm not sure if its peoples computers or what, but I hardly ever see a video that does justice to exactly how both pretty and Smoooooth Flight is. Seeing this one made me decide to throw something together really quick, to show why Flight users seriously compare it favorably to P3D, in the eye candy department.

 

And why Flight with FSX scenery might be a killer combo.

[KavindaJD 31]

And why Flight with FSX scenery might be a killer combo.

 

      Agreed! Other Simulators wouldn't stand a chance in the market if this was put together!

[HiFlyer 9,359]

      Agreed! Other Simulators wouldn't stand a chance in the market if this was put together!

Not sure I would go that far. The tubeliner guys won't even blink, for instance. Then there are the people who want all sorts of Ai planes in the air, ATC etc...........

 

It will probably be quite attractive for pure GA, though.

 

I always thought that a great strength of Flight was its easy and simple multiplayer and the social aspect.

[KavindaJD 31]

Not sure I would go that far. The tubeliner guys won't even blink, for instance. Then there are the people who want all sorts of Ai planes in the air, ATC etc...........

 

It will probably be quite attractive for pure GA, though.

 

I always thought that a great strength of Flight was its easy and simple multiplayer and the social aspect.

 

      OH... OK then!

[188AHC 2,138]

I always got a chuckle at how many sim flyers bought all kinds of scenery enhancements for a pretty good bit of money and got less or close to what Flight had out of the box.

 

This is not to detract from what's available for the other sims nor to what they accomplished. It's just a comparison at what Flight gave to the community without extensive modification.

[KavindaJD 31]

This is not to detract from what's available for the other sims nor to what they accomplished. It's just a comparison at what Flight gave to the community without extensive modification.

 

... and imagine what Flight would have been like, if scenery enhancements were a possibility!

I guess that's why Microsoft never released an SDK for Flight. Modified scenery could have been imported from FSX and "enhanced" with Flight's technology, therefore, community members could get third - party scenery for free, instead of buying the official DLC package. 

[HiFlyer 9,359]

I always got a chuckle at how many sim flyers bought all kinds of scenery enhancements for a pretty good bit of money and got less or close to what Flight had out of the box.

 

This is not to detract from what's available for the other sims nor to what they accomplished. It's just a comparison at what Flight gave to the community without extensive modification.

 

True! I mentioned (in long buried threads) that Orbx would almost not have to bother with scenery in flight, since the existing textures where already so good. They could just concentrate on building airports!

 

[rodger 0]

very nice video. I love the sun flickering thru the trees :smile:

[Orion 2]

It will probably be quite attractive for pure GA, though.

I'd still disagree with "pure GA." If I want to make a realistic general aviation flight, I'll still do it in Flight Simulator X. Why? I can start at parking spots, I can tune the radio and get ATIS/AWOS/ASOS (weather), I have GPS for reference (radio frequencies, runway length, etc.), and I can have actual people being air traffic controllers (as well as have the option of using VATSIM or PilotEdge).

 

However, as for practicing power off landings or just landing on random stuff, I enjoy (and prefer) Flight.

[HiFlyer 9,359]

I'd still disagree with "pure GA." If I want to make a realistic general aviation flight, I'll still do it in Flight Simulator X. Why? I can start at parking spots, I can tune the radio and get ATIS/AWOS/ASOS (weather), I have GPS for reference (radio frequencies, runway length, etc.), and I can have actual people being air traffic controllers (as well as have the option of using VATSIM or PilotEdge).

 

However, as for practicing power off landings or just landing on random stuff, I enjoy (and prefer) Flight.

 

I can see your point, but for me, the flying experience is a very visual one as well, and I find the visuals, smoothness and general it-just-works of out-of-the-box flight much more pleasing than out-of-the-box FSX.

 

I've also come to the point where dealing with multiple (and sometimes conflicting) third party scenery's, updates and general tweaking to keep it all running with any sort of consistency in FSX was becoming something very akin to drudgery.  :(

 

I just want to boot up, fly, have fun and shut down.

 

Flight is......... soothing, but admittedly limited in variety. If, however, I have access to the whole world of FSX in flight (I have only intermittent mild interest in tube-liners) then that will do me for quite some time.

[Orion 2]

If I weren't a real world student pilot, I'd likely agree with your assessment. I've had proper procedures and radio communications drilled into my mind too well to be able to truly ignore those things in simulators. Many IFR practice trainers and even NASA research simulations (and likely Level D as well as other full motion simulators) really don't go big on graphics -- they're all about procedures and realism.

 

While it is annoying dealing with FSX addons at times, I've gotten to the point where I fly nearly default with a select few addons. I don't worry about tweaks or adjusting settings anymore, and to be truthful, the sim runs just fine without it.

 

I do agree about Flight being polished, though. It's well done; the flight dynamics feel much nicer (especially at the back end of the power curve), the shadowing has vastly improved, the sight picture seems better -- all things that are nice, but in the end, unfortunately doesn't completely make up for what it lacks.

[HiFlyer 9,359]

 

 

While it is annoying dealing with FSX addons at times, I've gotten to the point where I fly nearly default with a select few addons. I don't worry about tweaks or adjusting settings anymore, and to be truthful, the sim runs just fine without it.

 

True. I guess some of us approach FSX in phases.

 

First re-discovery had me buying about $100 dollars per week in various add-ons, and I did that for a very long time. Then there was the bench-marking and tweaking phase, followed by the slow realization over time (a few years) that I was'nt really using the majority of the things I had purchased; just a moderate circle of favorites. Then you realize that the major reason you're constantly, tweaking is that you've overloaded the sim with crap.

 

Crap gets uninstalled, and while FSX now runs as intended, it probably looks much worse than you've become accustomed too. You also now have gigs of unused crap on your HD, and have little interest in ever buying more.

 

Then comes the quiet "I just want to fly" phase, and an appreciation of something that looks good (enough) and simply works.

 

And is even.........

 

Fun.  :ph34r: