Heimi

Glass is standard today. Steam just for oldtimers and low budget. But even low budget start to use glass.

Anyway it`s a bit too late to ask these questions. If they release the sim end of the year it must be almost done by now. I remember similar questions like this in the steam forums 1 year ago. If they still don`t know what we expect then they are lost.

Is there a free soundset downloadable somewhere that is better?

DA42 is a nice aircraft, but i can`t fly it because my frames drop immense. With the pipers i have 30-80fps, normally about 40. With the DA42 i only get 5-25 fps, mostly about 17. A lot of stutters, not playable. They failed again....

DA42 DLC on STEAM is now decrypted and has a size of 1.18 GB. I think they will release it tomorrow.

Looks like they added a 3rd place for a Fligth School? German registration of the DA42 maybe a hint. But can`t identify airport on picture, maybe EDRK ?

Any other devices plugged in? Had the same problem until i realised that the game automatically binded brake to another device. Make sure no other brake command assigned.

True, i would understand if the graphics were great that the performance is bad. But bad graphic with bad performance is unusal. http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/266089411983408216/38AB8A9209A2860D3440086C3D3EB71FCD9DEBA8/ http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/260461914169925343/D3F866F0048BCC5F29A4964471D35121AAD8287D/

Everything that is working without 64Bit binaries is working as it worked in FSX. So pure data and configs are no problem. One guy was able to port over even aircrafts, with some issues of course but they fly at least.

I think the key to success is simple as that: DTG has to release their new Sim at leat at FSX level but with up to date graphics, scenery and database. Everything else beyond for Addon developers will be easy sledding If they can't deliver that it will be doomed.

They just told me that they will release the DA42 (which is made by Alabeo) end of this month.

I know, but they can throw in a retarded piece of software lacking basic functions and content because the community is used to it? I don`t think so. Add-Ons should provide additional features and content, not basic ones.

Did you tried the new DiRT Rally from Codemasters? It`s the best Rally racing game up to date if not the best motorsports game until now. They made it a hard Rally simulation and it is a bestseller, not only to Rally fans. Finally they achieved now for the Rally Sims what we are waiting for FlightSims since FSX.

This where i personally see the biggest issue. Everything we have today was developed because FSX is incomplete and abandoned. The need of add-ons was due to the imperfection of FSX or other Sim`s. Now they rebuild it with knowledge that it will be unfinished and rely on others to complete it because they can`t or don`t want to do because of time issues or missing knowledge. I understand that they can`t build everything. But looks like they complete rely on add-on`s to make the sim run. You see now in Flight School that they already gave everything away. Airports, Aircraft, Scenery and Missions were developed by external companies. Looks like we will get an "updated" FSX that technically is advanced, but looks like the old one and you need to buy X add-ons to make it even playable. You want weather? Buy weather add-on. Want aircraft? buy aircraft add.on. Scenery? buy scenery.............. I can`t understand why flightsimmers are willing to pay for every bit and piece that is fundamental. You wouldn`t buy a Golf game where you have to buy your golf course, glf club, caddy, weather ?

Thank you for the video Well, i`m excited and in doubt equally. I understand and appreciate the intentions and goals. Then i look what they made with Flight School and can`t match it with what he said. I don`t know how to express it. For me it is simple as that: Give me a few weeks , FSX or P3D, freeware and payware addons and i will build you a better Flight School than DTGFS is now. I`ve done that years ago when i was active in FSX, more or less - In terms of graphic, functionality and educational objective, not technology. I tweaked the hell out of it, installed more than 100GB of add-ons and it looked superb and was an awesome experience. But it was long and hard work to get it working. And one wrong click, wrong dash in the cfg, or add-on and everything was screwed up. DTG: Just put together all the good things the community (and companies) developed over the years and convert to new technologies. Finished :wink: I know it`s not that easy, but i fear you missed the course slightly. Anyway we have to wait and see. Maybe it will blow my mind.

Looks like the DTGFS DA42 is just before release. https://steamdb.info/app/441920/depots/ And they plan do release additional content contrary to their original intentions? DLC 441930 is the DA42, but there is 441931 and 441932 too. https://steamdb.info/app/441920/dlc/

And no word about the messiah of flightsims DTGFS ?

Today I fiddled around with the .cfg`s since not all of my request to the customer service of DTG are treated wit priority First i changed the cockpit lighting, because i don`t like red light and it`s too bright anyway. Replaced it in the aircraft.cfg with "vclightGreH" which is a soft green. Then i changed Flap behaviour by reducing flap pitch_scalar to 0.3, it is now more smooth and realistic i think. After that i enabled autopilot, but it looks that only altitude hold is working, can`t change to another mode. Tried to display autopilot panel but doesn`t work until now. Any tips to get it working or other tweks to share?

Anyway you can see how the FlightSimmers are more scattered and sceptical than ever. Afaik FSX had several million sales and if i remember right Microsoft said that even MSFlight had ~1 Million downloads. It´s quite a different number compared to P3D,FSX, FSX:SE,Aerofly and FSc nowadays....

After 23 hours i found a positive aspect in DTGFS. Night Lights. But only if not too close, then they are overdone.But far away from above it looks quite nice. And it does not look everywhere good as here. In the video you can see EDDF at night, with the major roads (Autobahn) bright enlighted. Just the LOD could be bigger, you see the lights popping in and out in the not so far distance. The Airport itselt isn`t too bad also, actual database, with new runway and hangars.

But only because especially FlightSIm developers are years behind technology since MS left the house...

It doesn`t matter if you are a flight simmer or a beginner. ugly graphics is ugly graphics, bug is bug, and poor lesson/mission design is poor lesson/mission design- period

This what they said: " standalone experience to attract new players" and "teach people to fly a plane" ? But it isn`t. Most people that are new to flight sims turn away from it because it`s just ugly and it`s all but not beginner friendly. Just talk to the people that tried it, and of course obviously you can see in the STEAM community what they think about it and what problems they are experiencing. It`s a bit strange to me. The FlightSIm community here at AVSIM and elsewhere bashed MS Flight for what it was. But it was still better than Flight School now, and DTGFS is not bashed by the FlightSim community but everywhere else. I don`t get it. And the goal for MS Flight was the same: Easy to use Flight Sim with "Flight Training" elemets to attract new players.

Hi all, i thought about writing a review for a few days now. After 15 Hours flying time i try to do that. Don`t get me wrong, i like that DTG is investing in the future of flight sim. But this product "DTG Flight School" is a fail in my eyes. I try not bash it, but english is not my native language and the negative impressions weight more. Short version: DTGFS is just like a Mission Pack from a modified version of FSX (modified worse?) with ugly graphics and loads of bugs, and less features. The aim to attract new people to Flight Sim will not happen with this. More likely that they are scared away now. The "Flight School" or flight training element doesn`t succeeded. Here is why Pro`s: - Engine Sound - Airport database updated? (at least for some airports) Neutral`s: - Iced Windshield ( but only during mission, couldn`t reproduce during free flight) - Aircraft graphic - Not too bad but not what i expected. MS Flight aircraft -with Cockpits;) - were way better - Flight Planner - not enough features for a decent flight planning. More or less only A to B selection. Con`s: - Controls configuration - Took me almost one hour, not beginner friendly, not even for "professionals". Too much commands, most of them didn`t even work, hard to configure. UI tricky. - AWFUL scenery/objects and sky/cloud graphic (unless the aircraft itself) I won`t go into detail. It`s just not what to expect in 2016. - Bugged "Training Lessons" - Different orders per voice/text. Little margin for errors. No good introduction. NOt suitable for real beginners into aviation. Aviation basics are not explained really. - Cockpit not fully functionable - Trim controls too coarse - Missions - I love missions, but most of the DTGFS missions are very short,clumsy and (opposite of fanciful) + also bugged. I cannot resist to compare it with MS Flight. Which was -in my eyes- the most advanced "out of the box" Flight Sim, despite the missing features and issues. It had better graphics, better performance, better (if not the best) Flight model, great missions. Yes you can get there with FSX or P3D with loads and expensive add-ons. But thats not the point. I just hope that the full DTGFS Simulator later this year has nothing to do with DTGFligthSchool. Because they made everything wrong except the 64Bit DX11 portation. But even though you can`t see the advantages right now. Maybe i will add some points later.

You guys don`t like sky colors? I don`t like the scenery... http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/266089411983408216/38AB8A9209A2860D3440086C3D3EB71FCD9DEBA8/