Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mibmab

  1. Hi, I had Flight re-installed more than two years ago after upgrading my machine to Windows 10 64 bit, and with the help of the flight toolkit (last version 1.1.22) I again converted the FSX-SE world. It all worked fine without problems. So after a few months since last using it, I tried starting Flight again. Unfortunately the program did not start. Looking at the task manager, I see the Flight Application (32 bit), but the memory is constantly stuck at 2.3MB while it does not consume any CPU time. So I thought, I update to the latest flight toolkit 1.1.31. But it had the same problem. When I switch to GFWL mode in the toolkit, Flight does start, and the windows live login appears. The login works, but then it asks me for a product key, which I never had to fill in previously. So I'm stuck at that stage. Now, apart from the normal windows 10 upgrades that are automatically applied in the background, I have only upgraded the graphics card drivers recently (NVIDIA GTX 960). What other reasons could there be for this problem? Should I try going back to an earlier version of the flight toolkit? Has anyone experienced similar problems? Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks, Andreas
  2. It was maybe a bad businesses model to choose a closed platform, but the core of the software was and still is very good. And if you want to reach a market beyond the core simming community, it needs to look like a game.
  3. In Windows 10 you just click in the "search windows" field and type "cmd" then press enter. That should open the command prompt.
  4. Also, I remember I had problems with the steam version of Flight in combination with the toolkit. So I had to install the standard Flight version first.
  5. While I tend to agree with most points you raise, it is worth considering that the price for Flight School is very low, less than for many FSX addons. So I'm not too disappointed in having spent the money. I agree with you that the lesson are not suitable for absolute beginners as they do require a bit of background knowledge. The very basic "lessons" in MS Flight were IMHO much better in teaching the key basics of starting/landing and steering a plane. Graphics wise I'm quite disappointed. While it looks much better than stock FSX (the least one would expect) the frame rate on my average system is very poor, with occasional longer delays. It seems the graphics engine is still depending heavily on raw CPU power. When I look around the cockpit, the plane graphics looks very nice, but the movement "breaks up" the graphics and the bottom part is drawn with a delay. MS Flight was way superiour in this respect in terms of smoothness even on modest systems - and as a 32 bit app.
  6. I just tried the first two missions of Flight School - so some first impressions. - It seems my slightly aging but not too shabby system (Core i5-2500 + Radeon HD 7700) is not powerful enough to provide smooth framerates in Flight School. Both MS Flight and stock FSX with some freeware addons work much better in this respect on my system and run smooth like butter. I suspect DX11, the adapted ORBX Global and the underlying FSX engine might require a more powerful machine/graphics card? - The whole user interface is reasonably well designed, but setting up or adjusting the controllers is not very intuitive. - I really liked the default settings for the XBOX 360 Controller in MS Flight, why did they not use the same settings by default in Flight School and use all control buttons? This will be the main controller many gamers will use on their PC/console. So - is it worth 15 quid, probably yes. Is there room for improvement - definitely yes... Though I still prefer MS Flight for simple bush flying. ;-)
  7. Well, the flight lessons might be easy to pass for experienced simmers, someone like you I suppose. But you are not really the target market. And I'm sure an absolute beginner will take quite a while to pass them - certainly sufficient time to justify the modest price paid for Flight School.
  8. Well - that describes exactly what was intended by DTG. They have made it very clear that those already using a flight sim are not the main target market for Flight School. It is the much bigger market of gamers - some of them maybe already familiar with other simulation games - who might see it on steam and think, well, they might give it a try for 15 quid.
  9. In MS Flight the sky and some of the the clouds occasionally looked a bit purple-ish as well, depending on time of the day and weather. Here is an example: https://flic.kr/p/FAgnuh And to be honest it did not bother me, as long as it does not turn into a surreal painting :smile: .
  10. I seem to remember that DTG plan to offer a migration function for the "career" from Flight school over to the full flight sim. So it sounds like any plans for further lessons will be kept for the full flight sim. I could imagine that there would be some more lesson missions built into that full sim from the start, while others might be sold extra as DLC maybe in combination with the respective more advanced DLC planes (e.g. teaching how to properly operate a turboprop or a jet engine plane). I guess much of this is not yet decided for the full sim, but (to stay ontopic in this thread) maybe Martin can comment if their thinking goes in this direction? I certainly would like an overall career/qualification-level function beyond succeeding individual missions in FSX. This was one of the features I liked about MS Flight.
  11. This new interview with Mr Hood about DTG Flight School might be of interest: http://www.pcgamesn.com/dovetail-flight-school/onwards-and-upwards-dovetail-flight-school-and-plane-simulation-in-the-modern-era There are some new insights into the design considerations, for example he did not like the unrealistic hoop flying in previous versions, used to use FS 2004 - and grew up with early flightsims on the Amiga (I remember those well). I didn't particularly like the hoop flying either, but in MS Flight the Aerocaches search was actually quite fun following vague hints.
  12. To be outraged would IMHO require that someone, in this case DTG, broke promises, or even worse a contract. And I don't see that. This will be new product and you'll either like it or you stay happily with FSX(SE) or one of the other alternatives. I guess if DTG see a medium/long-term economic potential in providing an SDK, e.g. widening the user base of the new sim or providing a pathway towards commercial development for the platform (from which they would have to benefit with a small share), they might consider it.
  13. You first install the core game of Flight - and then use the flight toolkit to download required content.
  14. It might well be that they decided quite late to add a third plane and the development with the two initial planes was already quite advanced. So they might just need some more time to test the DA42 and the associated lessons, hence the later release and "patch".
  15. Great program - works well! And it shows what could have been if DTG might have built on the Flight core...
  16. I can second that - my Samsung 850 EVO 1TB has been working superbly well since I did a fresh Win10 install last summer. The OCZ Solid 3 120GB SSD that I used before with Win7 initially needed firmware updates before it worked on my machine. In terms of price per GB, the Samsung 850 EVO 512GB is probably the best value at the moment, but if you can afford it, it's worth going for the 1TB version to have a bit more headroom. The Sandisk Extreme Pro has a slightly higher performance but costs a bit more. Regarding possible writing limits of SSDs - that's only a theoretical concern, but for regular backups and occasional archiving I still use conventional harddisks.
  17. I think the texturing on steep grades is still there in the converted FSX files. A while ago I did a few comparison screenshots between FSX and Flight - if you look at the Grand Canyon shots you'll notice that there is not much difference between FSX and Flight rendering. In other areas there is much bigger differences in the rendering. https://flic.kr/s/aHskunZJs8 Oh, and to encourage you to try the conversion, have a look at these screenshots of various locations around the world in Flight :-) https://flic.kr/s/aHskxL5fZ9 On the shots from the alps you can also see the rendering on steep gradients in Flight using the converted FSX files.
  18. In a way flight school will be a good opportunity for them to do a test of the core technology for the full flight sim coming later, even if they will do more work on the engine since then - e.g. regarding shadows. They can see in flight school how the core engine performs on a range of systems of a large user base without the possible interference of plugins or DLC.
  19. DTG Martin answered this one in the other thread - and confirmed that this won't be included in Flight School, but that it's being looked at for Flight Sim: http://www.avsim.com/topic/483642-ask-dovetail-games-about-dtg-flight-school-flight-simulator/page-17
  20. It's an alternative world map providing more detailed topographic view than the default map - and covers, as the name suggests, the whole world. You can find more information in this old thread: http://www.avsim.com/topic/454973-ftk-menu-world-world-map/
  21. On my core i5 the conversion takes less than 20 minutes if the source folder is on my data hd and the destination folder on my ssd.
  22. Flight is generally running rockstable with a decent performance, including with the flightool installed and using the converted world scenery. One key difference to FSX is that the performance of Flight is less dependent on raw CPU power, though you can only set some of the graphics options to maximum if you have enough memory, which you only get if you use a 64 bit Windows. Let's hope that some of those advantages will also be realised in the upcoming DTG Flight Sim. ;-)
  23. Hi Jim, while the global graphics of the converted files are a vast improvement in quality compared to the stock fsx graphics, don't expect it to be as good as in Alaska or Hawaii. But it's certainly worth converting. Then try getting the Maule off the ground in stormy weather in the highlands of Bolivia ;-) I use the following lines in a batch file to run the conversion. If you but it in a batch file (text file with the ending .bat) the advantage is that you can rerun it if required or if there is a new version of the converter: MkDir FSX-SE_Base "Flight Toolkit\ContentConverter" FSX /l:fsx_se_conversion.log /i:"d:\Program\Steam\steamapps\common\FSX" /o:"FSX-SE_Base" Pause Here are two examples how the converted files look like - Lisbon and London: https://youtu.be/tCmYCn03tXQ https://youtu.be/ZlOcB2yZlIE
  24. It might be easier to simply install flight toolkit and then use the Flight Addon Manager to install the Alaska Wilderness Pack. This also provides a good overview over what is installed for Flight. Oh, and if you own FSX or FSX-SE, it's well worth converting the global scenery using the toolkit.
  • Create New...