Airports and Planes

[sam_thompson]

Does anybody know how many planes will be included in Microsoft Flight and if the scenery will be world wide? All the screen shots seem to be around Hawaii.

Please let us know your thoughts.

Sam

[loki]

All anyone outside Microsoft knows (or those not under NDA) is what is on the MS Flight website. So still no word on aircraft, scenery or anything else yet.

[ReggieF5421]

Early preview pics of each version of FS normally include only one area which is well developed. It would be useless for MS to develop a sim program and not include the whole world. The sales potential would be terrible. One thing folks have learned over the years is that people want to fly in their home areas. FS sells well around the world.

As far as planes, it is very likely that we will see the normal group of Boeing, Cessna, Mooney, King Air. Also most likely the A321 and Maule from FSX.

New aircraft - obviously a Stearman bi-plane and I would be very surprised to not see the B-787.

[tigisfat]

FSX was pretty comprehensive for airports. It included many closed and abandoned fields, as well as some that hadn't been charted in years. I don't want anything additional, I just hope FSX standards for airports are included.

[mgh]

Does anybody know how many planes will be included in Microsoft Flight and if the scenery will be world wide? All the screen shots seem to be around Hawaii.

Please let us know your thoughts.

Sam

The short answer is no so thoughts are meaningless

[Overspeed]

It's got to add something to the table in graphics or detail or gameplay. I'd think they'd put an a380 and some other updated planes like the 747-8i/f and the 737-900/xl
would love to see a 757 in it tho and a 777. The airports in FSX were OK in quality and there were loads of them but they lacked realism which would be something to add.
definitely a maule involved. Seems to me that they've really worked hard on the scenery it looks fantastic but it looks like you'd need a couple of ASUS mars GPU's to get it to look as good as it does unless they have adressed that too.

[mgh]

Microsoft has stated it's run Flight on Windows XP. That doesn't support DX11.

[loki]

That doesn't mean they couldn't use DX10 or 11 on Vista and 7, while still supporting DX9 on XP.

[Overspeed]

I'd like to see windscreen wipers and GPWS systems in planes and maybe able to adress the cabin

[Firekitten]

you're starting to hit payware quality stuff here... features that ms doesn't need to add, because a, it takes a ton of development time, and b, what incentive does microsoft have to develop something that someone else inevitably will? Flight isn't going to be fsx plus every payware aircraft for fsx, and feature, unless they expect they can sell each copy at the same price as prepar3d... For the market they want to apeal to, those features are available else where, and most don't care. Not viable.

[fxsttcb]

Even if it only contains a couple planes and airports, if it expands the capabilty to run extremely well on a decent state of the art computer, I will buy it.
My personal wishlist would include:
A detailed dynamic environment with smooth weather transitions and allow better, tighter FDEs
A detailed 10m or less terrain elevation mesh, planet wide, with terrain hugging runways/taxiways that work on RW 5cm mesh airport models.
An SDK with more and easier access to internal variables for developers to create instrumentation such as a Weather RADAR(pet peave)
Continuous NAV/Airport data update capability(*.xml by region?), so the sim's database(s) can remain current, and reflect RW changes.

As far as I'm concerned, everything else can be left up to add-on developers who will help create my detailed world...Don

[Firekitten]

agree on the updated nav / airport databases... 6yo data is annoying! especially gave me a shock taxiing at Winnipeg Canada, ground gave me clearane to taxi via Kilo... as I got to it on the chart, I turned onto the now defunct runway that has been replaced by kilo! gave me quite a shock thinking id made a massive boo boo :D

[Ragtopjohnny]

One thing that would be nice if Flight gave it Navigraph Update ability. That would be a huge plus.

John Thuot II

[cheneymax1470]

I would definitely be disappointed if animated ground service vehicles were not supported. I know its a small thing but it adds a lot in my eyes. If they are supported, I would like to see an improvement in their animations i.e. articulated trailers, baggage on conveyors and in carts, catering trucks and so on.

-Chainz

[Overspeed]

I would definitely be disappointed if animated ground service vehicles were not supported. I know its a small thing but it adds a lot in my eyes. If they are supported, I would like to see an improvement in their animations i.e. articulated trailers, baggage on conveyors and in carts, catering trucks and so on.

-Chainz

+1 after all it is a simulator not a game loads of aircraft these days come with their own AGS which makes it really unrealistic in the way that they just appear, I'd also like to see cabins and cargo decks also for freighters thay should be properly converted so they have bigger doors and nose doors too. The game should include more things that previously addon manufacturers had to make themselves

[lefu]

i hope they put some oldies in there, as the "ryans"

[Overspeed]

I heard they're making a Microsoft flight addon store which could be useful

[dubina]

I knows flight sims, and FSX to some extent, so I'd guess MS Flight will not have jet fighters, only wide bodies and small a/c such as Lear, Stearman, etc.

I would hope, on the other hand, to see a fighter jet. Anybody know anything about that?

Thanks,

[shermank]

I am not a beta tester and have no inside information. But, from what I have read and seen, my guess is that this is going to be more game than simulation, with a very heavy emphasis on Inet connectivity and Multiplay, with even more emphasis on that aspect than FSX currently offers. while the intitial tease will offer something "free", my guess is it will be a souped up demo....
I have always been more less an early adopter, but for now I see not much reason to abandon FSX...though time, and the demo will tell.

Sherm

[djadlib]

I knows flight sims, and FSX to some extent, so I'd guess MS Flight will not have jet fighters

FSX acceleration has a F18 Hornet (although not a very good one). That's a jet fighter in my book.

[benEggleston16]

Wow, wow, wow, is everyone forgetting the posts and announcements of the last few days?


Early preview pics of each version of FS normally include only one area which is well developed. It would be useless for MS to develop a sim program and not include the whole world. The sales potential would be terrible. One thing folks have learned over the years is that people want to fly in their home areas. FS sells well around the world.

As far as planes, it is very likely that we will see the normal group of Boeing, Cessna, Mooney, King Air. Also most likely the A321 and Maule from FSX.

New aircraft - obviously a Stearman bi-plane and I would be very surprised to not see the B-787.

Update: Everyone is angry MS have pretty much written off serious stuff, so no airliners (for now), MS have announced they will release the whol world but gradually, beginning with ONE Hawaiian
island.

The aircraft included are: the 'Icon A5', an ugly bird that looks like a car (featured a lot in the latest update): if you have Windows games live, only then do you get the Stearman (by far featured the most).
Other planes from previous screenshot posts: Vans RV-8 (a kit-aircraft featured a couple of times, now availible for FSX from Vertigo Studios) and the Maule Orion (FSX)
Also in the latest video, a brief glimpse of a P-51 Mustang but no interior shots.

So that's five aircraft at least, but only the Icon in the base pack. On the plus side, the 'base pack' is free although there almost certainly won't be enough features to entertain many for long, and that's deliberate to be able to sell DLC.


you're starting to hit payware quality stuff here... features that ms doesn't need to add, because a, it takes a ton of development time, and b, what incentive does microsoft have to develop something that someone else inevitably will? Flight isn't going to be fsx plus every payware aircraft for fsx, and feature, unless they expect they can sell each copy at the same price as prepar3d... For the market they want to apeal to, those features are available else where, and most don't care. Not viable.

looking at MS's screenshots, as much as everyone hates MS at the moment, I admit the graphics are pretty good (although apparently FSX is good with the right PC) and also, MS announced NO 3rd party, (see my other thread) so whatever the quality of addons, it comes from the horse's mouth.

[benEggleston16]

FSX was pretty comprehensive for airports. It included many closed and abandoned fields, as well as some that hadn't been charted in years. I don't want anything additional, I just hope FSX standards for airports are included.

True, although one of my local airfieds was missing.



FSX acceleration has a F18 Hornet (although not a very good one). That's a jet fighter in my book.

That was made by Captain Sim, one of the most revered designers in FS circles! They were however employed by Microsft to make an official addon, so perhaps this gives hope to the future of FLIGHT if this is what MS are going to do (employ trusted designers to make addons) since they (the other designers) can't make their own.

[djadlib]

That was made by Captain Sim, one of the most revered designers in FS circles! They were however employed by Microsft to make an official addon, so perhaps this gives hope to the future of FLIGHT if this is what MS are going to do (employ trusted designers to make addons) since they (the other designers) can't make their own.

Did not know that. Well if MS still have CaptainSim's phone-number maybe they can ask them for a 757 :)

[benEggleston16]

Originally Posted by benEggleston16

That was made by Captain Sim, one of the most revered designers in FS circles! They were however employed by Microsft to make an official addon, so perhaps this gives hope to the future of FLIGHT if this is what MS are going to do (employ trusted designers to make addons) since they (the other designers) can't make their own. Did not know that. Well if MS still have CaptainSim's phone-number maybe they can ask them for a 757

Hopefully with better PC performance though...

[jomni]

Hopefully with better PC performance though...

Well MS sorted it out already. FSX was CPU-intensive. Now Flight can maximize the use of multicore CPUs and video cards (GPU).

[djadlib]

Well MS sorted it out already. FSX was CPU-intensive. Now Flight can maximize the use of multicore CPUs and video cards (GPU).

FSX runs fine on my comp. Mind you it took a while to get it tweaked right. But now it runs great.

[Paxx]

Well MS sorted it out already. FSX was CPU-intensive. Now Flight can maximize the use of multicore CPUs and video cards (GPU).

Do you have a source for this information?

[jomni]

Just read the interview :


The way previous builds were made, the games ran very CPU heavy, and didn’t take advantage of the fact that graphics cards were developing quickly. The team has put a great deal of effort into getting the game to run smoothly at its highest settings, while not requiring out of this world hardware. But also, getting it to still look good on its lowest settings, accommodating those end users with lower-end hardware and even those running the Windows XP operating system

Read more: http://flyawaysimulation.com/news/4317/microsoft-flight-behind-scenes-at-microsoft-studios/#ixzz1igcC07T0

[Paxx]

So "... the team put a great deal of effort into getting the game to run smoothly at its highest settings..." tells you that " ... Flight can maximize the use of multicore CPUs and video cards (GPU)"? That is an incredible leap.

The MSFlight "Recommended" GPU of "ATI Radeon HD 5670 or nVidia GeForce 9800T or equivalent" tells me volumes about how much "tweaking" was done to the engine. Miraculously if you remove all FSX scenery except Hawaii and tweak said area, some performance gains become apparent. This clever tactic however does not mean that the ESP engine is maximizing the use of multi-core CPU systems and video cards.

[eraclito]

I understand that Flight should come for free (only Hawaii). Then if one wants more planes or sceneries , these are to be purchased.
It would be interesting to know the price policy that Microsoft will apply.
One of the fsx drawbacks was that the scenery was not adjourned following recent modification of aiports, routes and so forth.
Does anybody know is microsoft is going to improve in this direction?
As far as I know, nothing has been released about ATC in the new simulator or about flying facilities in big line jets.

[jomni]

I understand that Flight should come for free (only Hawaii). Then if one wants more planes or sceneries , these are to be purchased.
It would be interesting to know the price policy that Microsoft will apply.

I suspect they will be cheaper than what we have now. Like what Apple is doing spoiling the market with $0.99 apps? But I don't think it will be as cheap as an iOS app.
This is the reason why many developers find it not economical to make stuff for MS Flight. But because it's cheep, the quality might just be less than what we get now.

[bob2]

The Icon A5 is a yes. I imagine that the 737-800NG will be default or if we're lucky, the 737-800MAX.

[fxsttcb]

...the reason why many developers find it not economical to make stuff for MS FlightEconomical? No SDK = No 3rd party development. Period.
I'm sure MS has contacted many developers, and maybe contracted with a few, but, I doubt we'll see PMDG quality planes offered(PMDG demurred)...Don