What Microsoft recently said

[mgh]

Has anyone actually realised what Microsoft actually wrote in its recent fact sheet?

The game immerses players in the flying experience with realistic graphics and accurate physics, and will continually evolve with new terrain, aircraft and challenges that can be downloaded via expansion packs.

Set the pace by choosing to turn on flight aids or use the cockpit controls to perform authentic piloting procedures

Players looking to deepen their experience can download additional packs that add new aircraft, regions and customization options.

Should we not hold fire on criticising what is still only the beta, until we see what Flight will actually offer when it's released?

[Paxx]

Has anyone actually realised what Microsoft actually wrote in its recent fact sheet? ...

Yes, this is why people are disappointed.

... Should we not hold fire on criticising what is still only the beta, until we see what Flight will actually offer when it's released?

The starter pack is free to play and includes the Icon A5 and the Big Island of Hawaii.

Release the hounds!

[Nels_Anderson]

Has anyone actually realised what Microsoft actually wrote in its recent fact sheet?

Should we not hold fire on criticising what is still only the beta, until we see what Flight will actually offer when it's released?

We should, but clearly we won't :-)

It's been this way with every new sim that comes out and Flight has more to criticize than most.

[jomni]

1) People are upset that these so called additional content may not even materialize since Microsoft does not want 3rd party developers to make stuff independently.
2) Also the additional cost of building your world will be pretty steep compared to a complete world in FS2004 and FSX.

[royalone]

We should, but clearly we won't :-)

It's been this way with every new sim that comes out and Flight has more to criticize than most.

Unfortunately, this is far to true. I do believe that not giving the whole sim and selling it in pieces have some simmers in an uproar. I do know of a beta tester who sent
back the key and told Microsoft, no thanks. He told me he could not get the graphics he wanted, it was too demanding. He runs FSX well with addons. Wait an see attitude works for me.

[Jayskits]

2) Also the additional cost of building your world will be pretty steep compared to a complete world in FS2004 and FSX.

And after I pay the steep cost to build my world with expansion packs over the next few years as MS releases them, what will be my result? I will have a sim that essentially looks and feels a lot like the current FSX. Why would I want to do that?

[tigisfat]

And after I pay the steep cost to build my world with expansion packs over the next few years as MS releases them, what will be my result? I will have a sim that essentially looks and feels a lot like the current FSX. Why would I want to do that?

Well, you're dead on. The funny thing is, there's enough information out for us to know that Flight is a repackaged FSX. They add a few planes, make some pretty autogen for the big island, so on and so forth. If you want to build flight and get all the scenery, you'll be paying for extremely expensive FSX upgrades essentially. I don't know how much adding the whole world will cost, but I'm sure it'll be hundreds at a minimum.

We'll have to wait and see if FSX is pulled off the shelf so as to not distract from flight!


Everyone in this thread has very good points to make. This is the first rational flight thread we've had.


Here's something else for you: Why couldn't they have made the island in photoreal with overlaid vegetation and buildings? That's clearly the way of the future. They had a small enough area. Why are we stuck with autogen?

[Jayskits]

Why couldn't they have made the island in photoreal with overlaid vegetation and buildings? That's clearly the way of the future. They had a small enough area. Why are we stuck with autogen?

Excellent point. The only thing I can think of is that the photoreal will possibly be one of the extra-cost things you can buy from MS.

[n4gix]

1) People are upset that these so called additional content may not even materialize since Microsoft does not want 3rd party developers to make stuff independently.

About that so far we've only read one side of the story, and I've no reason to give one side the benefit of the doubt without also being willing to give the other side that same benefit of the doubt.

Until Microsoft themselves make their intentions clear and announce what -if any- terms there will be for third-party involvement with their online store, there's really nothing on which to make any rational judgments yet.

I know both the principle parties who've thus far spoken out, so I at least have some reason for my unwillingness to simply "take their word for it" as though it were unbiased and strictly factual...

[Paul Golding]

Here's something else for you: Why couldn't they have made the island in photoreal with overlaid vegetation and buildings? That's clearly the way of the future. They had a small enough area. Why are we stuck with autogen?

Because there's no way they could do the whole world like that (or even the bits they're going to be selling). The Big Island has to be representative of the quality of the other areas that will become available. Also, how many photoreal sceneries are there available for FSX that include 5 seasonal textures?