Gaming Microsoft Flight Megathread

[Hielor]

The one advantage here is that the free version will be a lot more complete than the FSX demo was in terms of exposure to the features.

I foresee a lot of people either trying the free version and discarding it, or just spending a lot of time with the free version and never paying through the nose for an airplane or two.

 

[Grover]

heres a question for you guys:

how did they manage to make the entire FSX game cost only ~£40, where you get the entire world, loads of missions, loads of aircraft and a ratehr nice API/SDK kit
whereas FLIGHT will cost hugely more, for way less? you could easily spend £100 on this game and get nowhere near the amount of content that FSX has for £40

someone at M$ product design didnt know maths very well it seems

 

[Codz]

heres a question for you guys:

how did they manage to make the entire FSX game cost only ~£40, where you get the entire world, loads of missions, loads of aircraft and a ratehr nice API/SDK kit
whereas FLIGHT will cost hugely more, for way less? you could easily spend £100 on this game and get nowhere near the amount of content that FSX has for £40

someone at M$ product design didnt know maths very well it seems

Because they know that a large amount of people will buy this simplified, overpriced version of MSFS, even if those people aren't the original fans.

 

[NovaSilisko]

Because they know that a large amount of people will buy this simplified, overpriced version of MSFS, even if those people aren't the original fans.

Exactly. Welcome to what modern gaming is becoming

 

[Grover]

well, we can help protect REAL gaming, by buying the most "Sim-ish" games out there, choose BF3 over COD, choose Orbiter over Asteroids P) and FSX over FLIGHT.

show the world that theres a market for us that like cheaper simulators, where the market is freeware/payware driven, and if necessary, make your own simulator (Orbiter in this case) to show them what we like!

 

[Codz]

well, we can help protect REAL gaming, by buying the most "Sim-ish" games out there, choose BF3 over COD, choose Orbiter over Asteroids P) and FSX over FLIGHT.

show the world that theres a market for us that like cheaper simulators, where the market is freeware/payware driven, and if necessary, make your own simulator (Orbiter in this case) to show them what we like!

I'd take ARMA over BF3.:lol:

 

[Fabri91]

Source?

That would be pretty hilarious if they wanted you to pay $8 for a plane that didn't even have a cockpit.

Hilarious in a depressing kind of way.

Ultra-official press release on Flight's website.

Here's the exact quote:

The North American P-51 Mustang flyable from the outside will be available via Games for Windows—LIVE for 640 Microsoft Points.

 

[Keatah]

This whole Microsoft Flight thing is ridiculous..

 

[Pablo49]

well, we can help protect REAL gaming, by buying the most "Sim-ish" games out there, choose BF3 over COD, choose Orbiter over Asteroids P) and FSX over FLIGHT.

show the world that theres a market for us that like cheaper simulators, where the market is freeware/payware driven, and if necessary, make your own simulator (Orbiter in this case) to show them what we like!

There aren't enough simmers out there to make any worthwhile stand. Flight wasn't made for flightsimmers. It's too niche of a market for an effective boycott. There are more people who are just interested in planes enough to fool around flying them, than there are people who want to flip switches and read checklists all day. It's unfortunate, but they don't care, this game wasn't made for us.

 

[Spacethingy]

My thoughts:

a) Noooooo! The death of fS is very sad. The end of the (arguably of course) best flight simulator series out there.

b) Hooray! A reincarnation of Flight Unlimited! I actually love the idea of concentrating on one area of the planet - you can get so much more detail (although I really do understand why this will irk other people too!).

c) HOORAY! It's free! But then, I'm just a miserly old wotsit so...

 

[Hielor]

heres a question for you guys:

how did they manage to make the entire FSX game cost only ~£40, where you get the entire world, loads of missions, loads of aircraft and a ratehr nice API/SDK kit
whereas FLIGHT will cost hugely more, for way less? you could easily spend £100 on this game and get nowhere near the amount of content that FSX has for £40

someone at M$ product design didnt know maths very well it seems

FLIGHT has better graphics, significantly better terrain, and more to do--it's not just the simple missions like FSX or the sandbox free flight, there are more choices.

Basically, more arcade-like features.

Ultra-official press release on Flight's website.

Here's the exact quote:

Well that's...yeah, I don't even know what that is.

$8 for a plane that doesn't even have a cockpit, and which was probably just an import of the FSX model?

 

[Kveldulf]

That seals the deal for me, I certainly won't be buying Flight. What's the point if all I can do is fly around Hawaii?

Microsoft would be working on adding other areas of the world to sell I assume. Of course, I've got my own questions on how that would work in relation to large landmasses, and how it would be handled at the borders of that landmass.

---------- Post added at 11:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:16 AM ----------

To play devil's advocate for a minute, in FS9, I've never flown to Australia, and I'm not currently planning on flying there, so why have the files on my comptuer? There are planes I've not touched, and probably will not touch. Again, why have them on my computer?

Splitting the world up like this may not be the worst thing I've ever heard. I can see the appeal in cutting down on an install size by letting me pick and choose what scenery I want, with what airplanes I want.[/devil's advocate]

In all seriousness though, I was worried about the pricing before, and this just puts the nail in the coffin as far as I'm concerned. Hielor's comment sums it up pretty well. All of Hawaii and 5 total planes for $43. Even unlocking the rest of Hawaii is $20. If the rest of the world is going to be added, I truly shudder to imagine what the US is going to cost, unless it's broken up into sections.

Which also raises another concern I have. If entire landmasses are going to be released in sections, what is going to happen at the edges? If I pay for the midwest, what happens when I reach the borders of that chunk? I just fly over the great planes, and then... ocean? Will I hit an invisible wall? Warp to the other end of the map?

 

[Hielor]

Four and a half planes, not five--the P-51 is just an exterior model, so you don't get a cockpit.

$8 for a plane without a cockpit. That's absurd, and also sets the precedent for MS (and external developers, if they're ever allowed) that it's OK to release and charge for half-finished addons.

If an FSX developer tried to release a plane with no cockpit for $8, they'd be laughed out of business. There are freeware planes for FSX that have incredibly detailed VCs, better than the stock FSX planes.

The best part is--how many people will buy the plane without realizing that?

It's also unfortunate that this is a download game, and there probably won't be any physical media--at least if a physical-media game fails miserably, you're able to get it at bargain-basement prices a few months later since people are trying to liquidate stock. No such luck with the online world.

 

[Codz]

It's also unfortunate that this is a download game, and there probably won't be any physical media--at least if a physical-media game fails miserably, you're able to get it at bargain-basement prices a few months later since people are trying to liquidate stock. No such luck with the online world.

Have you seen Steam sales?:lol: I much prefer digital to physical.

 

[FADEC]

FLIGHT has better graphics, significantly better terrain, and more to do--it's not just the simple missions like FSX or the sandbox free flight, there are more choices.

I personally don't care about better graphics, and especially not about missions at all. What I want is flight "simulation", systems depth, and realistic airports (only available through addons anyway).

FSX for example has better graphics than FS9, but my FS9 config beats FSX regarding addons/extensions. So it's superior to FSX, in my case. Not not mention flight. Beside FS9 I am also using FSX now, since I figured out how to fix the famous FSX crash (which is related to a windows vista dll that is not included in windows 7 or XP). But in my case and regaring my needs, an almost 9 years old simulation beats FSX and even flight altogether. The better graphics and missions is 100% worthless in this case. And with the right settings and addons, people mostly don't even see the difference between FSX and FS9 in videos on Youtube.

Well, flight does make a difference graphically, but that's actually the only thing. It's by no means a successor of FSX, and not even of FS9 (addons, airplanes etc.). And I think it's customers like me which is the majority of the FS community, made possible all the great payware addons and looking for systems depth of aircraft, and not for missions and eye candy. Microsoft will fail with flight. I bet.

 

[Blake]

Looks like I'll be holding on to my copy of FSX.

I'm not sure who the target audience is with this, it does not seem to be the 'simulator' crowd.

 

[Hielor]

Yeah, I think it's been made obvious that the targetted audience for Flight isn't the same as the targetted audience for FSX.

FADEC, I wasn't saying that those differences justified the price, just that those are probably their reasons.

 

[FADEC]

I'm not sure who the target audience is with this, it does not seem to be the 'simulator' crowd.

Right. The target audience is causal gamers who like flying games. No more, no less, very sadly.

---------- Post added at 07:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:25 PM ----------

FADEC, I wasn't saying that those differences justified the price, just that those are probably their reasons.

Okay.

I just wanted to mention that there are probably a lot of people who don't care about better graphics in the first place. So the whole strategy behind flight might be a fail.

 

[Fabri91]

It got released today.

Our suspicions got confirmed, it definitely is more of a game, rather than a simulator.
However, I'm impressed by the program's performance: it is very playable even on my laptop (i5 430M, Nvidia GeForce 310M).

 

[Kevon Daye]

So what is with the free to play thing? Is it just a demo or is the whole game free? Sounds too good to be true.