In case you missed the homepage:

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3537131/Review_Microsoft_Flight.html#Post3537131

Good review, Beach. You captured my sentiments exactly. I stopped before buying the rest of Hawaii. The "game" is just oo boring, and that includes the multiplayer which I tried just a few minutes ago. I can't see spending a dime on DLC stuff.

I predicted when the beta was released that this game would be an all-time MS disaster, from the standpoint of DLC sales,the only place where they can make money.

Who in the name of everything holy sat in a conference room and said Flight was a great idea and moneymaker? I predicted disaster weeks ago for the very same reason that you correctly identified in your article: who the flippin' flip is the market for this thing? It ain't real flight simmers that's for sure. So that leaves so-called "casual" gamers. But they've NEVER taken to a civilian flight simulation or flight game. Not civilian. Not ever. What overpaid "brainiac" at MS didn't know that?

Here's what I don't understand. Why didn't MS do some focus groups before creating this junk? They should've gotten some Xbox gamers and some hardcore PC flight sim fans into the same room and quizzed them about what, if anything, would appeal to both groups. The answer would've been nothing like Flight.

Someone in product marketing and development should get fired for dereliction of duty---for failing to understand and accurately define the market before developing this product. It's a cardinal rule that you don't develop a product unless you first are damn sure of the market, i.e., who is going to be interested in purchasing the product. Some Bozo is drawing a paycheck at Microsoft. Somebody who obviously does not understand the market for flight software but somehow convinced his bosses that he understood the market.

This is the "best" FLIGHT review I've read so far. ("best" as in most closely matches my own feelings on the game)

Excellent review.

But why does X-Plane 10 not get a mention as an alternative?

Thank you for the review.

How about comparing a FSX originally published version vs FLIGHT?

X-Plane (in my opinion) would be trying to fit a square peg into the round hole of "appealing to novices". No missions, no real ease of setup, and not much really for the beginner..

In their attempt to appeal to the masses, they actually are appealing to no one.

You can decide for yourself but no need to include me in it.
Like Jatsi is asking can we see some FSX out of the box reviews?You were all crying then and your still crying ,in 3 years you will have flight on you pc and be happy.
Cheers!

You and Jatsi are wrong. Apples and oranges. The issues people had with FSX were totally different than the issues we have with Flight. The main issue with FSX were the system demands. It wasn't about the CONTENT or lack thereof. With Flight, it isn't about the system demands, it's about the CONTENT. Or should I say, the lack thereof. Microsoft can add all the scenery packs or remote areas like Hawaii and Alaska, but until FLIGHT has thousands of airports, and every country on earth, and every major METROPOLITAN area, and A.I. taxiing, taking off, landing, etc., and air traffic control, just like in real life, it's nothing but an arcade game. And MS have absolutely no plans to add the necessary content. They are offering, and will continue to offer, remote scenic areas with some really stupid "missions" that appeal only to eight year olds.

Look up hyperbole - that is what that statement was. I'm not dumb enough to realize that there are people of all experience levels that will love Flight.


Before you call someone out, you might want to do some research. *I* wrote the review for FSX for SimHQ years ago - and I seem to recall I liked it pretty well. Since you asked - you can go read them:

Part I

Part II

Part III

Part IV

Part V

You're welcome..

BeachAV8R

I think if you read the review above of FSX and then the review of Flight, it pretty much covers it. The fact that the Flight review couldn't really span a 5-part review is pretty telling that it doesn't deliver near the quantity or quality of FSX.

Regards,

BeachAV8R

Flight is going to become the most hated simulator in history. The reason is MS has decided they want all the money in their pockets and when it's about money, oh boy!, that's war. MS has declared war against those who had been making money out of FSX success. But with Flight it won't be possible any more.

MS Flight developers had stated on the Microsoft beta forums, that they are trying to debug and squeeze the Flight engine to allow new features to be included in the future. Meaning, this is just a Flight beta version and we are indirectly testing it to allow next features to come...if haters don't kill it first.

Those who criticize Flight are the ones who enjoy FSX and X-plane but of course they don't want this hobby to become main stream, they want it just for them. Would you imagine how uncool it would be, if any one could fly a plane?. Not cool.
Flying with a mouse??!! a game pad??!!. Blasphemy!!!, call the inquisition!!!.

Create a piece of software like Flight takes years and a lot of coding, debugging more coding, testing and headaches. They could be doing angry birds and make millions but they choose the harder way, they have decided to make simulators for us and at the same time trying to catch fresh air and new people into this hobby. I don't see why I should dislike it.

Guess when you fly Lockon, Il2, Flaming Cliffs, DCS, Silent Hunter, Strike Fighters... you don't play. Well, I play and also learn and imagine what's like flying the real thing.

I'll sit and wait. It's sad to see how I have to hear a bully disliking my videos and making nasty comments, just because it's Flight or someone calling me idiot just because I choose play multiplayer in Flight. Sad, very very sad.

In the meantime I'll keep enjoying Flight as I do with any other sim as I always did...

Funny thing, I still remember many many years ago in a Spanish simulation forum a few people wanted to ban others from talking about Combat Flight Simulator 3 because "they" considered it wasn't a simulator. This world is pure madness.


About this review. Well, I never really cared about reviews, since I have a good brain to think for myself.
Bye,

In terms of developing Flight, Microsoft had a huge bunch of code ready written. It's natural that they might recycle it.


Personally I'm not over impressed with Flight. It looks good but the world is just too sterile. The challenges were fun for a short while...

I've tried MP but it's only seems to be there in a form that does not work for a casual flight. I really didn't like the warp jumping aircraft.

Overall, it was free to try and I'm not forced to use it so good luck to MS. Maybe I'll just see how the game develops.

Cheers!

PS Anyone tried adding aircraft or scenery from FSX?

Im just an optimistic by nature,i like to give the runner a chance rather then kill it in the shell.
Doent make sense to me comparing a grown up to a new born baby .

That's rubbish.


You don't have to dislike it. You can revel in its mediocrity all you like. Heck, I still occasionally play Jane's F-15 because I enjoy it even though it has dated graphics, capabilities, etc...


Again - rubbish. I've seen plenty of our users that enjoy playing games. Fact of the matter is that Flight could have been a great game if they had put any thought into making the gameplay fun. Instead, it is boring, repetitive, lifeless, and just a poor game altogether. Not sim. Not game. Just something in the middle that is really unremarkable.


Nobody should criticize you for liking it - nor should you criticize others for not liking it and putting out valid reasons why.


I don't understand your statement. We aren't even close to banning people for supporting or being critical of Flight. I figure Flight will stand or fall on its own merits, irrespective of cheerleaders or critics. We will just have to stand back and watch what develops. With the relatively uninspiring initial DLC though, they might have an uphill battle trying to get people to shell out for more.


LOL.. Well, I'm anxiously awaiting your review..



BeachAV8R

Well, unfortunately if we compare the newborn FSX (out of the box initial release) to Flight (out of the box initial release) you have an apples to apples comparison. By the time you add all the DLC to Flight you have pretty much reached the release price of FSX, so it isn't unfair to compare them feature for feature.

I was (and am) actually rooting for Microsoft on Flight. I don't want Flight to be a failure, but it isn't looking real good from a gamer OR simmer perspective right now. They have serious issues with gameplay longevity they need to address if they want to attract and keep people playing and continuing to download more content.

They missed an opportunity to knock it out of the park on the initial release with fun (read - no repetitive) missions and something like a storyline to keep you interested (like Take On Helicopters for example)..

BeachAV8R

I think Flight is new and like FSX before it, inherits a lot of baggage and expectations and especially here on SimHQ there are lively opinions pro and con.

It seems to me that making a new civilian flight sim must not be an easy thing to do, just from looking at how the initial releases of high expectation FSX, XP10, and Flight have gone. We flight simmers are not an easy audience to please as evidenced by the noise and outcry for many other sim releases, I recall even good ones like ROF, Blackshark2 had very bumpy initial reactions here on SimHQ, not to mention the always controversial Cliffs Of Dover, or Wings of Prey.

So I suspect the strong pro and con reactions to Flight may soften over time, and just like with FSX I see a lot of potential here in the improved performance and graphics depending on how Microsoft develops or mishandles the product, ROF's DLC model at one time was seen as a complete no-go for many, but nowadays we've all come to appreciate it as a good way to continually fund a sim development team so that the product continues to improve, and this could turn out to be something similar.

Personally I see a lot of obvious missing things in Flight (TrackIR, AP, ATC being top for me), but I am enjoying flying my Maule and RV6 in multiplayer, when not in the mood for serious flying in FSX, and I am prepared to wait and see how Flight develops, in a way it is like ROF and WOP, an interesting experiment in the sim or simlite segment.

I thought the review was a good one and on the money coming from the simmer perspective, even though I am finding the multiplayer and missions more fun than Chris did, but I may bore of it too eventually.

I don't do reviews, I don't have to. If people can think for themselves, then no one really needs to read any review to make a decision.


As I said before do that kind of software is hard and time consuming and including new features like ATC or AI might not be good when it's about debugging or improving the engine, that means a lot of coding and when you don't have a lot of time, money or people, it might be a problem. You have to include new features in a modular way. Because when it's about developing a simulator or any software you have priorities and can't include everything at once.(example Cliffs of Dover).

I'll give them at least the chance and see what they can do in the future. If they don't deliver what I have been expecting then, I'll try another thing. No drama, no anger, no hate. Simple as that.

You can waste you time making that review. I'll just enjoy my hobby. Simulation and aviation which I love, since I was a kid.
With that kind of attitude, you and SimHQ are gonna loose more than we do. That's simply the wrong approach.




I have exactly the same feeling about your review.

Very true. I still hope that they will produce some theme-based expansions. Then Flight could shine. The missions in FSX were often awkward, especially when compared to what you see in other game genres, but even they were more varied and more interesting than what we get in Flight.

I think this illustrates the mistake that MS has made: right now Flight has some appeal for simmers "who want to take a breather". But for non-simmers? In fact I wonder if there were any non-simmers (you know, the people MS was trying to reach) in the beta group. Go to a general gaming site/forum and you will have to look very hard to see any mention of Flight.

So we just have to accept dumbed down flight sims now and so we don't offend those who want to fly around and land a flying car with immense ease with a console controller now?

I don't like seeing flight simming dumbed down just as a console player wouldn't want Halo to be made into Arma2 realism...