206 replies to this topic

[Flying_Scotsman]

I wouldn't insult my PC by running that programme again, not even to find out if something has been added.

Sorry, sounds like the most interested in the game didn't get the Beta.  Will be out soon enough I guess.

[ChaoticBeauty]

Can someone tell me why the ground textures are so low-res, even at high settings? The taxiways are unrecognisable.

Will they be the same in the final release?

[Heimi77]

Dr...Watson, on Jan 23 2012, 08:28 PM, said:

I wouldn't insult my PC by running that programme again, not even to find out if something has been added.

Sorry, sounds like the most interested in the game didn't get the Beta.  Will be out soon enough I guess.

It`s a shame that the "beta testers" don`t test the beta to improve it, but only have a sneek peek an then throw it away.

[BrandonF]

Kaotika, on Jan 23 2012, 11:37 AM, said:

Can someone tell me why the ground textures are so low-res, even at high settings? The taxiways are unrecognisable.

Will they be the same in the final release?

"Maybe" Flight is very GPU dependent, so a very powerful graphics card is needed to achieve clear textures.

[162db]

Heimi77, on Jan 23 2012, 01:57 PM, said:

It`s a shame that the "beta testers" don`t test the beta to improve it, but only have a sneek peek an then throw it away.

I doubt MS is taking this seriously. A signed copy of NDA wasn't even required like it was for FSX beta. MS brought this upon themselves. If they wanted to do it right, they would have built Flight by starting with the simulation aspect and then add more missions as an after thought. But they did it by focusing on the arcade aspect first. Face it, Flight has 0 new features other than arcade madness. Graphical improvements are very few. The night lighting is still the same ugly lit ground tiles.

The biggest thing is no 3rd party support. It seems like the plan they originally had was to make a sim and have the 3rd party devs bow down and allow their content for Flight to be distributed exclusively through Live while giving MS a large chunk of their earnings. But that plan blew up in Microsoft's faces because no one is stupid enough to pay for a license just to distribute their own product through Microsoft. Then it looks like Microsoft wasn't happy with the 3rd party devs decision and not surprisingly gave 3rd party devs the finger. So the DLC will all have to be done by MS if they care to do it themselves and I wonder what the quality of that would be. From what I can tell so far, Flight will be a huge failure and I hope Microsoft is receiving the appropriate hate mail for it.

BrandonF, on Jan 23 2012, 04:13 PM, said:

"Maybe" Flight is very GPU dependent, so a very powerful graphics card is needed to achieve clear textures.

How can that be even remotely true if it uses the same exact cpu dependent engine as FSX?

Edited by 162db, 23 January 2012 - 06:30 PM.

[jcovelli]

BrandonF, on Jan 23 2012, 07:13 PM, said:

"Maybe" Flight is very GPU dependent, so a very powerful graphics card is needed to achieve clear textures.

it's not... at all. it's still VERY cpu dependent. the beta was using 22% of my MOBILITY 5870 at ALL max settings.

[jcovelli]

btw... loading and displaying high res clear textures... is very very easy to do for even a very low end gpu.

[ChaoticBeauty]

BrandonF, on Jan 24 2012, 01:13 AM, said:

"Maybe" Flight is very GPU dependent, so a very powerful graphics card is needed to achieve clear textures.

Oh, come on. So many games today are CPU depended and have far better textures than Flight.

[-Dexter]

Kaotika, on Jan 24 2012, 08:40 AM, said:

Oh, come on. So many games today are CPU depended and have far better textures than Flight.

But see, Flight has to render miles and miles of terrain; Battlefield 3 only has to render ~1-2km max.

[jcovelli]

-Dexter, on Jan 24 2012, 12:54 PM, said:

But see, Flight has to render miles and miles of terrain; Battlefield 3 only has to render ~1-2km max.

except that bf3 is rendering a few hundred custom hi res textures and flight is rendering... the same 20 or so over and over again. even so... very easy to do for a modern low end gpu / cpu. calculating things like mesh and placement are much harder... but flights mesh isn't even that good. idk what it is but it's only slightly better than fsx. also when i had the beta... you could see the meshing through the textures in many areas.. lots of triangles.

[Daube]

Kaotika, on Jan 23 2012, 02:37 PM, said:

Can someone tell me why the ground textures are so low-res, even at high settings? The taxiways are unrecognisable.

Will they be the same in the final release?

Have you checked if your video drivers had a "Flight" profile ? Perhaps this profile is not set correctly. I'm thinking about the anisotropic filtering level, for example.

[Flying_Scotsman]

Heimi77, on Jan 23 2012, 03:57 PM, said:

It`s a shame that the "beta testers" don`t test the beta to improve it, but only have a sneek peek an then throw it away.

It certainly is.   Signing up for the next FSX should have been exciting, I gave my feedback, similar to what everyone else on the Beta forum has said (ie. not squashing but more basic things about it not being a simulator)  I'm not obliged to do any more with it.  I fired it up again tonight and fell asleep at the controls after 5 mins, it's that rubbish.

[ChaoticBeauty]

-Dexter, on Jan 24 2012, 06:54 PM, said:

But see, Flight has to render miles and miles of terrain; Battlefield 3 only has to render ~1-2km max.

Textures in FSX are much better, and it's 6 year old software.

Daube, on Jan 24 2012, 09:00 PM, said:

Have you checked if your video drivers had a "Flight" profile ? Perhaps this profile is not set correctly. I'm thinking about the anisotropic filtering level, for example.

I don't have an NVIDIA card.

Besides, I looked again at all screenshot samples, and it looks like the final textures will be that blurry.

[SwitchFX]

The problem with NDAs is that unless you signed it in person with a third party as witness and to bear signature, then a digital NDA is useless. NDAs are also very difficult to enforce overseas.

[_BD6_]

Kaotika, on Jan 24 2012, 03:17 PM, said:

Textures in FSX are much better, and it's 6 year old software.
I don't have an NVIDIA card.

Besides, I looked again at all screenshot samples, and it looks like the final textures will be that blurry.

I don't have a problem with the textures?

also, what does nvidia have to do with it?

[ChaoticBeauty]

bl00mfield, on Jan 25 2012, 05:47 AM, said:

I don't have a problem with the textures?

also, what does nvidia have to do with it?

AMD cards don't have profiles for each game.

[n4gix]

SwitchFX, on Jan 24 2012, 08:43 PM, said:

The problem with NDAs is that unless you signed it in person with a third party as witness and to bear signature, then a digital NDA is useless. NDAs are also very difficult to enforce overseas.

No, the real problem is the increasing absence of something that was known as personal integrity. There was a time when a person's word was his/her bond. It was an invoilable contract that actually meant that a person's trust was well placed.

[Flying_Scotsman]

The problem with this NDA is that you sign up to test drive the latest Lamborghini and they sent you a broken golf cart and ask you if there are any bugs in it.....people aren't going to give a toss.

[jcovelli]

i don't even understand the point of the beta??????

there was one single mission... that hamburger thing you could fly from all the airports and like 4 challenges and a few repeats of those... and two planes. so...... what are we testing?   how r u supposed to find bugs when you get 1% of the game?  it should have been called a preview like the fsx preview...

[ChaoticBeauty]

I'm not a beta tester so I can't report a bug I found, so can someone report it for me?

You cannot invert the left/right joystick axis in the controls menu.