14 replies to this topic

[ikbenik]

As from today you can free download and install(MS Live account is required). My first impression is better than expected in reference to earlier info. If your HW can handle high settings for the graphics, the presentation inside and outside of the planes are really good and the options to adapt your controls for a HiFi-flying experience are present together with enjoyable missions and challenges. Well done by the the team of MS Flight. More postings will follow, hereby 2 shots:

[gabetx]

Those clouds don't look so great.

Good shots for that game, but I think FSX looks and is a lot better.

[ikbenik]

Made some more flights and begin to enjoy this new FS. Also the presentation of planes and scenery(just the Hawaii Islands is actual available but I suppose more sceneries will be released later on) looks and sounds very good.
Hereby some more shots of 2 planes --> Boeing Stearman PT-17 and the VAN-RV6 (both are a joy to fly around):

[niteye]

I'm not really impressed, it looks the same as FSX graphics wise and you can do much less.

[E-mage]

I am considering getting fsx in the near future but i may just get this next. it's not like it could be worse than fsx

[CaptainSpeaking]

I'm unimpressed.

[EduardoSpaz]

can u get rid of all that crap up top that tells your speed, heading, etc?

[Jetset]

Beautiful shots.    
The haters will come round eventually  

[franthree]

niteye, on Mar 3 2012, 02:33 AM, said:

I'm not really impressed, it looks the same as FSX graphics wise and you can do much less.

What?? I love the default textures on the aircraft here!   FSX is much more crap! I'm wishing to see how they do a default 737!

BTW--ikbenik--very nice shots!

[franthree]

Just use this mate!

[EduardoSpaz]

Is performance better than fsx?  I  can barely run fsx on medium settings.

specs:
Amd dual core 2.4ghz
4gb RAM
Ati HD4650 1gb

[ikbenik]

caaront, on Mar 3 2012, 08:18 PM, said:

In my experience it is, but I've just flown the one time in it thus far.

Keep in mind, this is different from FS9 and FSX, but for what it is I like it.

Indeed, needs less HW-performance to get same graphics-quality in FSX. My presented shots are even not in the highest possible settings because my system is not a current state-of-the-art assembly  -> Quad core Intel 9300, 4GB DDR2 Ram, nVidia 8800GTS 512MB Graphics, display via LCD-screen in 1920x1080 resolution. I have no idee about the FPS but I fly fluent without stutters. I must admit that the core of 'Flight' as game is more concentrated around the 'play'-feeling above the 'simulator'-feeling but I enjoy it and feel more relaxed. Conclusion: Flight is not(yet) a replacement or successor for the abilities that FS9&FSX and his 3rd parties offers.