|Posted by Garry Hedrick at 08:57 PM on Mar 01, 2012||Post #1|
It is available as of yesterday, Feb. 29. Anyone try it yet? I'm on the fence about it myself, with their new 'micro sim' method. Sounds to me like it will cost a small fortune. The initial sim is free of charge, but only a single aircraft, and a small percentage of Hawaii made available. If you want more, you have to pay. TBH, i'm looking more toward X-Plane now.
Also, didn't they claim 'Games for Windows Live' was dead, and moving to strictly X-box? Wtf?
|Posted by Heinz Petzold at 11:57 PM on Mar 01, 2012||Post #2|
I bought xplane 10 a few months ago when i started getting into sim flying, and i must say.. Xplane is a resource HOG!!! and so expensive aswell, you have to buy alot of extra planes if you want them
Compared to MS flight sim X which is so easy on the PC and still fun!
I was waiting for this New MS flight forgot its launch was yesterday
|Posted by Mario Slezacek at 07:58 AM on Mar 02, 2012||Post #3|
I've read some articles about it and they say it's more game then sim comparing to MS Flight Sim X.
I'm also waiting for some reference from users.
|Posted by Garry Hedrick at 06:47 PM on Mar 02, 2012||Post #4|
Looks like i'll be sticking to FSX after reading several reviews on both X-Plane 10, and the new MS Flight last evening. Flight WILL be VERY expensive. $20 for a single aircraft, and another $20 just for the rest of Hawaii? Insane!
The majority of flights i make are west of the Mississippi here in the US. I would guess it would cost upward of $500+ just to get that scenery, and that's only a small portion of the world. Then we add in a few aircraft, and it really gets out of hand on cost. Also, from what i read, Flight doesn't even have a flight planner now? Isn't that an important part of real world flying? Wtf are they thinking.
On the X-Plane side, the scenery looks great out of the box (judging from videos and screenshots), but they have no AI traffic, and from what i can tell, it doesn't even support it (maybe Heinz can shed some light on this?). Also, the aircraft look cartoony to me. Even FSX looks far superior in that category.
All in all, i'll be sticking to FSX. It's well established, tons of 3rd party add-ons (just avoid any that used the SDK from FS9. they simply do not work well in FSX), and it runs well on current PC's.
CORRECTION: I mentioned in my original post that only 1 aircraft was available in MS Flight. This simply isn't true. There are 3 aircraft available, but you have to 'earn' the other 2. Can you say console gaming? I knew you could.
|Posted by Garret Diduck at 07:13 PM on Mar 02, 2012||Post #5|
"Can you say console?"
Hmm, I'm confused.
con·sole - n: electronic system that connects to a display (as a television set) and is used primarily to play video games.
con·sole - v: to alleviate the grief, sense of loss, or trouble of;
I guess both fit in this case.
|Posted by Kevin Brigden at 07:29 PM on Mar 02, 2012||Post #6|
|Posted by Garry Hedrick at 09:25 PM on Mar 02, 2012||Post #7|
LoL! Only you, or the Mighty Finn could come up with that. ¦-)
|Posted by Andy Graydon at 10:32 PM on Mar 02, 2012||Post #8|
I can't believe that Garret, clearly, got a dictionary out to copy that down here! And there's me thinking I needed to 'get a life'!
Personally, I find FS9 will run on my (quite) modern PC, whereas X just slows things right down. These 2 flights sims are still up there, despite being 'old'.
|Posted by Aaron Jackson at 01:13 AM on Mar 03, 2012||Post #9|
You have to understand one thing about flight sims. They are an even smaller niche than sim racing.
We have C.A.R.S. and Iracing and I'm sure rfactor 2 will be raking in some money with there yearly subscription. You would have to assume the flight sim community will follow suit.
Back on Topic, I'll wait a bit and see what else they have before I add this to my plate.