May Screenshots from MS Flight

[Splitpin]

QUOTE (Adamski @ May 30 2011,4:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Was she related to Mary Rogers (a very old joke!)?

Hey hey....you naughty old polack, this is a family forum......plus your showing your age....now go to bed, and think about what youve done .

[BrandonF]

Time for the comparison shots you have all been waiting for. The only things in my shots that are not default are the water shaders and airplanes. Everything else is out of the box default. The locations are matched as closely as possible. I have not been able to find location 2. It seems to be a very tricky one to find, even with help.


Screenshot 1

FSX


Flight

Screenshot 2

Location has not been confirmed
Screenshot 3

FSX


Flight

Screenshot 4

FSX


Flight

Screenshot 5

FSX


Flight


Based on these shots, we can conclude that there is a huge improvement to the capabilities of the scenery engine. (probably a rewrite along with a texture set that is going to be completely new. They are probably still working on replacing the textures.) The shaders appear to have been upgraded a good amount. Buildings look like they have self shadows. (visible in shot 2, not posted here, but available on the Flight website) The overall lighting on the aircraft in shot 1 and 2 seems very nice compared to FSX. (was forced to use FS9 planes in the comparisons due to the lack of fsx native freeware Stearmans and Vans RV-6A's) The water in Flight is looking good, although lacking some reflection. Hopefully that will be added. As for the waves meeting the coast, that is a huge improvement. Waves washing onto the coast in Flight are like nothing we can get in FSX. It would appear that the sand is even left a little wet from the water! Clouds look mostly the same, although there might be somewhat of an improvement to the way they are rendered. (more coverage?) Sky textures look to have all been redone. That horrible bright blue from FSX looks to be gone. Autogen coverage looks to be quite good. You can see it go out much further into the distance in Flight than in FSX. Ground textures look much better, although blurry in spots. My opinion on this is that the settings were not turned up all the way for these shots. (Microsoft doesn't want to show us even more amazing shots, then end up having to cut out a feature and Flight not look as good in the end.)

Overall, there is a huge improvement to the whole graphics engine. (I'd guess that it's a rewrite in progress, or completed. Texture set could be a work in progress with most of the textures we saw in FSX getting redone) As long as it delivers with these amazing graphics and good performance, it's a definite win. The online store shouldn't kill freeware. It's a store...meaning, it will offer payware, most likely. Freeware will either be available on a specific freeware place at the store, or will be freely available at all the normal add-on websites. Add-on development needs to be a little simpler for beginners, so I hope that they make that a goal.

[AndrewJamez]

I definately agree Its looking good but I guess we can only speculate about freeware addons?? I thought everyone was of the mind that MS was trying to kill that area? or am I wrong. The only fact we do know for sure is that MS have told the community squat about Flight bar some monthly teasers. Who knows that lovely scenery we have seen could have had Orbx's hand in it. Time will Tell. I just hate waiting.

[Adamski]

Looking pretty good! Welcome news, considering only a while back we thought MS had dumped Flight Sim for ever!

Reading the above, though - I'm dismayed by the "fixation" with reflectivity on water. In RL - on sea - **it simply does not happen**. Has anyone ever seen sea (when seen from the air) actually reflect anything? Of course not! Other than shadows under clouds and roughly mirrored coastline features ... you simply do not get a "shine". It's just a cheap computer gimmick.

The only time I've ever seen decent reflections is on a mill pond (or lake) with no breeze .. therefore no waves/ripples at all.

While I'm in "rant" mode ... I wish they'd also dump the (IMHO) idiotic 3D outside view with ridiculously exaggerated perspective. OK in a CAD/CAM environment, but realistic? No!

[connor]

Looks like they're finally cleaning up their act in the area of cliffs. Have a look at the default White Cliffs of Dover in FS an you'll see how poor they are.

[Ian Warren]

Still the Question is how many of the current FSX paywares can install into MS-Flight , example Cap sim C-130 and scenery,s or mention the clouds REX ? . I recall fancy screens for FSE that never eventuated , I guess we will have to wait and see .

[Adamski]

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jun 7 2011,12:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Still the Question is how many of the current FSX paywares can install into MS-Flight , example Cap sim C-130 and scenery,s or mention the clouds REX ? . I recall fancy screens for FSE that never eventuated , I guess we will have to wait and see .

I'm not bothered. I've spent a LOT on FS9/FSX in terms of add-ons (don't tell HER) ... but I think I've had great value out of them (when compared to pizzas, going to the movies etc. ). If the FS engine is so wonderfully revamped that add-ons need to be equally wonderfully re-written, I'd be quite happy to spend money on new [improved] add-ons.

For instance - many of my old FS9 add-ons "work" in FSX but let's face it ... they're usually pretty chronic when compared to native FSX add-ons ... except for maybe the Flight1 ATR72-500, which is a *beaut*.

Same deal for PC hardware. You pay *loads* ... use it for a couple of years ... then have to more or less throw it away. Can hardly even give it away, these days. But ... when costed out on a per-hour use basis, it's still great value.

[Ian Warren]

After the amount off dosh i've spent , that,s pizza for the rest off my life time and can reheat then on old pc parts , a lot of models - how can you get them any better ! , simply interesting to find out what could work . Movies ... oh well Battle of Britain again tonight .

I do like the city scape tho and would have like to seen the airport close up if those city buildings are anything to go by .

[Timmo]

QUOTE (connor @ Jun 7 2011,11:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Looks like they're finally cleaning up their act in the area of cliffs. Have a look at the default White Cliffs of Dover in FS an you'll see how poor they are.

Although to be fair, that sim only really has to model 1 set of cliffs accurately....instead of the whole world!

[Naki]

Must of took some time to put the comparison shots together...thanks for posting here

Not so sure about the textutes and vegatation and water but everything else looks like an improvment especially the city scape, airports and cliffs/hills. I wonder if they have NZ a lot more realistic though.