NZFF

by **Dontcopy** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:27 am

More Screenshots and System requirements announced.

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/#new...rmance_hardware

Amongst the most popular questions the Flight team has been asked via e-mails to msflight@microsoft.com are those about the release date and game performance. While we arenâ€™t quite ready to talk about a release date, we did want to share a bit about our approach towards performance and hardware.

Performance optimization has been a core focus of our development from an early stage. To achieve this, we constantly monitored game performance metrics across a range of hardware configurations and reacted each time we saw a new feature or code change that caused a dip below the established thresholds. The end result is that Flight looks fantastic on a brand new PC, but because of the emphasis on performance throughout development, it also runs well on older desktops and budget laptops.

Weâ€™ve found the game runs well on low graphics settings with hardware meeting the following specifications:
CPU: Dual Core 2.0 GHz
GPU: 256 MB card capable of shader 3.0 (DX 9.0c compliant)
HD: 10 GB Hard Drive space
OS: WinXP SP3
RAM: 2.0GB

It was also one of our goals to ensure that the game can run well with high settings on hardware that is attainable today. Based on our testing of core scenarios, the game runs smoothly on high graphics settings with the following hardware specifications:
CPU: IntelÂ® Coreâ„¢ i7 960 @ 3.20GHz, AMDÂ® Phenomâ„¢ II X6 1100T 3.3 GHz or better
GPU: ATI Radeonâ„¢ HD 5870, NVIDIAÂ® GeForceÂ® GTX 560 or better
HD: 10 GB Hard Drive space
OS: Windows 7 64-bit
RAM: 6GB

by **GlennAV8R** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:47 am

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/#new...rmance_hardware

The road on shots 9 and 10 looks like a huge improvement!

by **Olderndirt** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 1:43 pm

Sorry, I'm not seeing it. Much better graphics on this forum and with less than state of the art equipment.

by **Ian Warren** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:54 pm

I do like the way they have modeled the Missouri , but end off the day it seems all to be one Island only.

by **AndrewJamez** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:53 pm

With an opertunity to address the community, microsoft have failed again. Ample opertunity to give us a little info on the rumors flying around, but nope.

by **deeknow** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 5:30 pm

GlennAV8R wrote:
QUOTE (GlennAV8R @ Nov 17 2011,12:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The road on shots 9 and 10 looks like a huge improvement!

Heh, yeah, cant wait to fly on those roads

by **Ian Warren** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 5:34 pm

One thing i use to compare , how dynamic both the scenery and aircraft in FSX is the photos and many details real time flyers keep posting .. Nelson is a recent example and with the PMDG 737 would take the aircraft awards currently to a position both complement and question how much better can it get .

by **FlyingKiwi** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 7:02 pm

I'm still waiting to see somewhere that isn't Hawaii, and the virtual cockpit in the Maule doesn't really look as good as most good quality payware addons coming out for FSX at the moment.

In saying that, default FSX was pretty barebones in comparison to what's possible with it now, so as a platform for third party development it looks promising.

by **markll** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:10 pm

I don't understand why everyone is so quick to rip into them every time they release an update, or some screenshots or a video. Why people? Why not at least wait till the software is finished?!?

You have to admit that overall the graphics look like a real step forward from where we are now, and I for one am actually looking forward to it, even if none of the rest of you are!

by **Ian Warren** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:07 pm

markll wrote:
QUOTE (markll @ Nov 17 2011,10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't understand why everyone is so quick to rip into them every time they release an update,

End off the day , the same music playing again .. Peoples memory of convenience how great FSX was surpose to be - the six year ago pre release , HELLS they still winge , they stuck to FS2004 , Microsoft built Flight Sim ... FLIGHT may be the one , we are yet to see but the results are the same .. Peoples memory of convenience

by **markll** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:26 pm

Ian Warren wrote:
QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Nov 17 2011,11:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
End off the day , the same music playing again .. Peoples memory of convenience how great FSX was surpose to be - the six year ago pre release , HELLS they still winge , they stuck to FS2004 , Microsoft built Flight Sim ... FLIGHT may be the one , we are yet to see but the results are the same .. Peoples memory of convenience

So - clinging to the past you mean Ian?? Personally I'm looking forward to it, like I said....

by **Ian Warren** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:50 pm

markll wrote:
QUOTE (markll @ Nov 17 2011,11:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So - clinging to the past you mean Ian?? Personally I'm looking forward to it, like I said....

So - clinging to the past you mean Ian?? .. Negatory , Ive been at the fore front off all Flightsims .. your comment I'm looking forward to it, like I said.... will turn into a , OH S.H.I.T its not like they promised .... most users Peoples memory of convenience

It is going to be interesting to see how far afield they go , 'clinging to the past' is maybe where Microsoft is returning to .

by **GlennAV8R** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:48 am

AndrewJamez wrote:
QUOTE (AndrewJamez @ Nov 17 2011,5:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
With an opertunity to address the community, microsoft have failed again. Ample opertunity to give us a little info on the rumors flying around, but nope.

They are giving us monthly updates and they have said there will be a big announcment in December so that should be interesting. Rememeber that we buffs probably dont even make up 1 percent of their target market.

NZFF

Flight update

Who is online