Olegs worst competitors (?) - Microsoft Flight have released new screens...
 

So - Microsoft Flight has released new screens yesterday...

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/

Look at the new January 2011 screens and think about that before whining about the landscape shots Oleg has released - or the palette for that matter... A small Russian company does this and the worlds largest software company gives us that? Look at screen 4 - is it only me or does it look even worse than FSX? (which obviously is what Flight really is with some tweaks - I know). Look at the fields in shot 1 and compare to the Blenheim shot from the latest update...

Do you think they will manage to get real DX10 support this time? Don't even dream on DX11 - but I guess they will promise that this time like they did with DX10 in FSX ;)

So Oleg, you don't have to worry about them any more then :)

I am not a Microsoft fanboi, but these screenshots look quite beautiful to me? You sure we looked at the same ones?

Besides Flight is not really competion to COD, is it?

Install Silverlight
No thanks

No Silverlight for me either, thank you

I actually don't like the FSX graphics at all with the satellite textures and low res houses and trees randomly scattered over them, and this is more or less FSX with "Games for Windows Live" support if I get it right... The reason they always have these mountain ranges in the shots is that it's the only thing it does fairly good ;)

Take one of these "new" shots of their "new" engine and compare to the same place in FSX and I'm sure it would be impossible to tell them apart - and we know that the FSX engine stutters badly while doing graphics like this. I think they are beaten easily by IL2 with later maps when you see them "in action"... They may look fairly OK on a screenshot but while rolling it's the opposite to me at least when the autogen objects freak out and the cities look like an old DOS game like EF 2000 with some landmarks in the middle of a pile of boxes :)

Then we know how crappy the FM is compared to IL2 - and that does not make it better - I think the stall behaviour in FSX feels like an old DOS game so it fits the autogen cities well ;)

OK, it has the whole world to fly over so naturally the trees in Mombasa can't be placed manually like the trees near the edge of the white cliffs in CoD, but when it stutters in the menu while loading a rather crude Cessna with a 3D preview something is wrong - and then FSX was used in the promos for Vista/Me 2. Anyone remember that OS by the way? :)

And I suppose it's competition as there are just a few flight simulators in production right now and the communities should overlap quite a lot?

Somehow, I got Silverlight...

The pictures look like the equivalent of current payware for FSX if you ask me, the Maule is the same too...this is shaping like marketing drama leading to...being forced to use windows live...they all want (Microsoft and the other giants) their own Facebook and Apple store...Not looking as good as it first seemed.

Lou

FSX to sell Vista, powered by DX10 was the PR... too bad it all fell over.

but there was something cagey about an open architecture, with 3rd party support that offered paid for 3rd party bits and pieces to fix the crappy oem product, which had me wondering about what went on in "the back room" ( ;) ;) ) during the development phase

I agree. I never cared for the FS series, but I don't see anything obviously wrong in those screenies.:confused:

Same here.

I have FSX and its great - after adding lots of aftermarket enhancements.

calling FSX 'pilots' nerds is laughable when I see Il2 fans calling themselves 'fighterpilots' lol

whats the difference - all computer sim players and or gameplayers are nerdlingers - time to face reality on that point, fellers

I agree that MS Flight looks exactly like FSX with ORBX and REX addons in place as default environments -

but then, when you render it all down to brass tacks, Il2:CoD looks like Il2 with hackmods in place and a little extry rounding on the models courtesy of the added polygons you get with PC improvements so....

why all the fingerpointing ?

well i have to say compare to COD, the pics are weak!you can tell its the texture which will look blurry from close again, plus it looks unbalanced with the trees sticking out like that and the sea is far from feeling like a real one, i have to say COD won this one easily.

That is precisely the point: If any of them call themselves, seriously, "pilots", they are nerds.


No son, I refrain from taking this title as I have a real life too. ;)
Try to keep a healthy distance.

really? i have to say if you follow the updates developments closely its not extra rounding, its more than that, its the love for detail, the feeling to make things looks good and right from any view , and the extra new features, like working fluids in the planes, advanced physics, FM and tons of other new stuff, but your right why the fingerpointing, these 2 games cannot be compare, they are way different.

If Cliffs of Dover looks anything like the initial FSX graphics, I will throw up on my keyboard. That said those screenshot look very good, but I wouldn't pass judgment until I seen low level videos of MS Flight. Also Microsoft's has a history of false advertising.

I know the FM won't be as good as COD, but it doesn't have to be that good, as I'd be just sightseeing, navigationing, and pushing buttons, rather than flying combat.

Please, no one called anyone nerd here in this thread before this post? I just pointed out that the "new" engine from Microsoft is just the old stiff from the axed Aces Studio with some new lip stick - so no need for Oleg to worry they may be cooking CFS4 :) Well, I also own FSX and play it occasionally. I have never liked the graphics engine though,especially down low, and the fact that a company with MS muscles could not fix the dx10 support after using that feature to market Me 2 is interesting when complaining that CoD will not have Dx11 from start.

Regarding calling people nerds I thougt that it was something most people stopped doing after high school when they stopped being concerned about trying to be like the coolest guys in school? And yes, I was one of those cool guys that did not dare keep up my programming I had done before high school to risk beeing called nerd (it was like that in the mid-late 80:ies). So instead I called other insecure kids nerds and got laughs from the other guys and girls in the high status gang at school... Like a damn cheesy high school movie from Hollywood ;) Finally I got enough confidence to realize I could be a computer nerd and still get invited to the cool parties and date the cute girls that I wanted etc, but that confidence was gained by pushing others down calling them nerds etc and they never got out of it until moving somewhere else to college where very few in Sweden at least continue calling people nerds because of their interests...

Way off topic there ;)

Proprietary cr@p silverlight, no thanks.

I prefer Silverlight to Flash - by miles ...

i cant see anything, and yes i installed silverlight

actually, MSflight isn't a real contender with Oleg's new product.

these guys are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zfE_4JzwR4

But only if and when they or anyone that is gonna use this product starts making stuff that allows you to use ww 2 warbirds much like Cliffs of Dover....

IL-2:CoD only real competition today is IL-2 1946.

Simple as that. And as I said in other topic, I don't care of the great terrain at 3km alt, but when I'm chasing an 109 at deck or in a dive bomb over some armour column. Nothing today comes close to IL-2 1946 in these points.

I think the shots make one thing pretty obvious: The used mesh is unable to compete with real modeling.

Just look at the grand canyon (I guess that's what it's supposed to be). In reality he canyon drops almost 90° from the rim (sometimes even more!). In the screenshot it looks like an normal steeper valley. Same for the actual river-bed of the Colorado-River. It's a very narrow deep canyon for long distances. This is completely missing.

Also check out the rivers in Shot4. They are evenly wide from the spring to the point where they end in the ocean. :rolleyes:

+1 on your motivation, even though I guess Oleg is happy they don't put a new team on doing a new CFS4 from the ground up with their budget...

I don't know... even with the big budget M$ never can make a decent graphic engine to FS series... I never like this aspect of M$FS series.

Maybe if M$ hire Maddox team...

That's what MSFS is all about though... being up at altitude. Everything is geared for being an airliner pilot, not mudmoving.
They could make great terrain if they wanted... sadly though, for the reasons mentioned before, it doesn't seem in the sim purchasers' interests to do that.

S!

Sharp, that F18 thing was nice, but it is harder to make a realistic sim of modern jets as much of the information on the planes is restricted or classified. No sim for sure uses real radar data or frequencies etc. Also the procedures in many of them are off etc. But nevertheless give a nice view to what it can be to operate a modern jet :)

Regarding WW2 planes they are easier as nothing is classified on them anymore and such. Only thing is how to obtain all the data as much of it is lost, for reason or another. There are books for sure, but many just repeat common things heard over the years and very few really critically look into things and dig up new data.

I want to bag a 747 with that F-18 and listen to the shock and wailing on the ATC comms channel.

:o

They tried this already with CFS3 and lost miserably to IL-2. I would like to see Microsoft do a quality WW2 combat flight sim, but I'm not holding my breath, as the bean counters either get in the way or they're developers lack enough talent.

careful, you never know who might be listening on the internet:-P

big brother is watching you!

The more sims the better for us. I have most of them and most are fun.:-P
One warning tho. Don't get your hopes high on MS promo screenshots!!!!!
Wait for the game. Any of you remember the difference between MS FSX DX10 promo screens and the actual game.:???:?

FSX became a nice game, but it took a few generations of hardware, and a whole bunch of addons to make it run decent and look good.

I hope MS has learned their lesson after all the turmoil created with the faked FSX DX10 screenshots. FSX with a couple of third party add ons can looks almost as good the new Flight screenshots, so I expect that they are real this time. Some in the community already expressed their disappointment that the progress in visuals between Flight and FSX won't be as big as they anticipated.

i doubt that new MS Flightsimulator will be a threat to il-2, since it is mostly based on general aviation with POOR and nearly unexisting simulation, it is aimed at general public audience and the major "luring in" effect is the beautiful environment and graphics (which is an important sell out factor for a commercial game)

Where as to me, the shot looking down at the ocean and runway, where every little stream on every hill in the forest is sparkling like the sun is directly on it looks comically bad.

OK, so there are two possibilities here. Either everyone posting in this thread that IL-2 looks better are being paid to say it by Steve Jobs or they are legally blind. These screen shots look wonderful, what's the issue?

This right here! Also MS really "Cherry Picks" their screenshots that they want to show off. In the past there were issues with them retouching screen caps and generally misleading buyers as to what they were really getting.

One thing that they do well are mountains. They tend to look pretty good at a medium to higher altitude and I have to give them congrats on that. Get any lower and you see where they start to fall short, especially away from well known landmarks and airports where they have not put much detail into the terrain or buildings.

As for competition? A lof of people who fly FSX and who will pick up Flight will have no interest in COD because they are interested in pretending to be an airline pilot or a pleasure-flyer, not a fighter pilot. There are also a lot of people who will fly both. I don't think someone is going to look at FSX or MS Flight and say, "Well I'm going to skip COD because I have this game!". With the exception of flying aircraft, that's about all these two products have in common.

Microsoft has a history of false advertising and very crappy graphics down low and away from any airfield. I do like the the screenshots, but I would be very very very skeptical on their quality at low level.

Microsoft does a great job on takeoff procedures, climb to 10,000ft and navigate to your destination, but if you like low level site seeing forget about it, unless you spend a tidy some on all the third party terrain updates. Either way it would probably soon get boring if your primarily a combat flight sim pilot. Although I never had time to get bored with FSX as it was so damn ugly down low I quit flying it.

Mmm, the reason for me being pessimistic is that it is obvious that Flight is just FSX with some tweaks, and FSX looks good at some places high up, but looks like crap on most places down low. To make my point I fired up FSX Acceleration right now and took two "ms web site" shots (no addons) and one "the real FSX shot" at Ultra everything settings (all settings at max accept cloud range at 30%)

Here we have Grand Canyon in dawn... I sure could find a better place and more dramatic sunset if I put more than five minutes to it. Just searched Grand Canyon and took off and took the shot.
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/7...randcanyon.jpg

EDIT: OK, I put in five more minutes and took off from Honolulu in sunset:
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/2843/fsxhonolulu.jpg

And here we have the "white" cliffs of Dover down low...
http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/7625/fs10manston.jpg

Most places you fly look like Dover, but the screenies look like Grand Canyon or Honolulu - that's my point!

Anyone want to discuss the palette or the selection of spruce trees and Large multifloor buildings in the Kent countryside? The color of the cliffs anyone?

Yes, I know they cover the whole world and then it gets like this...

EDIT: Yes I forgot the mapping for the darn brakes, in FSX it's no problem taking off with full brakes in a tail dragger anyway ;)

EDIT again - the people complaining about the CoD beta shots being too green maybe want something like this? (could not resist it ;))

Could you rehost the second pic, I'm not seeing it.

My office is blocking it due to the file name I think. It's saying it's porn. Probably something to do with "xdover" thinking "bend over" manybe?

lol, nice cliffs, I really dig those 2d trees too. :-P

It just doesn't get any uglier than those FSX cliffs of dover, tree, and quagmire terrain textures. It will be easy for MS Flight to do a better job, but I'm not holding my breath.

Probably a safety measure: that image can cause eye cancer... :mad:

The Inq has been my favorite site for many years :) They must have loved this "open goal" groin kick at "the vole"...

I will buy it too, like I bought RoF, BoB II and all the games released by ED - but Oleg has hinted many times that "he don't want to show all his cards" due to the competitors. It may be that he thinks of a WWII follow up to RoF but as it is now "Flight" has a release date of Q1 2011 and what other major titles in this genre has that? DCS A-10 probably, but they will never compete about selling 800.000 copies like IL2 has (?). FSX has sold a lot more, but they are the only ones in the same league. So is there really any real competitor accept "Flight" if Oleg is aiming at selling more copies of CoD than IL2? For sure CoD is a high fidelity combat simulator and "Flight" is a flight procedure or "tourist" simulator...

Most of the couple of thousand die hard simmers here buy all of the few sims that gets released these days anyway (and yes, we will buy Flight too). The competition I talk about is the fight for the 20-50 year old man on the street who had an RC-plane when he was young, maybe dreamed of becoming a fighter pilot after seeing "Top Gun" at high school but became an accountant and sees a stand of DVD:s with an aircraft on the cover while his son is looking at PS3 games at the local GameStop store... We will never see them here or on Hyperlobby though, which goes for the majority of those 800.000 buyers of IL2 too.

EDIT: Another thing, Oleg has talked a lot these days about how to open the sim for third party and modders - reaching out a bit to the industry around FSX that was left in the cold when Aces got axed. So when Ilya says there is an upcoming expansion "that will rise many eyebrows" - how about a civilian sim as Korea is expected and the Med or Eastern front would not get much money back on a bet? Maybe with initial focus on north western Europe at first? Not really serious about this myself - but it sure would rise a number of bushy eyebrows here and over in Redmond :)

Or you like grossly exaggerated streams and rivers. Look at any of those 4 pictures, particularly number 4.
The result to me is one that is unrealistic and unappealing.
You love it I guess, maybe you have never flown over such terrain so as to know its not even close.

The only real competition I can see is if Microsoft somehow was able to keep Combat Flight Simulator 4* a secret and release it a month before COD with a huge amount of publicity and media attention and plaster every store that still sells PC games with their boxes and offer it with a 25% off coupon for a newly released MS FFBIII joystick, and also it's only $20 and covers not only the Battle of Britain, but another 2-3 theaters as well and comes with the SDK for no extra charge. Also the game can give perform fellatio on you like a pro.

That might hurt COD a bit!

That might get a few of the casual "on the fence" people to buy that and then skip COD. BUT! If this game is going to turn out how I think it is, every review that would come for CFS4 would also mention how it pales in comparison to COD and how it drags it's teeth a little too much.

*hopefully does not exist

The only thing that gives oleg some competition are the A2A payware planes for FSX (WOP3 series) with accusim

Wow the level of paranoia for something that is basically the same a Adobe's offering ... never ceases to amaze me.

Anyhoo ... FSX / Flight and CoD are chalk and cheese, no point comparing them at all. They both have their own target audience.

I for one like blowing #$%@ up and shooting #$%@ down. But there are some things FSX does do better than IL-2.

With FSX you have larger maps, you can fly around the globe and don't forget the one big winner in my eyes is that MS provides the SDK, which gave the sim community the ability to mod/add to the sim.

Now you should all know by now that modding a sim extends it's life and maintains the support base. Look at Falcon 4 as another example.

Oleg knows this and has stated many times that he wants the same for CoD

I agree with swiss, the terrain textures and 2D trees in FSX suck, but overall, FSX despite its technical hiccups is a well rounded and enjoyable sim, I personally have bought and enjoy A2A's "accusim" P-47 and Classic Hanger's FW-190s

Think of the bigger picture people, competition is good, it only makes our "small" industry expand and keep it alive and MS has certainly blazed the trail in that regard.

Whilst not a huge FSX fan, one thing it did have over IL2 was 4 seasons not just 2.

It looks nothing like Il2 with hackmods? IMO, but you are right most people would consider us all nerds.

ROF would be the real competition, although its of course WW1, but probably has the current best FM, shame there aren't more people playing online, but still very enjoyable, still I'm looking forward to get back into some WW2 action.

Hi Guys

Remember there is a reason that in Cliffs Of Dover Oleg has included a modern plane...

I think long term that Oleg would like to see this flight sim engine expand into all areas of flight including the modern civilian era and when Microsoft FS was scrapped I expect Oleg and Ilya rubbed their hands with glee.

( yes folks..glee is the only cream for rubbing your hands with and only £5 a pot..)

It will be interesting to see which civilian flight sim wins the battle in the next 5 years!


.

The link leads nowhere. Nothing!

I tried again...absolutely zero. Nothing in this link.

Zero. Absolute zero.
Please check a link before you post it!

It's working for me - does it require silverlight or something?

You mean that http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/ leads nowhere, or are you one of those that refuse to install Silverlight?

Like I said before I wouldn't trust any screenshot Microsoft puts up until I actually take one myself.

thunderworks has change the cockpit planes:

harrier (not seaharrier)

http://www.thunder-works.com/harrierGR3RAF0002.jpg

i want to see that Mirage III Mirage V and Superetendard cockpits

i wander if this guys want to do my Wish sim: 1965-1971 indo pak fight sim:-P

I honestly do not see COD ever being a contender in the civilian flight sim ring. FSX (despite its many faults) has a massive lead already with all the stuff that MS has included and the huge selection of aftermarket content. Besides FSX and Flight there is also X Plane to contend with. They're upgrading and I think they honestly have the best FM in the biz.

Why would Oleg try and break into a sector of a pretty small niche thats already got two big players and very little room for competition? He's got the WWII combat market cornered already and if I'm not mistaken the Korean one next year or so.