forums.fsstation.com— Microsoft released this week a new set of screenshots of the upcoming Flight Simulator X, totalling 52 pictures. Check them out!
Feb 21, 2006View in Crawl 4
...but in the interest of fairness, MSFS does have the best in-game flight training tutorials I've seen, something X-Plane is sadly missing. I have about 60GB worth of X-Plane installed (including satellite textures) on my laptop, but I also ran a minimal FS2K install entirely for the tutorials...
What a piece of s**t."Oh look! We updated the graphics but our engine still sucks!".Try XPlane. It SIMULATES the plane 15 times a second in realtime as it would behave for real and it's military certified.This POS just simulates the look of things and it isn't even certified by the American Air Association, as all simulators designed to educate a real student are.
I'm sitting here laughing at the x-plane fanboys. And I'm a fan of x-plane as well. But I'm also a fan of microsoft's flight sim. X-plane is not perfect. While it does do a way better job of simulating the physics of flight it's still not perfect. And saying that these new screenshots "look almost as good as x-plane" ??? What the hell? Are you people high? X-plane's graphics are dated. Even FS2004 looks better than x-plane. X-plane doesn't look bad by any means - just not as good. FS has the looks, x-plane has the brains. If they could just combine the two it'd be sweet.
"FS has the looks, x-plane has the brains. If they could just combine the two it'd be sweet."They should have high-altitude sex (or land a spot on Late Night with Conan O'Brien).
@ThugEsquire:I think, for an added bonus, they should add realistic crash models and put the WTC back in.Why would you say something like that??? Dumbass
"In my opinion, M$ Flight Simulator is and always will be a piece of crap. The airplanes fly nowhere near how the real ones do. The systems are not modeled, the ATC sucks, and the physics are TERRIBLE. I wish Microsoft would get together with X-Plane to produce a truly remarkable simulator. After all, all Microsoft does it pretty up the game instead of focusing on making it realistic. Just my $0.02"I must agree, i fly for a living and have always been disappointed with the realism of both flight sim and x plane, they both are appealing more to the game side rather then the simulator side. I would not go as far as calling them a peace of crap but i would think they could make it alittle more advanced, with more advanced systems on the larger aircraft. Regardless it still looks really good and i imagine i would still buy it.
LOL...actually its LMAO!...looking at what u guys wrote is...lets just say it should be a commedy/fighting show....its FSX vs X-plane and this other guy who has no idea which one to pick...*cough* brucer69 *cough*...anyways...let me put mi point in...first of all i prefer FSX, but i still havent played X-Plane YET...but from the screen shots of X-plane 8.0 compared to FSX...i mean come on!..are some of u people on crack!!!...FSX has WAY better graphics...actually i think those graphics would need a computer that only bill gates can build to play...im getting scared of the system requirements...for thos kind of graphics...u would need like a 1GB PCI-E, super fast transition video card...also, nobody has played FSX, u guys are arguing about the wrong thing...for what u know, Microsoft could be looking at all these blogs and saying "dammit, we need to fire that physics guy and buy out the one from x-plane" or "we are going to need to get X-plane's physics instructor and a couple of real pilots to fix up this game"..u guys can argue about the previous games, but u dont know what FSX holds...they were only working on this for a short time...screen shots just came out...they probably have a whole lot more in store for Flight simulator hobbie people (not FS fans, X-Plane is still a flight simulator, dont believe me look up the defenition for 'simulator' and 'flight')...i agree that microsoft should put in some military jets and some REAL crash simulations, not the "when u hit the ground, crash comes on the bottom left screen and the simulator starts right over," thats not realistic at all...o yeah and by the way, i dont think they are putting in the WTC's back because they want to maintain there saying which is "as real as it gets"...i couldnt say anything about the physics in comparison to X-plane, but i know that turbulence in FS2002 is not the way turbulence actually happends in real life...but then again, FSX is still being worked on, and remember, they are TRYING to get as much customers as they possibly can...u can continue wit da argument!by the way, if FSX is going to be on Windows Vista, it might be on iMac cuz Microsoft are trying to push windows vista onto the iMac society
i forgot a few things, u may want to wait to actually wait till u know what the system requirements are for FSX before u buy a new computer, for all u know, a new athlon or intel processor may come out that is twice the speed of out current processors, so its better to sit and wait, i know i will buy FSX before i buy a new computer although, i wont be able to play it till i buy a new one, my computer could barely handel FS2002, much less FS2004 or even worse FSX, and in X-Plane, i dont think u have flying birds, other airtraffic or moving cars, but FSX does (the moving cars and the birds would make me mad cause now i hate FS2002, it seems so boring to me compared to the video of FSX i seen)
legion303Feb 22, 2006
...but in the interest of fairness, MSFS does have the best in-game flight training tutorials I've seen, something X-Plane is sadly missing. I have about 60GB worth of X-Plane installed (including satellite textures) on my laptop, but I also ran a minimal FS2K install entirely for the tutorials...
niaoFeb 22, 2006
What a piece of s**t."Oh look! We updated the graphics but our engine still sucks!".Try XPlane. It SIMULATES the plane 15 times a second in realtime as it would behave for real and it's military certified.This POS just simulates the look of things and it isn't even certified by the American Air Association, as all simulators designed to educate a real student are.
dodger2020Feb 22, 2006
I'm sitting here laughing at the x-plane fanboys. And I'm a fan of x-plane as well. But I'm also a fan of microsoft's flight sim. X-plane is not perfect. While it does do a way better job of simulating the physics of flight it's still not perfect. And saying that these new screenshots "look almost as good as x-plane" ??? What the hell? Are you people high? X-plane's graphics are dated. Even FS2004 looks better than x-plane. X-plane doesn't look bad by any means - just not as good. FS has the looks, x-plane has the brains. If they could just combine the two it'd be sweet.
gamekidFeb 22, 2006
"FS has the looks, x-plane has the brains. If they could just combine the two it'd be sweet."They should have high-altitude sex (or land a spot on Late Night with Conan O'Brien).
Closed AccountFeb 22, 2006
@ThugEsquire:I think, for an added bonus, they should add realistic crash models and put the WTC back in.Why would you say something like that??? Dumbass
combatcupcakeFeb 22, 2006
Imageshack killed most of the pics.. digg and imageshack do not mix
brucer69Feb 22, 2006
"In my opinion, M$ Flight Simulator is and always will be a piece of crap. The airplanes fly nowhere near how the real ones do. The systems are not modeled, the ATC sucks, and the physics are TERRIBLE. I wish Microsoft would get together with X-Plane to produce a truly remarkable simulator. After all, all Microsoft does it pretty up the game instead of focusing on making it realistic. Just my $0.02"I must agree, i fly for a living and have always been disappointed with the realism of both flight sim and x plane, they both are appealing more to the game side rather then the simulator side. I would not go as far as calling them a peace of crap but i would think they could make it alittle more advanced, with more advanced systems on the larger aircraft. Regardless it still looks really good and i imagine i would still buy it.
deinonychFeb 23, 2006
Looks incredible. I may have to pick this version up.
oblackMay 18, 2006
LOL...actually its LMAO!...looking at what u guys wrote is...lets just say it should be a commedy/fighting show....its FSX vs X-plane and this other guy who has no idea which one to pick...*cough* brucer69 *cough*...anyways...let me put mi point in...first of all i prefer FSX, but i still havent played X-Plane YET...but from the screen shots of X-plane 8.0 compared to FSX...i mean come on!..are some of u people on crack!!!...FSX has WAY better graphics...actually i think those graphics would need a computer that only bill gates can build to play...im getting scared of the system requirements...for thos kind of graphics...u would need like a 1GB PCI-E, super fast transition video card...also, nobody has played FSX, u guys are arguing about the wrong thing...for what u know, Microsoft could be looking at all these blogs and saying "dammit, we need to fire that physics guy and buy out the one from x-plane" or "we are going to need to get X-plane's physics instructor and a couple of real pilots to fix up this game"..u guys can argue about the previous games, but u dont know what FSX holds...they were only working on this for a short time...screen shots just came out...they probably have a whole lot more in store for Flight simulator hobbie people (not FS fans, X-Plane is still a flight simulator, dont believe me look up the defenition for 'simulator' and 'flight')...i agree that microsoft should put in some military jets and some REAL crash simulations, not the "when u hit the ground, crash comes on the bottom left screen and the simulator starts right over," thats not realistic at all...o yeah and by the way, i dont think they are putting in the WTC's back because they want to maintain there saying which is "as real as it gets"...i couldnt say anything about the physics in comparison to X-plane, but i know that turbulence in FS2002 is not the way turbulence actually happends in real life...but then again, FSX is still being worked on, and remember, they are TRYING to get as much customers as they possibly can...u can continue wit da argument!by the way, if FSX is going to be on Windows Vista, it might be on iMac cuz Microsoft are trying to push windows vista onto the iMac society
oblackMay 18, 2006
i forgot a few things, u may want to wait to actually wait till u know what the system requirements are for FSX before u buy a new computer, for all u know, a new athlon or intel processor may come out that is twice the speed of out current processors, so its better to sit and wait, i know i will buy FSX before i buy a new computer although, i wont be able to play it till i buy a new one, my computer could barely handel FS2002, much less FS2004 or even worse FSX, and in X-Plane, i dont think u have flying birds, other airtraffic or moving cars, but FSX does (the moving cars and the birds would make me mad cause now i hate FS2002, it seems so boring to me compared to the video of FSX i seen)