Customer Reviews

Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004: A Century of Flight

5 star:		(110)
4 star:		(53)
3 star:		(19)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(18)

 

 

I am in love with aviation, and therefore FS has become a part of my computing experience. I purchased FS 1998, and though it was a tolerable product, I in no way felt that it was a great simulation of flight. It just didn't have the look and feel of flight. However, I was blown away by the progress made in FS 2002. Though the clouds were not always realistic (modeling gave them a two-dimension look that was disconcerting to say the least), I thought that the overall experience was pretty good.
I saw FS 2004, and I thought it was probably mot much of an improvement based on reviews I had read. Let me just say that the first reviews I read were wrong. FS 2004 is a major improvement over FS 2002, and it stands as a all-time great product for aviation buffs like me.

Improvements:

1. Weather: for the first time, flying on FS2004 simulates almost perfectly the experience of actually flying. Clouds have the mist look when you fly through them. The weather systems seem to generate randomly, just as in the non-virtual world. Also, I like the weather themes that can generate snow conditions, thunderstorms, and fair weather with high altitude stratocumulus clouds. In short, the weather is a fantastic approximation of reality. FS 2004 truly represents a quantum leap in simulations. (although IL-2 still has the best clouds).

2. ATC: FS2002 had the feel of real ATC but with some stupid problems. For example, if you fly using IFR (instrument flight rules), and you failed to reach your assigned altitude, the ATC would terminate their services (what the heck is that about?). If you wanted to fly at a different altitude you couldn't. Also, you couldn't change you IFR route, or change from VFR (visual) to IFR in flight. FS2004 makes those changes. For the first time you can change your altitude, you can change your route, and you can switch between IFR and VFR. Yea!.
Another big improvement is the ATC feel itself. For the first time, I actually feel as though I am flying in a populated world. Lots of traffic at big airports, just like in reality. Fly into San Francisco International, and you may just see airplanes lined up to land. This is a big improvement.

3. GPS: In FS2002, the GPS was very basic and frustratingly difficult to use. It was based on a second generation hand-held, and consequently, there were few features. The GPS in FS2004 has lots of features, is far easier to use because of a new interface window that you can access in flight (see above), and you can switch to terrain features and in-flight messages. It is a more realistic approximation of a GPS device you would use in flight.

4. The World: FS2004 adds signs at airport runways so you can see where your going! It also adds more features to the world around you, such as construction cranes, and different buildings not seen in previous models of FS. Although I have noticed a new "Chick-fil-a" looking restaurant, I can state definitively that no such place exists in San Diego, CA next to the Lindbergh field runway. However, the scenery looks a lot better than FS2002. Little details really add up and make flying in FS2004 much better. The airports really look great. Denver International Airport looks very realistic now, as does Seattle-Tacoma. ( I would rate more but I just haven't had the chance to fly all over to world yet!)

5. Computer: For some reason, FS2004 sees to run better on my machine than did FS2002. No "slide shows" (bad frame rate) that I have found yet, and the computer seems to run better with FS2002. I like this very much. I haven't added to many third-party add-ons with FS2004 yet, but it just seems to function better than does FS2002, so perhaps FS2002 had some unresolved frame rate problems.

6. Open architecture: In general, MSFS has open architecture which allows aviation geeks like me to add-on scenery, and hundreds of planes, general, military and specific airlines as well. Most of the products and downloads I have found are excellent and work well with FS2004.

Complaints:
Given how I feel about this product, I have very few complaints.
I wish the ground textures were better. However, you can either download or purchase products that have photo-realistic scenery, so you can really fly though England of Southern California and really recognize the ground.

Also, I wish the airports had more realistic aircraft in them. Sometimes flying through LAX, I realize that Cessna would probably not be at that airport. I have even taken off from major airports with DC-3's lined up for takeoff - what is this the 1940's?
However, these are minor problems, and overall Microsoft FS2004 is an excellent product and is well worth a purchase.

My qualifications: More than 3000 hrs of real world flight time, Commercial, Instrument, Multi-Engine and Flight Instructor certificates, and an incalculable amount of my life spent "flying" every major flight sim ever made for the PC, starting with the original MS Flight Simulator on an Apple IIe in 1983. For whatever it's worth, folks, I'm an expert on this subject.

FS-2004 Century of Flight is the new state of the art, the new gold standard. By itself, this software is worth going out and buying a new, hot PC just so you can fly it.

If this is your first flight sim experience, you'll have fun just doing loops and looking at the pretty scenery.

But here's the truth: the more aviation experience you have, the more you will appreciate this sim. Quite frankly, I can't think of a single significant element of the real-world flying experience that isn't precisely modeled and simulated in FS-2004.

Want to climb in the 172 and practice NDB approaches down to minimums in rain and a stiff crosswind? No problem, you can do that here. Want to captain the 747 from San Francisco to Honolulu by moonlight? Consider it done. Want to fly neck-straining aerobatics "in the box" over the runway at Oshkosh in Patty Wagstaff's Extra 300? Start the engine and go. Want to load up the DC-3 and fly "The Hump" to gain an appreciation of true aviation heroism? Yep, you can do that too. With or without the snowstorms and turbulence.

Quite frankly, if you can come up with a non-combat flying scenario of any kind, you can almost certainly experience something very close to it in FS-2004. This sim isn't just fun, or accurate - it's realistic training and practice for the IFR pilot.

Words simply can't express the depth, thoroughness, accuracy and variety to be found in this sim. Everything happens in real time and it's so accurate on my PC that I can get out my E6-B whizwheel and do time, fuel and distance calculations while I'm "flying" and have them work out almost exactly.

The more of a pilot you are, the more this sim will give you. And no matter how many hours you have, there is no pilot alive who won't benefit from the incredibly realistic practice and training that this sim provides. If you rent a 172 now and then, you'll be so much sharper in the real cockpit because of this sim. And if you own your own airplane, you can practice things like non-precision approaches, holding pattern entries, missed approach procedures and engine failures to landing, all without burning a drop of gas or putting your own airplane in jeopardy.

Here's what it boils down to: In general aviation today, you either train and practice with this sim, or you're behind the times and selling yourself short. Get it.

I have been using flight simulators since MS Flight Simulator 4.0, and have more diverse experience than only Microsoft's offering to call upon. While any simulator can be made quite realistic with the latest hardware and enough money, it is important to note that Microsoft's offering is no different - you cannot, as they say, make a silk purse out of a pig's ear. This means that if you're running an underpowered system, you will not be able to run the simulation optimally.

Published system requirements:
* Pentium 450 or greater processor
* 64 MB RAM for 98/Me, 128 MB RAM for 2000/XP
* 8 MB/3-D with DirectX 7.0 or later videocard
* 1.8 GB hard drive space

My recommendation:
* P4 2.x GHz processor; the faster, the better
* 512MB RAM, with ideally 1GB under the hood
* 128MB / 256MB AGP video card that pushes TONS of pixels - the more, the better
* At least 5GB free hard drive space - You'll want to do a full install, and that comes in just under 3GB (2.88GB, I think)

I run on:
* P4 3.0GHz processor
* 1GB RAM
* Windows XP PRO (SP1)
* 256MB 8xAGP GeForce 5700 series NVidia video card
* Sidewinder joystick (soon to go, thanks to some pedals and a yoke I ordered!)
* On-board surround sound processor

The software itself is practically infinitely extendable, with software and hardware add-ons supported. A quick look around in the flightsim community will support my assertion that the software is CHEAP compared to what can be done to augment it. Add-on packages are available to augment FS2004's admitidedly weak "ground mesh" mapping - flying through Norway's waterways and coasts with the default scenery is nothing next to the real thing, and pales in comparison to some of the add-on packages (both for photo-texturing and mesh-building) out there. But of course, these things cost money (sometimes), as does building and maintaining a system that can fully take advantage of the software.

This is a SIMULATOR, remember - a dozen years ago something like this with a set of pedals and yoke would have been a BIG deal and far out of the reach of the home consumer. Now, as the bar of admission lowers, it is important to realize just how MANY numbers are being crunched every second (most of those in graphics routines), and spec a system appropriately. It might not be a multi-million dollar prospect to own any longer, but to adaquately run the simulator and get something "real" out of it, it is certainly not unheard of to run multi-head (throwing many monitors onto a machine) for a partial panoramic view - but, of course, realism comes at its price.

(same text as is found in my review on the "tin box" version of FS2004)

I have not played the game much as yet,but what I have used so far is tops. I am nearly 64 and suffer PPH and am on O2 24/7 so I need a game that does not require lightning reflexes,which I no longer possess. I had to give up piloting due to health problems years ago. Now I can get my weekly fix from ground level at home and without endangering anyone. Top marks from me.
Rod Leveridge

But you should spend another $20 on a good joystick also. Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 will teach you how to fly a number of real planes. Let me put it to you this way - if you are on a plane and the airhostess asks suddenly over the intercom "Can anyone fly a plane?" and if the answer is - "No one here can", then your next best bet is to go with whoever has the most flight time with Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004... and its all thanks to John and Martha King of King's Air school and Rod Machado, your flight instructor who feature in a couple of hours worth of scripted tutorial videos that play in the games menu and describe everything that could ever possibly want to learn about flying a plane. When you are done with that then you can start reading the couple of thousand pages of documentation that range anywhere from using digital GPS tracking systems to flying with damaged equipment. Let us be clear here for a moment - if you get into it, then you are in it for the long term and will almost certainly save yourself tens of thousands of dollars in real flight lessons because when you go up for real you will know nearly all of it except for actually doing it.

For $20 you are on your way to joining the best and cheapest flight school there is and really the tutorials are the Gem of the box, not to mention the fact that a round the world trip is possible with this simulator, including real-time weather events. I have the latest 256mb Radeon Graphics card and even it has trouble rendering everything on full detail so this game will certainly last a very long time. The 512mb card generation should be able to cope with everything.

As a note there are classic trips you can take like missions - for example the Wright Brothers first flight. There are also plenty of mods and addons for it if you search the internet.

This is a great and educational Simulator. If you like flying then what are you waiting for? It is massive improvement on previous versions of this sim (it has a couple of thousand airports to choose from). There is nothing else even remotely like it.

Reviews which say, "This game runs horribly" or "This game crashed my computer," help no one when you don't list you specs.

AMD 2700+ @ 2GHz
512Mb DDR
GeForceFX 5200 w/256Mb DDR
SB Audigy Platinum
7200 RPM 120 Gig HD

I cannot get this game to slow down. I put the settings on ultra-high, trilinear filtering and all that, bump the resolution up to insane levels where I can no longer read the flight lessons because they're too tiny, and I don't even get a stutter. I can freely alt-tab in and out, or play in a window. My specs are very decent, but by no means are they the bleeding edge. I see other reviews here where people seem to hint that they have similar specs and are only getting 10 to 15 Fps. That's ridiculous.

So first, know your hardware. Not all RAM is created equally and not all video cards are either. You may "have the numbers" but if you bought cheap hardware, expect cheap results. Also, SOUND! My guess is that many of the people here who have bad performance with apparently decent specs can trace it to their sound card. It's often overlooked. My sound card isn't great, but it used to be a lot worse. I noticed a marked improvement in many 3d games after I got the audigy--and that's just an audigy, not an audigy2 or anything flashy. Do you people that have performance issues even have a PCI sound card or is it built into your motherboard? If it's onboard, then it's sapping CPU time from you.

Second, know your OS integrity. When's the last time you defragged? When's the last time you scanned for addware and spyware? Are you the kind of person that has bunches of useless stuff running all the time, like screen saver programs? Some one here said that FS2004 caused the loss of all date on her C drive. No, it wasn't FS2004, your computer and OS were unstable to begin with. Don't blame some game because you can't manage your machine.

Now the game. Yeah, I meant those five stars. I love this thing. I know people don't call it a game, but I do. I'm playing "Being a pilot" and loving it. I enjoy many different kinds of computer games, but this one is quite unique in that it calms me down. Straight and level flight can be very Zen.

One of my dreams is to be a pilot, and unfortunately this may be as close as I'll ever get, but this is an incredible simulator. If you don't watch it, the hours just slip away as you fly across the great spynx, or the niagra falls, or the rocky mountains, or the mississippi river!! And it's soo much fun to take off the runway without radioing for clearance and hearing the control tower yelling at you!! :-) Its awesome!! And I love it!!

MS Flight Sim 2004 is the best sim...ever made. The graphics are great (on my 2.4 ghz 512mb ram 64 mb geforce 4 mx card i can run it at 800x600 resulution with medium graphics). Its the most realistic sim ever made also. The only bad thing about this game is that it takes around 1 1/2 hours to install, and it takes up around 5 gigs of your hard drive. A joystick is reccomended so you dont have to mess around with the keyboard too much...the planes are almost impossible to fly with just a keyboard. It has over 20 flyable aircraft, including the Wright Brothers first plane. It also has more modern planes like cessnas and the 737,747,and 777. The learjet and 2 helicopters are also included. There are over 20,000 airports to fly to, anywhere in the world.

*WARNING* You should have at least double the minimum requirements to run this game. Just to see how it worked, I tried to run it on a computer that had the minimum requirements. It could load the game, but when i tried to fly i was getting about 3 framespersecond on average....on my machine (specs listed above) i can usally get 25 frames per second on a clear day...about 15 when the weather is cloudy.


This is a great game, and if you like flying, or want to become a pilot, get it!

Forget about MSFS-X. A Century of Flight is the only flight sim you'll ever need. As an owner of MS Flight Simulator X, I can honestly tell you that it won't give you any better graphics or performance than 2004 unless you have a $5,000 machine minimum. I deleted MSFS-X from my 2 GHz duo-core machine and re-installed MSFS 2004 and have BETTER performance and graphics. For the full experience, get a CH yoke and rudder - you'll think you're flying the real thing!

Well it's clear that they have lowered the price of the game because the imporvements over 2002 are small. However, the weather and ATC imporvments are GREAT!! Much better than 2002. The historical planes are semi-cool but who really wants to flyu a wright bros plane that goes 20 mph?? The planes are a bit disapointing because there is no reason they can't put a larger variety of jets on there. And where is the Concorde?

At $52.50 it is a bad buy, at the new price $29.00 it is a must have.