Customer Reviews

Microsoft Flight Simulator X Deluxe DVD

5 star:		(105)
4 star:		(72)
3 star:		(42)
2 star:		(31)
1 star:		(89)

 

 

I am a general aviation pilot, flying single engine fixed wing Cessna type aircraft (4 seater). Flight Simulator X gives the feeling of actually piloting a plane. The plane responds to the controls much like "the real thing".

Like other reviewers, I must agree that you must have a great computer. I have a dual processor Pentium D 940 running 3.2 Ghz, 4 gb RAM, 512 mb NVIDIA graphic card. On my system, with maxed out graphics and scenery, it runs very well, with only an occasional slight bump in frame-rates. I am somewhat disappointed with the scenery, which is good in major cities, but still basic in the country-side. The terrain is good everywhere, but the structures lack detail in other than the cities. The detail on airport runways and taxiways is terrific! Aircraft list is extensive. I recommend it.

I got my copy of this edition a week ago. The last copy of FS I owned was the 2000 version so I was about ready for an upgrade! I dropped the first DVD in and installed it; it took a good half an hour to get through all three DVD's. Then I fired it up. I was immediately prompted for what kind of user was I - novice, experienced FS user or an actual Pilot. I picked novice as I'd not played a game like this one in at least four years and needed all the help I could get. It then talked me though some basics and let me control a plane already in the air at one point and that was cool - very easy intro; I was looking at the plane from behind so no confusing instruments or what-have-you. Felt like an accomplishment!

After this it suggested I go through the tutorials, and told me where to find them, and even though I was itching to just take off from a small airport very close to my home in a Cessna or something and just get flying, maybe try to find my house - I resisted the urge and dutifully found the first mission.

It was in a microlite, which is nice and easy to see out of, which was already flying in the air when the mission started. I just had to navigate it though some huge green squares hanging improbably in mid-air, which I just about managed after the second go. I then wandered about, and found it very cool to see a small boat whizzing along a coast I seemed to be over; I worked out how to get down close to it and was racing along just above it! Well, briefly - I got too low and fell in the drink :-p

I only have a keyboard and mouse and found it devilishly difficult to control the thing with the keyboard; it was a little easier with the mouse. I then undertook several other missions, where I learnt to take off, and land, and navigate around the ground in an airport. The computer talked me through the whole thing; it was fairly straightforward and tremendous fun.

I found after a couple of hours of periodically losing control of my various aircraft that I really needed a joystick. I rushed out to my local electrical retailer and bought the Saitek X52 flight System, which costs a third less here on Amazon btw, and I can't recommend it highly enough. I didn't even need to restart the game; I just plugged it in and the whole thing worked immediately. It is so much easier to control the aircraft with this set-up; made a massive difference.

The most fun I've had so far was the mission that introduces you to Jet's. I found myself in the seat of a medium-sized passenger jet, on a slip-road by a runway. In front of me, through the windshield, I could see another passenger jet, ahead of me in the line for the runway. The computer started explaining to me some of the gauges in front of me, about how it was a glass cockpit and so on. I looked around using the "Virtual Cockpit" view, which is ever so lifelike. I found myself pushing the buttons on the display (prompted by the computer) and it was just so cool. All this while "we" (the computer, playing the co-pilot, and the plane in front) waited for a 747 to come in to land, which it duly did. Then the plane in front moved in to position to take off. The tower came over the speakers, and the computer answered it for me, and told me that we should move forward. I can't describe how real it felt to move the thrust forward a little, wheel the plan around and get in position behind the plane in front; I was as nervous in that simulation as I was on my first ever driving lesson. I was worried I was holding people up in the line behind me! That the tower might get impatient! Anyway the first plane took off, and after more instruction I got myself on to the runway as the computer, still playing my copilot, jabbered away about heights, angles, vectors and some similar stuff I was too nervous to take in. Then we had clearance from the tower to take off and I was time to crank the engines and get off the ground! I managed it just fine, mostly by luck rather than taking in the computers' tuition, and followed the computers directions and managed to navigate to a nearby airport and *nearly* landed (I clipped the trees at the front of the airport <sigh>). I did it the second time perfectly; the feeling of achievement was just exhilarating!

There are several helicopter missions - I couldn't do those. I will go back and try them later but I found that guy, even with my whizzy new joystick setup, *HARD* so for now I'll stick to planes!

Later I tried the online thing; I found a game hosted by somebody who was prepared for newbies like myself and joined it. I neglected to ask for permission to take off but made it without incident (or rebuke from the tower), and then pottered about the airport flying very low and making a complete nuisance of myself. Finally the guy in the Tower asked that I get above 2,000 feet, which I duly did; when I didn't answer he must have realized that I didn't know how the radio worked and he attempted to explain it to me. This was all via verbal communication, btw. He had a Scottish accent and he was very good about it. I shall go back when I have more of a clue.

I finally tried taking off from an airport near my house and following the roads - it worked! I picked the microlite as I had got the hang of that one and it's nice and slow so it's good for low-flying and checking out the view. There is a large road bridge near my house and I found that easily enough; of course the houses and other buildings around the roads are made up but I still felt like it was familiar and that was cool.

In summary, I can't remember the last time I was so immersed in a computer game - I found the learning process just utterly exhilarating. I recommend everybody give it a try :-)

As for performance, I initially had my graphics settings cranked to Ultimate and got about one or two frames a second so wound them back to somewhere in the middle and it's fine. No doubt my next computer will make it look better which is something to look forward to :-) BTW I am running Vista which maybe helped I don't know. The specs of my notebook, for the curious who care are below.

- Toshiba Tecra M4 with 2Gb of RAM and a NVIDEA GeForce Go 6600 TE 128Mb
- I ran the game off of an external Maxtore 7200 RPM drive / 16 Mb Cache

Flight Simulator X is the newest edition and graphically the best of the flight simulators on the market. Many of the graphics has been improved since flight simulator 2004 like the ground textures. It really looks like the real world. You can even pinpoint many recognizable highways and roads from your own city. You can even see moving cars, moving gates at airports, and even moving baggage carts. The airports look much more realistic as they have real markings and even the airport tiles at the gates. Also mountain ranges look much better. Many of the mountains are sculpted to their acutal sizes and makes it very realistic. The graphics have more depth than in 2004 version and when the new Windows Vista 10 comes out, the graphics will look even more realistic than it is currently. There are also more planes in this game. Included are the usual Boeing and Cessnas, but there are also new jets like the airbus a321, and even a new glider, which is towed by another airplane. You can even go to websites to get more planes and decals for free like (Delta, Southwest) by googling the search flight simulator x downloads. Websites like simviation give you a lot of variety and can make it much more realistic. Another feature is the missions. Some of the mission include just getting from point a to point b. Others include landing a plane on a moving bus, or rescuing people in the middle of the ocean. This new mode adds a lot more depth and you even earn rewards for completing them.

Many of the features from Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 is back. Like the Learning Center. The Learning Center has everything you need to know about in aviation. Including some articles about weather, the planes, and many other features in flight simulator. It is a very comprehensive source of information and can replace buying the strategy guide. Also understanding how to fly IFR like the real pilots is very useful to know just for even gamers.

The only complaint is that you need a very powerful computer to run the game on max textures. The system requirements on the package is the BARE MINIMUM to play the game and at the lowest textures. It makes it disappointing to play the game on shaky framerates. However, many of the new items added to this game won't stop flight simmers from buying this game. All in all a great game and well worth the purchase.

I should preface this review with a statement:

I've been a fan of the flight sim franchise since I first played Bruce Artwicks' version on Apple II. And no other software title has inspired me to spend as much money over the years to upgrade my pc hardware as much as Flight Simulator. I know this kind of game demands the latest and greatest, and generally, I have no qualms about making this kind of investment when a new FS version comes out. And I really wanted to like this game.

However, I really believe that Microsoft has over-done it this time. What I mean is, I think it will be about a year before the hardware that is required to run this game at acceptable speed and display quality settings will even be available to the average person. Like I said, I expected to need high-end hardware to run FS X, I did not expect that the hardware required would be stuff that isn't even for sale yet. Now, if you're willing (and can afford) to go out today and buy an ultra-super-extreme-high-end gaming rig, with the very fastest core 2 duo cpu available and a water-cooled quad-SLI video subsystem, you can probably get this pig to fly, but if you don't, you won't have much fun with this "game."

Case in point- my machine has an Athlon 64 X2 4800+ cpu, 2Gig of RAM, and an ATI 1900XT video card with 512M RAM. While not quite "bleeding edge," I think by all rational standards this machine is a pretty solid gaming rig. I can play FEAR, QUAKE 4, LOCK-ON, and a half-dozen other graphics-intensive games with all the settings turned up to MAX and I still get very fast frame rates. But when I loaded up this dog, it was like watching a slide show. I am not kidding - 5 or 10fps, tops. Even after turning everything in the graphics and scenery settings way down, turing autogen OFF, it barely got up to 15-20fps. And often it would still dip below 10. This is not a playable frame rate for flight simulation- not even close.

Frankly, I almost think this version is a step backwards- I say this because if you turn down the display settings so that you get flyable frame-rates, the view out the window will look considerably worse than FS2004. By comparision I can fly FS2004, with detail and video settings at or near max, AND MegaScenery installed, and I consistently get 35-45fps. It appears that Microsoft is selling this title primarily based on the improvements in the eye candy, but in order to get that eye candy and have reasonable frame rates, you need to spend at least $3000 to $4000 on a completely new and very, VERY high-end machine. If you're OK with that, knock yourself out. Hell, for that amount of money you could almost get a real pilot's license. But for the vast majority of people out there, I would say, save your money, because FS2004 looks and flies MUCH better on today's hardware.

MAYBE, when the Vista version comes out, AND we give the hardware guys about a year to catch up, then FS X will be a playable game. Because it's sure not right now. =(

Microsoft has always boasted about Flight Simulator taxing the machines that are out there, but this time they have gone too far. I am running a Dell 3.6 Gig, with 3 Gig of memory, a 512 MB Nvidia card and I still have to turn down the settings to get "smooth play."

What I have is 3 times more than their recommended setup on even the lowest setting. Now some will say that it was built for the Windows Vista but that doesn't come out until November..........if they make that date!!! For Microsoft to put their "minimum" settings on the box to make everyone think that this will play well on most puters is an absolute insult!!!

And god help you if for some reason the game doesn't activate (you know like activating Windows? Oh yes they have created that for FSX) over the internet. Like me it didn't, and I literally spent 3 hours and 42 minutes on hold with tech support to get it activated and the customer service lady (from India no doubt) told me there were 62 people in line ahead of me. 62!!!!

Microsoft needs to get their act together and make some serious flight simmers happy and do it now!!!!

Been a real life chopper pilot for. . . a very long time. Have every release of flight simulator ever made but, this is a futuristic voyeur's nightmare from the anti-Christs at Microsoft. At home, I have an actual helicopter simulator driven by an AMD64X2 clocked to 2.4 on an Abit board, twin 250 Seagate Cheetahs in raid array, two gigs Corsair XMS extreme and a screen display through an Nvidia 7900 card. Even at 16 bit color depth and overclocked to the max on medium settings, the game stutters worse than a preacher caught with his hand in the collection plate. I've read all the tips and tweaks guides proferred so far by "those in the know", HA!, but everything only degrades the program that much further backwards towards FS2004. The box hardware requirements are a bad joke and it never specifically states the game was made for VISTA, not Windows XP, Pro, 64, or otherwise. To find this lack of full disclosure requires the readme file on disk and, you've already broken the box seal, can't return the, then used software and Bill Gates and company pockets your money without a shred of remorse. Try to boot on the minimums and I guarantee if you're young, you'll be too old to focus on the screen by the time the first aircraft which you can only fly at one frame per sec., finally loads up.
In summary, this product was developed for a processor that does not yet exist in any quantity; based upon an operating system Microsoft won't sell you until big business is satiated; driven by a motherboard that isn't yet complete and a video card which will likely cost more than your hospital bill for the heart attack you haven't suffered yet; until you get the bill for all these new components and software. Right about now the hardware manufacturers are bowing to Mecca, alias Redmond, thanking Microsoft for propping up their slumping hardware sales while bending all of us little people over, as usual. SO, do yourself a favor and shop Amazon for great deals on a good, heavy duty vibrator for both you and your wife/girlfriend/boyfriend and relax your deep muscle troubles away while concentrating on making the most of good 'Ol Mom's apple pie brand FS2004. Maybe by the next release of Flight Simulator in 2008, some of us might be able to afford the transition to this 2006 nightmare.

Flight Simulator X is the culmination of decades of programming and product evolution. As someone who used FS briefly back in the 1980's on a Commodore 64, it was always something I wanted to learn but never had the time required. So after following developments on both Microsoft and FS community websites, I decided to purchase a Dell XPS M1710, FS X, and Saitek X52 stick and Pro Rudder controls. While I have been generally happy with my decision, I am a bit dismayed that my system isn't powerful enough to utilize the full capabilities of FS X.

The current incarnation of FS is quite an accomplishment. However with such advanced features and realism comes the commitment of resources, including cutting-edge computing hardware, money and time. While FS X has added missions with specified tasks, this is NOT a game. More importantly, the programmers at Microsoft were somewhat forward thinking in their hardware demands.

Much of the griping heard from the FS community centers around the incredible computing horsepower required to make the game function. Many of the complaints are valid. However, computing power is continuously increasing. Moreover, the rate of increase in graphics performance is actually exceeding Moore's law. Yet, do expect to make a significant investment in your hardware beyond a high-end business PC. Think cutting edge hardware in Q1 2007.

When in the task manager, I routinely see the memory usage exceed 500MB for FS alone. To make FS function properly, you should have at least a 256mb video card, 2 GB of RAM, and a 2 GHz Core DUO processor. Even with such a system, you will have the urge to upgrade. In fact, I am considering dumping my machine in favor of an M1710 with 512MB GTX graphics. Most hardcore users should strongly consider desktops for upgradeability.

What is demanding such hardware requirements? Realism. Everything from the scenery, ground traffic, water, advanced animations, visual effects, and weather require extensive CPU and GPU computations. These are all adjustable, of course, but the realism is what inspires users to purchase FS X. If you don't have the financial means for the latest hardware, use an older version of FS or just wait until hardware prices come down.

Some examples of the level of realism include missions with walking elephants in an African game park, a burning oil rig, and a jet-powered truck that the pilot races in Oshkosh, WI. When the computer doesn't hang, the scenes are impressive. The detail also adds a sense of urgency to the missions.

Missions such as those above require beginner to expert skill levels. Taking from ten minutes to an hour, they are both exciting and educational. The verbal cues are great instructional aids for beginners. With discrete objectives, they really encourage users to learn FS in a concerted manner.

My personal favorite is the drag race against a jet-powered semi truck in Oshkosh. With 36,000 horsepower, the truck is at standstill while you have a flying start. The trick is getting up to maximum speed during your flying start in a dive without a crossing the starting line early. It took me about twenty tries to win the race.

With my current system, I can use FS with all the sliders maxed out at 1920 x 1200 resolution. I especially like using my Dell 5100mp projector aimed at a 120" screen. Talk about immersion. Depending on the scenery and weather, the machine will stall though. One of the biggest drags is inclement weather where significant precipitation affects your field of view. When taking off in a 747 during a snow storm in Chicago, FS was almost unusable.

Much like a real airplane, the number of settings is daunting. There a learning curve but it isn¡¦t that steep -- at first. Envision it as an exponential function where it initially increases at a gradual pace. Then, the user is allowed to push forward, making the level of play as difficult as he chooses. Fortunately, new users should be able to use FS out of the box, especially when employing proper controls by CH or Saitek. Clearly, Microsoft understands there is both an established FS community and amateurs such as myself.

The Microsoft FS development team deserves a lot of credit for its magnum opus. Both entertaining and educational, FS X can provide a great deal of enjoyment for users of all ages. With a large ecosystem of add-on products, it is much like a model train set where there is no limitation on the expansion of the original product. There will always be more detailed scenery, additional planes, and other enhancements. Few simulation games have such an ecosystem. This leaves the question, is it really the flying or the anticipation that is the draw? I am sure once the average user can afford a suitable system, Microsoft will come out with FS 11 and the whole process will start over again.



Pros
Overall realism
Scenery and animations
Ecosystem
Missions and other training
Voice coaching

Cons
Incredible CPU, GPU and memory requirements
15 GB of disk space required
Requires separate controls which can get expensive
Learning curve
Some autogenerated scenery inaccurate (i.e. single family homes adjacent to skyscrapers in downtown Chicago)


NOTES

1) Tips
*Disable all unnecessary processes using msconfig (start >>> run >>> msconfig), including network, restore, help, remote functions, power management, virus protection, etc. forget about Task Manager. There could be 20-30 items to disable
*Use a separate flight stick and throttle, keyboard/mouse use is pointless
*Add memory /change video card if possible


2) My System (that I am planning to replace)
*Dell M1710 XPS
*2.0 GHz Core DUO
*1 GB Ram
*Nvidia Geforce 7900 GS graphics with 256 MB
*Dell 24¡¨ WUXGA monitor and Dell 5100mp projector
*Saitek X52 Stick and Throttle
*Saitek Pro Rudder Pedals

If you don't have Intel Core 2 Duo processor with a very decent graphic card in your machine, don't even bother to buy it. On my AMD Athlon 3800, 2Gb memory and Nvidia 5800 512Mb runs at about 14 - 18 frames per second with scenery, dynamic scenery and 2D panel set to minimum. The minimum system requirements on the box are waaaaay off.

But if you do have a Core 2 Duo machine, go ahead - it looks awsome.

To start with my system specs: D830, 3Gb DDR2-800, 7950GT 512MB OC, 2xSATA2 NCQ in RAID0

I was pretty confident I would be able to run the game - with the default scenery - at reasonable FSP's. I was wrong as wrong can be. With the sliders in medium range, I was enjoying FS-Slideshow Deluxe !
So I started fiddling with the settings and really, I was actually getting flyable values but for which price ! Autogen almost off, all the advertised bells and whistle not present !
So I started to to look what FSX would offer me. Did anyone at MS ever look at the textures? Who came up with that idea of a fixed mipmap setting ? The more I looked around, the more I got ticked off. Improvements of ATC over FS9 - negative. Better designed mde's (flightmodels) - negative. I'll spare the rest of it...
I am sorry Microsoft but unless you people come up with some major patches - or better FS-XI - i'll stick to my trusty FS9.
I've been simming since Apple2e times and cursed those neccessary hardware upgrades more than once, but almost always I did get rewarded by improvements - not this time! Oh, sure, if your priority is on animated birds, underwater reefs, swinging pamtrees or the ability to control a plane with your x-box controller, THIS IS YOUR GAME.

Let me get something of my chest first. I have noticed a lot of bad feedback on reviewers who give higher ratings to products that are developed by Microsoft. So just to make it clear - I am not reviewing Microsoft, I'm reviewing the simulator.

So.. how fun is this game? Well it's your system that can actually answer this question. This game is amazing from my point of view. I have used everything, from FS98 to latest X-Plane.. and nothing is as good as this.

The Good:

- Stunning graphics. This is the most beautiful game I have ever played. From the water effects to shadows from the plane.. every effect and particle is breathtaking.

- Gameplay. It is an amazing gameplay, indeed. You can now fly in any seat you like, control literally any view of the airplane, most of the cockpit controls work and function the way they are supposed to. The weather system is amazing.

- Multiplayer. This one speaks for itself: FUN FUN FUN. It is very entertaining since you get to see people from all over the world. However, there are few cons.. like the Bad ATC guys who often mislead you and cause you to crash etc. It was foggy, so I depended on A/P. I was told to turn 074R, which I did. I heard the ILS Frequency so I put it on APP but ultimately, I was put into wrong direction and as much as APP fought to align me to the right direction (while keeping up with sped and altitude) i still landed in the ocean.. and of course crashed (since you're not able to actually land on water in this game). Of course, there are plenty of pefect ATC's out there but even with few that are not as good it's still VERY fun to play. Try it and see for yourself.

The Bad:

- ATC. ATC has not changed much from FS2004 other than a new "window" that it displays in. Still no ability to declare an emergency which is sort of a disappoint since you ARE able to set engines to fail or to run out of fuel (or both). So.. if your engines die out on you don't you think you deserve a right to report the situation to ATC? LOL

- Crash dynamics. If you're hoping to be able to crash your plane into a mountain and see a giant explosion and earthquakes then I have to disappoint you. While I almost never crash in Flight Sims I still wish there were better crashing dynamics to make it more realistic. For example, if I land heavily on my nose I'd love to see my plane's nose gear to fail and act like it would in physics.

Also, why can't we have the ability to land on water? Boeing 737 CAN do that (if propely executed). Here, no matter what amazing pilot you are.. as soon as you touch the water - you crash. Oh well. It's a very small thing but I wish it was improved a bit.

The Ugly:

- System requirements. I agree with what many reviewers said - this game depends more on CPU than it does on video card. This game will most likely NOT work at the Max settings if you have a brand-name PC (eMachines, HP, Dell).

When I first installed the game I had AMD Sempron 3300 (2.01GHz); 2GB DDR, Radeon X1650 Pro with 512MB. I ran the CanYouRunIT tool from System Requirements Lab.. the report said that I exceed RECOMMENDED requirements and should have a great experience with the game. I didn't really believe that since I have a 3rd class CPU but I played FS2004 and HL2 on the HIGHEST settings with absolutely NO lags so I thought it would work fine.

I was.. wrong. The game was not playable unless I set all of the aircraft, transport and texture settings to Minnimum Low. It lagged horribly on my native resolution of 1680x1050 32 which I had to put into 1440x900 16bit.

I purchased a new video card which is Geforce GTX 8800 with 740mb of RAM and can now play without any lags on my native resolution with settings set to Medium High but still not maxed out. Why? Because this game needs CPU. In this case, the CPU is the heart not the video card. If you buy it make sure to get the SP1 for this ASAP.. there are few performance updates which could be crucial if your video card or CPU isn't the best.

So to wrap up - I highly recommend this simulator to any Aerolover as myself. But make sure you have a GOOD CPU and card. If you have them you'll find yourself spending hours and hours flying above gorgeous landscapes, commmunicating with people all over the world, surviving a dead engine and/or faulty mechanics and generally having fun. This amazing software is both entertaining and educational.

UPDATE: I have got myself a new PC. I built it with Anthlon 64 x2 4600+, 4GB DDR2, 2 GTX 8000 (in SLI mode) and a SLI motherboard/PSU/case. I am now able to run the game to its full potential.