Short and to the point.

    :o  :D  ;D

LOL!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Best review ever :D

What am I missing here -- Where is the review? I read the standard MS description at the top of the page - no review.

Click on the 'Review' tab just above the article.

Or if you don't see the tabs, here is a direct link-http://pc.ign.com/articles/122/1220696p1.html

Ok, well I still use an older browser, so the only review I noticed were the words "Flying is magical, but playing this game is not." Didn't realize it was just the heading. Oh well, made me laugh anyway! ;D

Yes sorry I didn't see the review ..... not so short .... & not so sweet!!  ;D

"Not so sweet" is an understatement.  And they copped out with the final review numbers when compared to the text.......... sounds like it should have fared WAY lower in the ratings department.

best,

...............john

I can only imagine that the team of designers of; "Flight", acting upon instructions from Microsoft, must be absolutely gutted when they read the degrading reviews of all their hard work, day after day.

I know how I would feel, and I do sympathise with them..

There is nothing as cruel as the "reviewing" public!

Paul.

Pulitzer material.

The mark of a seasoned reviewer who can give the worth of what s/he's reviewing in a single, lapidary sentence carrying a judgment that cannot be challenged, and without having to waste words over a waste of coding.

A masterpiece, if nothing else.

Well they can still get it right again by opening it up to whoever can design aircraft and scenery. That would mean freeware and payware and not just those selected fsx payware developers they have contracted to make stuff already.

Common MS .. get the message. open it up and give us the SDK.

striker wrote on Jun 27^th, 2012 at 4:01pm:

Well they can still get it right again by opening it up to whoever can design aircraft and scenery. That would mean freeware and payware and not just those selected fsx payware developers they have contracted to make stuff already.

That ONLY to start.

Then there is the fact they compel you to subscribe to their game site if you want to use the thing.

No. Just NO! >:(

Then there is the problem of the world scenery, until FSX released all together and not given is smallish sips overtime and THEN you must fork payware-grade money for default-quality scenery.

Again, NO! >:(

...

Am I forgetting something? :-?

Strategic Retreat wrote on Jun 28^th, 2012 at 7:37am:

striker wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 4:01pm: Well they can still get it right again by opening it up to whoever can design aircraft and scenery. That would mean freeware and payware and not just those selected fsx payware developers they have contracted to make stuff already. That ONLY to start. Then there is the fact they compel you to subscribe to their game site if you want to use the thing. No. Just NO! >:( Then there is the problem of the world scenery, until FSX released all together and not given is smallish sips overtime and THEN you must fork payware-grade money for default-quality scenery. Again, NO! >:( ... Am I forgetting something? :-?

Yes!M$ doesn't have AI!or even I in general...

Look here, its at the bottom of the second page of my free MSN games, you know.. way lower than Angry Birds.


  http://www.simviation.com/phpupload/uploads/1340954818.jpg


Solitare is more exciting

 

LOL,its even lower then granny in paradise,thank you for making my day! ;D

:'( I was wrong...I gave it 6 month it only last 4

;D

where are those FRAUD FLIGHT defenders now??

  It doesn't even deserve to be free Its still too expensive to waste 1.4 GB of people's  time waiting for download for such of  MEDIOCRE game as the review said which is very true

and the worse part was what they did as a desperate claiming that "they were going to make Alaska then then New York" that definitively was the worse ,that was the lowest part of this flight adventure a lie to call attention

.well done M$ ,if you continue like this you will end up very soon like Pan am /General Motors or Enron   [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

It is indeed strange.

And I'm telling this while we're losing 4:0 against Spain in the European Soccer Championship, so I DO KNOW about failure.

The question is: exactly to WHOM was directed that half a$$ed attempt called Flight.

If you compare it to... say... not FSX... not FS9... or even FS2K...

If you compare it to FS98, the only thing that has more is graphics. But FS98 at least could boast a whole PLANET of admittedly badly rendered scenery, that WAS THERE ANYWAY if you wanted to simul-fly on that spot.

It's a sort of: "how FS would have been if it was like Train Simulator, only done WORSE, because differently than Train Simuilator, that remains a SIMULATOR, Flight simulates NOTHING and it's proud of it".

It is a fascinating subject to ponder upon, if quite the pissing-off one. Where the HELL is Flight better than ANY of the last three editions of FS to have deserved publishing rights? It just SUCKS even compared to even FS2000 and is only SLIGHTLY better (and exclusively graphics-wise) than the the oldest releases (from FS98 to before). WITH WHAT KIND OF JUDGMENT was it thought out. With what kind of misplaced bravery was it published?

Was I right in thinking that them at M$ desperately wanted and still desire to ape Apple? Was I right to insinuate they wished and still long to accustom their customers to become Apple-customers-like? Was I right in feeling deeply insulted in being considered a brainless visually impaired idiot who buy a thing only for what it looks, and far away at that?

Is that why Win8 looks like a tablet version of Windows even on traditional PC? Because is catering to the same censurable phantom target?

...

Them at M$ REALLY need a overhaul of their managerial persons. A COMPLETE one. And an urgent reset, reboot and reorganization of priorities. Else they better begin compiling the paperwork for bankruptcy here and now. It'll only spare them time down the line.

The release of Flight created a schism in the Flight Simulation community that will probably never heal itself.

ViperPilot wrote on Jul 1^st, 2012 at 7:08pm:

The release of Flight created a schism in the Flight Simulation community that will probably never heal itself.

that as the purpose of M$ Flight, to destroy and inconvenient well define auto created community from a very long time,to own it ,to manipulate it and erase what was born because of their creations (MS Flight Simulator Series) 

  they thought by making airplanes/scenery by themselves and kill control & transform  the old Flight Simulation Community into Flight Community they would make the deal of the decade 

they are good in brain washing ,some has been banned from this forum ,others has very strong arguments among each others and at the end This part of the forum became inactive ,and yes I agree with you I don't see the same enthusiasm used to be for FSX/FS9 since fraudflight came out.




    
   

alrot wrote on Jul 1^st, 2012 at 7:41pm:

...they are good in brain washing...

Forgive me in THE REAL WORLD, brain washing is like hypnotism. We're not talking about mad scientists with a bad hair day that put a hairdresser helmet on your head and then they will make you do what they want with only a switch being pressed on the nearby bench.

The same way hypnotism is impossible to happen to you without your cooperation, REAL WORLD brain washing CANNOT happen to someone unless the subject is broken first... or a complete dimwit to begin with.

This fact suggests that those who allowed M$ to brainwash them were either broken or dimwitted (or both), and if so, I staunchly believe THIS community CAN make due without them and actually WILL BE STRONGER because of their absence.

Going off half cocked sure to conquer your enemy and finishing with making said enemy stronger instead by weeding the unfits is the mark of a strategist whose ability in being a failure is too big for him to be human. He or she must perhaps be something even more underdeveloped (brain wise) than a banana. :P

Strategic Retreat wrote on Jul 1^st, 2012 at 4:18pm:

If you compare it to FS98, the only thing that has more is graphics. But FS98 at least could boast a whole PLANET of admittedly badly rendered scenery, that WAS THERE ANYWAY if you wanted to simul-fly on that spot.

Forget FS98.  Even FS 5.0, or FS 4 for that matter, has more content, sim, and game than Flight and those sims fit into little floppy disks if anyone remembers them  ;)