Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
65 of 71 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Flight simulator x detailed review, 5 May 2007
Fun:5.0 out of 5 stars
I have just baught the game off amazon and would like to help the future buyers know what they are getting. you may have viewed the video (on this page of flight simulator x) and be amazed by the quality of the sim. dont be fooled by other peoples reviews on here saying "we dont all have a super computer like bill gates" and letting you down thinking you cant run it. i have installed it on both of my pc's.
1st pc has 2.8ghz intel duel core, 1gb ram, 300gb hdd, and a 512mb graphics card. i can run the game on ultra high settings with no glitches or pauses working with no problems this is full on graphics, detail, scenery, weather etc. my other pc is intel 2.6ghz, 1gb ram, 256mb graphics card and 2x80gb hdd. on the 2nd pc i can run the sim on medium high settings (which is about 3/4's of the full settings on graphics, detail, scenery, weather etc) and runs with no glitches or pauses... i cant say i have tryed the settings higher yet but it may handel a little more. the system spec's on the game case say; at least windows xp or vista, 1ghz or higher, 15gb hdd, 32mb graphics card... i am sure with the lowest spec's even with lowest graphic settings the game will pause and have glitches... very demanding on graphics, BUT if you have any pc with (in my mind) atleast 1.8ghz, windows xp, 256/512mb ram, 64/128mb graphics card you will see a good view from the game. if you have the spec or higher than my 1st pc then definatly buy this... you wont be dissapointed. i hope i have helped people with any questions about this, and be warned... you WILL NEED A DVD ROM!!! wont work with a normal cd-rom. have fun. edd
|
|
|
34 of 38 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Way ahead of it's time, 25 Jun 2007
Fun:4.0 out of 5 stars
If your looking to buy Flight Simulator for the PC, I would strongly recommend getting FS2004. The reason I've given this game quite a generous rating is because (set aside the rest) it's actually an excellent game in terms of it's vastly improved content and realism. For the majority of PC owners who do not yet own Vista, you will find FSX rather disappointing. For a start it occupies a staggering 15GB of HD space! (13.5GB higher than FS2004). It requires a processing speed that exceeds the power of even the fastest computers.
I am a flight simulator fanatic and I bought this game soon after it's day of release and at first I was totally addicted; it was way more dynamic than FS2004. Not before long though I started to notice it's pitfalls: The graphics settings had to be lowered all the way down just to prevent my PC dying on me (even though I've got a fairly descent machine), and dozens of little program errors caused glitchy graphics and poor rendering, making the game seem like a botch job on the part of Microsoft. Soon I became tired, and so did my PC. Since then I have been playing on FS2004 instead. The 'Deluxe' edition (at £10 more) merely adds to you're computer's hardship, although it adds more content, offering a few more missions to enjoy, as well as enhanced scenery. I own the deluxe copy and it does improve the game considerably, you can even play as air traffic controller. This however does not redeem the major pitfalls of the game, as you can't escape it's sluggish performance.
I understand that many people are able to run this game no problemo; it's really down to how good your PC is. A lot of people get annoyed when others give it stick, but I am trying to base this review on behalf of the majority of gamers who's PC may not meet the high spec of this game.
I'm sure that if I came back to this game in five year's time once technology has advanced a little, I would absolutely love this game. I feel that the celebration of 10 years of Microsoft Flight Simulator (hence the 'X') has forced Microsoft to deliver this game too soon, and it hurts me to say that the case is beginning to gather dust. It's not cheap, and whether you're looking for a serious FS experience or you just want a bit of fun, get FS2004 for now. Flight Simulator X will just have to wait
|
|
|
20 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Need a monster PC, 1 May 2007
Fun:4.0 out of 5 stars
This simulation is very demanding on your PC - make no bones about it. I installed it on my old rig (AMD 64 4000+, 2GB, 256MB 7800GTX) and it chugged, but it was just about playable on low to mid settings (configuration settings are all important to get the best performance). I've since built a new PC (Quad core QX6600 OC to 2.67GHz, 8800GTX 768MB, 2GB, RaptorX etc.) and it runs pretty smoothly on almost max settings (@ 1280x1024 - the max my current TFT panel supports, so I can't comment on higher resolutions) and load times are much reduced.
Don't think of it as a 'game' - it's going for realism over f.p.s., and don't try and run it on max settings and silly resolutions on a PC which isn't state of the art ...you'll be bitterly disappointed (see other reviews). However, if you like proper flight simulation, and you're prepared to invest in the proper kit to run it, it can be very rewarding. I'm really glad Microsoft invested so much time and effort in making this, although they should have been up-front about the 'real-world' minimum spec.
FYI - There's a service pack due in May 07, which should address some performance issues (optimised for multi-core etc.)
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|