I think I have finally seen a game with near photo realism, MS Flight Simulator X. Check out this screenshot: http://i.i.com.com/cnet.g2/images/2006/074/931252_20060316_screen008.jpg. Here is a link to the official website: Flight Simulator X. This one might be worth the money just for the spectacular graphics. Any thoughts?
Wow...that's pretty realistic! I'm not so much into flight sims, but it looks like a beautiful game nontheless. I bet the specs are pretty high...I must show this to my friend Mark. He's a sucker for flight sims and railroad sims And HE rails on me for playing gory FPSs! Phhhttt.
Hmm, I would assume that it is at full settings but I couldn't say. Maybe I'll download the demo and see for myself.
It's good but honestly I don't really see a difference over 2004. But it's not a big deal, it's the ground detail, terrain, and structures that'll need the real upgrade.
This might change your mind (images 73,74 & 75)............ Microsoft Flight Simulator X Screens for PC at GameSpot
Woah! Assuming those aren't target shots or concept art I'm totally impressed with those images. The requirements are going to be killer though, I mean look at that water!
Yeah that's the problem, it's never obvious early on if they're pulling concept/target shots on you or if this is the real deal. Jaggies are a good indication of ingame realtime footage but without knowing for sure you can get pretty confused. It's not too uncommon to see trailers of big deal games that look stunning and then when the game comes out you find it was a prerendered cinematic or something. Only time will tell I guess.
on the first screenshot (http://i.i.com.com/cnet.g2/images/2006/074/931252_20060316_screen008.jpg) if you are useing firefox i think ie can do it click on the pic and it inlages it tha fixed the jaged edges
Yea, but even with that one being concept art, the terrain is far more detailed than 2004. that was the first thing I noticed when I saw the screenshots. If my CarPC doesn't drain ALL of my money then I might get this one.
I'm just worried that beyond massive system requirements for max settings it'll cost a lot more than $50 due to the development time and expenses.