User Score

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 102 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 25 out of 102
  2. Negative: 63 out of 102

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 15, 2012
    you could say that "Flight" has done the things that FSX should do, but before you say "FINALLY!" learn that "Flight" compromises everything else. Free to play games are dominating the market. Many of those are sneaky and wont let you win if you dont pay, others do this model just right with being fair with free players. Flight doesn't fall in any of those categories and the reason for this is that its a glorified demo and not a freemium game. the only difference is that unlike other demos you will never get a full game, but rather buy content for expanding the demo. needles to say that this might be very expensive than just buying a full game Sure, i gave this game a chance. i said "ok how bad could it be?" thinking that the initial reports of what the beta included(just two planes) was not what the final game will have. i was mistaken. indeed there are just two planes and the world is as dead as it gets, no AI airtraffic, no cars on the road or boats in the sea and total lack of animal life. Another compromise done is the realism. its not realistic while its not arcady either. it just cannot decide what it is. it has an identity crisis. you will stall, but you cannot overstress the aircraft? what kind of sorcery is this?! to change the mood a bit, the scenery is well designed and the aircraft look gorgeous, and best of all the performance is smooth and way better than dear old FSX, and that's where the good things end. the sound? yes, the sound is good especially the engine sounds of the aircraft, beyond that there's the music which another problem are the missions and challenges. they get repetitive while absurdly enough, most missions that already exist in the game require an aircraft you must buy for real money. there is also a leveling system in place. that means in order to do some challenges and missions you must be in the proper level and this could mean you would have to grind. yes, this is not a typing error, grind in a game like this. last but not least the false advertisement and MS herself. we got tons of sugar coated news on how Flight is reconsieved and renovated and how is meant for old and new fans, but it turns out its not like this at all. the game is not an advancement rather a significant downgrade and with its realism stripped out(both in physics and world) and its limited scale, Flight deserves the dislike of old fans. MS seems to have asked the marketing department rather the fans or devs, she bullied third party devs and required them to accept preposterous terms in order to let them make content for Flight. in the end this whole DLC model is as stupid as the people that decide to make money out of it and the people who would pay for it. Expand
  2. Apr 23, 2012
    if you're looking for an aircraft simulator because you aspire to be a pilot (or you're already one and wanna practice the basics) by bunk-flying actual planes... don't download Microsoft Flight even if it's free. stick to FSX or even FS 2004.

    Microsoft Flight has absolutely nothing to do with simulation because they've messed up the angles in order to emphasize the game's graphics. one
    can't "scan" any instruments... there's just a GUI small enough to see the aircraft's heading, airspeed, altitude, power setting, fuel, and an annoying cross hair. there are no indications for vertical speed and turn coordination. there's also no point in having navigational instruments and flight planning since the game only takes place in Hawaii.

    as a game, it's not that impressive either. it only has the ICON A5 and the Boeing Stearman (if you have a Windows Live account) as default aircraft, the rest (which aren't that many) are DLC's in exchange for Microsoft points. i haven't tried this game with a joystick, but it does feel very awkward with an Xbox 360 controller especially during taxi. also, this game can be finished in a day because there aren't enough missions. flying freestyle is also boring with either of the default aircraft. the ICON A5 looks and feels like a car more than an aircraft while the Stearman is painfully simple.

    the only good thing about this game is the graphics. that's just about it.
  3. Mar 17, 2012
    severe lack of everything , no flight control, no traffic, no variety of planes zero helicopters and the few that are there are boring to fly. P51 has no **** view. best to just stick with FS X, p51 also feels very sluggish no where near as "snappy" as a real one.
  4. Apr 12, 2012
    I hope Microsoft weren't serious with this game. Wanna know why it's free? Because it sucks. It's only worth playing for the achievements. On Max graphics settings the scenery is almost non-existent. I expected at least SOME detail not flat terrain. Framerate is pretty choppy even on a good PC and the camera views are terrible. The ckckpits are acceptable detail but everything else looks terrible I have literally seen games from 1970s and 1980s do better scenery. The only 2 things which are credit worthy about this game are that it has achievements and the tutorials and generally gameplay is well done in the sense that it easily appeals to even non-gamers while still keeping the depth and simulation aspect of flying for the more serious fans. It's not a 'bad game' but there simply isn't enough content or anything which is interesting here. There's absolutely no fun or enjoyment to be had here, and no matter what kind of games you like I guarantee you will find more satisfaction elsewhere. However there aren't many free flying simulator games which appeal to the casual market of good quality. The execution is good, but the whole concept and idea of it is flawed. For this "casual simulator" to be seriously considered as a game it needs to look to Test Drive Unlimited for inspiration, but instead of driving put the focus on flying. Only then can it be a viable game to spend time on. Expand
  5. Mar 19, 2012
    sorry i gave this a score of 1. although the graphics aren't too bad, they are still outdated and MS never got rid of that texture pop. a dumbed down version of FSX and the worst crime to play DLC
    a complete failure
  6. Apr 6, 2012
    Absolutely terrible game. Don't even consider downloading it, it's not worth the bandwidth. The plane models are actually pretty good but you only get TWO PLANES! The ground textures are absolutely terrible along with everything else about this game. Keyboard flying sucks too. Arma 2 has has a more realistic flight system. I'd suggest buying X-Plane instead of playing this piece of garbage.
  7. Mar 18, 2012
    Been playing Microsoft's flight sims since fs2002, and im telling you, this one is the worst one yet. 2 Airplanes? Minor improvement in graphics, could be alot better, and why the hell can i only fly in hawaii? This game is a disgrace for flight simulator series, mainly because its not a flight simulator, its a freaking arcade game. Luckily the flying works well. BTW, I got i little hint from someone over at microsoft: Why do you think we couldn's use the name "flight simulator".. get it? Expand
  8. Apr 5, 2012
    I really don't understand microsoft... I think they would benefit providing PC Gamers, PC lovers, a game ahead if it's time. Serioulsy I played Hawk 1 et 2 and the graphics was awesome. The graphics in this game looks like 2007. I think I'll just play Just Cause 2 and steal an arplane, it's seems more realistic than this... Seriously Microsoft?!?!?!?!?!?!?

    If I put aside the lame
    graphics, the game is still a good sim, but when you want to feel like you are flying, and you know there is more out there, much, much more, you can't get over it... I know I won't. I played the demo and that's it. I was waiting for this game... DOH! Expand
  9. Mar 15, 2012
    This is just a pretty looking arcade game, and for that its pretty boring. I have followed the product line almost 20 years from the sublogic times. This was one of the greatest flight simulators of all time, which in no small part helped me, and many others, become a pilot. Now all that trashed. There is no ATC, flight planning, load and balance, IFR, third party add ons for your local airport in timbuctoo.... This is just horrendous. If MS wanted an arcade game for XBOX thats fine, but why trash 20 years of development, a loyal client base, and ontop, steal the name -- Ill stuck with FSX. See flight go the same way as IE, IIS, Silverlight, Office and Windows8 , right to the garbage bin... Expand
  10. Apr 8, 2012
    Garbage! Their free-to-play content model does a poor job of masking the fact that this is a barely thought out and terribly executed excuse for a flight sim.
  11. May 31, 2012
    Wow... Another **** warbird? Really M$?

    Flight uninstalled from my PC. If you want me to re-install then start regularly releasing aircraft with a FULL AND COMPLETE VC!
  12. Apr 13, 2012
    Its a fun thing to have a mash up between sim and arcade flying, also tutorials are fun. But this game is not very big its like a big demo. You get 2 planes 1 island. A few tutorial missions, a few challenges your done with that fast enough. Aerocashes are a good idea but poorly developed, you seen them all fast and when you log off they aren't saved so you must always start with the first one Honolii Cove. The planes design could be a lot better, especially with the p51 Mustang which I bought its turning rate, turning speed, and handling is not good at all. To be short about the DLC part, lots of money for what you get in return. I am tired of the expansive DLC rip-off hype under companies. Can't give a high grade because of the price-content ratio is very low. Else this game deserves a higher grade. Companies should look to innovation of fun gaming instead to their wallet. In the 90s and 00s you bought a big game and you get something in return, from MFS98 to MFSX: big content, very detailed, lots of planes and so on(yes ok they are more real sims and not arcady but that's not my point here). MS Flight is Free2Play but if you download all DLC and look what you have its WAY more expansive in comparison with the earlier Flight sims from MS. So lookout. Expand
  13. Oct 25, 2012
    If MS Flight is an indicator for what is to come for the games industry, then the future is bleak indeed. Flight takes a different approach to the previous games in the series; namely removing "simulator" from the name and giving us a small area to fly in, plus having customers pay money for additional aircraft or scenery; it's just that you're effectively paying £70 for about 1/100 of FSX or 2004. In Microsoft's rush to try and make the series more "accessible", all they've done is make a game too boring for the casual gamers and too insubstantial for older fans of the series. The only good thing I have to say about this game is that the graphics are quite nice, as is the sound. If I sound a bit dry, it's because everything about this game just makes me feel depressed for the AAA games industry and I really don't have anything to say about it, just don't download it. Expand
  14. Jul 19, 2012
    Absolute garbage, while it may look better and play smoother than FSX the limited game world and ridiculously expensive DLC really ruin any potential it may have had.
    Another big failure by Microsoft.
  15. Jun 6, 2013
    They should FIRE the a$$hole who made the decisions to destroy the Microsoft's best franchise ever!
    I could not believe the design choices that were made. All I can think off was that it was driven by greed. They must have seen a thriving 3rd party community and they wanted a slice of the pie, but they wanted the whole pie!! Making sure that there will be no more 3rd party anymore. HOW
    STUPID! Then releasing aircraft without any MORE STUPIDITY! MORONIC! It was funny though seeing all the fanboys running in every direction to defend this piece of JUNK.
    This is so sad.
    If you want to fly a proper civilian aircraft simulator stay with FSX.
  16. Apr 8, 2012
    This game suffers from several glaring problems. First, the flight dynamics of the planes is completely unrealistic. For example, the P-51 Mustang from the DLC is much slower in game than a real P-51. It also lacks a **** Another is that the scenery of Hawaii is very inaccurate. I live in Hawaii so I know what I'm talking about. It looks like they simply took a satellite map and used it to build out the scenery. The funny thing is that the maps they used are more than 5 years old, so highways go places they don't go any more. Don't make the mistake of thinking this game is going to be anything like the Flight Simulator series. Expand
  17. May 27, 2012
    At first I was quite interested with the title, but after discovering the control system I was not happy. I don't think this type of game will ever be that interesting until the ability to fly is coupled with awesome scenic views.
  18. Apr 21, 2012
    Terrible! They should just stick to 'ACTUAL' simulation! I didnt learn anything of flying an aircraft from this waste of space!!! I can nearly the same stuff in this in GTA SA, which is anytime better!! Long Live F S X!!
  19. Apr 26, 2012
    The game originally had promise, however that quickly faded into obscurity. The game had enormous potential, potential effectively pissed into the flusher by an incompetent development staff. Graphically, the game is ok, not great, just ok. The airplanes (the ones that are fully modeled) are nice, however the world you fly them in is stagnant and dead. I won't even comment on the **** abominations that honestly have no place in gaming in the year 2012 (unless it's AI or a static display). The game could succeed, however the developer needs to stop repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot. More importantly, the game must find an identity, because really what is it? An arcade shooter with no shooting? A civilian flight game with an over abundance of warbirds? or a really poor attempt at a simulator?

    As is, the game is little more than incomplete wasted potential.
  20. May 28, 2012
    Flight is basically an impoved FSX but only in Hawai'i. While it is free to download and play, the "game" doesn't quite have its own identity. Is it a flight sim? Is it a MMO with airplanes? Graphics are better than default FSX, but not better than almost every "A" PC game title today.

    One thing I do know: It's not appealing enough for its target audience. MS wants millions to buy their
    DLC, but I'm pretty sure that will not be happening based on the game being a hybrid genre.

    In 2012 it is an insult to release airplanes with no **** Think about that. A Flight sim or game with airplanes and no ****.. The only game I can compare that to is PilotWings and the Nintendo offering is far more fun. Afterall, there is no ambiguity as to what PilotWings is.

    Graphically better than default FSX. Replyablility? If you like doing "jobs" (sort of like random repeatable quests) then you might call this category average. Fun? That depends on you, but if you are approaching this as a flight sim fan there is none of the following: ATC, AI traffic, airliners, or autopilot. This game appeals to GA "low and slow" but even then there is only Hawai'i to fly in so that has to get boring quickly. Alaska DLC scenery has been announced, but no release date as of this writing.

    The game is relying on people to purchase DLC by the droves. In this endeavour, IMO, MS has chosen poorly. Since the game is free there is no risk to DL it, but don't expect it to blow you away.
  21. Jun 15, 2012
    Microsoft has really missed the mark here; the game has had six add-on planes released which should be a good thing. The problem is they have released 4 WW2 vintage aircraft with no missions or objectives specific to them and if that alone was not bad enough, none of them have a **** After the release of the first one the message boards lit up with criticism and yet onward MS pushed with releasing more of the same and not replying to any of the customer feedback.

    After ther elease of the P-40 their reaction was to just remove the option for customers to leave comments any more and they have yet to formally respond to all the criticism. There is potential with the title but unfortunately it will probably die a slow death due to the lack of interaction with the customer base and clearly releasing content the community is just not interested in purchasing.

    The game has a cap of level 20 which can be achieved over a weekend of flying and there is no replayability built into any of the mission objectives. In the game you can transport freight, deliver a passenger to buy a $100 hamburger, fly up to 3 passengers to another airport or medivac a patient and nurse. Again, wrong execution of the right idea; the freight missions require you to fly over the MTOW limit of a Maule, the burger missions allow you to use any plane (including single seat warbirds - WTF?) and the passenger missions again limit you to only the Maule. This leaves a very repetitive (read as exciting as watching live coverage of a primary on CNN) game scenario with a slow plane that does not even have working autopilot (although the controls for it are on the instrument panel).

    The flight community has always supported the new products that came out through developing add-on planes the community wanted to see in the sim/game, a lot of it is freeware and the more advanced content as payware. Again, MS missed the mark here in understanding what the target audience wants and has not released any SDK tools.

    This is the absolute worst attempt at niche software development I have seen in the 25 + years I have been gaming, it plays like one of those off-brand console games that are in the bargain bin at the large retailers. Keep in mind this game was years in the making and was released as the evolution of the flight game. The only reason the game gets a 1 is I could not see a way to give it a 0 on here; save your money to buy the additional hardware you may need to run X-Plane 10.
  22. Sep 8, 2012
    What is this for game?
    even Flight Simulator is better then this...
    And you need to Purchase Planes?
    What the Hell...?
    Is this a sort of scam?
    I prefer Flight Simulator, i hate this game badly.
    no offence.
  23. Sep 30, 2012
    No realism, no aircraft's, no procedures, no world, no fun. BIg disappointment from Microsoft. Was very exciting for FS players, but came with this "car" with wings. They say it was free, it was free, but only 2 aircraft's are free and only Hawaii Big Island is free, with missions, ridiculous missions.
  24. Nov 12, 2012
    Disappointing. I was hoping for a good free game with a wide option of planes to fly and scenarios to play through without buying an add-on. A good game to play when trying to fill in time as there is a free flight option. I wouldn't recommend it for those looking for a proper flight simulator, but I would for those trying to get into this sort of gaming genre.
  25. Apr 29, 2013
    This game is a solid flight simulator, but everything else is meh or bad. The graphics are a complete disaster if you don't have them all turned up to max, and if I do that my machine blows up. The trailer is completely deceiving, as there are basically no 3-d structures. The only reason to get this game is because it's free-to-play.
  26. May 22, 2013
    Again this is a microsoft game, so with that said you have to buy every little thing. The flying is fun, but microsoft wont update this game anymore and instead of flying all over the world you are stuck with just Hawaii and Alaska. Also you are only stuck with certain aircraft and nothing fancy or big. I give this game a 1. I wish I could get my money back and buy other flight simulator games.
  27. Jan 17, 2014
    Microsft? why just why...

    this is one most bad games that i ever got think goodness that this F2P On Steam
    the gameplay is bad i hate play games that you have to fly an air plane not one best choices games to be F2P but i still would not want this be on steam
  28. Feb 2, 2014
    Microsoft decided that what their simulator series needed was the removal of all realism. So they took away the global scenery and left it with one tiny island, they took away all the aircraft and just left a few basic ones, they took away the detailed simulation options and left just a basic arcade framework. Then they released little expansions to the scenery that you had to pay for, They released new aircraft you had to pay for. So determined to destroy their successful flight series that they didn't even make interior cockpits for the aircraft they wanted you to buy as add-ons. Thus you see that most aircraft are "exterior only". As Steve Jobs one said: "Microsoft has no finesse". Over the past few years we've seen a consistently stupid decision making from this company. Bill Gates said he hires lazy people because they take the shortest route to solving a problem. Lazy people took the shortest route in creating FLIGHT. It's an absolute pile of s*it. Expand

Mixed or average reviews - based on 21 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 21
  2. Negative: 1 out of 21
  1. Jul 29, 2012
    The Microsoft Flight's offer is rather poor, however, thanks to a well-structured and deep gameplay and an excellent technical department, the title cut its market share.
  2. Apr 27, 2012
    It might have had a bumpy take-off, but with a bit of hard work Flight should grow into a competent sim worth flying. [May 2012, p.56]
  3. 40
    Empty and almost useless game offers little reason to try it, even for a weekend player – despite the fact that the basic version is free. [Apr 2012]