Rating: 
Summary: Flight Simulator Rising?
Review: I first saw FS back in the early(ish) days around 1988. I just had to have it, and FS2000 was no exception. I ordered my copy sight unseen, and then thought I'd made a bad mistake when I saw some people's comments about processor speed etc. I'm running a P3 at 450MHz, with a 16Mb graphics card and 128MB of RAM. I'd have to rate the performance as "above acceptable" with all the bells and whistles. I can turn off some of the fluffy stuff and get good frame rates (in the 40fps region). The graphics are simply incredible. Turn the aircraft around on a sunny day and admire the glare of the sun. Great flight models on all the aircraft (no surprise there). I just love the Concorde and the 777 - it's almost worth getting for those two alone. A number of new features crept in between FS98 and this version. The flight planner is much more useful (since you can pick waypoints from a map - great if the geography of Iowa isn't high in your mind). I love the GPS addition also. I miss cockpit communications (unless I just haven't found it yet). It would be nice to Request to Land/Takeoff at a minimum. On the whole - if you've got a respectable machine, buy it to show off the graphics to your friends, and if you're a pilot, turn down the graphics quality and you'll have a great experience. Trust me.
Rating: 
Summary: A quality, fun game to play.
Review: When you turn it on you feel the power that you are in the pilots seat you start up the engine you turn off the parking brakes and you pull the power up and take off you go far your crusing and you go through the mountains and you see the beauty and then you get to close to the mountains and you try to turn to the right andw you spin out and crash; you start over...
Rating: 
Summary: Don't buy it unless you have a powerful PC!
Review: This may be a great product but Microsoft marketing was inaccurate about it working on a PC as low as a Pentium 166. While FS98 works on "older" PCs, FS2000 needs CPU power and lots of it, probably at least a Pentium II 400. See Microsoft's own FlightSim message board on how angry deceived purchasers are. So be sure you have a more powerful PC to make this work efficiently. Thanks to MS's 30-day back guarantee (on the box) I was able to return it.
Rating:
Summary: This game is so much better than Flight Simulator 98
Review: Flight SImulator 2000 i ss o awesome. It has a real weather program, the best GOS system and totally awesome graphics. I would recommend anyone ot get it. ANd the good thing is the flight Simulator 98n planes you doenload work on FS 2000.
Rating: 
Summary: GOOD BUT
Review: Very good, but you need at leat a PII400Mhz and a 3D Card if you want to land that thing... Great Graphics, sound, trip planner..Nice Clouds..
Rating:
Summary: Great... Much better than FS98
Review: Microsoft made some definate improvments this time. The new graphics and scenery are the best they've ever been. But... you'll deifinately need a good system to for it to run really smooth on. I'm running a PIII 500, 128MB Ram, and a 16 MB 3D card, and occasionally it gets choppy, but fo the most part, its great. If you're into flight sims, its a must have.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent, Very Very Excellent!
Review: Flight Simulator 2000 Professional is just an incredible sim game. The graphics are just superb and if you have a 3D accelerator and a Pentium III with lots of RAM, boy you will think you were flying the real thing. The instant weather thing is really cool and it is neat to update it and then look outside. This is a must have game that you have to buy if you like this!
Rating:
Summary: FS2000 Professional Edition
Review: Suitable for PC with slower CPU like PII. It doesn't require a very good video card, 4MB RAM can run very smooth, of course more RAM means better, suggest 8-32MB.
Rating:
Summary: You need a good graphics accelerator.
Review: I keep reading about people with fairly fast systems (800 mhz) and up running this game and hating the frame rates. I'm also reading that these same people are using 8MB or 16MB graphics accelerators... The truth is, if you have a such a system, flight simulator WILL work reasonably well, IF you get rid of the slow graphics accelerator. This is because 8 MB graphics cards are a joke to this game, and they make the main processor work much harder, slowing things down. An 8MB card is like running a race car on snow tires; the two don't work well together to produce speed. So don't get a new computer, get a 32MB or better yet, a 64MB graphics accelerator for your system. (And if you can afford it, I'd also suggest you get some RAM.) You'll see that you DON'T need a brand new Pentium IV 1.7 GHz or anything that fast that to effectively run the game. One last thing: I suggest running the display at 1024 X 768 at 16 bit. Fiddle around with the display and scenery settings until you get a "decent" frame rate. Good luck!
| 
