Take a look at Avsim or Flightsim and see...

Roger

Roger

Senior Administrator
...that the community is still at Fs9. FsX is like the bastard child of Fs9 and Disney and no one is taking any notice except Tim and a few payware developers. Is Microsoft wrong or is there going to be a revelation, a falling of the scales from fs hardened eyes. No, I suspect that Flightsim is about to fall into a big hole where none but the brave will emerge, gagging for modelling tools that are well beyond their means as legitimate tools. Where is MS taking us...and what is the point? There has to a reason....dosen't there?
 
What's your point exactly, Roger? I look around this forum, and I see a whole bunch of 'simmers who are using and enjoying FSX. I'm sorry it doesn't run well for you (if indeed it doesn't), but I disagree completely about FSX. I've developed for 4 versions of FS now, and FSX is hands-down the best looking and most advanced sim to date IMO.

I challenge your assertion that the community is still on FS9. What I've seen, and the latest poll on SimFlight bears it out, is that we're divided at the moment. Seems to me that low and slow fliers (and those with up-to-date hardware) have moved on happily to FSX. Tube pilots and those with older machines or thousands tied up in add-ons stayed with FS9 because it suited their needs.

What I imagine will happen is that we'll see another jump like the one from FS98 to FS2002 when the next version of FS comes along. The Aces made some critical miscalculations regarding the direction hardware was going to take, and a few missteps in their marketing. If they learn from those, we'll all reunite again around FSNext, whenever that is. In the meantime, you'll never convince me that FSX isn't the best thing yet for 'simmers. On my machine, it definitely is.
 
The only reason FSX got a slow start is the fact that a lot of simmers didn't want to update their equipment so they could run it.Most that can run it have made the switch,and most developers are switching their products to FSX, FS9 is on it,s way out,just taking awhile,
 
I tend to agree with Bill. I decided to design exclusively for FSX about a year ago. Yes, there was a steep learning curve and a new one with every upgrade. I am still mastering the attachpoint stuff for carrier catapults, etc. However, it has been worth it to me because I enjoy towing gliders of my own design with tow planes of my own design and I really do like carrier ops with moving carriers. I am a FSDS designer which left something to be desired for FSX until Dave Nunez developed his FSDSxTweak program which emulates the complete FSX materials system. At my age it is still an enjoyable challenge to learn these new techniques, so I intend to continue down the FSX path.

Cheers, Paul
 
Thoe6969 said:
The only reason FSX got a slow start is the fact that a lot of simmers didn't want to update their equipment so they could run it.Most that can run it have made the switch,and most developers are switching their products to FSX, FS9 is on it,s way out,just taking awhile,
Click to expand...

FSX came too fast after a solid and good looking FS9, with too much a demand on the hardware side. I still have both (though i have to admit i have not juiced up the good old ACOF for quite a while :redf:).
 
Roger said:
...that the community is still at Fs9. FsX is like the bastard child of Fs9 and Disney and no one is taking any notice except Tim and a few payware developers. Is Microsoft wrong or is there going to be a revelation, a falling of the scales from fs hardened eyes. No, I suspect that Flightsim is about to fall into a big hole where none but the brave will emerge, gagging for modelling tools that are well beyond their means as legitimate tools. Where is MS taking us...and what is the point? There has to a reason....dosen't there?
Click to expand...


You are just now noticing this Roger?


:d



I saw this along time ago. I hope FS11 runs smoother, has nicer scenery, and is easier to create planes for.



Bill


EDIT: Like Windows XP, FS9 was a good 'golden child' platform. It had 'limitations', but still had tons of mileage left in it. I still think Aces could still makes loads of money on the FS9 platform by releasing a FS9 Platinum, and add some new Autogen, planes, some bits, new compiler, and have it as a updated new FS9. But then I think this way about Windows XP. People want it, people like it, but MS doesnt want to make it or sell it. They dont want to do what the people want. ok.. fine.

With FSX, it is so difficult to find something that can make it run right, and thats hoping its at 50% settings or less..... Mind you, there are some that can run it at 100% settings, but they are rare... Some have paid $5,000.00 for custom computers, and still it didnt run good, while 3 year old rigs are running it fair...

In college, in small business, you learn that the customers are the boss, not the boss. Also, you learn that customers are not dumb. Third, you learn that what makes money is what sells really well, and that is what the people want. If you force them to buy things (like vista) and they dont like it, but they will buy Win XP all day long, even backup copies, and the company still doesnt want to sell it to them, well.. That too tells you something.

If a new sim comes out, and no one is making things for it, ok.. well there are alot, but nothing like before with FS9, that also is a sign...


FSX is very exotic... Its awesome.. But it doesnt run on most computers, and its danged difficult to make things for.....
 
I dumped FSX...It was beautiful...Just too unpredictable for my likings...So I went back to FS9 mostly because I wanted to fly,not fix ...LOL

I am loving FS9 at the moment...I am even getting ready to drop another 110 bucks into it ....

I have had three high end rigs in the last 6 months...All flew FSX well,at first,then started to fail......

I'm happy with FS9,as I get to fly and relax,and thats something that has eluded me for 6 months....LOL


I also plan on a i7 core and X58 mobo coupled with the new OS and FS Whatever is next......I will indeed chase that too......LOL
 
Lionheart said:
FSX is very exotic... Its awesome.. But it doesnt run on most computers, and its danged difficult to make things for.....
Click to expand...

Bill, there might be a lot of truth to the difficulty argument where making planes is concerned - you're certainly the expert there, not me. But as far as scenery goes, FSX is a big step forward. It's actually a lot easier to produce great-looking scenery for FSX than it was for FS9. Sure, there are a lot of new material options to learn about, but they're mostly pretty logical and they offer a dizzying level of flexibility than we devs have ever seen before.
 
I couldn't agree with Bill W more. I see so many frustrated posts from freeware developers that seem to have issues with developing for FSX and I try and understand the frustrations because I don't see them..

FSX is very exotic... Its awesome.. But it doesnt run on most computers, and its danged difficult to make things for....
Click to expand...
Not from my point of view, it's the main sim, it runs fine on my old rig at high settings and I have no issues designing for it.

Please, correct me if I am wrong, but at the very minimal, if you have a working source for an FS9 aircraft, assigning new material settings, reworking the animations and the big one, new gauge work (XML?) and you can get the FS9 model working as an FSX native?

I think that one of the strong points of this site, is that we have a very vibrant FSX discussion at most times and I know (for myself) that we try hard to bring out the news on the latest addons, tweaks and fixes to try and help users have a good experience so they don't get brainwashed by the FSX bashers. this becomes a mute point without any users.


Personally I look at embracing FSX as preparing for the next version since FS9 addons will be history and not even an option from my understanding.
 
I'm curious about the trouble some have making FSX run well. I have three systems, none are cutting edge, and it runs just fine. The one system is a sub $1500 Dell laptop and it runs FSX at pretty high settings pretty consistently getting 30 fps.

I still have FS9 on one of my desktops, but I don't remember that last time I flew it. I do agree that an FS9 "Platinum" edition would be a good idea. If they could bump the ground texture resolution to 2m and include the autogen from FSX they would have a winner.
 
MCDesigns said:
Please, correct me if I am wrong, but at the very minimal, if you have a working source for an FS9 aircraft, assigning new material settings, reworking the animations and the big one, new gauge work (XML?) and you can get the FS9 model working as an FSX native?
Click to expand...

That is pretty close...although fs9 gauges will work with little or no modification to the code. FreeFlight Design is the place to look for more info, and plenty of help & advice.
 
N2056 said:
That is pretty close...although fs9 gauges will work with little or no modification to the code. FreeFlight Design is the place to look for more info, and plenty of help & advice.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU Robert! my point was that I feel to many freeware developers instead of taking a chance and seeing how hard it is to try and export their old FS9 aircraft into FSX native are instead listening to the ones that say how hard it is and what a nightmare it is and don't even try.
 
It was tough to learn it all back when FSX first came out. Now there is plenty of information to help you get going. There are a lot of things that can be done to 'optimize' a model for good performance, but that is a bit more involved than just getting an FS9 model up to FSX.
 
Personally I dont think FSX is any more difficult to design for than FS9. More labor intensive yes, difficult no.
 
I've been developing since FS2002 days, and I can honestly state that I find FSX far easier for both modeling and gauge programming...

...in fact, I build FSX models then "downconvert" them for FS9. It's much, much easier that way.
 
i keep fs9 so i can fly ifr in bad weather. i don't have enough computer to do it in fsx, without tweaking. i have looked at some of the tweaks but i don't understand them, or even which ones i need. if i could set up bad weather, and still have the atc load, i wouldn't need fs9 anymore. however, when i fly fsx, i can only have atc in weather with no precipitation. i can do fog, but no snow or rain :banghead:


any tweakmasters who want to volunteer to help out a tweakilly challenged simmer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top