God help me, I have questions about the current state of FS2004

D

datter

Guest
God help me, I have questions about the current state of FS2004

Hello all.

I recently found myself desirous of a flight sim. Yes, desirous. I've been away from sims for awhile, and found the two main choices staring at me from the archive were FSX and FS2004. It being 2009 and all, I grabbed FSX and have been tweaking and fooling with it ever since. Moreso than actually flying really. Frame rates are good (20's to 30's depending) with most things cranked up but no traffic... or.... traffic cranked up and other things turned down. Being a complete nerd, I of course want it all but just can't have it.

All this of course leads me here ,to enquire about the current state of FS2004. With FSX I have Real Environment Xtreme for some wonderful skies, clouds and water. Ultimate Terrain X for great autogen, roads etc and Ground Environment X for the spiffy high res ground textures. I'm curious what level FS2004 can be pushed to (graphically speaking), as I'm aware the frame rates are of course going to be better than FSX regardless and if it can be pushed satisfactorily with addon products like those I'm using for FSX I might just default back to it. In this way I might in fact, be able to have it all.

Clouds, water, textures and traffic. How nice can FS2004 addons make this stuff these days? I've been away awhile.

datter

PS- Rig specs as posted elsewhere

Q6600 quad
2gb Reaper OCZ 9200 ram
nVidia 8800GT x2 (sli)
1.3 terrabytes hd space
4.0l overhead cam
Alloy wheels
Faux leather interior
Optional sunroof
 
You will run FS9 quite nicely, however, it simply won't look as stunning as FSX. I'm a solid FS9'er, and have thought many times of giving up nice smooth frame rates for FSX's flashy visuals and textures. However, in my position, I choose against that still as I simply have too much money in FS9 payware addons.

I've been thinking, and I just wouldn't have the time to tweak the crap out of FSX to get it running where I'd like it. I also need that photoreal Phoenix before I'll seriously touch FSX.

Just the two cents. :ernae:
 
Actually I beg to differ with Pilatus, in that I prefer the FS9 environment but it is a very subjective thing. I dislike the bright default environment colours of FSX but there's addons for it which change the environment, just the same as the ones I run in FS9. Pretty much all of the addons you have for FSX are available for FS9, and it does make for a pretty world.
But bottom line is that if FSX can give you a satisfactory simming experience and doesn't drive you crazy with FPS and smoothness issues, then it's probably the better one to go for. It's a bit newer and recent events suggest it's going to be around for a long, long time - which is great for third party developers.
But i you can't get it to run satisfactorily, you're losing nothing sticking with FS9; in fact you're gaining a poultice of addons not available for FSX.
For me FSX is a stuttery mess despite a very current machine. I gave up on it long ago, but I'll likely revisit in in a year or two if my hardware gets upgraded (again). Like Pilatus, I also have a lot of $$ invested in FS9 addons, which makes changing an undesirable thing.
LPXO
 
I work in telecomm/datacomm/whatever you choose to call it (I pull cable, set up phone systems, set up networks, set up paging, etc.)

I spend a lot of time on a computer, so tweaking my computer for FSX is kind of like working in a pizza place, then having pizza for dinner...

I started with FS9 and still love it!
 
I never made the move to FSX either. I've redone FS9 to a 50's vintage redoing the AI flights to propliners and GA while using California Classics' retro'd airports. Too much work invested in doing it and having too much fun in the 50s.
 
I bought FSX and the expansion pack, but really couldn't run it all that well with the level of detail I'de prefer so I've stayed with FS2004.
 
datter said:
...Clouds, water, textures and traffic. How nice can FS2004 addons make this stuff these days? I've been away awhile.
...Optional sunroof
Click to expand...
How nice?
Very nice, especially if you are kitted out with optional sunroof...
Clouds, water, textures...time for a screenshot.

Picture1Large.jpg


Zurichfs92008-04-1015-24-21-45.jpg
 
To paraphrase an old pro wrestling slogan........FS9 4 Life!

Ground environment pro, flight environment, FS Genesis world wide, Every Georender title, several Aerosoft, Lago, TropicalSim, FlyTampa and numerous freeware sceneries, I could never start over with a bare bones FSX and rebuild....
 
You remember what they used to (and still do) say about Boeing - "If it aint Boeing I aint Going" - well I feel that after the years of making FS9 the way it is now on my rig, it would really feel something like desertion to put it up in the hangar and start with FSX, although admittedly one must progress at sometime in the future, to keep up with development and personal enjoyment.

For now however, after gathering the best there is in payware and freeware, according to my tastes and wants, spending countless hours, days, months and years on tweaking, destroying, rebuilding and reaching for the finest Scotch Whisky, for medicinal purposes of course, rather than pull all my hair out, I have to say "I aint going just yet"...
:fish2:
 
My FS9 experience comes as four seperate installations for different periods and/or locations.
My copy of FSX super double whammy edition is sitting on the shelf, not 'customisable' enough for my taste.
:whistle:
 
I have both and I am torn between the two.

FS9: tons of great freeware, but in stock form the scenery leaves much to be desired, so expect to spend some $ to make it look as good as FSX. I've never been able to completely eliminate the micro pause in FS9 as it loads scenery tiles. I've tweaked and tweaked and it will get fantastically high frame rates until it needs to load the next set of scenery. Oh, well, there's lots of planes available and propeller driven aircraft work great in FS9.

FSX: looks good in stock form, has animated ground and water traffic (can't be done in FS9), but far less payware or freeware, doesn't run as fast as FS9, but does run smoother. Propeller driven aircraft often have moving prop texture issues with FSX. FS9 aircraft, especially props, do not always transfer well to FSX with SP2. I like the feel and ease of adjusting settings in FSX, but the prop problems and some other little texture issues as well as start gauge problems in using FS9 aircraft drives me nuts.
 
Thanks for all the feedback (and screenshots), this is just what I was looking for. As said, FSX runs wonderfully for me with little or no traffic. I get nicely immersed when flying, but for that fact and I'd really like to have a sky full of AI just to fill it out that much more. I could no doubt get that to some degree in FS9 but I'm not wanting to sacrifice too much in the graphics department, hence my question. I understand that even with a lot of payware addons FS9 isn't going to be as pretty as FSX of course, but I'm starting to think it's worth the undertaking. If I take the time to get FS9 installed and running nicely I can then just see which one I reach for more often. FSX with nicer visuals but little traffic, or FS9 with more dated visuals but lots of AI.

Thanks again for the input.
 
Hey Datter...This is a shot I took while still tweaking my FS9 config....
Its still a little blurrie but thats all gone now..this is with Ultimate night Enviroment Pro.( that i forgot to mention to you) and AS6.5
 
As it appears to be the penultimate FS from MS, FS9 is IMHO still the best out there. On machines made to operate FSX, it will fly off the map, full FSGenesis mesh, full UTX-Everywhere, GE Pro, Active Sky, Real Environment Pro, all of Holgar, Mazzokan, and Blue Sky Scenery's stuff, sliders all full right.

And it will do it with the fastest jets too. before I built my new rig this past July, I could not fly Dave's excellent Hunters in FS9, fps was slow and it took forever for land textures to load. Now, I can fly them anywhere, New York City, Las Vegas, London, all full right and not one shake or stutter.

As Astoroth says, FS9 4 life. It will never be off my system, nor will its companion, Bill Lyon's wonderful GW3, which is also tricked out with full US FSGenesis 38-meter DEM mesh. Since I added UT to FS9, I used my old US Roads for GW3. It is all just the best that a Flight Sim can offer. The Fly-By module and the F1View module both work in FS9 and GW3, I can playback Instant Replay with no stutter. I could go on and on. If you have a high end computer and FS9 and all of its bells and whistles are not on your system, then you are the one missing out.

Caz
 
I still get an ocassional stutter.......

For the life of me I can't figure it out still...It is brief..But there ....

But I do run it all full right..Traffic at 100% .... In full AS6 weather...

Nothing slows it down..just that ocassional stutter...Arggggggh
 
harleyman said:
I still get an ocassional stutter.......

For the life of me I can't figure it out still...It is brief..But there ....

But I do run it all full right..Traffic at 100% .... In full AS6 weather...

Nothing slows it down..just that ocassional stutter...Arggggggh
Click to expand...

Are you using the VOZ tweaks in your FS9.cfg?

Caz
 
Hmmmm Niot real sure what I'm using now...Not much... I will have to see on that one...

Here is what I use.... Besides Brake message

TERRAIN]
TERRAIN_ERROR_FACTOR=100.000000
TERRAIN_MIN_DEM_AREA=10.000000
TERRAIN_MAX_DEM_AREA=100.000000
TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL=20
TERRAIN_TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8
TERRAIN_AUTOGEN_DENSITY=5
TERRAIN_USE_GRADIENT_MAP=1
TERRAIN_EXTENDED_TEXTURES=1
TERRAIN_DEFAULT_RADIUS=3.500000
TERRAIN_EXTENDED_RADIUS=4.000000
TERRAIN_EXTENDED_LEVELS=232
 
I found the culprit...

I had the Texture_Bandwidth_Multiplier to high......

Once i dropped it from 400 to 350 it was golden.......Thanks YEA...:applause:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top