#2461210 - 03/03/08 03:21 PM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: speedbump]
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 481
awj112
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 481
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
|
Lewis,
I know I don't get the fancy bells and whistles of FSX but as I said earlier, I don't need to build a PC just for FSX. I suppose if I flew something in FSX my attitude would be different but as I see it, a $30 upgrade beats $2000 for a PC and $70 for the sim; I would only buy Deluxe and Acceleration, not basic. That and all FS 2004 addons still work. There are no addons that work with FS 2004 but don't work with FS 2004 9.1. You still can't say that about FSX. It simply comes down to economics and reliability. Finally, I am still not ready to pay more for an aircraft addon than the simulator itself costs.
Slimey,
For the most part, a little tweaking here and there. I didn't have to dedicate much time to it. Another big plus for FS2004.
Last edited by awj112; 03/03/08 03:26 PM.
Controller: "Air Force 53, it appears your engine has... oh... disregard, I see you've already ejected."
|
|
#2461228 - 03/03/08 03:32 PM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: awj112]
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,803
Lewis-A2A
Tom Thumb
|
Tom Thumb
Senior Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,803
Lowestoft - UK
|
Lewis,
I know I don't get the fancy bells and whistles of FSX but as I said earlier, I don't need to build a PC just for FSX. I suppose if I flew something in FSX my attitude would be different but as I see it, a $30 upgrade beats $2000 for a PC and $70 for the sim; I would only buy Deluxe and Acceleration, not basic. That and all FS 2004 addons still work. There are no addons that work with FS 2004 but don't work with FS 2004 9.1. You still can't say that about FSX. It simply comes down to economics and reliability. Finally, I am still not ready to pay more for an aircraft addon than the simulator itself costs. Yer I hear yer, I just wanted to remind people of some of the other goodies that canbe found within FSX that tend not to be talked about as it isnt Eye candy. The MSFS series is quite eye candy focused imo, which coming from a combat sim background personally is still a bit strange to me.
|
|
#2461258 - 03/03/08 04:03 PM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: Lewis-A2A]
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 481
awj112
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 481
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
|
One other thing I forgot to mention is having to repurchase every add on from FS2004 for FSX. One that comes to mind are the Seahawk and Boxer from Aerosoft. Granted, there are some companies like Alphasim and Razbam that have all-in-one installs but they are the exception, not the rule. If it's any consolation, I did just buy 3D Lights Redux for FS 2004. Trying to get a grip with adding the lights to aircraft.
Last edited by awj112; 03/03/08 04:05 PM.
Controller: "Air Force 53, it appears your engine has... oh... disregard, I see you've already ejected."
|
|
#2461493 - 03/03/08 08:58 PM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: Lewis-A2A]
|
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 3,904
Tolwyn
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 3,904
WA, United States
|
Not to mention you want folks to buy your new FSX products. This right here is why I haven't switched: Close enough to FSX for me. The only thing that boggs my system down are clouds. IMO far far far far far too many people make this mistake. Too many seem to just assume that fs9 to fsx gives more eyecandy. Sure it does,... its one of the list of hundreds maybe thousands? of upgrades in the sim itself. A few other ones that dont get mentioned nearly enough; -New better FM -New 100 times better ground handling -New ATC features -Adventures turned into mission which are much more popular than adventures and can download many many many user made ones. -Higher SDK counts so better models can be made, better VC's etc. -Better texture support -Bump and spec map full support -Better multi crew VC suppoort for multiple 'seats' in one aircraft without the need for 3rd party programs -Re-worked controller setup, no more having to spend hours getting multi throttles and rudder pedals setup. CH and such can even be flown plug and play! -Ability to save controller setups with an easy click -Much better default traffic etc etc. Sorry a bit of a vent again just gets me a bit when fs9 users just state 'hey look am I running FS9 or FSX its just fs9 and it runs smoother etc etc' At the end of the day sure it may look as good as fsx on low settings but at the end of the day its still just a heavily eye candy modded fs9.
My personal licensing agreement: In exchange for my hard-earned cash for your product, you agree to the following terms: No part of my hardware may be used as a mechanism to verify or reverify my economical patronage. My receipt will serve that purpose. If you disagree with this license, you may return my money to me, and I'll return your product.
|
|
#2461655 - 03/04/08 12:20 AM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: speedbump]
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,205
Skycat
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,205
Pennsylvania or Montana
|
Skycat. If you compare FS2002 against FSX, that will be unfair. FS2004, IMHO runs twice as good as FS2002 ever did.
I wasn't comparing FS2002 to FSX. FS2002 was a cheap test to see if my new laptop could handle flight sims. A few months later I jumped into FSX with both feet. Soon after that I purchased a (replacement) copy of FS2004 because it is superior to FS2002 but runs better on my laptop than FSX. Sorry if I was unclear about that.
Remove before flight
|
|
#2461721 - 03/04/08 02:22 AM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: Lewis-A2A]
|
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 3,904
Tolwyn
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 3,904
WA, United States
|
I agree that FS9 should have been patched a LONG time ago to include this functionality. Oh. Also, FSX finally has a mission editor... or at least, missions. (Does it come with an editor?) I'm just saying since that didn't happen, FSX doesn't add enough to justify the cost of upgrade. I'd have to think the opposite there Tolwyn, and say the MP would have been patch side and the rest as a feature of a new product.
Also I am a flight simmer if I have shockwave next to my name or not (one thing I like about this and other communites is I dont need to have two accounts, indeed my old madaboutsims account is basicly dead), I still believe FSX is the better sim and support it.
My personal licensing agreement: In exchange for my hard-earned cash for your product, you agree to the following terms: No part of my hardware may be used as a mechanism to verify or reverify my economical patronage. My receipt will serve that purpose. If you disagree with this license, you may return my money to me, and I'll return your product.
|
|
#2461776 - 03/04/08 04:15 AM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: Tolwyn]
|
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 1,107
Goalie
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 1,107
BC, Canada
|
I think they need to focus on a more realistic flying environment. They need to update their ancient ATC to the functionality of something like Radar Contact. I want to fly SID/STARS, emergency procedures, holding patterns and so on.
They also need to add more traffic and real airlines. I don't know if there's a problem with licensing but various 3rd party companies have produced traffic add-on packages so it can't be that big of a deal. It would be nice if the ATC could properly handle the traffic too. I don't know how many times I've seen airliners arriving in a chain of planes miles long and less than a mile apart.
Really FS is just a base and I don't see FSX being that much better of a base than FS9. I guess if you fly the stock planes with stock atc and stock weather it might be a bit of an improvement. So far I have replaced the FS ATC, weather, aircraft, AI, textures, mesh, landclass and a ton of scenery. If I'm going to use FSX as a base for all that I would need one hell of a new computer to get much out of it, and sadly FSX stock comes no where near what I get with FS9 with all of the above.
|
|
#2462371 - 03/05/08 01:51 PM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: Heretic]
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 16
Unknown Target
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 16
|
They're still expensive for people who can't afford them...although to be honest a rig that's capable of running FSX is only about $600 these days.
However, that's a lot of money for someone who can get almost all they would need out of FSX out of FS9. That includes people who use the sim for instrument practice, or only fly single player. The multiplayer improvements to FSX are astounding, but the interface is bad (having to quit OUT of the game to go and change your airplane is a pain, because you have to spend so long loading in between teh two things).
Semi-OT: The thing that I find hilarious about the whole "DX10" update isn't so much that they lied about what it'd look like (that's old news), what I find hilarious about it is what they actually put in it. Self-shadowing cockpits? Better water? All of that stuff is available for DX9, and with the exception of the internal cockpit shadows, is available in other sims. IL-2s water is still unparalleled, and the whole self-shadowing cockpits is actually in a few arcade flying games IIRC.
The lighting bloom that shipped with the game is great though, I'll admit that.
Last edited by Unknown Target; 03/05/08 01:53 PM.
|
|
#2462832 - 03/06/08 12:02 AM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: Heretic]
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 16
Unknown Target
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 16
|
They announced the DX-10 mode as a "preview" or test or whatever. Not a full-blown DX-10 conversion, which can most likely be seen in FSXI, featuring an entirely new engine.
Honestly, I never thought it was possible to kick an engine from 1999 up to DX-10 standards. The architecture is simply too old and inefficient for that (hence FSX's "bad" performance). That last part isn't true - it's just bad coding on the FSX team's part. If you've never heard of Freespace 2, it's a space combat game from 1999 who's source code was released several years back. It used to look like this; http://www.activewin.com/reviews/software/games/f/images/freespace2_3.jpgNow it looks like this (Starfox mod): http://i31.tinypic.com/vyzaf.jpgSo really, it's pretty much all on the FSX coders, they were probably rushed by Microsoft as well, so that didn't help an already poorly made codebase. And as for the DX10 mode "preview" - we'll probably never get all the hoopla and fancy billowing smoke and whatnot that was supposed to happen with DX10, at least, not until DX11 - DX10 really isn't much more than an incremental upgrade to DX9, unlike DX9 was to DX8, which was a massive leap. We'd need something on that scale to achieve the effects that Microsoft was touting. IIRC, the only difference between DX9 and 10 was that 10 allowed longer shader instructions than was allowed in 9 - except even in DX9 shader effects weren't anywhere near the maximum length of the instructions there.
|
|
#2463511 - 03/06/08 05:53 PM
Re: Is FSX lagging in interest ?
[Re: Unknown Target]
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,801
Heretic
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,801
GER
|
I know Freespace and the SCP, but comparing it to FSX is like that thingy with apples and oranges. The FSX engine has to handle way more complex components than "just" higher resolution objects and textures paired with some new effects. So really, it's pretty much all on the FSX coders, they were probably rushed by Microsoft as well, so that didn't help an already poorly made codebase. I think it's more the codebase than the rushed development. You shouldn't use the same engine for nine years, since it's simply impossible to keep it up-to-date and shining with current features that easily.
|
|
|
|