FS9 vs FSX

[Crussell]

FS9 is the safer option if you don't have the greatest comp or the money to risk getting FSX.

[PsychoDiablo]

FS9 at the moment

[an-225]

Ugh...people just face it, FSX IS better. Default FSX with no add ons looks like FS9 loaded with all the best payware products out there. Yes, the performance is crap, because it was designed to run on tomorrows hardware. If you want your frames, for now, FS9 is the way to go. But if you want more features, capabilities etc. FSX is the way to go. Just look at all the new features it has brought to the table, default.

[machineman9]

FSX and ive only played the demo of it (versus getting FS9 in like 2004 and playing it since then)

why?

missions... it adds practise, excitement and makes the game seem less 'ooh you just fly a plane, how boring'
graphics... they look great. no addon ive seen so far for FS9 has made them look as good
runnng speed... i get some better performance on FSX (without the running speed download addon thing which makes it even quicker) than FS9 when they are at about equal settings


its just all over better and i havent played the most of it yet

[Fozzer]

As an owner of both FSX and FS 2004, and one of the merry band of daily Multiplayer flyers, I find that in all the various Flight Sim Sites, that FS 2002 and FS 2004 are still the most popular Programs for on-line flying.. ...!
...for whatever reason..

F....G-BPLF... 8-)...!

[fabiane]

I'm undescided / can't give a vote.

I use FSX for GA and FS9 for my heavies.

[Mazza]

I have used 2002,2004 and fsx...and my choice is fs9 because it has good graphics(i'm playing 2002) and as u guys brought up u need a supercom to play fsx( i downloaded the demo put on low graphics couldn't get 20fps out of it) anyways i have played fs9 on my friends com( he has the same sytem as me expet for ram my is 500mb his in 1g luckly i'm getting fs9 for my b-bay 8-) )

[JBaymore]

A very good FSX machine can be built for under $2500US..

Brett,

With all due respect, that's a LOT of disposable income to dispose of.

[Fozzer]

......A very good FSX machine can be built for under $2500US....  

Blimey!.....that's nearly four months total Old Age Pension income for me... ...!

I build mine bit by bit, over a period of years......!

F....Food comes first...Flight Sims way down the list of priorities!... ...!

[Ashar]

I'm sorry, but I get the feeling that MS has made FSX into more of a game rather than an actual sim...Do we really need missions in FSX? Fine, the cars and all are good looking, but rather pointless to me...I'd rather spend time up in the air than on the ground...I'm not saying FSX is useless...I do understand that's it's better than FS9 by leaps and bounds, but to me, the actual Simulator died out with FS9...I don't want my simulator to be a "game"...

[Mazza]

Well, im going to go with FS9, it was a hard choice because ive played both but the reason why im picking FS9 is because, you don't need a super computer to run it on. Second, because its possible to get all the Ground Crew, Fuel tanks, Jetways ect ect, by addons, i have thousands of addons, to make FS9 "better" and it can still be improved, im hopfully getting a new computer soon, so when i do, my graphics will be much better and textures improved, the only thing that let it down for me was, Space Flight which in FSX is possible, but other than that i think FS2004 is better.

And in fs2002 from camsim(go camsim )

[an-225]

I'm sorry, but I get the feeling that MS has made FSX into more of a game rather than an actual sim...Do we really need missions in FSX? Fine, the cars and all are good looking, but rather pointless to me...I'd rather spend time up in the air than on the ground...I'm not saying FSX is useless...I do understand that's it's better than FS9 by leaps and bounds, but to me, the actual Simulator died out with FS9...I don't want my simulator to be a "game"...

I see what you are saying here Ashar, however, it is not exactly a game.

MS has FAR from made FSX into a game. It is not like FSX has become *Fox two, Fox two! Mig-28s are down!* and when you complete the mission, you get a *Well done, high score, enter your initials*. No, rather, the missions are there to show you new features in FSX. The scripting possibilities (flour bombs, human voice, waypoints that are triggered on certain conditions, so that you know if you are flying the mission properly etc), the graphics (in several scenic flights, you tour parts of the world so that you can see the graphical improvement), the aircraft and several other similar things. It also offers more chances for complex add-ons (PMDG MD-11, CS C-130 and 727 etc) with more chances to code aircraft specific items (FBW etc) and checklists into the plane.

[Brett_Henderson]

A very good FSX machine can be built for under $2500US..

Brett,

With all due respect, that's a LOT of disposable income to dispose of.

[an-225]

Sorry.. I don't check this section of the forums often...  Someone bumped it up so I'm late responding.

Yes, $2,500 is alot of money, but it's about average for a new gaming computer.

Heck.. I paid $4,000 for an IBM PC back in 1981. It was  0.004GHZ / 0.0005GB of RAM / 0.01GB HDD..

Circa 1996, a Monster Gaming computer ( 233MHZ /  64MB of RAM / 16MB Voodoo V-card ) was a good $4,000, too..

Sell it in the year 2020, its an antique by then, est. 500 000 back into your bank account, leave it there for another five years, collect interest, instant million, enjoy.