Simviation Forums

My FS9 with UT USA, Instant Scenery 2, AFCAD, and the plethora of FREE addons here at SimV (and SOH) has allowed it to REPLACE FSX on my system, Flight never had a chance.

I say that because FS11 if it comes will need to be built like FS9. Clearly FSX on the inside was poorly done, FS9 has its bugs yes, but it is a tank on my system. Even when I first got it, with an old laptop it still ran good. Flight I might add ran very poorly on my laptop which can run FSX at ~75% and FS9 at 100%+. So to me, it seems yet again as with FSX they never considered playability from a hardware end. They should take notice from World of Tanks! WoT is still demanding on systems, but the devs for it are continuously working to increase FPS and stability on older systems and they have been successful.

So for FS11, the #1 priority should be making sure it is STABLE and runs well on average systems. #2 should be being open to being modded by the community.

Flight failed on both of these, FSX failed on #1 period and on #2 it is so so (prop blurs, black glass, etc are signs of problems to me).

Well.
You say you aren't wanting to push someone into not using FSX while everywhere in your post you say that FSX is rubbish.

It's a matter of freedom of choice and freedom of being able of naming what you know as rubbish as such.

I don't keep you from yours. Please, return the favor.


[quote]I am not going on about how FSX code isn't rubbish

One mans rubbish is another mans treasure. I'm sorry but FSX was never this great problem of which some of you speak. I don't have a water cooled super behemoth of a machine either. Yeah, I had to spend an afternoon tweaking it, but if FSX had never been released, I would not be flight simming to this day. FS9 requires just as many tweaks as FSX does. So the code?, was state of the art in the day and in retrospect was a mistake. No! I don't think so. 

As I said,I am not going to say anything.

But what I am going to say is:
My FSX runs on medium-low(for some) FPS but it looks great,and I have an acer PC.

That is all I am going to say in this topic because otherwise this will go on for ages.

As I said,I am not going to say anything.

But what I am going to say is:
My FSX runs on medium-low(for some) FPS but it looks great,and I have an acer PC.

That is all I am going to say in this topic because otherwise this will go on for ages.

Yes, This was supposed to be Flights funeral eulogy. RIP Flight.   

[quote]RIP Flight.

I'm not surprised

[quote]I'm not surprised

[quote][quote]I'm not surprised

[quote][quote][quote]I'm not surprised

The problem is any involved

Yes, there is still X plane but when something/anything has no compitition things tend to get stagnant .

Well, there's always FlightGear, to say.

It has suffered greatly for the inattention of the mainstream users up until now, and if it MUST become the anti-X-plane, to generate competition and keep everyone on their toes, better someone begins to understand its working and get some add-on for it out.

Why not just improve on FSX. Not just more aircraft and missions. As example incorporate a comprehensive aircraft carrier operations much like the Abacus Flight Deck 5. Improve basic scenery and don't make the software too demanding on the hardware. MS Flight simply stunk much like all other MS Combat Sims stunk after CFS1.

This issue has nothing to do with the public's interest in flight sims .

The issue has EVERYTHING to do with the public's interest in BUYING flight simulations.

John, FS has lived almost 20 years using the old and proven way.

Love of simulation aside, M$ STILL makes money out of their old versions of FS.

All this bandwagon COULD NOT have lasted 2 months, if it brought little or no income to M$, let alone almost 20 years.

M$ simply, BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION no less, tried to follow the marketing example of Apple... with US who NEVER were blithering idiots ready to ANY EXPENSE so to better be able to follow the fashions.

Something had to give... and it weren't the NOT blithering idiots etcetera.

Worse, technically the NEW software was a step... hell SEVERAL steps backwards if compared to the last versions of FS. Ever since its fifth incarnation FS had all the world, sometimes with little detail, but it was there. AND EVEN BEFORE, you could at THE VERY LEAST fly over almost all the CONUS (can't remember if Alaska was part of those ancient versions or not).

I mean... THE REAL Hawaii is lovely, all right... but to tell us to take this much simulated land in all the planet and shut the hell up, after ALL THAT we've had in the past... you need some chutzpa.

...or drug induced insanity.

In the old FS versions had a certain amount of default planes. They weren't a lot in the older versions, and they weren't all that much either in all the versions, but were there nonetheless.

Remind me again, please... how many default planes had Flight?

And the last nail in the coffin? Absolute veto of any kind of freeware...

The lifeblood of ANY successful simulator... DENIED! What the hell have they been smoking? Exhausted nuclear reactor fission bars?

...OR payware that was not marketed BY THEM.

Who the holy f-word did they think they were? Hitler returned to life, perhaps? And if so, should we remember them what happened to their inspiration?

Oh... forgot we did already. On THAT side we can be DAMN proud of ourselves.

They went all the way to ask software houses like PMDG discussing... what? Of course no one knows the details of the proposed businesses, but if the software houses told them to stuff it, one can only draw ONE conclusion.

M$ got greedy. Were consumed by an unprecedented greed that went off scale and beyond reasons. And in their dream to CLUMSILY build up the Fourth Reich of software to fight the BAD and COMMUNIST Apple got trounced even before starting. And not only no one is going to be sympathetic with them, but they have only THEMSELVES to blame.