FS 2002 OR 2004?

[rich1241]

Hi there,

I am considering buying fs 2004.

1) Is it worth it (i.e- is it much difference from 2002)?
2) When will the next version be coming out (i.e. - when in 2006, i presume)?

Thanks very much,
Richard.

[Hai Perso Coyone?]

fs 2004 has better graphics, smarter AI, advanced weather effects, etc. as for FS2006, i doub its going to be coming out. keep your hopes high though

[beefhole]

I've heard so many rumors about fs10 not coming out, and I'm really not buying any of them. MS owns this business! They make 99% of all the money that goes towards PC civilian flight simming, and it would be an absolutely brain dead business move to abandon this market.

[Insert Name Here]

Well, I get 25 fps with settings moderate on FS2002, whereas if I had FS9 I'd probably get 2fps.

[beefhole]

I hate to say it, but thats often true. I had 30+ fps all the time on fs2k2 (I mean like, no matter what) and when I upgraded to fs9 my fps was HORRIBLE. Got a new comp though now, so I'm good .

[Hai Perso Coyone?]

i get smooth frames in FS2k2 about 30+, but in FS2k4 its usually down to about 15 or less

[Triple_7]

i get smooth frames in FS2k2 about 30+, but in FS2k4 its usually down to about 15 or less

And your system is nearly double mine in specs

I have tried 2004 on this computer and dropped to about fps of 2-3.   Im happy with 2002 pro though and dont plan to upgrade anytime soon  i get a comfortable 18 fps on ground in Dubai with quite a few AI around and these are higher quality AI aircraft from FS Painters.  I have it locked in at 27 fps and it holds just fine in the air.  Could probly go for more even.  All is with moderate settings with a couple like aircraft quality being at max.  Mind you with these settings and this system I mostly fly FS Painters models i have modified for more realistic flight.  I have never been able to fly a Meljet with decent frames even in the air  Posky I can get mild FPS and decent 21-22 once airborn.  though only in the 767s and 757s          

Then there are the people running 2004 on systems nearly identical to mine and getting the same results i get in 2002 :-/  Could depend on the make of computer you have as well.

[Fozzer]

I have FS '98, FS 2000, FS 2002 and FS 2004.
For all sorts of reasons, (too numerous to mention here), I prefer, and fly, FS 2002... ...!
FS 2004 disk is used as my beer mat at the moment... ...!
Borrow FS 2004, try it out, and if you are happy with FS 2002 save yourself some money...and get faster/smoother frame-rates... ...!
LOL...!

Cheers all... ...!

Paul....FS 2002...The bees knees... ...!

[Saitek]

Well,
you have to be wary of Fozzer - sometimes he drinks too much and it can affect his mind....

FS 2004 is better in every respect but you will need a GOOD computer. Post your computer specs here before buying it.

Ben

[Fozzer]

Well,
you have to be wary of Fozzer - sometimes he drinks too much and it can affect his mind....

FS 2004 is better in every respect but you will need a GOOD computer. Post your computer specs here before buying it.

Ben

Hi Ben...!
Tee-Hee...!

I agree, that anyone who is considering a first-time buy of the Flight sim, then FS 2004 may be the way to go, but for someone ike myself  who has stepped up, one by one, from the earlier versions, noted that the biggest improvement was from FS 2000 to FS 2002, and invested so much time and money in up-grading FS 2002 to the point that it is now superior to FS 2004 then that's the reason why I prefer my FS 2002...!
For example: FS Navigator and LAGO's FSSE programs are better on FS 2002, than FS 2004.
Also the add-on weather programs which bring FS 2002 up to FS 2004 standards, without the frame-rate hit...!
...not forgetting the various add-on water effects, road effects, scenery effects, scenery objects, etc, etc,...
Most available free from SimV, etc... ...!
Now you can see why I love my FS 2002... ...!
...and my FS 2004 disk is covered in beer stains... ...!

Cheers mate...!

Paul.

[Gnome]

I'm with Fozzer.  My FS2002 setup is greatly enhanced and moving to that other sim isn't an option.

As for FS10.  Forget it.  It will need a new version of windoze before M$ will release anything otherwise there will be a danger of everything having enough resources to run smoothly....   ;-)


Kev

[zeberdee]

Hi I use 2k2 pro and 2k4 (fs9). I used to use fs98 then got 2k2 pro what an improvement good graphics nice clouds etc, when I got fs9 I was dissapointed, low frame rates made it to jerky to fly. The main improvement I noticed was the taxi way signs.

That was on a 1600 AMD athlon 256Mb ram 32Mb graphics card.
 

The computer I have just built is

3.0Gig P4 1Gig ram 256Mb graphics card

This is able to have the sliders maxed for all the details to show and give resonable frame rates.

A lot depends on your computer, fs9 kills small computers for very little gain ( can't have sliders maxed so less detail)
2k2 set up on a reasonable computer will give a better result.
I hope this helps, Chris

[Fozzer]

As a dedicated fan of FS 2002 Pro, I find it's a little disappointing to find fewer and fewer designers are uploading various add-ons for the sim... ...!

But with what I have already got, plus all the old files still existing in the library, I'm satisfied at the moment... ...!

I tend not to download files for the sake of it, my hangar has a selection of all the nicest planes which I regularly fly... ...!

Cheers all...!

Paul.

[Gnome]

ALL my stuff is FS2002.  If it happens to work in FS9 then that's a bonus for them innit?  ;-)

Actually, I do try to make sure it all works with both sims but be assured, I fully support FS2002 first and foremost.


Kevin Bryan
Unreal Aviation

[microlight]

Way to go, Paul! I am also a dedicated FS2002 fan with far too much time and add-ons invested.