





GlobalHobo wrote:Yeah. FSX has better water, no doubt. But FS9 can look pretty good, too. I don't know why Microsoft didn't do so well with it out of the box. What I've ended up with is a combination of other people's stuff and my own texture tweaks. Took a while to get there, though.
OldAirmail wrote:I can pretty much bet that the computer that you cave now would have been considered a Super Computer back then. The kind that would only be seen in the basements' of the Pentagon.
GlobalHobo wrote:OldAirmail wrote:I can pretty much bet that the computer that you cave now would have been considered a Super Computer back then. The kind that would only be seen in the basements' of the Pentagon.
True 'dat! My last rig would only run FS9 with settings in the mid-range. Good enough. I could load FSX, but at anything other than the most Spartan settings, it wouldn't do much. No improvement over FS9, so why bother? With this rig, really a low/mid-range machine, I'm running FSX in the mid-range settings, which is fine. FS9 I've got everything maxxed out and even with complex weather and scenery situations it never bogs down.
Return to Simulation Screenshots Showcase
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 494 guests