So, I'm making the switch...any advice?

[TryHinkel]

For the last 9 years, I've flown on FS2004, designed scenery, done a boatload of AFCAD airport hyperaccurizations & updates...In a couple days, my first copy of FSX arrives in the mail. For those who've made the switch before me, is there anything to keep in mind, be aware of or....? Also, I'm hearing from a split consensus that AFCAD .bgl files can or cannot be used in FSX, because I love to spiff up airports. Already tried ADE, not impressed as it's not as flexible or user-friendly as AFCAD.

Anyway, what would y'all recommend or advise? Thanks!

[Sinkrate]

Why switch? I run both FS9 and FSX on my Win XP and Win 10 computers with no problems. I believe there are several others on this site who do the same.

[Flacke]

I would strongly suggest that you begin to study up on ORBX BASE SCENERY, AND ORBX VECTOR. They transform your enjoyment of FSX. Then search up one of the FREE Soft Clouds programs for FSX, they make the Sky and Real Weather so beautiful. I use the Real Weather feature on every flight.
I really do wish that you were getting FSX STEAM EDITION as it runs so much better and has many advantages. Since you have FSX coming it may be too late.
And above all else, ENJOY, FSX can be very wonderful when properly equipped.

[Roypcox]

That great advice Flacke!!!

[garymbuska]

I also use both FSX and FS9 and have FSX Steam as well. If you are using Windows 10 64 bit do not install FSX in the default location. I know you can turn down the UAC and that usually solves most problems but to me it makes better sense to not install in the default location which is C Program Files (86) Microsoft Games FSX. Of course if you have more than one hard drive it is best to put FSX on a hard drive that does not have your operating system on it.
But if you do not just put it anywhere on your C drive except in the Program Files(86) folder.
The other thing you will have to do is to adjust the sliders for your system. You will discover that FSX is more CPU and Ram hungry than FS9. You have to have a descent system to run FSX maxed out.
I run FSX maxed out with the frame rates locked at 70 and have no problems but I have a descent system as you can see by my signature
One other thing If you are using Windows 10 and have not installed the latest update for it which is called the Creator Update beware that when I installed the update it deactivated my FSX I had to uninstall and reinstall and you have to do different things in order to reinstall FSX. You have to use what is called a reset program before you can reinstall FSX which can be a pain in the but. I have done it so many times now I can do it in my sleep.
Good luck and smooth flying.

[B52bob]

I second the ORBX recommendation, a total transformation. At least ftx global and the one area you mostly fly in.

Steam is much better than stock FSX. P3D is better than that by a magnitude. 64 bit and no more oom.

[papituwall]

No need to unistall a so complete FS9.

I keep mine, with FSX-SE and P3D.

[TryHinkel]

Just got it, installed it, configured it, flew it...

..and deleted it. I'll stay with FS2004. Thanks anyway, fellas.

[OldAirmail]

I'd tried one or two flight sims back in the (very)80s. I was so disappointed that I didn't try again until 2012.

By the end of the second day I was ready to toss FSX into the trash. I hated it!

Then I reasoned that A LOT of people liked it. There must be a reason

SLOWLY, I started learning how to get the most out of it. Things got better.

I still didn't like the way that it looked and wasted money on scenery software that made little difference.

THEN, along came Orbx. Without the big improvement in scenery I would have stopped a year or two ago.

This is a sample of what Orbx can do for FSX.


And this is a sunrise in Austrailia.


Up in Canada.




But aside from payware, FSX has a tremendous amount of GREAT freeware too.

How does Death Valley look in your sim? Anything like this freeware?


Or this?



Freeware Grand Canyon anyone?



And I haven't even mentioned the aircraft.




My first reaction was similar to yours. But the initial FSX experience out of the box doesn't give a clue as to how YOU can change it.

But that begs the question - What do you have for a computer? On the wrong system FSX could be a problem. You don't need a supper computer. Careful buying of a few parts may be able to give you all that you need to fly to the next level.

[Daube]

Just got it, installed it, configured it, flew it...

..and deleted it. I'll stay with FS2004. Thanks anyway, fellas.

Sorry to read that, but to me it sounds like you just didn't try it at all :/
I mean, did you install it correctly ? FSX Acceleration or FSX Steam ?
Did you install any sceneries ? Any planes ?
Did you make any kind of comparison with FS9 to see the benefits ?

If you're happy with FS9 then that's ok, although I feel a bit sorry for you, because you're missing quite a lot of excellent addons.

[garymbuska]

FSX is not for everyone as you really need a descent system to make it look good and there is more work involved tweaking FSX
But if one takes the time and effort the benefits are worth it.
Now the steam edition is not that demanding as the boxed version and will work on just about any system with no problems
I did not make the switch at first as I really loved FS9 and still do I have a lot of addons for FS9
But FSX installed and properly tweaked is just as good and in some cases better
Do not be so quick to uninstall it make a little effort and I think you will find it more likeable.

[Daube]

You're right Gary, it takes quite a lot of efforts to properly configure and really test FSX.

I remember back when it appeared, I was a happy FS9er, enjoying various planes, mostly VFR flights to explore the nice sceneries (landclasses, mainly) from Holger Sandmann. At that time, I loved the exploration flights in slow aircrafts over forest/mountain areas with dense autogen (well, dense for FS9, that is....).
When FSX appeared, I gave it a try and of course the performance were terrible on my poor old Pentium4 single core :/
However, I still took the time to configure it and see what it had. When I saw what it could do for autogen, landclasses and meshes, coupled with the excellent quality of the default planes, I knew my VFR explorations in FS9 were coming to an end. I changed my hardware soon after.... I think that was in 2007 or something like that

I never came back to FS9 after that. But this is also because I wasn't really a liner pilot, and didn't have any paywares. Flying a liner in FSX required a very powerful computer (because major airports kill the FPS, even without addons) which I didn't have. Had I been a liner-addict, I would probably have kept FS9 for a few more months on my computer... But then again, flying a liner from non-major aiports in FSX quickly became a pleasant alternative...

[OldAirmail]

Like I said, a lot of people like it.

Unless it's a matter of your computer or laptop being too slow....

[Sinkrate]

Like I said, a lot of people like it.

Unless it's a matter of your computer or laptop being too slow....

Monitor size also makes a big difference. FSX looks much better on a large widescreen monitor. Small screens don't do it justice.

I have to admit that I much prefer the FS9 2D panel view but FSX is superior for 3D. As others have noted, FSX is power hungry with settings on high but they can be turned down for lower spec conputers. Now that you've got it, you might as well keep it and persevere with it for a while. You can run it alongside FS9 so there is nothing to lose!

[Herc-Canute]

I was an FS9 user for a while. I could get 25 fps but the downside was less detail on the airplanes and the inaccurate road layout for Kansas. I started using FSX. I get 20 fps and the detail on the planes is improved and the road layout is accurate for Kansas.