Which version?

[phog]

I was just wondering what are the improvements/changes that fs2004 has over fs2002 and if it worthwhile changing to the former, my logic tells me that microsoft will release a new version sometime this year or shall i just bide my time with fs2002.
     Thanks to all who reply
                                        phog.

[wji]

[b]" . . .

[Hai Perso Coyone?]

" . . .  or shall i just bide my time with fs2002"
Affirmative.
bill

YES SIR!! Me thinks me threw away precious money this year...

Should have waited for a while...

Cheers,
Ashar

[Apex]

For myself, onscreen FS04 has a better look to it than FS02, it somehow seems brighter and clearer.  You would have to get the MS update for it tho (thru MS website) as they left out a lot of bridges and maybe some other things.  HOWEVER:  FS04 takes a frame rate hit as compared to FS02, that is, FS02 is easier to run; your system would have to be able to handle FS04 (That might also be the case for FS06 if they come out with it).  FS04 was released in Aug 2003 I believe, so you might want to just wait and see.  Regardless, you might want to hang on to FS02 until you square everything away with whatever you try next.

[alrot]

Maybe i got a lot used to fs9 but i think the dinamics of flight,and even you can feel its weight in every default ones,I flown a lot in all other version and fs2002 was more frienly in what desig is,but the realistic and landscape in this agonizing version is the best ,by the way does anybody knows when fs2006 is coming??

[MattNW]

If you listen to the people over at AVSIM you'll have to get XBox for FS 2006. Yes, that rumor has started again.  ;D

[|| Andy ||]

i know that..

Xbox is a
700mhz scrawny computer that couldnt play 2006 with decent frames, comparied to todays computers it wouldnt stand a chance..


Who started this rumor?
was it a leprichorn by any chance?

[TacitBlue]

Thats rediculouse. It wouldnt be a flight sim if it was on a console anyway.

[Delta_]

xbox 360 could play it though, with the 512MB ATi graphics card and the rest...

However i would expect it to come out on the PC.

I though will not get it unless it has been better programmed so that it works better on the average system for the time, at max settings with a decent fps, i would look at my PC and say that is quite average for late 2005.  

If it is much better than fs9 i will think about getting it, if it is not much better programmed i will have to build a new PC, however i don't have the money for that until i start earning in my placement year at uni in 2006/2007.  I will build it to run FS2008.

[|| Andy ||]

Im getting it anyway lol... just for a excuse for a new gpx card..

[Fozzer]

I've been more than happy running FS 2002 since it first came out...excellent program... ...!

I also bought FS 2004 when it first came out... ...!
But it sat on my shelf for a few years...!

It's only very recently that I've got the hang of turning everything up to the max, and winding one or two un-necessary things, (like highly detailed weather, water effects, etc.), down to get superb frame rates on FS 2004.

For most computer systems, FS 2002 runs lovely.
FS 2004 really need a lot of fiddlin' with to get decent frame rates, and this often involves turning lots of nice things down/off which spoils the whole object of getting FS 2004... ...!

Having got both I can swop between the two...best of both worlds... ... ...!

Cheers all...!

Paul.

[Springer6]

FS9 is slightly more frame rate hungry than FS2K2 and you have to get a DX9 graphics card to get the proper water effects for example , but really there is no comparison when it comes to realism.

The default textures are so much better with more lifelike colours in FS9 and the GPS is very much better. There are also many better aircraft available now , both freeware and payware , but the best advantage over FS2k2 is in the weather!
The clouds are a giant leap forward.

If you use real world weather for example for you own location and look out of the window you will be impressed on how alike they seem.