Will you be buying?

[Ashton Lawson]

Sorry, forgot wat i was gonna say...

[x_jasper]

"FSX will be opitmised for Vista, so you will buy Vista"

Interesting comment, probably more true than most realise. Getting their customer base held in vice-like grip by the gonads is what M$ do best. Sims are not unique in this respect and this is why M$ has the monopoly as a software house, not because what they offer is the best but rather there is no serious competition.

Bloatware, stutterware, poopware, are trademarks of puffed up products designed to force hardware upgrades. This of course provides an excellent back-scratching service to Intel.

Conspiracy? what conspiracy?

Try running CFS2 on a P4 these days and it will run perfectly, even with 64M graphics. It also happens to have the better flight engine out of all the series. On a modern machine massive scenery and terrain data can be run through without glitch. CFS2 scenery is very well understood. The sim is Gmax compatible too.

If anything, the new 'FSX' should have been based on the CFS2 model, where at least FM developers had full access to all aspects and the damn thing now runs flawlessly in virtually any home PC.

I have nearly re-worked CFS3 for use on a private network:

1) I shouldn't have had to do it.
2) Despite everything M$ failed to give access to rocket velocity.
3) It is historically inaccurate, no P80 flew combat in WWII. Where is the Meteor?
4) It is seriously flawed in a number of areas and unless you know where and how to correct things, you have a kids 'toy', not a sim.

It's a question of 'consumer confidence' with me. Basically I have no confidence in M$ products.

They fix EVERYTHING in the last sim I bought from them, and then I'll consider buying another. Also as a gesture of good will to all the sim comminity they 'pooped' on repeatedly for the last five years, I think they should include a free copy of Vista with each FSX purchase, just as a way of saying 'sorry' otherwise be forced to remove the word 'simulator' from their packaging under the trades description act. I.E. simulates what ? certainly their previous efforts didn't simulate aircraft flight characteristics.

No forgiveness from me, I'll not be buying unless it's to pull the crap out of it and scoff at it.

Jasper

[Katahu]

In the case of CFS3, I agree with Jasper. Here is an article that reviews CFS3. Gamespot

According to the article, CFS3 was centered more around on improving the dynamics [which are very realistic] rather than system optimization or functionallity. In other words, it was a "failed" experiment by the Microsoft development team who are trying to see what happens when you use a different game engine.

PS: Why do think Microsoft discontinued further development of a combat sim for the time being?

[vololiberista]

In terms of a/c dynamics and flight characteristics FlyII still outpaces FS9. and instead of having to model 2 cockpit versions just one is modelled in 3D!!!!! The default scenery is slightly better than FS9 (the clouds not) AND navigation is "On the Ball" It's the only sim I've seen with ground effect!!

I don't just want to see what the Americans call "eye candy" in FSX. How about proper ATC? Directing a/c via SID's and STAR's with separation and speed notification. Proper navigation visuals and of course proper a/c dynamics.
To me these are much more important than dropping flour all over the computer!!!!!!
I really can't wait to see elephants crossing the African plains from 35,000ft LOL
Vololiberista

[x_jasper]

Lol

'Eye Candy', same old trick.

Perhaps we need a European sim?

Globally 'open' in multiplay, for both commercial and military all in one common IP or game room. In this way it would be possible to mount a virtual WW3 because you would have armed aircraft and trans atlantic airlines in one room, you could even have shipping.

I wonder where most of the bombs would fall?

It'd put an end to annoying VA crap gamers which spoil FS9 and quite honestly make me puke.

Hmm, where is my Su27?

Oh of course, the aircraft would have to be European. Maybe the odd american 'plane', but that would have to have some serious fault and be historically inaccurate.

As for access and SDK, this could be provided by software which was only available in Europe.

I'd love a sim like that, in-fact I would go so far as to say I'd deffinately buy it.

You'd think 'eye candy' was the sole prerequisite for simulation >:( Grrrrr!!

[Katahu]

You'd think 'eye candy' was the sole prerequisite for simulation?

Are you talking to me? Or are you talking to somebody else. Just confused.

[Daube]

"FSX will be opitmised for Vista, so you will buy Vista"

Interesting comment, probably more true than most realise. Getting their customer base held in vice-like grip by the gonads is what M$ do best. Sims are not unique in this respect and this is why M$ has the monopoly as a software house, not because what they offer is the best but rather there is no serious competition.

X-Plane is serious competition.
As for Vista, it will not be needed. I don't see any problems here

Bloatware, stutterware, poopware, are trademarks of puffed up products designed to force hardware upgrades. This of course provides an excellent back-scratching service to Intel.

Conspiracy? what conspiracy?

Try running CFS2 on a P4 these days and it will run perfectly, even with 64M graphics. It also happens to have the better flight engine out of all the series. On a modern machine massive scenery and terrain data can be run through without glitch. CFS2 scenery is very well understood. The sim is Gmax compatible too.

This one is now really funny.
Are you serious telling that ?
Are you really comparing the amount of thing handled by CF2 and FS9 ?
Here is the tip: Take FS9, disable AI traffic (there is none in CFS2), disable traffic control, disable 3D clouds (CFS2 clouds are only 2D), reduce visibity (not sure about this one but anyway), reduce the LOD of you scenery and reduce the texture sizes, reduce the amount of details, turn off autogen, reduce everything, and it will be as smooth as CFS2.

Of course CFS2 is smooth, it just handles much less that FS9 has to handle in a normal situation.
And however, who cares about CFS2 crappy MS thing ? Why don't you continue playing FA-18 Hornet 3.0 ? Textures are useless for sims anyway, just stupid eye candy you know...

If anything, the new 'FSX' should have been based on the CFS2 model, where at least FM developers had full access to all aspects and the damn thing now runs flawlessly in virtually any home PC.

I have nearly re-worked CFS3 for use on a private network:

1) I shouldn't have had to do it.
2) Despite everything M$ failed to give access to rocket velocity.
3) It is historically inaccurate, no P80 flew combat in WWII. Where is the Meteor?
4) It is seriously flawed in a number of areas and unless you know where and how to correct things, you have a kids 'toy', not a sim.

CFS3 was crap when it was out, with its diving bombers etc... But one must agree that MS tried to implement some new stuff in it (new flight model, several virtual seats per planes etc...), and I think this soft just went gold too early.

It's a question of 'consumer confidence' with me. Basically I have no confidence in M$ products.

Agree with that

[Daube]

In terms of a/c dynamics and flight characteristics FlyII still outpaces FS9. and instead of having to model 2 cockpit versions just one is modelled in 3D!!!!!

You are not forced to model a crappy 2D panel (2D panels sucks, id I say it already ?) and you can stick with a 3D panel. Unfortunatley, because 2D panel still exist in FSX, 90% of the modelers will still continue producing magnificient 3D models for AI only  :P

The default scenery is slightly better than FS9 (the clouds not) AND navigation is "On the Ball" It's the only sim I've seen with ground effect!!

I'm not sure about the default scenery, but I saw some ground effect in FS9. For example with that Swiss Bastion high altitude heliports. My copter can take off only at full power, and as soon as I am no more above the plateform, I just can't maintain my altitude anymore on stationnary fligh. This is ground effetc I think, isn't it ?
My plane (well, helicopter, but anyway) flies better near the ground...

I don't just want to see what the Americans call "eye candy" in FSX.

You can tun it OFF

How about proper ATC? Directing a/c via SID's and STAR's with separation and speed notification. Proper navigation visuals and of course proper a/c dynamics.
To me these are much more important than dropping flour all over the computer!!!!!!

Agree with that. But how about the ATC in other sims ? I didn't try Fly II yet, and the only Xplane I used was too old, so I cannot compare...

I really can't wait to see elephants crossing the African plains from 35,000ft LOL
Vololiberista

Sure, FSX has only one new feature: elephants.
In fact, they should have called it Elephant Simulator, don't you think. It's amazing this crappy ACES team took three years only to develop moving elephants. Ahah, MS really sucks you know  ::) Personnaly, I will never pay 80 euros for elephants. And Vista certainly has sme elephant features too, like elephant icons, elephant sounds for events, and when you install it your computer weight increase, cool  8)

[Katahu]

So let me guess, we are going to argue over new features that were strictly demanded by the FS consumers a few years ago just after FS9 was released?

If this is so through out the FS community, then I am shocked to see how part of the FS community has become.

Too many times, I have seen both sides go at it with each other just over a few features that were demanded long ago in the first place and yet "neither" side has won out. Unfortunately, this endless cycle of point-counterpoint will continue on until the FS franchise is no more.

[x_jasper]

The current flight engine CANNOT and WILL NEVER simulate flight properly.

Not necessarily so. That basically is an excuse for bad dynamics banded around originally by people who, not by their own fault have little comprehension of aerodynamic basics. Not everyone is an expert, M$ knows this only too well.

Some developers specialise in 3D, some in scenery, others objects etc. Each to their own however my particular skills are with sound files and air dynamics.

I can tell you it is perfectly possible to get ACCEPTABLE performance from the flight engines of all the CFS series, FS2002 and FS9. I have compiled / reworked many airfiles in the series.

Obviously, you cannot achieve absolute modelling however this has nothing to do with the fact that M$ individual FM's are basically flawed from the start. They have to be re-written, properly.

I used to rewrite FM's for people, unfortunately having once seen  my work pinched I have a policy of not giving anything away, otherwise I would have been glad to write FM's for an aircraft of your choice, and let you see for yourself. I am sure you would be amazed at the difference.

Of FSX? well I am considering making my own sim based on the CFS2 core, but with FS9 globals and UK VFR photo scenery. This should essentially make a combat sim out of FS9, giving the advantage of common player weather formatting (i.e as per CFS3).

FS9 scenery in CFS2 is well understood.

Why would I bother with yet another sim from M$?

Jasper

[vololiberista]

Basically the different requirements and expectations stem from the fact that some of us who use flight sims are REAL pilots. Properly trained etc etc etc!! And those who because they can land and take off in a  "Desktop/Laptop Sim" think they are pilots!!!!!!  (The reality of course is substantially different!!!)
It does seem to me that MS$ have in FSX concentrated more on American "eye candy" than on the more important aspects of a real flight sim. Elephants seen from 35,000ft are all very well but not something that makes me want to rush out and buy FSX!!!!
Vololiberista

LIMZ CUNEO/LEVALDIGI  (Elev. 1267 ft - 42mb) CUF
METAR LIMZ 200900Z VRB03KT CAVOK 28/14 Q1022=
METAR LIMZ 200800Z 31003KT CAVOK 26/13 Q1022=
TAF
No TAFs available

[x_jasper]

Agreed on the 'american Eye Candy'

Too much guff for too long.

Unfortunately, the main market for these products actually believes what is sold represents reallity.


Jasper

[Paz]

Typical of most forums, someone asks a simple yes or no question and it ends up being a bitch session.

[x_jasper]

Who's bitching?

Plenty of 'NO' replies, if you care to look.

[Delta_]

I'm not buying 'til i get my new rig in about May, depends when 2nd gen DX10 cards come out.