http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1166872480
Well, said.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions. However, no one is entitled to run down the opinions of others nor tell them how to state their opinions. If people don't like FSX, then they have a right to say so. If people DO like FSX, then they also have equal rights to say so.
There also seems to be a false assumption going around. There were people in some cases where they state that everyone must have a super computer in order to get good frame rates with decent settings. This assumption is not entirely accurate. For example: I own a Pentium 4 2.4GHz processor with 512MB Ram, and a GeForce 4 MX440 with 128MB of memory. Please note that this setup is so old that it doesn't even support DX9, yet I get up to 15-20 FPS in FSX when flying an Extra 300 over Interlaken with almost all terrain settings set to max [expect for the texture resolution which is set to about half way]. All reflections, wing flex, jetways and any other settings that require shader 2.0 support is out of the question due to my lack of DX9 support.
However, because of this lack of support, my hardware doesn't need to make extra calculations for the DX9 settings; thus allowing me to increase the settings of the scenery and weather while still maintaining decent frames.
This is not to say that all OLD hardware will work decently like mines with FSX. Every computer in this world [just like a fingerprint] are completely unique. Even two computers with stock hardware put together by the exact same company [ie: gateway or dell] won't perform the same way due to the end users' habit of putting other things into the computers that can have an effect on the computer's performance. This is not including those who also have a habit of changing certain settings of the stock computers.
Because of this, not everyone is happy about how FSX runs in their system.
