Lifeless, boring...NOT what I expected

[phil509]

I wonder if rajeeve is monitoring this thread to see the flurry of posting he's caused on this topic?I hope so cause mabey he'll take a likeing to this activity

[Smoke2much]

My first flight simulator was on the Commodore 16.  You had to take off, fly over a mountain range and then land at the airport.  There were no instructions, you just had to see what went wrong during each flight and correct it next time.

It took me about thirty attempts to get the damned thing off the ground.

The next was Overlord for the amiga, still a great game.  I have FS95 somewhere and have recently been given FS5 on CD-ROM!!!

Will

[Ivan]

oh yes, the old times...

we had a flightsim on the C64, with IFR and stuff, but AFAIK no scenery...
i couldn't fly the damn thing.

when i got FS5.1 on a P60 it started for me, tried a 'round the world' with it
then we got FS98, on my brothers machine (hed didn't like it) and later on my machine too
now i have FS2000, it looks great, but bad FPS
and i'm waiting for FS:ACOF, to use the big vidcard for some more peaceful entertainment

[packercolinl]

It seems to me that after reading all these posts that the underlying passion is for flight(obvious innit)and perhaps Rajeev doesn't share quite the same view.

What's MS train sim like? Maybe he should have bought that instead?

[Redwing]

[quote]I think it's also important to remember that creating an exact virtual reality copy of planet Earth is a near impossible task. It would take years to do and by the time it was released to the public, the game would be very expensive or even obsolete.
Microsoft had to cut many corners when creating FS2002 because they had to keep cost, time, and buyer system power in mind. An exact replica of earth would be nice but not at 1fps!

[pissmeoff]

It seems to me that after reading all these posts that the underlying passion is for flight(obvious innit)and perhaps Rajeev doesn't share quite the same view.

What's MS train sim like? Maybe he should have bought that instead?

I don't believe that was the point being made. The point was all the people claiming greatness in this sim, and it wasn't as great as this person thought. I can't say I blame them. Yes, it's great, cool graphics, etc., but riddled with bugs. Nice work MS. Next time test your work!

And if one thinks about the price and then add how many were sold, it was too damn expensive. Do you really think MS pays their programmers that well? LOL

[phil509]

It seems to me that after reading all these posts that the underlying passion is for flight(obvious innit)and perhaps Rajeev doesn't share quite the same view.

What's MS train sim like? Maybe he should have bought that instead?

I don't believe that was the point being made. The point was all the people claiming greatness in this sim, and it wasn't as great as this person thought. I can't say I blame them. Yes, it's great, cool graphics, etc., but riddled with bugs. Nice work MS. Next time test your work!

And if one thinks about the price and then add how many were sold, it was too damn expensive. Do you really think MS pays their programmers that well? LOL

Id take a job at microsoft in a New York minute.Im sure whoever wrote this program did so over months,mabey years of hard work-not on his/her lunch half hour,and is there a bug free program? If there is,GOD wrote it! Think about it-It costs more for you and your friend/girlfriend to go see a movie than this"flawed" program that provides endless hours of entertainment,as well as a computer education

[Redwing]

Hey Pissmeoff, you wouldn't happen to be an ex-MS programmer, would you?!

You say you like the graphics in 2k2, but that it's "riddled" with bugs......what bugs are those? I've had absolutely no problems running this game on my relatively slow system. I'd refrain from calling it perfect; I'm sure some people do experience problems. As far as the cost issue; looks like most people here think this sim is a good deal.

You are of course, entitled to express your opinion, however, it's clear that your and Rajeev's overall dissatisfaction with 2k2 puts you in the minority.

[phil509]

HERE HERE!!,Redwing(ribauld applause),And your boots are good too!

[pissmeoff]

Hey Pissmeoff, you wouldn't happen to be an ex-MS programmer, would you?!

LOL, no can't say I am. I do program though. Don't get me wrong-there isn't a night that goes by that I don't play this sim. It's one of those games that I made a really good investment on, unlike others where once I'm finished it, I uninstall and put it away for a few months.

As for the bugs. I like to keep separate log files. In fs2000 I never had this problem, but with fs2k2, I do. That isn't right in itself. One should be moving forward with a new program, not backward. On to the log files. I like to have a logbook for the 747, 737, Learjet, helicopter and cessnas. Let's say I quit out of the sim and my logbook is the 737 logbook. I go into the sim, create a flight for the 747, select options/logbook and select the 747 logbook. Guess what? When I finish and I log my time, which is set up to do so when I exit the sim, the time is in the 737 logbook, not the 747. I consider this a bug. Again, fs2000 never did this. So, if I want to do a flight in the 747 I have to select the 747 logbook, quit out of the sim, and then start it back up and do my flight. There are some other bugs that one must look, but they are there. For instance, Meigs field. Start a flight at meigs, but just look around a little. If you look closely at the water, it goes uphill! I consider that a bug-programming error, what have you. There's plenty more areas that are like this. I forget exactly where they are, but they are there. I'm being picky, I know. So, I'm not really in the minority, I'm being more of a realist. MS needs some competition so that they will pick up their socks and stop putting out things that have problems/bugs. It's a damn shame because this sim is a great piece of work, and MS isn't the only company out there that's all about the dollar bill. I'm a perfectionist, which is part of my problem. When I do a job, I do not say, oh that will do. I spend plenty of sleepless nights working on programs until I get the damn thing right. I get more satisfaction knowing that someone paid me to get the program that they paid me for-one that works!

[MattNW]

I'll admit that FS2002 has some bugs. Some even terminal at times but for the most part it's been a fairly stable program. I've seen worse for games that cost about the same or even more. I'd hate to think how long it would take to fully test this piece of software. This is what you get in today's game market. Companies don't get paid for a product that's still in testing. They get paid when it hits store shelves.

Microsoft found a reasonable middle point in perfection and marketing. FS2002 is functional (unlike some games I've seen or heard about). It does what it's supposed to do. It's got great graphics. It's expandable for modders and it can be taylored to fit just about anyone who plays it (except maybe for Rajeev and PMO).

I've had buckets of fun flying round everywhere. It's given me some surprises and a few fits of anger. It's not perfect but it's a damned good game in comparison to other flight sims.

Apparently Rajeev is upset about a lack of landmarks. FS2002 has landmarks but only major ones. Things used for navigation such as highways, lakes and mountains are there. There's also large towers. Apparently Microsoft used a database of navigation hazards and landmarks to create the scenery. It won't be perfect but I was surprised at what was there. I can find almost anything I can on a Sectional Chart plus a couple goodies besides.

It could also be a problem with recognition. Even in real life navigating by landmarks is different from the air than from the ground. Doing so when the details aren't perfect projects an added difficulty. Try it in real life. Go up in a plane and look around. If your not used to it, it can be hard even with everything being where it's supposed to be. Now with a sim that can't have every little detail it becomes much harder. That can't be helped.

All I can say is that I'm satisfied. It's not perfect but it "works for me".

[pissmeoff]

All I can say is that I'm satisfied. It's not perfect but it "works for me".

It works for me too. Although seeing tress off the ground and some buildings in some really weird places is a little distracting. Now, I must go fly!

[BFMF]

I've certainly got my money's worth out of FS2002. With most other games, you play it for a while, you have only certain objectives, you 'beat' it and then it get's real old quick.

Not FS2002! You can't 'beat' it, there are no set objectives, and you never have to do the same thing twice! The possibilites are endless.

Also, I just logged my 500th hour in FS2002. In the real world it's no less then $70 an hour to rent an aircraft. Yep, i've gotten my money's worth

[packercolinl]

So then,I gather noone has used MS train sim. I know I haven't-I've been flying!

OK,so FS isn't perfect but I've got about 1200hrs time up and at $50 for the program I ain't complaining about the few bugs I  do come across!!

[Ivan]

trainsim has:
- better detailed mesh (possible because you often don't see the 3rd mountain range anyway)
- better weather engine (oh man i WANT that snow effect)
- trains instead of aircraft (DOH!)