How many of you still using old 3rd party in Fs2002?

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, How many of you still using Scenery/Aircraft from fs98/2000 in Msfs 2002?In my case 0%Almost everyone are afraid to loose their 3rd party compatibility for the latest version of Msfs when the release time is coming. Every 3rd party is almost redone and including the new feature thats Msfs provide in the latest version. so why the compatibility from previous version of Msfs?I am asking this question because, Ms should works on others important things, like weather,recording video, better 3d object, scenery etc.. Every new release of Msfs, almost all 3rd party should be redone anyway for the latest version, A waist of time the compatibility?Microsoft sacrifice feature like, a new realistic aircraft system and are afraid to remove the *.air files for compatibility?Ms works hours and hours on the compatibility in alpha/beta stage for all new version of Msfs, They should put their restricted time on others important feature. We really need all hard works from them to put the time in the compatibility and sacrifice others area?My personal answer is no. Just another challenge to learn and use the full new feature capability from the New engine and make better than the previous version. I don't like old technologie and some old stuff still in Msfs, it is the time for a change.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFshttp://fsw.simflight.com/fsw.jpg

[Romeo_Tango 143]

I agree with you 100%

[Guest CapHavoc]

Howdy,Earlier FS scenery: 0.Earlier FS Aircraft? Well, been regularly flying a much re-configured FS98 Bill Black Grumman Goose for months now; ditto the 2K Beaver, Pilatus Porter, and Maule; simply because no one has bothered to re-do them (yet) for 2K2 (with the exception of Mike Stone's forthcoming Goose).

[Guest]

I can't really agree with you on that one. Personally, I thank them for backwards compatibility. Without it I wouldn't have my favorite aircraft, the Carenado F33, the FSD Commander, and the FSD Chyenne. My personal reason is that I just dislike GMAX. Generally all the animations are jerky, and the alpha-channel shine is pretty disgusting as compared to a good use of static, or hand drawn, shine. Anyway, with such high standards set by 3rd party developers, especially payware ones, I wouldn't really be pleased if MS decided to cut the compatibility and all my hard-earned money was blown on aircraft that only work in one version.Scott

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, "Without it I wouldn't have my favorite aircraft, the Carenado F33, the FSD Commander, and the FSD Chyenne."Those aircraft thats you have in fs2002, have been updated for fs2002? or never touched since fs2000 and works drag and drop in fs2002?" all my hard-earned money was blown on aircraft that only work in one version."I agree but what about buying a new computer system or upgrading for each new version of Msfs? Also whats about new aircraft from Flight One, Fsd for fs2004 thats you have to buy anyways, this never end all $$$..ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFshttp://fsw.simflight.com/fsw.jpg

[Guest GZR_Frenchy]

Ouch. This one really hits home for me.Most likely you aren't familiar with my sceneries. Doesn't matter to the subject at hand -- that being aircraft.To explain: I design WWII sceneries in CFS2 in the Euro Theatre. These sceneries are late 1944-45 and are drawn over precise maps etc. The latest sceneries work in both CFS2 and Fs2002 without any need for the end user to make any changes betwixt the two. Not really your standard fare. But, enjoyed by many who sim in that place in time.Think there are some 35 Euro sceneries uploaded here at Avsim and all must be converted to CFS3 standards. Having no idea of what CFS3 standards are -- all my work is at a standstill.Many of the new Fs2002 aircraft are of WWII origin. Geeses, and Gooses etc. They should/would fit into my sceneries. However, they must also fit into CFS3.Backward compatibility?? I surely hope so.Frenchy -- out.

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, So if I understand all your scenery have not be updated and works great in fs2002?My point is, I want to see how many old 3rd party are used in fs2002 and never be updated for fs2002.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFshttp://fsw.simflight.com/fsw.jpg

[LAdamson 240]

I do use FS2K mesh scenery for FS2002 that never had any up-dates. It's even much easier to install. There are a few compatibility problems such as the FS2K roads with car lights overlaying the existing FS2002 roads. Lost a few buildings at my home airport also.L.Adamson

[Guest GZR_Frenchy]

No. All my sceneries do not work great in Fs2002. But, they do work. Versions 1.0 were made before Fs2002 was released. They will work but need help from the designer. Not all users want/need to be bothered by such things.Versions 2.5 were designed with both sims on the computer. Each checked against the other until they matched CFS2 is a few meters off from Fs2002. To answer you question direct. Many hours were spent to make them work correctly. They are NOT directly compatable.Sorry.Never -- is a big word. Count me out.Frenchy -- out.

[Guest]

I don't agree. A few months after the release of FS2k4, we would have a limited choice of addon airplanes & scenery, i don't like that. I also agree about GMAX. What's the big deal about it? The only thing nice is true reflective textures, but 'fake' ones on FSDS aircraft work almost as well.http://212.212.159.238/svedude/imagesP/banner1.jpg______________________________________________________________________If you wanna bash FSPlanet & its webmaster Ferdy Serena, a freeware poacher, please go [a href=http://www.geocities.com/sia777fan//ferdybashing.html]HERE![/a]

[Guest]

>The only thing nice is true reflective texturesI have to disagree, to call it true would insinuate that it's realistic, yet most alpha channels that painters slap onto the models is around 20-25% which makes the plane look like it has a 5" thick coat of wax surrounding it. Not to mention that the days of custom, self created metal textures has dissapeared now that anybody can just photoshop 100% alpha onto a model and call it metal. Personally I preferred the days when people revered the work of photoshop gurus like Greg German and Bodo Mueller and countless others, but now it seems like everybody is impressed by the shinyness of those GMAX aircraft. I guess real painting is a dying art form now that GMAX shine has come around.Scott

[Francois_Dumas 10]

Salut Chris :-)When I just started running FS2002 I did tinker a lot with Fs2000 aircraft and sceneries, trying to keep them, especially the ones I got used to.Today I only have a few FS2000 aircraft left....yes, with some FS2002 upgrade applied, although not all succesful. It has been a year now and over the year I have downloaded, bought and built new sceneries and aircraft, tools and programs, as I think is normal when you are really 'into' this hobby anyway.However, for the more casual users it WILL be a stretch at times, and will turn people off no doubt, to 'renovate' everything each time a new version pops up :-)As for building things.... well, I skip several versions each time.. I did not build anything for FS98 and FS2000 and have just now started again looking to learn gmax and do some scenery work... perhaps painting when I ever find the time. That for me sort of solves the issue, although I did tinker with FSDS last year. :-)Having said all that I do know a LOT of people that are still running FS2000 or even FS98 aircraft or even the sims themselves. Not everybody can or will ugrade every time, so it always is a difficult issue. If you ask backwards compatibility (of any program or system) you limit yourself to some extent in possibilities and run the risk of making the new version too slow and cumbersome. If you don't, you lock out a fair number of people and destroy some 'capital' invested in add-ons (either buildig or buying). Tough choice :-( :-outta Francois :-wave[table border=0 cellpadding=10 cellspacing=0][tr][td valign=bottom" align="center]"At home in the wild"[/td][td valign=bottom" align="center][link:avsim.com/alaska/alaska_051.htm|Don's Alaskan Bush Charters]"Beavers Lead the Way"[/td][td valign=bottom" align="center][link:www.avsim.com/vfr_center/mainpages/vfr_flights_main_page.htm]VFR Flight Center]"Looking Good Outside"[/td][/tr][tr][td valign=top" align="center]http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif[/td][td valign="top" align="left" colspan=2]http://www.fssupport.com/images/moose2.gif[/td][tr][/table]________________________Francois A. "Navman" DumasAssociate Editor &Forums AdministratorAVSIM Online![/bemail: fdumas@avsim.com________________________

[Guest Scott Campbell]

Francois,>However, for the more casual users it WILL be a stretch at >times, and will turn people off no doubt, to 'renovate' >everything each time a new version pops up :-)This is exactly my issue from the FS2004 thread.Every two years we have to update and pay again and again for the same stuff. There aren't always replacements - like my 737-500, which is still from FS98 recompiled with night textures and that's it.The tools that worked great in FS98, and okay in FS2000, don't work at all in FS2002. Airport 2000 doesn't work at all. Most add-on panels don't work well if at all. These ALL worked from FS98 to FS2000.And because FS98 was so easy to make things for, there were boatloads of tools put out - some for free - to make aircraft and scenery. Therefore, people were putting out endless aircraft and scenery. FS2000 became slightly more difficult, and fewer things came out. FS2002 is so difficult that the number of items uploaded is insignificant compared to FS98. Most people have gone payware, and there is almost nothing to replace all the myriad free panels and gauges and aircraft of FS98/FS2000.Also FS2000 came along and suddenly everyone and their brother had to make hideous virtual cockpits. Then it's made further hideous in FS2002. So I can't replace everything I have from FS98.Then there's the FS2002 autopilot - definitely not an improvement. Quite the opposite. The "reflections" don't even exist on my system. Having doors that open and close is totally useless to simming flight. Unless MS is going to sim catering trucks and cargo loading and honey trucks, what's the point? I have not the slightest idea why anyone thought this was a great idea.So where is it all headed? No backward compatibility, and all payware 3rd party, if anything is available at all. No Tools to make your own. And nothing simple. If gMAX is all I have to work with, I'm done.So to answer Chris' question - none - because everything needs updating. MS moved pointers and addresses and variables and got rid of anything useful to make anything compatible. There is no reason for them to have done this. Without FSUIPC nothing I have would work at all.So fine - I'm all for MS making something completely new, but they had better come out with some tools that any user can use. Development is now far too time and monetarily expensive for freebie stuff, so I'd plan on using whatever is in the box.My opinion - your milage may vary.

[Dark Moment 0]

I couldn't live without my backup FS2000/FS98 library. So many gems hidden away there that are excellent in FS2002 with a minimum of tweaking. A good Grumman Goose panel, for example! It's fun to dig back and see what I have there. Sure, I stay up to date with everything that's happening today - which is fantastic - but sometimes it's nice to load up an old 125KB model and see the difference in FPS, compared to a Simubuild 340 for example!Historical stuff, too. So many great freeware names, now swallowed up by a more commercial world. Wouldn't we all, I suppose, given the chance, but freeware is the name of this hobby for me. The community thing, with its taking but giving back, is everything.Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitak.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/reds.htmlhttp://www.swiremariners.com/cxkaitakv3.jpg

[Guest joea]

Scott Francois I agree with your points. I think Francois is right when he said he skips several versions...I personally think two years is too quick esp. regarding hardware upgrades. Scott said (speaking as a developer I hope) that we have to upgrade every two years, do we really? I am speaking as a PhD student who works and has saved money for an upgrade which keeps getting pushed back because of other expenses, like moving into a new apartment. I don't begrudge this and I will upgrade (probably Dell the developer's choice[;-)]) but am looking at the fall or more likely winter at the earliest. My current system is a 3 year old celeron 500, 256Megs ram and a voodoo3 2000 card, thus a machine that sometimes struggled with fs2000. With fs2002 OUT OF THE BOX, and with the sliders halfway or so, it did run better, but many of my addons, both freeware and payware slow my system (I don't use Chris Willis' wonderful clouds for that reason) and I just don't enjoy FS as much right now. Had I stayed with fs98 I would have had decent performance with an huge array of addons, now with the upgrade I could afford I am not sure I'll be able to run fs2004 but would like more than a years' worth of enjoyment with fs2002 and the great addons out and sure to come out over the next 12 months or so. So, I am not running fs98/2000 addons as of now (some stuff patched and updated) and am going to opt out of the upgrade ever year or two race...I can't afford it. My two bits.