I have just reinstalled FSX in preparation for SP1. I decided to fly 2 benchmark flights with the King Air and 737 just to see the difference between the pre and post patch performance. After not using FSX for quite a while, it really struck me how nice it looks. Visually it is so much better than FS9. If the performance was acceptable, I am guessing most would switch over. As for the addon fatigue, I was thinking about that on as well. With all of the addons I have for FS9, when I really think about what I fly it boils down to maybe 5 aircraft, 2 or 3 utilities and then a bunch of scenery....certainly a reasonable upgrade cost. Now here's hoping the patch delivers.Mark.

Same situation here, but I wouldn't call it laziness. After all, it's a hobby to be enjoyed; not a job. Although if a person is fortunate, a job can be enjoyed as well!

>L.Adamson --- real and simulated flight "enthusiast"Somehow, I knew it was just a matter of time. :-roll EwingKATLAlcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be a store, not a government agency.MSI K8N Neo2 PlatinumAMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.0 GHz2GB Corsair PC-3200 512x4 Dual Channel CL2.5 DDR DIMM eVGA nVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3Sound Blaster Audigy LSOCZ Powerstream 420WWinXPPro (SP1)

Was curious about their next aircraft, and it seems that they have jumped on the same train as LDS. http://www.realairsimulations.com/list_box.php?page=comingHonestly, I think it's a shame. I'm sure this aircraft will be amazing, but many more people would buy it if their was a FS9 version.I wonder how sales will be for FSX products? It's obvious that more simmers stayed behind with FS9 as opposed to the upgrade.

>It's obvious that more simmers stayed behind with FS9 as opposed to the upgrade. Maybe pre FSX SP1. Why not wait until SP1 is available before pre judging:-)

>It's obvious that more simmers stayed behind with FS9 as opposed to the upgrade.Maybe pre FSX SP1. Why not wait until SP1 is available before pre judging:-)I'll rephrase. :)Since the release of FSX, it's obvious that more simmers stayed behind with FS9 as opposed to the upgrade.Any better? :)No, but really. With the hardware demand that FSX comes with and along with the performance, more people have stayed behind. And in all honesty, we all know LDS and RealAir has not been able to design their add-ons for FSX. FSX wasnt even around when LDS started tge 757. Wouldn't that require them to work with GMAX and FS2004 as a base foundation? Then, after the release of FSX, modify what was needed to make them compatible?It's eathier that or they have started development on their products since all the FSX SDK's were released, and that I really dont think could be possible.Im not a developer, so I have no clue. But with my limited knowledge, this is they was I thought it would be. If they started development last summer, then wouldn't these aircraft had to of been initially be made for FS2004 since that's all they had to work with?Honestly, a FS9 and FSX version would of nice. I hate seeing developers mark off all their future FS9 products and jumping on the FSX train. Especially this early on. Would of been nice to do what you guys are doing at ESDG. Wait about 18-20 months before going forward with only FSX designs.

Of course all developers are faced with decisions with regard to future development for FS9 and FSX. It would seem the decisions will fall roughly in the following categories. A) Develop for FSX only.:( Develop for FS9 only. C) Extend FS9 Development out for a reasonable time while developing for FSX as well. In our case this effectively doubles our workload and we must sell FS9 and FSX aircraft as individual products in order to offset the costs for each. While this is understood by a majority of users, a few seem to not comprehend the reasons and challenges for developers.Notice the decisions must be made by the developers, not the users.

>Was curious about their next aircraft, and it seems that they>have jumped on the same train as LDS. >>http://www.realairsimulations.com/list_box.php?page=coming>>Honestly, I think it's a shame. I'm sure this aircraft will be>amazing, but many more people would buy it if their was a FS9>version.>>I wonder how sales will be for FSX products? It's obvious that>more simmers stayed behind with FS9 as opposed to the upgrade.>Believe what you want, gripe when you want, but in the end; the RealAir FSX version of it's Marchetti SF260 is the finest GA airplane I've got. It looks better, and flies better than it's FS9 counterpart. I must assume that the new FSX version will do the same. FSX, just can do "some" things better.L.Adamson

I have really enjoyed some of the time I have spent with FSX, but I always find myself going back to FS9 and I find that I like it much better.. Hopefully this will change after the patch, but I think I will always have a place for FS9 on my hard drive.. I have been a lot more selective about what I buy for FSX, versus what I buy for FS9... FS9, for me if an add-on looks good I buy it.. For FSX, I consider the performance costs on my system and if it doesn't offer both FS9 and FSX support I generally don't bother.

I'm sure it can. It's a newer and more advanced simulation. I dont mind letting you know though, that im not "griping."It was in this thread somewhere where the development for FSX addons was discussed. No, I cant call their shots. But wouldnt it just make more sense to develop for FS9 since that's where the majority of the users are, and then in the future release an update to FSX? It just seems to me that since more users stayed with FS9, that's where the best bet for business would be.

We often see developer "burnout", boredom, etc.Should a developer see improvements in a new sim format that he or she likes and actually prefers; I could imagine that it would be hard to be forced back to the old ways just for the sake of supplying the masses. It then becomes painfully slow drudgery and things might never get completed; and often don't. While some obviously still enjoy creating for FS9, there is evidence that some scenery and aircraft designers certainly prefer the new FSX format for what it's capable of.L.Adamson

While some obviously still enjoy creating for FS9, there is evidence that some scenery and aircraft designers certainly prefer the new FSX format for what it's capable of.True. I wish them the best. Im sure in a few years, we'll all be running FSX. :)

>>It's obvious that more simmers stayed behind with FS9 as>opposed to the upgrade.>>Maybe pre FSX SP1. Why not wait until SP1 is available before>pre judging:-)>>I'll rephrase. :)>>Since the release of FSX, it's obvious that more simmers>stayed behind with FS9 as opposed to the upgrade.>>Any better? :)>>No, but really. With the hardware demand that FSX comes with>and along with the performance, more people have stayed>behind. >This isn't really as obvious as you make it out to be.Looking at the stats for the past month, there have been 100 more posts in the FSX forum than in here. Now, I think we've done a pretty good job of keeping down the ranting in there, so that means a majority of those posts are by actual users.Now, posts of course don't equal users. That is certainly true. It could be that members who post in the FSX forum just have more to talk about or post more often. But there's nothing on the forum, numberwise, to support your claim.

>>Now, posts of course don't equal users. That is certainly>true. It could be that members who post in the FSX forum just>have more to talk about or post more often. But there's>nothing on the forum, numberwise, to support your claim.What's your claim based on what ;-) just keep it to facts ;-)Andr

He's a forum administrator and has access to our forum statistics page. That's what he bases his facts on. How's that Andre? :)