As being the author of this topic I really hope that someone is listening to us ...... I am very satisfied with FS9 but I will always want more and the likes of LDS,FlyTampa to name 2 we want a B757 from LDS and more US and/or European airports from FT. Lets keep FS9 alive and keep building on to this platform.Thanks again for all of your views and FS9 supportAndy

I just took a flight in a carenado plane...... bunch of addons, 100% traffic, all sliders maxed, full AA and AAF and i was a constant 80fps! It was pure pleasure! I actually felt there, and that was at 1920x resolution. Now i feel empowered for another flight. Was reading this thread and somebody mentioned alaska. might try it

I have not purchased FS X yet. I put that money towards my new Core 2 Duo system with a $175 x1950XT graphics card and 2 gigs of Ram. Compared to the system I am replacing, it feels like a new simulator with sliders to the right and decent frame rates in GA aircraft and the PMDG 747-400.With what I have invested in add ons and the performance I am now getting, and the fact that my sim time is limited, I'd rather just fly FS 9 and enjoy it. I felt like a kid with a big grin from ear to ear on Christmas with my new and unexpected toy on my first flight with the new system.I must be getting old because at this point, I don't see any need to upgrade. What I have runs what I need it to run and it does so quite nice. I am pretty darn satisfied.

Pretty much everything that needs to be said, has been said for me in here. I've invested so much money in FS9, and I too feel the sim has only recently matured. I've never been able to run full autogen, lots of traffic and all the other goodies at once. I'm in the process of building a new computer that will most likely run FS9 at its full potential while allowing for plenty of add-on goodies, so why go back to basics with FSX? It's fun to upgrade, but too many people are so willing to throw the old away, and I'm not like that. I bought FSX months ago and after reading so many threads about errors and bugs in it, I haven't had a desire to even try it. No matter what FS9 wasn't so riddled with problems. Sure we had CTDs and memory issues, but for the most part they weren't the end-all for enjoying the game, plus the patch mostly fixed those issues. You could buy a new computer at the time or perhaps 1 year post-release and really have a ball. FSX is giving people problems on all kinds of computers, plus the errors and bugs are worse. You either can't fly (activation error) or the blurries are killing every flight. Sorry, I just can't get into it yet.FS9 for me was a huge upgrade from FS2002 anyhow. FS2002 was dull looking and dim, plus you didn't have 3D clouds. FS9 was so much more realistic with amazing blue skies, brighter environment, and 3D clouds. So many things about FS9 kept me excited for its release. Now it's nothing like that. I have no interest in missions and the wonderful add-ons for FS9 have really transformed the environment into an amazing simulator. Most of all, at least in terms of development and FSX, I really believe the patches for FSX and the changes in the sim from FS9 have slowed a lot of developers down if not turned them off completely for now. I'm sure once the upgrades/patches are finished from MS the developers will get cracking on new software. Then you'll have to wait for the add-on to be made from ground up, so I don't think you'll see a ton of great stuff for a while. FSX has had some major teething issues unlike previous versions.

Long, Long thread. But I am also sticking with FS9. My machine(4 years old) runs it well. I have a fair amount of addons installed, tons of traffic, and a whole lot of fun. There is one thing that nobody has mentioned in this thread yet: "Is there going to be a FSXI?" We don't know, but I do remember after FS2k4 came out, Microsoft was in heavy debate over whether it was even profitable to release another sim, and in the end, they decided that they needed to "spice it up" if you will, to attract the gamers and people new to the hobby. It was great business thinking on their part, but they did not take into account the hardware requirements of their product. They were aiming at the Quake/Halo/FPS people who didn't need a Geforce 8800 and a Dual core processor to even get 20 FPS. 20FPS to their intended audience in unacceptable. I think the release of FSX this soon may have killed that audiences interest. Given the 1 year time-frame so far, and very few able to get FS to what they consider a "playable" state. I fear that Microsoft will not see the incentive to develop, as they want to have some "bang" with their new versions, and they've drained almost all of the bang you can pull out of FS. Anybody remember 32-sided fuselages? But as pessimistic as it all sounds, I think they reached the pinnacle of FS achievements between FSX and FS2004, and if they release FSXI, it will be a combination of the two, backtracking in certain areas of airplane/scenery development, but leaving the visuals as the hardware catches up. But it will be the last version, if X isn't already. Patrick ClarkAnchorage, Alaska, USAhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/1900driver.jpg

>I just took a flight in a carenado plane...... bunch of>addons, 100% traffic, all sliders maxed, full AA and AAF and i>was a constant 80fps! >>It was pure pleasure! I actually felt there, and that was at>1920x resolution. >Well, I managed to drag my FS9 down into the high teens last evening using 3rd party aircraft with the V/C, 3rd party high density scenery, and real weather. Perhaps I need a new super computer? :-eek Just being realistic, here.... L.AdamsonAthlon 3800+/ 2GIG/ Geforce 7600GS 256MB/ 1600*1200*32

I belive Phil recently stated that ACES are leaving FSX and focusing on the next version. Guess that's good news :)Regards,Eirik Alim

L.Adamson,Try a Core 2 Duo running around 3.2GhzEven with FS9 only utilizing one core, it will blow anything else away.With a decent video card you can easily attain 30+ FPS with all addons and any weather situation AS6.5 can throw at it.Very impressive and fluid.Having said that, I do now find it difficult to enjoy the ground visuals in FS9 after the 1m textures of FSX.If I could have the DF Bonanza in FSX, I would probably use FSX more.FS9 is still the best solution for 'big iron' pilots, especially when you throw complex scenery and large amounts of AI into the mix.Glenn

You know, to fully realise how incredible as well as viable FS9 is, and still is....and should not be swept to the back corner ONLY because a later-released version came out........after installing the ATI 7.10's. and having time, I whipped out FS98 and took the 12 minutes to install it.I took a flight from Detroit to Chicago and landed. I then took a 'mountain' LARGE LAUGH! flight around Denver. I 'loved' those dead flat couple of layers of cloud-scape....(wink!) Oh, those glued-on mountains (I think they were trying to be mountains...lol) were to die for....lol NOT!If you were to compare the two visuals, your JAW would drop all anew at what FS9 and all the add-ons gives it for our hobby.I suggest all of you try that....load up FS98...take out the 737...and then like a fine glass of vintage wine...just SAVOUR what FS9 and add-ons offers you. In a word, basic aviation reality on a monitor!Try it, you'll enjoy the 'reminiscing'.Mitch

heh i have a copy of fs5 around here........ now those were the good days. fs98 is way too advanced.

Hi,I'll tell you what FSX has done for *me*. It has liberated me from the constant upgrading to keep up with the next sim. Since MS didn't take most of our suggestions in creating FSX (better ATC, better AI, etc. - heck, 90% of the bugs in FS9 are still there in FSX!) AND they made FS2004 scenery incompatible with FSX (autogen excludes are no longer recognized and untextured parts are black), I decided to stick with FS9. Why? Well, I have created over a dozen airport sceneries, and over 100 modified AFCAD's. I would have to redo/convert all of those again. They also made my Propliner AI aircraft incompatible (again, untextured parts), so they would all need to be done again (more than 25 models). This is the first time (in my usage) that MS has made something designed using the SDK for the previous sim incompatible in the current one, except AFCAD's.So I had a choice - stay with FS9 and keep adding new features to something I already have where I want it, or start over again from a default world. The choice was easy! And now I find I have even more time to devote to my creations, since there are fewer posts about FS9 on the forums and I don't worry about the FSX ones. Yes I did buy FSX, but it's not even installed on my new computer. I found I never used it. I love AI aircraft swarming around my classic airports, and I can't do that in FSX (remember, they aren't compatible). There isn't anything in FSX that makes me want to spend the time to update to it anyway.I will not spend 50% of my simming over the next 2-3 years simply getting back what I already have in FS2004. I will spend that time creating new content for FS2004, a sim I plan on sticking with for the forseeable future (including FSXI).--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___

Hello TomI feel exactly the same, I have everything i need with FS9 after spending a small fortune to get it exactly as i want it.After deciding that i was happier with FS9 and reasoning that had i moved to FSX i would have probably spent another small fortune on it, i decided to stay with FS9 and spend the money saved on upgrading my flight hardware.I have added a few more goflight units and a AETI yoke and PFC pedals from Ebay to replace my CH stuff, next will be the Goflight throttle unit and a 30" LCD to replace my 20" LCD as funds permit.I will be in great shape for FS11 and in the meantime i get even more value from all my FS9 payware.http://www.freewebs.com/reading1871/30.jpg

And here I was all worried that by the time I released 9Dragons for FS9 there would be no pilots left around to fly it. Guess my timing for will be pretty good after all. :9

Well, to be perfectly honest, there are still quite a few people still happily running FS2002 with tons of add-ons, etc. Their arguments for sticking with FS2k2 are practicaly verbatim of the arguments made in this thread for sticking with FS9!There are still folks merrily running FS98 and simply cannot fathom why anyone in their right mind would want to run any of the "newfangled versions..."All of this simply underscores the inalienable right everyone has to enjoy their own vision of what's "good enough." :)

HelloI am really looking forward to you releasing this sceneryhttp://www.freewebs.com/reading1871/30.jpg