What Msfs Version Are You Using Now

[SK-1323 4]

I imagine your comments are insulting to the ACES team!

Maybe it is, maybe it's not. I'm just giving my honest viewpoint on a product i have paid for and i'm not about to sugar coat it either. I'm disappointed with FSX and i feel that it have failed to deliver what i was looking for in the next generation flightsim and if that insulted the MS and ACES team, then i'm sorry for that, but my opinions and viewpoint still stand the same.If MS and ACES can't handle criticism, then that's their problem. I have paid for the product they delivered so i know what i'm talking about, i'm a paying customer like most of us are. I have every right to criticize their product if i feel it haven't delivered, just like everyone else that bought the product.RegardsJan

[Guest keiron]

When i have asked on other forums if there is any computers at a reasonable price that can run FSX in it's full glory (read: all settings and AI set at MAX) no one have ever replied, and you know why? because such hardware does not exist yet, especially not when you're flying heavy airliners at densely populated urban areas with some addons.Don't you think that most of the simmers would have made the switch by now if such hardware did exist?RegardsJan

The hardware does exist to have good performance with FSX! It's the errors that still exist that cause any type of hardware to struggle. Run FSX with a debug program and you will see just how many errors there still is. I've never seen a program that does so many calls to the page file in my entire life. We're talking millions of calls per session. It's shocking!They should have never built the program off the back of FS9 IMO, that's where it all went wrong!As for the CPU making calculations for FSX, I've seen far more in X-Plane..and that's just to get the blade theory working within it!I truely believe most simmers would have made the switch if all the errors were addressed. The inadiquate hardware talk is total B.S. Too many people have been brainwashed by trash talk, graphics and payware.

I imagine your comments are insulting to the ACES team!

I think ACES team did a pants job with FSX! They could have done much better and I wouldnt blame Phil Taylor for getting outta the development sooner! Giving a flightsim platform to a games development company just says it all really. There's my insult! Imagine some more. Who's more imaginative, a gamer or a simmer... :(

[AJHeiser 0]

What is wrong with you people!?!? FSX is the way to go, why are yall hanging onto FS9 like it your own baby!? With newer products comes beter technology, yall are going to have to realize that. FS9 is going to fade away and I'll just be sitting here laughing while yall are all crying over that.And if yall are afraid of it cause you think you can;t run it on you comp, I don't have a high end computer and I run FSX very nicely.I LOATH FS9, why yall so afraid of FSX, its not like yalls comps are gunna blow up when you run it.Sheesh!

[AJHeiser 0]

Absolutely agree! And lets say the PMDG 737NG comes out a year from now. I wonder how many of those FS9 users will have upgraded to FSX by then? They will then buy the FSX version of the 737NG not the crippled FS9 version. Will PMDG even see good ROI for FS9? My point is the FS9 addon market will continue to shrink whilst the FSX addon market will continue to grow especially as "newbies" who recently bought FSX discover they can purchase highly realistic addons such as the FSX 737NG. I'm talking about online and in retail stores. I doubt retailers will even stock "FS9 only" addons since they don't sell FS9 boxes anymore, just FSX!

I agree completely....FS9 should really not even exist soon (I hope)

[Ralgh 43]

I am reluctant to weigh on threads like this one but here it goes. All I can say is most of you have a crappy attitude about this. Many of you are speking in absolutes or exaggerations based only on your opinion, not facts. The worst part is that a bunch of you have the attitude that if it is not what you want it has no value to anyone and should not exist. You have no ability to apprecieate the fact that others may like different things or have different priorities, advantages or limitations than you. It's a very self centered attitude and as I mentioned before a crappy one.The bottom line on all this is that these companies are businesses. If they see that there is a demand for a product they are likely to address that demand. The companies will make their decisions based on more level headed logic, not a bunch of petty bickering on the internet. I have only been doing the FS thing for about three years. I looks to me like the modding community really took off during the reign of FS9 thus a lot of people got addon planes, scenerys, and other utilities during that time. They are invested in it and want to continue getting value from their invesment. The programs are sorted out and have solutions to most problems. Then FSX comes along. Not without problems but ALL new software has problems. Those problems are being worked out by the simming comunity. FSX has better graphics and some neat new effects. Of course it takes more power to run all those things.You probably don't care but I am running both FS9 and FSX. I use FS9 more because I have a buch of stuff for it and it performs better. I remember when I got into this FS9 didn't always run smooth (FPS) but on my newest computer now it does. FSX runs a lot like FS9 did back then. It is reasonable to assume it will run as well as FS9 in a few years. There will be more mods for it an probably most people will use it. I know you guys aren't going to listen to me but I have to say cool your heads. Understand and accept the fact that your opinion is not the only right one. I'm sorry for my rant but I just couldn't keep reading these posts without venting a bit. Enjoy the simming you do and let others do the same.

[MatthewS 761]

I am reluctant to weigh on threads like this one but here it goes. All I can say is most of you have a crappy attitude about this. Many of you are speking in absolutes or exaggerations based only on your opinion, not facts. The worst part is that a bunch of you have the attitude that if it is not what you want it has no value to anyone and should not exist. You have no ability to apprecieate the fact that others may like different things or have different priorities, advantages or limitations than you. It's a very self centered attitude and as I mentioned before a crappy one.

My point is that if ACES need to drop FS9 support to move the platform ahead then they should do it without hesitation, rather than hold the platform back just to keep the FS9ers happy! That is not being selfish, that is simply wanting progress. I would argue that it's the FS9ers who want FS9 compatibility in FS11 just so that they don't have to spend any money upgrading hardware/addons are the ones who are being selfish!Thankfully, ACES is dropping FS9 support in FSX11.

[Ralgh 43]

My point is that if ACES need to drop FS9 support to move the platform ahead then they should do it without hesitation, rather than hold the platform back just to keep the FS9ers happy! That is not being selfish, that is simply wanting progress. I would argue that it's the FS9ers who want FS9 compatibility in FS11 just so that they don't have to spend any money upgrading hardware/addons are the ones who are being selfish!Thankfully, ACES is dropping FS9 support in FSX11.

That stuff isn't really what I am talking about. There are just a few guys basically saying FS(insert version here) is the only way to go and the other has no value. Different people like different things and those guys need to accept it. That is all.

[madtun 2]

That stuff isn't really what I am talking about. There are just a few guys basically saying FS(insert version here) is the only way to go and the other has no value. Different people like different things and those guys need to accept it. That is all.

No matter what any FSX users think as you can see FS9 is not going away that easy. One main point, why are all you FSX users not off flying the MD-11 right now instead of bugging us FS9 users waiting on our version. Could it be you are trying to convince us and PMDG to just drop FS9 products like THAT> Sorry go over to LEVEL D they are the only ones stiff neck about FS9.Carl P

[VHOJT 177]

What is wrong with you people!?!? FSX is the way to go, why are yall hanging onto FS9 like it your own baby!? With newer products comes beter technology, yall are going to have to realize that. FS9 is going to fade away and I'll just be sitting here laughing while yall are all crying over that.And if yall are afraid of it cause you think you can;t run it on you comp, I don't have a high end computer and I run FSX very nicely.I LOATH FS9, why yall so afraid of FSX, its not like yalls comps are gunna blow up when you run it.Sheesh!

1) Can you try and use the English language? (i.e. "you all" rather than "yall", "it's" rather than "it", "going to" rather than "gunna"...)2) If you'd actually read the post, and weren't just trying to "flame" or "troll" or whatever it's referred to, I would have thought it was abundantly obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than a single-celled organism what thoughts and opinions have caused some people to stay with FS9 for a while longer.3) Your name doesn't appear at the bottom of your post as per forum regulations.CheersRudyPS - I've probably just given you exactly what you wanted, a response!

[MarkRey 16]

I am reluctant to weigh on threads like this one but here it goes. All I can say is most of you have a crappy attitude about this. Many of you are speaking in absolutes or exaggerations based only on your opinion, not facts. ...Enjoy the simming you do and let others do the same.

Agree fully.

[klm251 62]

I agree completely....FS9 should really not even exist soon (I hope)

I just don't understand that you think that FS9 shouldt go offline if someone is happy with it rather then with fsx let them be also for ppl who use FSX let them use it make the choice wich platform is best for them self and don't start yelling that ppl using fs9 shouldt stop with it it just don't make sence

[ahuimanu 50]

Whew!! Take a deep breath now man. I hope all that selfish banter of yours makes you feel good. Let me remind you fsx only provides upgrades in terms of graphics and when compared to fs9 with all the great add-ons available, not by very much. And yeh, eventually developers will move away from fs9. BUT not yet my friend “see poll above” not yet…

Frankly, I gave the opposing point of view ample consideration. In any case, the developers admit that they have to make compromises to get their vision of what the MD-11 SHOULD BE into FS9. It is taking considerable time away from their ability to move forward and will seem more like a fool's errand as time goes by. It's all moot... you'll get your MD-11 and you'll enjoy yourself. And, two years down the road, when the 737-NGX comes out as FSX-only, you'll hopefully be in a position to enjoy it. I see the poll results, loud and clear... it is what it is. There are those who are taking an opportunity to bleat about the "bloat" and other ills of FSX as they clearly are unable to use it. That's okay too, you'll want to defend and rationalize what you are "stuck" with because to do otherwise is self-defeating. I too have thousands invested in FS9 add-ons, but I budget to move forward with the franchise. Like you guys do, I'll load up FS9 when I want that experience. I find it difficult to accept the assertions that FSX is "barely an upgrade" to FS9. FSX represents significant movement forward in many respects and I find the difference between flying in FSX just after an FS9 session to be quite astounding and in favor of FSX. That just me though, of course others won't agree.However, this is all the way of markets. For whatever reason (mostly poor performance on mid-range machines and a lack of true multi-core utilization), FSX is being passed over by some... this has happened in many other product lines (Windows ME rings a bell). I also hope you feel good in rubbing my nose in your poll results; yes, yes, there's more of YOU than of ME... You Win! Seriously though, have fun with FS9 and grease a few landings. In the meantime, afford some space for those NOT happy with the poll results as more "dual development" is likely to continue to spread the PMDG devs thin in a market rife with economic uncertainty, software piracy and other bugaboos.Really, though, do have fun with the MD-11... as I said before, it'll likely be the BEST FS9 aircraft available and you are sure to wear a grin while flying it.

[ahuimanu 50]

The bottom line on all this is that these companies are businesses. If they see that there is a demand for a product they are likely to address that demand. The companies will make their decisions based on more level headed logic, not a bunch of petty bickering on the internet.

There's a "gotcha" in dismissing our commentary on the matter. Behind most of those poll results (which is hardly scientific and certainly not of the quality of a true market study) we see in this thread is a sentiment - a position on the matter. It just so happens that a smaller percentage of us bother to sit down and chime in about it. I am not unhappy because FS9 simmers are getting a cool toy, heck there have been FS9 product announcements all year and I always say to myself "cool!." However, in this particular case, I am unhappy as it is clear to me that PMDG's state of the art has surpassed FS9 and PMDG would likely rather move forward and innovate for FSX (and beyond). Time spent wedging the MD-11 into a platform that isn't suited to it is regrettable to watch. But, as many of you have chided me over, my displeasure is at the cost of someone else's pleasure and, sure, ok, that is not so nice. We do have several cases lately where the reverse has been true: the FS9 version comes out before the FSX version.In the end, my point is this: do we really want these 3-4 year cycles between PMDG's products? Because that is about how long the MD-11 took. I realize that, occasionally, the main simulation product does have a 3-4 year cycle, but should this also be norm for the top-flight add-on products from PMDG? I'll admit I make somewhat of a strawman argument with that point, as FSX is just as much the cause for the MD-11s delay rather than the other way around. However, PMDG is clearly MUCH more pleased with what they can accomplish with FSX. Well, if the market dictates development and testing for the current and previous product cycle, then it will be the norm. As has been astutely pointed out, PMDG are running a business and won't risk alienating such a high percentage of their customer base. I think the nature of this particular release cycle may be a factor. Recall that the multitude of patching and the general "moving-target" disposition of FSX has caused some of the top-flight developers to be almost apologetic on ACES' behalf. The experiment in community openness and the embrace of 3rd Party Developers has been disruptive in both good and bad ways (which is usually the nature of change). All the upheaval has certainly caused some developers to be late to the party (regardless of who is at fault). What is interesting was all the banter in 2005 and 2006 on how the top developers were "hand in hand" with ACES for the development of FSX and how this unprecedented integration and cooperation with the add-on community was going to create better products. I am not sure if it has, but I do know that the MD-11 is the most incredible aircraft I've flown in any version of MSFS.Now, what we see 2 years and some months later is PMDG desperate to crank out a version of the most excellent MD-11 for a sim what was released 5 years, 5 months, and 8 days ago. They do this because that's what the market dictates by a ratio of 2 to 1 according to the poll in question. I say it is holding up progress on new opportunities and others say FSX is flawed and thus, all new ideas must also appear in FS9 because they are so vested in it. Clearly the selfish and self-serving attitudes cut both ways, which is why the problem is so intractable.In any case, serving the wants and needs of markets assumes that markets are rational - yet we have witnessed fresh reminders this year that markets are NOT always rational. The sentiments upon which we rest our purchasing power, especially when it comes to hobbies and trivial pursuits, is not always rational. One plausible argument would suggest that if PMDG were being rational about this, they'd throw their hands up and say "sod it, it's too difficult to go backwards like this... FSX only from now on." Until this present FS9/FSX schism that is EXACTLY what most 3rd party developers did when we had version changes in the past - they moved on and we followed. For some reason, it feels profoundly different this time around.In any case, your reasons for wanting and feeling entitled to an awesome FS9 version are sound and I really do sincerely wish you luck and happiness with it. I do see your point... we FSX guys have our toy and you are without. I admit it's not cool to poke at a guy anxiously awaiting his toy. The entire affair will certainly feel different 6 months down the road.

[thecoook 0]

There's a "gotcha" in dismissing our commentary on the matter. Behind most of those poll results (which is hardly scientific and certainly not of the quality of a true market study) we see in this thread is a sentiment - a position on the matter. It just so happens that a smaller percentage of us bother to sit down and chime in about it. I am not unhappy because FS9 simmers are getting a cool toy, heck there have been FS9 product announcements all year and I always say to myself "cool!." However, in this particular case, I am unhappy as it is clear to me that PMDG's state of the art has surpassed FS9 and PMDG would likely rather move forward and innovate for FSX (and beyond). Time spent wedging the MD-11 into a platform that isn't suited to it is regrettable to watch. But, as many of you have chided me over, my displeasure is at the cost of someone else's pleasure and, sure, ok, that is not so nice. We do have several cases lately where the reverse has been true: the FS9 version comes out before the FSX version.In the end, my point is this: do we really want these 3-4 year cycles between PMDG's products? Because that is about how long the MD-11 took. I realize that, occasionally, the main simulation product does have a 3-4 year cycle, but should this also be norm for the top-flight add-on products from PMDG? I'll admit I make somewhat of a strawman argument with that point, as FSX is just as much the cause for the MD-11s delay rather than the other way around. However, PMDG is clearly MUCH more pleased with what they can accomplish with FSX. Well, if the market dictates development and testing for the current and previous product cycle, then it will be the norm. As has been astutely pointed out, PMDG are running a business and won't risk alienating such a high percentage of their customer base. I think the nature of this particular release cycle may be a factor. Recall that the multitude of patching and the general "moving-target" disposition of FSX has caused some of the top-flight developers to be almost apologetic on ACES' behalf. The experiment in community openness and the embrace of 3rd Party Developers has been disruptive in both good and bad ways (which is usually the nature of change). All the upheaval has certainly caused some developers to be late to the party (regardless of who is at fault). What is interesting was all the banter in 2005 and 2006 on how the top developers were "hand in hand" with ACES for the development of FSX and how this unprecedented integration and cooperation with the add-on community was going to create better products. I am not sure if it has, but I do know that the MD-11 is the most incredible aircraft I've flown in any version of MSFS.Now, what we see 2 years and some months later is PMDG desperate to crank out a version of the most excellent MD-11 for a sim what was released 5 years, 5 months, and 8 days ago. They do this because that's what the market dictates by a ratio of 2 to 1 according to the poll in question. I say it is holding up progress on new opportunities and others say FSX is flawed and thus, all new ideas must also appear in FS9 because they are so vested in it. Clearly the selfish and self-serving attitudes cut both ways, which is why the problem is so intractable.In any case, serving the wants and needs of markets assumes that markets are rational - yet we have witnessed fresh reminders this year that markets are NOT always rational. The sentiments upon which we rest our purchasing power, especially when it comes to hobbies and trivial pursuits, is not always rational. One plausible argument would suggest that if PMDG were being rational about this, they'd throw their hands up and say "sod it, it's too difficult to go backwards like this... FSX only from now on." Until this present FS9/FSX schism that is EXACTLY what most 3rd party developers did when we had version changes in the past - they moved on and we followed. For some reason, it feels profoundly different this time around.In any case, your reasons for wanting and feeling entitled to an awesome FS9 version are sound and I really do sincerely wish you luck and happiness with it. I do see your point... we FSX guys have our toy and you are without. I admit it's not cool to poke at a guy anxiously awaiting his toy. The entire affair will certainly feel different 6 months down the road.

When the day comes that I leave FS9, it will be for X-Plane.

[Guest Charly]

Maybe it is, maybe it's not. I'm just giving my honest viewpoint on a product i have paid for and i'm not about to sugar coat it either. I'm disappointed with FSX and i feel that it have failed to deliver what i was looking for in the next generation flightsim and if that insulted the MS and ACES team, then i'm sorry for that, but my opinions and viewpoint still stand the same.If MS and ACES can't handle criticism, then that's their problem. I have paid for the product they delivered so i know what i'm talking about, i'm a paying customer like most of us are. I have every right to criticize their product if i feel it haven't delivered, just like everyone else that bought the product.

100% agree. FSX was one if not the worst FS release after FS2000 / FS2000 PRO... the real revolution was FS2002 with a mind blowing engine (at that time ofcourse) and then later FS2004 as an upgraded sim ... now, ofcourse FS9 will fade away in time, sooner or later that will happends.. but it will remains as the people choice rather than FSX .. a sim that will be remembered as a not so good release .. please ACES learn about the mistakes and don't release FS11 with the "optimized for future PCs" philosophy in mind ... 2 years after FSX release and still on second place against a 5 years release ... thats a fact and not only in this poll .. everytime a poll like this appears FS9 demolish FSX ... please learn.PMDG, thanks for taking the time to make this addon FS9 compatible... a lot of people thanks you.Regards