While in agreement with your sentiments, keep in mind that a lot of this FSX vs FS9 bollocks is fueled by developers and publishers themselves. For example, I can't blame Aerosoft for wanting to kill off FS9 ASAP (after all, that means fresh $$$ for them), but their downright condescending and patriarchal tone sure as hell really irks me to say the least (fortunately most of the developers that develop for them couldn't care less and keep on churning out products for both platforms). Ditto for FSDT, who keep on saying how much they want to move to FSX but have to support FS9 because they still get 50% of their sales from that terrible, terrible platform. I always figured pecunia non olet, but it appears that it does stink when coming in the form of FS9 sales for some. Go figure.For the record, I own both sims, I wasn't all that terribly impressed with FSX so I've shelved it for now (my machine can easily run it on decent settings), but I'll probably go back to it when FS9 is phased out entirely. For now, I'm happy with FS9, while appreciating the fact that FSX does have a lot to offer.

This FS9 & FSX debate is similar to what I see in many flightsimulation forums. Its totally pathetic as many users from both sims just act like complete morons to each other. I cant understand where the bitterness comes from.FS9 users moan when there's FSX only products. FSX users moan because they seem to think FS9 users should spend money (because money grows on trees for all) and upgrade to an FSX capable machine.FS9 users demand dual platform addons or in some cases demand FS9 only products because apparently there is no market for FSX users.FSX users demand FSX only products and let the FS9 users be punished for not upgrading to FSXThere's just zero thought from either side. Weirdos :(

Hello Keiron,Why do you have to use such harsh words (pathetic, morons, moaning, bitterness, zero thought, weirdos...)?To me, on the contrary the whole post looks like a courteous exchange between simmers who try to explain and comment their respective position and choices - except from a few agressive comments like yours (in my opinion, at least). To me the poll and associated comments show that :- a large part of PMDG customers who answered still favor FS9 and the customer is always right (even if he/she sometimes is misinformed, or conservative)- FSX, being released a few years after FS9, has many improvements over its predecessor but not all customers have the time, the money or the motivation to make the switch.Supporting two platforms comes with a cost for everyone (and especially the developpers). I don't know the relative size of the "hardcore simmer" market who buy sophisticated add-ons like PMDG's (us) compared to the overall FS market but wereas other customers might be happy to buy the latest - and better - version of FS on the market and go fly happily, the passionned simmers make such an investment in time and money on non-portable, non-ugradable add-ons that they think twice before changing - especially if the change might involve starting from scratch with a more powerfull machine. Nothing moronic, there. Mainly common sense in my opinion The key questions for developpers is : if we start a project now, will our customer preferences have changed by the time the product reaches the market? Personnaly, at this time, I really hope that PMDG will stick with FS9 for the NG2.0Best regards,Bruno

While in agreement with your sentiments, keep in mind that a lot of this FSX vs FS9 bollocks is fueled by developers and publishers themselves. For example, I can't blame Aerosoft for wanting to kill off FS9 ASAP (after all, that means fresh $$$ for them), but their downright condescending and patriarchal tone sure as hell really irks me to say the least (fortunately most of the developers that develop for them couldn't care less and keep on churning out products for both platforms). Ditto for FSDT, who keep on saying how much they want to move to FSX but have to support FS9 because they still get 50% of their sales from that terrible, terrible platform. I always figured pecunia non olet, but it appears that it does stink when coming in the form of FS9 sales for some. Go figure.For the record, I own both sims, I wasn't all that terribly impressed with FSX so I've shelved it for now (my machine can easily run it on decent settings), but I'll probably go back to it when FS9 is phased out entirely. For now, I'm happy with FS9, while appreciating the fact that FSX does have a lot to offer.

Naturally I agree, I've heard quite a few simmers say similar things. I feel the same, i'll be sticking with FS9 for now, although FSX does look ace in contrast with FS9 even on low slider settings

Hello Keiron,Why do you have to use such harsh words (pathetic, morons, moaning, bitterness, zero thought, weirdos...)?To me, on the contrary the whole post looks like a courteous exchange between simmers who try to explain and comment their respective position and choices - except from a few agressive comments like yours (in my opinion, at least).

LOL oh don't be such a drama queen...harsh and aggressive :(

FS9 untill the FSX PMDG MD-11 was released, which forced me to start the tweak and add-on process. I have a machine that runs FSX pretty good, actually really good with slidders at 3/4 right, UTUSA and some addon scenery. I must admit, FSX has some things to offer that I like and will find it hard to go back to FS9 once the MD-11 is released for that platform. As for the weather in both sims, that never really mattered to me, I have always ran active sky for em. I guess if you talk about the cloud textures and such, FSX and FS9 are just about the same . Oh, the winds are much better in FSX, more realistic.Right now, Im in the 2D cockpit of the MD-11 with the sun setting crossing DRK VOR for KONT and Im getting 35FPS. That is my target FPS. Beautiful colors I must say.Anyhow, good luck with the beta testing, I bought the combo just as many others did and look foward to placeing her in my FS9 hanger.Merry Christmas to all and blue skies!!Brett LucasKSTLASUS 790FX MOBOAMD Phenom 9950 2.6 OC 2.9250gb SATA 7500 HD500gb SATA 7500 HD4gb DDR2 RAM ATI Radeon HD 4870X2 (Bad &@($* card)750W PSULiquid cooled system (CPU never reaches 53c at 2.9)24" and a 19" Samsung LCD monitors

Difference between FS9 and global warming, Willy, is preference and fact respectively.

:( :( :( WillyPS Bruno, What would you gain by getting 2.0NG in FS9? Isnt the current NG about all they could squeeze into an FS9 aircraft?

PS Bruno, What would you gain by getting 2.0NG in FS9? Isnt the current NG about all they could squeeze into an FS9 aircraft?

No, it is not... look at Fly the Maddog MD80, the great 747 from PMDG or the nice 767 from Level-D, I think the 737 is a bit under that... It is an "old fashion hard core simulation" but not at the level of what PMDG can do now, even for FS9.

PMDG MD-11 is probably going to be one of the last payware I'm gonna buy aside Airsimmer's Airbus series and NLS A380. I have too much non portable addons to abandon FS9 such as the PT Tu-154M. FSX was created with gamers, not simmers in mind, hence the tons of eye candy, missions etc. As for me, FS9 has reasonable graphics, which can be improved with existing addons to FSX quality. As long as the system modeling is extremely accurate I'm happy. The MD-11 could be missing a VC, (I hope there is an option to fly w/o it) with no exterior texture and I would still be very happy with it due to its excellent systems modeling. Once I have the last remaining positions in my hangar filled, I will stay with FS9 until FS11's addons can replace all my current addons. By then they will be far superior. I heard Microsoft overestimated people's PC performances at the time and they said if they could have gone back, they would have either toned FSX down or waited until more people had PC's that can handle FSX before they released the sim. As shown by the poll, for now and a little while more to come, the MD-11 will have a much larger customer base with FS9.

:( :( :( WillyPS Bruno, What would you gain by getting 2.0NG in FS9? Isnt the current NG about all they could squeeze into an FS9 aircraft?

Hi Willy,I am quite happy with the present version, which is still amazing for a sim released so many years ago but there is a long list of potential improvements that has already been discussed in several posts : IRS, HID, ACARS etc (see links below). http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?s=&...t&p=1508740http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?s=&...st&p=817078http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?s=&...t&p=1509386Also some of the algorithms can certainly be improved in light of the experience gained with the latest products. Finally, a radar would be great - although I understand the limitations of FS9 (and FSX for that matter) might preclude it.Bruno

Flying GA aircraft VFR, I now do preferably in FSX. However, I do have to stay away from large airports and use a minimum on AI traffic. Under these conditions, I get an acceptable of FPS.Flying IFR heavy metal is done only in FS9. I've bought the LDS-767 for FSX (upgrade from FS9 version was quite affordable), but I never use it :( because my FPS drop instantly to slide-show level.For the comming 1,5 to 2 years, I do not expect to be able to invest in a new high-end system, so I'll keep happily flying in FS9.

FSX was created with gamers, not simmers in mind, hence the tons of eye candy, missions etc.

Let me repeat that I do respect all people who chose FSX and I find it neither a better nor a worse decision compared to staying with FS9.But from my personal point of view that's exactly how I feel about FSX. I see I'm not the only one.Best regards,Rafal

FS9 is better Simulator!

We ALL must hope that we ALL can finally go to FS11.

hear hear, fs9 only here but in fairness this is indeed not good for 3rd party devs and thus the hobby, especially regarding the mother of all 3rd party projects - high end airliners.

I think FS9 is a far better and professional minded platform for flight simming than FSX

Both have their strengths and weakness. I don't feel FSX is as bad as a lot of people like to say and FS9 is not a good as some also put it. No I did not speed a lot of money and build me a mini Cray to run FSX either. Personnaly I only use FS9 for MD-11 Beta testing and of course my all time favorite, the PMDG 737. I own both the FS9 / FSX version of the 747 but I almost exclusively use the one in FSX. Don't get me wrong, FS9 is a good and it does have its place; I still love seeing how far off the ground I can get the Wright flyer. So I would say 85% FSX, 10% FS9 (Sorry Robert I mean when I am not BT MD11 FS9), and 5% is something I can't talk about.

I think FS9 is a far better and professional minded platform for flight simming than FSX

I just love these posts. Their only purpose is to start another flame-war between FS9 and FSX. Hey erjpilot, can you list some thoughts for such a statement? Or is it just because YOU still use FS9, so it must be better?The funniest thought around the flightsim world is without any doubt that FS9 is a professional simulation for professional pilots and FSX is just a game because it has only better graphics. Hmm, funny. Then, according to this logic, FS2002 was more professional than FS9, FS2000 was more professional than FS2002 etc. etc. Isn't the better graphics one of the reasons why ACES develop a new version of the flight sim? Isn't the better graphics good for making the simulation even closer to reality?What extra for the professionals does FS9 have, erjpilot? FSX has the same features plus it improves them. Maybe PMDG developers could tell us what FSX brings to them during an aircraft development. So tell me, FS9 users, why do you think that FS9 is more professional?? I would like to know because two years ago I left the hard-core flightsim world and joined "stupid" gamers...Regards, Marek