FSX and the Mathijs Kok Interview

[Cruachan 705]

Hi,I would encourage everyone to take time to listen to the Mathijs Kok interview at:http://fsbreak.com/Everyone who has had dealings with Mathijs will, like me, regard him with the highest respect. He is someone who really does care about his customers and is always willing to help whenever he can. His comments about FSX are particularly interesting. Also there are some hints about Microsoft's current attitude towards serious flight simulation and third party developers which, to my mind, sucks big time. However, I suppose we shouldn't be surprised as it seems the leopard, after all, will never change its spots.The prospect of a new simulator from Aerosoft is already starting to rekindle my excitement in the hobby whereas FSX and its performance issues had all but finished it off. Thank god for FS9! Reading between the lines I now suspect that the all too brief but excellent public relations exercise which manifested as Phil Taylor's helpful discussions with the community had nothing to do with Microsoft but was, instead, solely down to ACES. Perhaps I was kidding myself that Microsoft actually cared about what we thought. It now seems pretty clear that the reality in fact was that it had been tolerating the existence of the Flight Simulator/ACES franchise until, finally, the opportunity came to ditch them once and for all.If Aerosoft's new flight sim does see the light of day (and the signs are certainly looking good) we can be sure that at last we will have a simulator of substance that we can really get our teeth into. Yes, as always, with any new venture there will be teething issues, but this time we will know that the support will be there and that support will be both enthusiastic and willing. I don't wish to denigrate ACES in any way but, it has to be said, that it is more than likely that their acceptance of the need for better relations with our community only came about as a direct result of concerted pressure from many within that band of unhappy people.Anyway, once again I encourage you all to listen to the interview. It is very interesting and insightful.Mike

[rojantrojan 17]

I listened to it on the way to work this morning. I thought it was great and very informative. If what he says is true about high end graphics cards causing timing issues with FSX then that really is worrying! I too am quite excited about Aerosoft producing a modern advanced "open source" flight simulator but I think it is a long way off. It's certainly interesting to put an actual voice to a very well respected individual in the forums. I agree with Mike, the interview is well worth listening too. Rhydian

[Tim_Capps 474]

Aerosoft has long been one of my favorite companies. Non-FS sims have not been happy experiments with me, and I'm one who thinks FSX is pretty good, with enough decent stuff to keep me occupied for many hours a day. But if Aerosoft made a serious stab at it, it would be interesting.Their Beaver was one of my all-time favorites.

[Guest Nick_N]

The primary problem with FSX is poor design with respect to memory and CPU cache communicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_disambiguationAlthough I do agree that FSX can be a bit of a pain to get tuned in, I have no problems with FSX and newer hardware.. noneMost issues stem from users assuming hardware ability based on model numbers and Toms Hardware and do not take into account properly matching the CPU, memory and video card with the final clock and memory timingFSX is a pain in the arse because of that but none the less the problem with the app stems from its older rendering engine base design and what was added to it from FS9 without clear thought as to how bad the memory and CPU system is (in my own words) 'attacked' by the code. Phil Talyor said quite clearly FSX hits the memory system very hard and could have been much better designed if it had been thought out early on. Same with mutithread ability.A new sim like any other software will have its own set of issues to deal with even if it does address the ones that FSX left behindThe term "You get what you pay for" with respect to hardware will STILL apply

[Glynn 405]

Hello NickI am now getting much better performance in FSX than FS9, I have both sims on this machineresiding on their own drives, so I have done many back to back flights in order to confirm myfindings.E6600 @ 3.28800 ultra @ 1900x1200 on a 27" dellXP32bit sp3So not a great machine by todays standards but I rarely drop below 30fps and thats withRadar contact and FSmeteo running , also Shoot1.6.4 for voice control of Radar contact.Two key steps to getting good performance in FSX1.Only run FSX native addons under SP2/acceleration2.Set up the OS and sim as per your guide.Two things preventing folk running FSX smoothly1. Installing it on the machine they originally bought to run FS9 well2. Running aircraft ported over from FS9

[jrhoads 6]

Although I do agree that FSX can be a bit of a pain to get tuned in, I have no problems with FSX and newer hardware.. none

Exactly. I totally disagree with the statements made that newer graphic cards cause timing issues and do not work as well as older cards. Hogwash.Jim Rhoads

[ryanbatc 12,800]

I started to listen but then I got sidetracked, maybe tonight...The other problem is you need a lot of cash to get a really solid FSX system. Especially now it can be difficult to get that accomplished. My system is getting near the low end of medium haha but I've made some compromises such as disabling road traffic in UTX, running high (not max) cloud coverage and normal-dense autogen depending on where I fly. FSX can be very enjoyable on my system, for the type of flying I do - GA singles/twins and the occasional bizjet (F1 Mustang)

[Mace 1,902]

I started to listen but then I got sidetracked, maybe tonight...The other problem is you need a lot of cash to get a really solid FSX system. Especially now it can be difficult to get that accomplished. My system is getting near the low end of medium haha but I've made some compromises such as disabling road traffic in UTX, running high (not max) cloud coverage and normal-dense autogen depending on where I fly. FSX can be very enjoyable on my system, for the type of flying I do - GA singles/twins and the occasional bizjet (F1 Mustang)

You gonna rebuild ryan? I know you were talking about it one time a few months ago. Just can't bite that bullet eh?A friend of mine just offered to buy my FS rig (the E8500 box) today (he's bought my old comps in the past). :) I am tempted...(to get one of these i7's). However, I was hoping to wait for Sandy Bridge...but it looks like that is being delayed a bit.

[Chock 17,769]

FS Break is usually an entertaining listen and it was certainly worth hearing what Mathijs had to say, although I don't think he was really saying anything we didn't already know. Once Bill Gates was out the door, everyone knew FS would be on shaky ground.I guess I'm one of Aerosoft's cliche customers from what was said about how much people buy in terms of repeat business, since I'm from from the UK and I have Flight Keeper, TSR Autobrake, their Twin Otter, their Catalina and probably other stuff too which doesn't immediately spring to mind, and I'm currently in the process of testing out one of their other products on behalf of AVSIM.I sure hope they do get their flight sim(s) off the ground - note the plural - since according to PC Pilot they apparently have two such projects in the pipeline, and I agree that despite what X-Plane's Austin had claimed the other week on FS Break, the constant chopping and changing of X-Plane is a stumbling block for long term commitments from developers.I was amused by Mathijs' pirate hunting endeavours too, which is certainly a proactive way to garner sales.If Mathijs happens to see this thread, I say make the damn Boeing 314 anyway, you could get it to perform a bit like the Martin Mars if you need a base from which to start working out flight characteristics for a big-assed flying boat, and you'd get a least on sale based on how good the Catalina is, because I'd buy it.Al

[flyerkg 62]

This interview provided insight to things I had curiosity about. I have been reading the Aerosoft forum for discussion on a potential new simulator and a lot of users are posting concepts to be considered. I am hoping there will be some perspective payware corporate jets or turboprops in the upcoming future to satisfy any interest in short to medium flight. I would encourage enthusiasts to visit the Aerosoft forums.Keith

[Guest jshyluk]

Flight simulation isn't dead, but it isn't what we are used to anymore, either. It's almost like going back to the early 1980's, except our computers, hardware controllers, and our networks are more powerful. I expect that we will start hearing flight sim news from all sorts of unique sources. Jeff ShylukSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

[Geofa 108]

Flight simulation isn't dead, but it isn't what we are used to anymore, either. It's almost like going back to the early 1980's, except our computers, hardware controllers, and our networks are more powerful. I expect that we will start hearing flight sim news from all sorts of unique sources. Jeff ShylukSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

I long for the late 90's when many were competing to make the best sim-and the barriers of flight simulation were pushed. It would be nice if desire for the best sim and a little imagination to do so took grip again ...Not holding my breath-but hoping.

[Guest jshyluk]

Ab-so-lutely! I could not have put that better myself. Microprose, Spectrum Holobyte, EA (with Chuck Yeager & Jane's) and all those other great flight sim options... man, oh, man...Jeff ShylukSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

[Virtualwombat 4]

I found this week's interview really interesting. FSBreak are going great guns with their guests. First Austin Meyer and now Mathijs. Maybe next week they can get Phil Taylor!!! :( My take home messages were:1. FSX can survive only a couple more years before it will look dated against new releases.This is what I've been saying since ACES was canned. It's already starting to happen if you look at The Rise of Flight.2. FSX performance doesn't scale with hardware speed. Well, we all knew that. While I don't agree that new GPU's give poorer frames than old GPU's, it is certainly true that my system does not run FSX nearly as well as it should given the horsepower available.Cheers,Noel.

[Geofa 108]

I found this week's interview really interesting. FSBreak are going great guns with their guests. First Austin Meyer and now Mathijs. Maybe next week they can get Phil Taylor!!! :( My take home messages were:1. FSX can survive only a couple more years before it will look dated against new releases.This is what I've been saying since ACES was canned. It's already starting to happen if you look at The Rise of Flight.2. FSX performance doesn't scale with hardware speed. Well, we all knew that. While I don't agree that new GPU's give poorer frames than old GPU's, it is certainly true that my system does not run FSX nearly as well as it should given the horsepower available.Cheers,Noel.

Curious-I looked at your Rise of Flight. I didnt' see anything earth shattering-am I missing something? Weather looked average, planes with ww1 instrumentation obviously not taking many cyles-ground scenery looked like present xplane.I love sims -was unwaware of this one and will probably support it-but what is ground breaking?