FS2k2 100 Steps forward FS2k4 20 steps back...

[Dillon 2,197]

After owning this sim for awhile and reading the other post here on this and other forums it seems Microsoft has dropped the ball on this one. Here are some issues I've found so far that make the sim unplayable and keep me going back to FS2k2,1. Dancing mountains in the distance at higher altitude..2. ATI Radeon display issues (9500, 9700, and 9800)3. No true overcast unless you add multiple cloud layers (doesn't work to well with downloaded weather as the weather is already preset).4. 3D clouds that kill frame rates when your flying above them. The clouds don't have the since to know that (smile) your aircraft is tens of thousands of feet above them, they always look as if they are two thousand feet away from your bird eating framerates all the way.5. Terrain doesn't look as good as FS2002 at 32,000ft. If you like flying low this is the sim for you but anything above 25,000ft doesn't feel the same as FS2002. Doesn't even get darker at higher altitudes.6. Can't save situations and use them as default flights. Even if your situation was saved with a default plane your going to get an error message "FS can't find the desired aircraft" (or something to that effect).Now I'm sure there are many other bugs/issues to report but if Microsoft refuses to patch this one this time around I for sure am staying with FS2002. I just hope developers keep developing for FS2k2 because though it had it's problems, at this point it's the more enjoyable of the two.

[TonyB 1]

Based on your last 10 or 15 posts, if I really try and read between the lines, and then use a huge jump in logic, I come to the conclusion that you are not happy with FS2004. Of course as several people have pointed out to you, some of these things may be fixed with a the impending driver update. Some other issues may be your settings. Some may be design choices. Tony

[Dillon 2,197]

Buy this sim and tell me what you think... I know it may sound like I'm complaining but trust me when you get it in your hands you'll see what I'm talking about. I can't wait till next weekend when most people have bought this sim and seeing the comments,unhappy remarks, and bug list people will report. This is just the beginning of what's to come and I'm just warning people about what their getting into... FS2k2 was a much more solid product right out of the box than COF, you'll see what I mean when you get it in your hands...

[Guest]

Ditto - I was just about to write pretty much the same thing. 1) There has been so much rant about the "superior graphics," but sorry, I don't see them. Once you get to higher altitudes, everything is dull, whereas FS2002 had a little color and personality all about. Oh - the dancing mountaintops and horizon are charming.2) The clouds, although improved from FS2002, are frame rate killers. As others have recommended, you can turn the sliders down and deactivate detailed clouds, but well - you're back in FS2002 at that point. 3) The ATI problems are annoying. I do not blame ATI either. The Radeons are great cards and I run a LOT of games on it with no problems and very impressive performance. All of the flashing when opening menu's and setting up the flight is very annoying. This is something Microsoft must have seen in testing and apparently ignored. Sure, ATI will probably put out a driver to fix it - but the onus shouldn't have been on them 100%.4) Poor multiple monitor support - this one really disappoints! Sure, you can run in windowed mode and undock modules to the additional monitors - but if I wanted to run in windowed mode, I'd go back to the FS98 era. And - even though you can switch to windowed, undock your panels, and switch back to full screen, the sim doesn't maintain ALL of your undocked windows. If I undock (for example) 5 windows, as soon as I go back to full screen, I lose 1 or two of them - who knows why. The FS customer base has a lot of home cockpit and multi-monitor users that were apparently brushed by the wayside with this little "improvement" in FS2004. 5) Have you seen the clouds coming out of the ground? 'nuff said on this one. 6) I have a 'fairly' high end machine. Not a 3.06 of course, but I don't spit at a 2.53 either - it does everything else with grace. With sliders taking advantage of the new functionality (basically - higher or max settings), I get "just OK" frame rates with default aircraft and nothing added to the sim at this stage. Smack me down if I even THINK about putting VMAX 747 RFP or PMDG 737NG on FS2004 - I believe we'd be in the single digit frames for sure (but I can't base this on fact because I haven't gotten brave enough to install either yet - waiting on the remaining PMDG development to finish and RFP is still working on the FS2K4 upgrade). Now that I've b*ed and moaned, there is a solution (as I've been taught that one should not complain unless they have a solution to the complaining). 1) Lower sliders to 50% or less.2) Don't use the 3d / detailed clouds.3) Don't use weather situations that put the weather at ground level or below. 4) Temporarily swap out Radeon cards with other brands until drivers are available that fix the ATI related issues. 5) Don't use multiple monitor setups. That should cure most ailments and provide reasonable performance on 2g+ machines. Oh - my final solution? eBay!

[Guest]

Well, while I cannot attest to the problems people are encountering while running this Sim, I can attest to the fact it don

[3Green 80]

It sounds like the patch for FS2002 (which is FS2004) should not be installed. I don't have FS2004, and don't think I'll buy until things "get fixed". Most add-on aircraft don't work, and yes I know, patches might be forth coming, but I love the look of FS2002 way better than the screen shots that I've seen of FS2004..PS: I think the sky in FS2004 looks too blue...

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi dilloll0, You are way going to fast, most things you have reported on the overcast and the ground that`s looks like fs2002, you can tweak them, also the light and sky/horizon change day by day,-Do not compare of a 2 years mature fs2002, compare to fs2004 with no addons, you are way too fastThe ATI problems still the same thing since 7 years on there drivers departement problems, they have juste released new driver for most released games like Unreal 2 and many more, go to their web site problems with ALT, flickering issue.-Can't save situations and use them as default flights.I have save tons of situation, all works"3D clouds that kill frame rates when your flying above them. "If you want inovation, do not expect to run all with no little price to paid, specialy fs2004 is for two years for better system later, and if you want don`t want improvement on weather for any fitur release, stick with the 2d clouds with all bugs in fs2002 on weather fs2002.Remember the releae of the FUIII , the sim could even not run well with major frame rate hit compare to fs2004 because of the weather in FUIII.I recommend to wait a little with before your bombarde each things that's you don't like it and presume it is not fixable and still posting. Just see the past with Fly1, flyII, fs2000,fs2002, fuIII, all of them have never be perfect at the release and either after and others worst with broken engine.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

[Guest edrutl]

I think the entire FS community needs to to maintain perspective. We want all the bells and whistles, yet grumble when they don't match the performance of FS2002 on machines that weren't even available when FS2002 was released. We want advances in graphics, functionality, but want to bring along products designed for FS2002 and FS2000.Some of us love graphics, others love flight models, others want the ultimate realism. We expect this product to meet the wishes of everyone from the causual simmer to the hardcore home cockpit builder.Ever since 98, the pattern's the same: "I can't wait." "I got it!" "It's really cool." "Wait, it's bug filled piece of crap." "MS blew it on this one" By the time the next version rolls around, we all love the previous version and can't wait to upgrade.IMHO FS2004 is a nice update. It has too many new features to be considered a "patch." Compared to previous versions, the performance out of the box is good. Remember, you weren't running FS2002 full tilt out of the box. And like FS2002, the graphics for FS2004 at the base setting are better than it's predesessor's high settings. My experience is that it's playable with today's technology. This is nothing like FS2K or FS98 where you had to wait for technology to catch up. After the first flight in the dusk/night transition or with poor weather/visibility, and FS2002 looked dated.We need to maintain perspective on the bug issue. I hate the flickering (and the way text smudges when you scross menu text) ATI issue too. But since it'll be resolved shortly, I won't condemn the whole program for it. Lack of multimonitor support is dissapointing.I think everyone needs to go into it an open mind. People with lots invested in FS2002 will probably keep both on their machine for awhile. But I'd bet there are WAY more satisfied users who are enjoying the new version than those who are ready to give up on it. IMO, a few bumps in the road is the price of progress. I also think it takes more than a few days to really evaluate the program.If someone is on the fence, they should sit tight for a few weeks and see what shakes out. If form holds true (FS2000 notwithstanding), we always end up falling in love with the new version -warts and all.ed

[Naji 5]

Well, guys, I have a completely different story here. Out of the box, on my machine with an ATI 9800, COF rocks to no end. There is no way I'm gonna even take a peek at FS2002 again! This new sim that Microsoft has given us is a real wonder.I've had COF for five days, and now I can't wait to come home from work to fly in it. It is fantastic in every way except for a few minor aspects.

[Guest]

I agree with stepping back and maintaining perspective...but....1) FS2002 Out of the Box worked fine on my old machine, a 1.4 ghz P3 Dell with 384 megs of Ram and a 128 mb Radeon 8500LE. Even packed out with add-ons (including Simflyers, PSS, VMAX, etc., it still ran acceptable).2) Out of the box, FS2004 with default only configuration runs "acceptable" performance wise, but doesn't look as good, sliders maxed or not.3) Suggestions to "wait it out" mean what? Microsoft's position of late has been "no patches" and I don't expect waiting it out will fix FS2004 (although many of the community's add-on developers may fix some of these problems via improved FS cfg settings, better clouds, better scenery, etc.)4) Will new hi-fi machines solve flickering scenery, clouds in the ground, bad coloring, bad multi-monitor support? Nope. It's bad coding. 5) People are bashing ATI's driver department. If they will check ATI's website and driver database, they will find that ATI has been making as many (at a minimum) certified driver updates as Nvidia since their release of the 9xxx series cards - so what's the beef there? None.6) A newer version of software, at a minimum, should be an improved working version of what it replaces. If new features are added - great! Don't take away what was there before though (unless it was also bad).

[Guest]

Since when has any stock graphics look good at 30,000+ feet. Since when has real views looked good when you are flying a real life airline. Of course its going to be dull! If you want graphics, then your going to have to fly below 15000...The danceing mountains does seem a bit bad thoughHow have flight dynamics improved?How do the small, major airports look that dont have detailed gates and scenery? (Not as big as ohare, but not as small as Green Bay type)?How does MS stock aircraft look?

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi Naji, "There is no way I'm gonna even take a peek at FS2002 again! This new sim that Microsoft has given us is a real wonder."It's really depend one some attitude, I remember many many similar comment on fs2002 at the release, 2d clouds, line in the horizon, crap weather engine, problems on video cards, poor frame rate, clouds hit frame rate, the water take hit, missing things here and here, I got no reflection, frame rate hit on AI traffic and ton's more etc..Anyways I can't back to fs2002, specialy when the addons will start to be available for fs2004, there is much more capability in fs2004, from what'I have seen on the engine and all stucture on files and added new capabiblity on the aircraft compare to fs2002.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

[Jay R 0]

Well,I got mine from Provantage. I have a PIII 1ghz, with 512mb, and an old but solid Geforce 2 Ultra.I am COMPLETELY satisfied with my Fs2004 performance, the sim is absolutely gorgeous. Even on my system the performance is very impressive, better than FS2002. That suprised me totally.I don't see the major problems most are seeing with the clouds. I dunno I must be lucky. Now I was also around when FS2002 was released and the comments I see now are exactly the same I saw then. It's only been a few days. It took us much longer to get our FS2002 configs to purr along like we wanted it too. GIVE IT TIME, stop jumping to these conclusions. Sheesh people have patience in time tips will pop-up, Windows ME will die awawy and go down in flames, and many other things will come around making it better and better.I notice some things that are not as I expected but I am sure as I tweak and play with my settings it will get better. And soon a new machine will get it to be even better.After installing it last night, I really don't think I will be going into FS2002 anytime soon after flying in this sim.

http://www.forefrontgrp.com/jayssigsmall.jpg"There is an art . . . to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss!"

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, "Now I was also around when FS2002 was released and the comments I see now are exactly the same I saw then.":-lol and some with the same nick nothing have change since 2 yearsCheers!ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

[Guest]

Naji, I'm with you 100%, and I am running a Celeron 2.0gHz, ATI Radeon 9600 Pro, 768mb DDR SDRAM, generic sound card in my Sony VAIO. I am getting 10-15fps with the sliders maxed on the ground at ORD. However, I do not run the sim with any AI Traffic or ATC as it just drives me crazy. I have been flying the LearJet,the Cub and the DC-3. All excellent, especially the Cub.I admit to haveing flown FS2002 2 times since I got FS2004 on Thursday(I couldn't wait for oshkosh, and ordered it on Provantage) but I only flew FS2002 because friends who only still had FS2002 wanted to fly, so I fired up 2002 a couple last times.Paul Meyer - Morris, C09http://www.flightsimnetwork.com/dcforum/Us...7b45404593a.jpg