FS2k2 100 Steps forward FS2k4 20 steps back...

[Guest H_Kev55]

Sounds to me like another unhappy user simply because his expectations are too high. Opinions are like bums, everyone has one, but they're not all attractive.IMHO, return it and get your money back....KJhttp://fsgateway.com/frank/fs9paibeta.jpg

[Guest crashing_pilot]

>Sounds to me like another unhappy user simply because his>expectations are too high. >Opinions are like bums, everyone has one, but they're not all>attractive.>IMHO, return it and get your money back....>KJ>http://fsgateway.com/frank/fs9paibeta.jpggives KJ a round of applause:well said mate!

[Guest anthonye]

Being in the UK, and having to put up with the distributors not releasing until the officail date, I see a lot of comments regarding the ATI cards. I myself have the Nvidia card, but it would perhaps be handy to see the readme that comes with FS2004, so we could all over here see what is mentioned about ATI and other problems that could arise when we buy it..Any chance of someone posting the readme so we patient UK people can see it.RegardsAnthony......

[Guest ScottPilot]

That's good to here!I have a system with similiar specs to yours and after reading many of the posts here, I was almost ready NOT to go on Tuesday and buy FS2004 COF.I'm not expecting perfection due to my system specs, but if I get close to FS2002 performance on my machine, I will be happy.I own FS2002, Fly!, Fly! 2K, X-Plane 5 & 6 and I like them all for different reasons. Hopefully FS2004 will fit into the group.So I will give it a try.Scott :-)My System: PIII 1GHZ with 512MB SDRAM 2X AGPNvidia Gforce 4 MX 440 64MB card with 2 17" Monitors

[StoneC0ld 5]

And it'll be the same thing in FS2006, FS2008, FS2010......

[Bray 1]

I dont care to bash FS2004 much as I have already done a bit myself. But after more flying and tweaking today it is obvious that MS did a poor job with this one. And to those who say "we said the same for FS2002" thats not true. 2002 was a major improvement after the pressures put on MS. I recall the AVSIM boycott which was later called of. I dont advocate organized boycotts but 2004 deserves some pressure from users on MS. Why do we have to hear :Pull your sliders to the left, Disable this that and the other, and so on. Whats the point if we cant see and enjoy this sim?MS needs to publish the truth when it comes to system requirements. This thing needs the full treatment to really enjoy it. And as for the clouds growing out the ground, I saw that today, and had a good laugh. I guess that will not qualify for a patch. Next patch? 2006I will wait before spending on hardware upgrade and fly 2002 for my VA stuff.thanks for reading if you did :-)BillPS I cant wait for the AVSIM review to see how that shakes out for system requirements...and other short comings

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi Bray, "Why do we have to hear ull your sliders to the left, Disable this that and the other, and so on. Whats the point if we cant see and enjoy this sim?"Maybe only for you, or some system type, you don't have the choice.MS needs to publish the truth when it comes to system requirements."Each Msfs release:, Low, Mid and high Actual Market system, don't expect too much anything on lower end, like 1.2 ghz, gforce2 etc, it's even not a lower end system available to buy in most store etc.You will saw completly differents post from tons of others, so you can will see some post make no sens at all:-)Fs2004 already as Award Of Excellence at flightsim.com, I Expect maybe the same thing at avsim.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

[Guest WorkingStiff]

LMAO...this post is laden with irony.>Hi Bray,> "Why do we have to hear ull your sliders to the left,>Disable this that and the other, and so on. Whats the point if>we cant see and enjoy this sim?">>>Maybe only for your, you don't have the choice.>>>MS needs to publish the truth when it comes to system>requirements.">>>Each Msfs release:, Low, Mid and high Actual Market system,>don't expect too much anything on lower end, like 1.2 ghz,>gforce2 etc, it's even not a lower end system available to buy>in most store etc.>>>You will saw completly differents post from tons of others,>so you can see some post make no sens at all:-)>>>Fs2004 already as Award Of Excellence at flightsim.com,>Expect the same thing at avsim.>>>Like fs2002 at release, Some post make no sens at all :-)>>>Cheers!>>Thanks>Chris Willis>>[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons>For MsFs>

[Bray 1]

Chris I appreciate your input but I read all over this and other forums from users with much better systems than mine complaining about the severe frame rate hit with 3d clouds. This seems to be the biggest problem. Also I am surprised that you already know that Avsim will give the Sim an award for excellence. I guess I wont bother reading their report.I hate to say this, but I have to wonder if the flight sim journalistic community can be impartial after being wined and dined by MS. Every preview report was so lush and glowing, I am sure myself and a lot of users never saw this problem coming. We live and learnAnyway, I personally appreciate the work you do for add ons to make the sim better, and hope you can work more magic for us to get better performance with 3D clouds and to stop them growing from the ground up :-) It was really hilarius to see a cloud by a terminal building taking up a gate slotThanksBill

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi Bray, "stop them growing from the ground up "Disable the dynamic weather slider to off, if you are talking about this.Clouds can take frame rate hit on some situation, slider help if you do it right and still preserving the quality.You can't do nothing about this if you want 3d clouds and if you want improvement on weather or anything else, for now and any futur release.Imagine fs2004 with the fs2002 2d clouds, line in the horizon, clouds that's disappears to cirrus, klimited weather engine, fixed sky system, :-erks, since this sim is not even mature with no addon's and it will be for 2 years, whatch out all addon for fs2004.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

[Dillon 2,197]

I can't wait until the official release Tuesday, it's going to be enjoyable reading peoples reactions to this new sim. My expectations aren't too high just wanting to see an improvement over what we already have. I don't care what awards Flightsim.com gave COF, this sim is not all it could have been. Many users will confirm this by this time next weekend and it will be a joy to read... Below 10,000 feet the sim runs great but above that your going to have and see issues (not to mention the other issues mentioned, maybe MS designed this sim for low level flight to better accommodate the vintage aircraft included). The only reason more people aren't complaining is they haven't seen the sim in all it's overrated glory, in other words COF hasn

[Guest SoarPics]

"Every preview report was so lush and glowing, I am sure myself and a lot of users never saw this problem coming."I have not (and will not) waste my time reading any reviews about this sim, or any other for that matter. There simply is not enough objectivity in most of these reviews.Having said that, I see far fewer "it's a piece of crap" posts around the boards than FS2002 when it was released. Folks were pulling their hair out trying to figure out how to config that sim. Perhaps we'll see more unhappiness over the next week or so, but I for one am happy with the new sim. Runs well on my machine. The only issues I have are ATI flashing menus (confident that their driver guys will resolve this soon), making a default flight with a third party airplane (third party developers will have to address this issue), and the clouds growing out of the side of mountains (MS?? what ya gonna do?). I've also read posts about the multi-monitor problem.All in all, the sims runs extremely well for me. I have very few solid complaints... most of what I see can (and will) be resolved in short order.Just as it was in the 2K2.

[LAdamson 240]

>I hate to say this, but I have to wonder if the flight sim>journalistic community can be impartial after being wined and>dined by MS. Every preview report was so lush and glowing, I>am sure myself and a lot of users never saw this problem>coming. We live and learn>In my own case, as a beta-tester for FS2004...........I bagged FS98 in favor of Pro-Pilot & constantly got into it with those who favored FS98.I think that CFS3 "sucks", and never use it.I combined the scenery of FS2000 with CFS2 to have a decent simulationThought FS2002 was great ---- compared to anything elseBut now, after months of FS2004 ------ I much prefer it! Nearly everyone of my reports are also "lush & glowing" as you say.L.Adamson

[Guest SoarPics]

"I just can't wait to see how many people will praise this sim after Tuesday..."I believe the same ratio that we've seen in the past when a new iteration came out.We'll be here to assist folks in setting up their machines properly... we'll be here to help newbies config the sim for their computers... we'll be here to listen to the rants (there are always rants with any new product, software or hardware)... and we'll be here once the dust settles and folks really start enjoying the "new" sim.And two years from now we'll be doing the same thing again.

[Tabs 2,790]

This is hilarious - I read another post this morning claiming the exact opposite: that the visuals suck at low altitude and that everything looks great up high. Let the contradictory bashing begin! People expect way too much - every knows that MS designs FS ahead of the hardware curve because it has to last two years before the next version. If you expect to run this well on anything less than a 2Ghz with a GF4, you're dreaming. I have no delusions that this sim is going to run well on my current 1.4 GF3 rig, and I don't expect it to run AND look better than 2002. I'm interested in trying out the features like the clickable VC, the GPS etc with lower detail settings until I can afford the new system in a month or so...Ryan