Interesting discussion on FlyTampa forums

[Dillon 2,197]

I have to admit FTX does a great job in Image 1 & 3, but I'm not entirly flying in Australia. But Jean-Paul, with all due respect, image 2 (Perpignan) does not look better or worse than what I see within my FS9 with GEPro, AS6.5, UT, detailled mesh, a good land class etc. http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtop...058&hl=fengSorry to disappoint you.Wolfgang

A good Feng post always does the trick for topics like this... :(

[mwilk 1,106]

A good Feng post always does the trick for topics like this... :(

I was thinking the same thing. Amazing stuff. It must be written down somewhere that these threads have to pop up every couple of weeks.

[Jean-Paul 167]

A good Feng post always does the trick for topics like this... :(

Glad that Feng's screenshots did the trick for you. I happen to prefer what moves on my screen :(

[F.Alonso22 4]

IMO FSX it

[Jean-Paul 167]

It must be written down somewhere that these threads have to pop up every couple of weeks.

Yes, and as long as statements like these are posted in this forum, it is likely to continue

IMO FSX it

[Guest djt01]

Neither of them are flawed. They are just different

Correction, FSX

[mwilk 1,106]

Yes, and as long statements like these are posted in this forum, it is likely to continue

Jean-Paul, I fly both FS9 and FSX and enjoy both. My point is, these "My sim is better than your sim" threads show up all of the time. There won't be a resolution because each group has their own opinion along with valid points to back them up. You,on the other hand seem to be trolling for an argument.

[Guest djt01]

IMO FSX it

[Jean-Paul 167]

You,on the other hand seem to be trolling for an argument.

Perhaps you should re-read my posts then. Anyway, I won't bother you any longer.

[Guest deltaflight]

Yes, and as long as statements like these are posted in this forum, it is likely to continue

Jean, your right. And while your images were very nice, only the 3rd exceeds FS9 and the first two were subordinate. Especially the first one where the horizon leads to no where. Additionally, I also notice when FSX snapshotters of detail there always done in puddle jumpers and rarely, if ever, at altitude and from a plane going faster than 300 knots.I suppose it was said long ago, and still holds true, the two platforms as it relates to aircraft:FS9= High and HeavyandFSX= Low and slow Mitch

[flightwatch 68]

I don't know where that magazine got its information btw (probably very old source material) - we are not doing an FS9 NG, the real information is on our forum.

So this is PMDG's official response about the NG?? Because I have searched your forum high and low for that information, but that I keep getting is that PMDG has not made a decision yet. As Les stated previously, if your market research data is as flawed as your comment about the forums (which I personally think it is), then that leaves something to be said...But it is Robert's company, and he can do whatever he wishes.

[cmpbellsjc 2,961]

Jean, your right. And while your images were very nice, only the 3rd exceeds FS9 and the first two were subordinate. Especially the first one where the horizon leads to no where. Additionally, I also notice when FSX snapshotters of detail there always done in puddle jumpers and rarely, if ever, at altitude and from a plane going faster than 300 knots.I suppose it was said long ago, and still holds true, the two platforms as it relates to aircraft:FS9= High and HeavyandFSX= Low and slow Mitch

Look sport, it's clear that you hate FSX which is fine by me and you have already set your mind to believe that FSX is only good for low and slow. Still there are many users, me included, that ARE able to fly heavies into major hubs and not have a slide show for performance. If you look at Soya's images or other peoples shots you will be able to find this out. Why not just man up and say that for you FSX won't cut the mustard but for those of you that are able to run it with no problems, hats off to you. Is it jealousy that you don't own the hardware or skill to set it up? Or that it frustrates you to see other succeed with a platform that wouldn't work the way you wanted? Could be, I don't know, but the generalizations you make regarding YOUR experience don't hold true for everyone.Like Jean-Paul said its not worth getting into a pissing contest over it. For every reason you find to hate FSX others will find a reason to praise it. Would you agree with that chief?

[pan pan pan 55]

Cohort wrote;

So this is PMDG's official response about the NG?? Because I have searched your forum high and low for that information, but that I keep getting is that PMDG has not made a decision yet. As Les stated previously, if your market research data is as flawed as your comment about the forums (which I personally think it is), then that leaves something to be said...But it is Robert's company, and he can do whatever he wishes.

I agree wholeheartedly.As soon as they said,"oh maybe we wont make it for FS9", it was dead and buried, didnt need to wait for an official response.As i said, i dont have a problem with them going FSX from now on, as Cohort said it is Robert's company, but when they kept promising the NG was definitely being made for FS9 for, what was it, over 2 years, and then turn around and say no not now, well that 'aint good business and its ###### a lot of people off.Andy

[JET 1 0]

As Les stated previously, if your market research data is as flawed as your comment about the forums (which I personally think it is), then that leaves something to be said...But it is Robert's company, and he can do whatever he wishes.

With all due respect, have you seen and studied their market research data? Didn't think so. So how can you, or anyone else who has not done so state or even express an opinion that it is flawed? You can't. I wish people would stop saying such things.Well, ok, you can say what you want but it's pretty pointless and and has zero value as an argument.

[bsmfinegan 12]

With all due respect, have you seen and studied their market research data? Didn't think so. So how can you, or anyone else who has not done so state or even express an opinion that it is flawed? You can't. I wish people would stop saying such things.Well, ok, you can say what you want but it's pretty pointless and and has zero value as an argument.

The problem is many of these FS9 users can't accept that eventually their sim will have to take a back seat to FSX. :( :( Add on makers are starting to 'wake up and smell the coffee' so to speak and sooner or later the FS9 users will do the same. :( B) Bryan.