Psolk posted in the FS9 forum too! Had a quick read and those FS9 users that responded are mostly a really excited user, pure and simple. Their fanaticism is actually quite funny and maybe a little sad. Poor guys. :(

errrrr....... he stated this at the top of his post.... I'm actually glad he posted them in both areas.disregard, I'm deleting what I was going to write...

I'm with kiwikat, I have absolutely nothing against FS9, just the users that expect developers to still cater to them which takes time and resources away from developing for FSX. You have all the addons you need, let developers make some for the current sim platform already. I love it when aerosoft starts a thread on a new high quality scenery for FSX only, the FS9 only squad sends in their members to post "will there be an FS9 version? why not?", get a clue guys. I fully try to support developers that develop for FSX only.

Business-wise you guys all know our standpoint on this.Personally though, here's why for me:FSX+addons looks much better than FS9+addons. Seriously, after using FSX with REX, GEX, UTX, PNW and so on for a while, go back and look at the same areas in FS9. It's a blurry low resolution mess by comparison. When FS9 came out, I was running a 19" CRT monitor at 1280X1024. The textures may have looked ok at the time, but on a 24" wide 1920X1200 screen, it's just all the more apparent how low res it really is. A big part of flight simulator for me personally is flying over landscapes that I know in real life - I've been fortunate enough to travel to a lot of places in the US and I like to be able to recognize what I'm flying over in the sim, just as I'd do in real life. Even at cruise in an airliner, it's important to me to be able to look down and see things looking like they actually do - it's not just about systems on screens in the cockpit to me like it seems to be for some. Looking out the window is a big part of real life flying. Seeing the terrain rendered in 5m mesh, 1m/pixel or better textures, tons more autogen, 4096 clouds, the better haze effect FSX has etc just looks FAR more convincing to me than FS9 is capable of producing. If looks don't matter then why did even FS9 become popular? Why not just stay on FS2002, or FS2000, or FS98 etc etc? It just so happens that you can actually go back into the archives of the Avsim forum and find numerous posts saying EXACTLY this with respect to FS2002 vs. FS9. People who thought clickable VCs were just a "gimmick" and cheap way for MS to cash in on another version. Complaints about framerate, even people saying they don't care about the new weather engine because the clouds in 2002 were "good enough." This happens every single time there's a new FS version, the community has a very short memory.From a developer standpoint it just does not make any sense at all to stay on the less capable sim in terms of texture resolution, model complexity, animation capability etc knowing that we aren't going to have another one. We'd never be able to move forward as creative people if we were stuck with the limits placed on us by FS9. The J41 VC would not exist. Much of the new NGX couldn't either. That element is there for us and I imagine for many other developers - the drive to see how much better we can do something. We aren't content to just sit and use the same old techniques over and over again because a minority of users either can't or won't upgrade their PCs so that they can use the newer features FSX has to offer.

My answer to your question is, some (and I am only talking about a minority here) think that because they have entered flight sim via FSX that it's the only one. When they found that FSX was nothing more than a 'slide-show' they badgered daddy to upgrade their hardware.Daddy not wanting his little runt to be upset complied with the request and now little johnny can boast that he has the latest 'all singing and dancing' hardware by not telling daddy that he pulled the wool over his eyes in a big way.As you will find in other forums the subject of your question is usually caused by the under 15's. It's a sad fact though that, some of our more mature associates never really progressed any further than the previous mentioned younger users.

The idea that FSX is popular because kids get their parents to buy them systems so they can run it well is the exact opposite of what we've seen in our data. Adult users who can afford system upgrades just go and do it - they run FSX just fine and buy addons for it. Many (not all, but many) kids/teenagers who don't have the money to upgrade stay on FS9 with their old hardware and go pirate addons. This is a generalization for sure, but we're positive this is the trend, not the other way around as you claim. Think about it, is spending $1500 or so to upgrade a computer once every couple years that big of a deal for most adults with steady income? It's worth remembering that flight simming is already by definition a luxury activity that costs a substantial amount of money to do, the idea that you should be able to do it perpetually without spending any money is ludicrous.

I use FSX and FS9. Lately Ive been using FSX more because of the VRS Superbug (looks and flies stunningly) but still have no plans to uninstall FS9. To be honest I will go where the addons I like go. I Like complex aircraft and most of the up coming ones that I want are FSX only so I guess thats where Im headed. I will go where the breeze takes me lol. PS I get the same performance on FSX and FS9 which is pretty good for me lol. They are also both very stable and flyable.

I'm with kiwikat, I have absolutely nothing against FS9, just the users that expect developers to still cater to them which takes time and resources away from developing for FSX. You have all the addons you need, let developers make some for the current sim platform already. I love it when aerosoft starts a thread on a new high quality scenery for FSX only, the FS9 only squad sends in their members to post "will there be an FS9 version? why not?", get a clue guys. I fully try to support developers that develop for FSX only.

There is no harm in asking IMHO. The harm comes when the answer is no and users feel the need to convince the developer to do it anyway ala the PMDG 777. I was one of the first to express my disappointment, that is understandable but I also expressed my understanding of PMDG's position and their need to run a business! No harm no foul there IMHO... It is when someone can not and will not accept the answer there is an issue and that brings FS9 users a bad name and should also be stopped. I agree with everyone on that as you will see by my last excerpt... The part I don't completely understand is your last comment... And it might just be the forum interpretation but do you mean you support their decision and defend it (which I totally understand and get) or do you mean you won't buy from a developer that develops for both? I am pretty sure it is the first one which makes a lot more sense...Makes sense Andy and I 100% get and understand Ryan's position from a personal and as I have mentioned a few times PMDG's business perspective...Flayandflight expressed where my head has always been at

About the only area where FS9 has FSX beat (for me) is when I'm flying in or out of busy airports with high addon traffic. It's truly a thing of beauty to have high and smooth framerates at JFK, O'Hare or Heathrow as the hustle & bustle of "Ultimate Traffic" airliners are arriving and departing. But that is something that a hardware upgrade will one day take care of. Then FS9 will join FS2000 in my CD bin of no-longer-used programs

although I am beginning to see with the latest HW and add-ons FSX is able to offer = performance at a greater immersion factor. Like I said earlier by the time PMDG releases the 777 (sorry NGX is coming first I just got excited about the 777 LOL) I fully believe the HW will be where it needs to be to get great performance out of FSX... With all due respect I think based on some of the more recent developments it is probably there now... And with all due respect to FSX it wasn't until 3 years after FS9 was released the HW for it hit its stride either...At least FSX has a longer ROI than FS9 ;) (Heck once the 777 is released all I will really need is a KEWR and FSX would be complete)And Matthew, what is your point? I clearly stated up front I posted in both areas and even KiwiCat acknowledged I was not biased in either and clearly stated this in both:

And for all the FS9 users myself included that does mean coming to terms that the development hayday of FS9 has long past and if you are going to stay with it you should for the most part be happy with what we have and NOT expect developers to churn out FS9 releases the same way they did in the past. We do not always do ourselves favors by assuming every release is going to be FS9 compatible although we are CERTAINLY grateful when it is!!! There is a certain level of reality that has to be faced if choosing to remain with FS9. So I do not hold FS9 users in a white light with a halo around their head either, I see both sides but again, I do not understand the animosity, the lack of appreciation for FS9 and what it is and was; and the insults strewn at FS9 and its users...

So again, what is your point?

My impression is that a lot of FS9 only simmers are a lot more committed and involved in this whole kind of argument. I'd be willing to bet a lot that this thread was started by a FS9 only simmer, and I don't think I'd be far off when I claim that some FS9 only simmers are very sensitive and defensive when it comes to FS9 vs FSX development. That's why I take all those surveys "which is your favourite sim - vote FS9 or FSX" with a bucketload of salt. It doesn't seem that FSXers are that involved. Most of us (me being FSX only - not on principle but because I can't be bothered installing FS9 the last few years with such amazing addons for FSX) seem to say that "Whatever floats your boat". We don't seem to have that many a really excited user.Which wouldn't be such a bad thing if FS addon developers were huge international companies with hundreds of workers. As long as addon developers are relatively small companies with limited funds and work force, developing for both platforms will slow everything down. I don't think that's an unfair assumption, but developers please do correct me. I think that FS9 will become more and more marginalized as time goes by, as simmers do have to replace their PCs at some point, and payware companies do have to make money to stay in business.Looking forwards to when FSX is "old" and the average five year old PC can run it flat out with all sliders maxed. By then I don't think this will even be discussed anymore, and most quality payware addon companies have stopped developing for FS9 - that'll hopefully speed things up for those of us who have "already" made the plunge.

My impression is that a lot of FS9 only simmers are a lot more committed and involved in this whole kind of argument. I'd be willing to bet a lot that this thread was started by a FS9 only simmer, and I don't think I'd be far off when I claim that some FS9 only simmers are very sensitive and defensive when it comes to FS9 vs FSX development. That's why I take all those surveys "which is your favourite sim - vote FS9 or FSX" with a bucketload of salt. It doesn't seem that FSXers are that involved. Most of us (me being FSX only - not on principle but because I can't be bothered installing FS9 the last few years with such amazing addons for FSX) seem to say that "Whatever floats your boat". We don't seem to have that many a really excited user.Which wouldn't be such a bad thing if FS addon developers were huge international companies with hundreds of workers. As long as addon developers are relatively small companies with limited funds and work force, developing for both platforms will slow everything down. I don't think that's an unfair assumption, but developers please do correct me. I think that FS9 will become more and more marginalized as time goes by, as simmers do have to replace their PCs at some point, and payware companies do have to make money to stay in business.Looking forwards to when FSX is "old" and the average five year old PC can run it flat out with all sliders maxed. By then I don't think this will even be discussed anymore, and most quality payware addon companies have stopped developing for FS9 - that'll hopefully speed things up for those of us who have "already" made the plunge.

I wouldn't call myself an FS9 simmer only anymore, (oh yeah, I am the thread starter) I would call myself a dual purpose simmer based on what I am doing that day... IE. flying from KEWR to EHAM in a 777 I am going with FS9 (for now) going in the MD-11 from EGLL-LSZH would have previously been FS9 due to ActiveCamera but now with EZCA could go either way depending on which OS I happen to boot into LOL...And while I understand your comment about FS9 simmers being defensive there are certainly a fair number of FSX "a really excited user"(others term, not mine) who repeatedly bash FS9 and its users.This post was not started as a debate between the sims, love them both, grateful for them both which is sort of the whole point, it was started to understand the animosity and was quickly and correctly pointed out I had not explored the constant bashing of FSX by a limited but vocal few on the FS9 side that gave FS9 users a bad name. I too prefer to go where the flow takes me which is clearly in the FSX direction and the current is moving from a slow stream to white water, I just don't understand why it has to be such an ugly heated argument and debate with the bashing and namecalling and demeaning comments...That is why this post was started...

The part I don't understand is your last comment... And it might just be the forum interpretation but do you mean you support their decision and defend it (which I totally understand and get) or do you mean you won't buy from a developer that develops for both? I am pretty sure it is the first one which makes a lot more sense...

Actually it's both, but more the later. The best way to influence any business is with spending afterall their goal is to make a profit. I have bought addons that I really don't use, just to show my support that they produce for FSX only. Carenado still make FS9 addons and the only reason I still support them is that they release addons quickly, which is not the norm for a developer that caters to both sims. I really want their new Bonanza, but I will bet that the reason it's not out yet is they are reworking the C185F SKYWAGON for FS9 users, so you can see my frustration. When it comes to scenery, developers that produce for both sims, either have to do two totally different versions because of the differences in code and design, or they skimp and use FS9 code that still works in the FSX version and leave out some of the great FSX only features which is unacceptable. Fortunately the developers that are still making FS9 addons are becoming less and less each day, so I am looking forward to some great products that will hopefully be coming out soon.I know hardware is a factor to most, but I sure do miss the days when everyone was using the same sim instead of having the community so divided. Hell, at our forums at SOH, I rarely visit the FS9 forum, no reason to as I don't use it.

And Matthew, what is your point? I clearly stated up front I posted in both areas

Just pointing out the FS9 "a really excited user" responses to your post over of the FS9 forum. Its hilariously biased over there and a perfect example of why developers should ignore the FS9er "noise" and focus on FSX only products! Most of them already do nowadays anyway. :(

Again....why are we talking about this in the FSX forum? Mod, please lock&move.

Again....why are we talking about this in the FSX forum? Mod, please lock&move.

Um, because we are talking about FSX and FS9. Don't be such a forum "cop". :( I think we are all having a good discussion!

Actually it's both, but more the later. The best way to influence any business is with spending afterall their goal is to make a profit. I have bought addons that I really don't use, just to show my support that they produce for FSX only. Carenado still make FS9 addons and the only reason I still support them is that they release addons quickly, which is not the norm for a developer that caters to both sims. I really want their new Bonanza, but I will bet that the reason it's not out yet is they are reworking the C185F SKYWAGON for FS9 users, so you can see my frustration. When it comes to scenery, developers that produce for both sims, either have to do two totally different versions because of the differences in code and design, or they skimp and use FS9 code that still works in the FSX version and leave out some of the great FSX only features which is unacceptable. Fortunately the developers that are still making FS9 addons are becoming less and less each day, so I am looking forward to some great products that will hopefully be coming out soon.I know hardware is a factor to most, but I sure do miss the days when everyone was using the same sim instead of having the community so divided. Hell, at our forums at SOH, I rarely visit the FS9 forum, no reason to as I don't use it.

Ok, I can understand supporting FSX developers but punishing a developer just because they still develop for FS9 is not doing anyone any favors, hurts everyone and helps no one. I mean think of the ERJV2, FSDT PHNL, REX, ASA/ASE, UK2000EGCC, EHAM and so many others; you are going to punish all those developers because they still support the sim you don't support? That is just as wrong as someone not buying from PMDG anymore JUST because they moved to FSX even if they flew FSX :( That is the part I didn't understand so thanks for clarifying, I might strongly disagree but to each their own if that is your choice...

Again....why are we talking about this in the FSX forum? Mod, please lock&move.

Because Scott maybe if we speak about it and don't sweep it under the rug we can all come to a middle ground and get rid of the negativity and forum animosity with every new release...Like 1mikel151 said,

"I also miss the days when the forums weren't divided"

and when there wasn't all of the negativity associated. I started a thread to try and bring FS users to a common ground and understanding not debate FS9 V FSX.Paul

I wouldn't call myself an FS9 simmer only anymore, (oh yeah, I am the thread starter) I would call myself a dual purpose simmer based on what I am doing that day... IE. flying from KEWR to EHAM in a 777 I am going with FS9 (for now) going in the MD-11 from EGLL-LSZH would have previously been FS9 due to ActiveCamera but now with EZCA could go either way depending on which OS I happen to boot into LOL...And while I understand your comment about FS9 simmers being defensive there are certainly a fair number of FSX "a really excited user"(others term, not mine) who repeatedly bash FS9 and its users.This post was not started as a debate between the sims, love them both, grateful for them both which is sort of the whole point, it was started to understand the animosity and was quickly and correctly pointed out I had not explored the constant bashing of FSX by a limited but vocal few on the FS9 side that gave FS9 users a bad name. I too prefer to go where the flow takes me which is clearly in the FSX direction and the current is moving from a slow stream to white water, I just don't understand why it has to be such an ugly heated argument and debate with the bashing and namecalling and demeaning comments...That is why this post was started...

Good answer, I stand corrected and what a nice and polite tone! I wish more simmers could handle such a discussion with that attitude. I'm become somewhat of an FSX a really excited user myself, because of the current addons. It seems to me that the FS9 a really excited user are more numerous and more aggressive than the FSX a really excited user, despite I think that there are probably more FSX users than FS9 users. I think the numbers play out wrong because a lot of FSX users aren't even bothered with this discussion or others on this subject, "having moved on already". So I guess most of "us" don't qualify as "a really excited user" if that term is used for someone who can only see one side of the discussion.The most avid a really excited user actually sound like they're advocating a religious conviction or something, regardless of which camp they're in. :( But I wish they'd say "oh I wish you could experience my sim in all it's glory" and not go on saying "you suck for using that sim" or things to that effect.

Maybe because FS9 simmers have a negative disposition to FSX?