Its like saying why you have found memories of your first car.

Its nothing like that .. :(

Personally MSFS has always been a joke, up until Direct3D... I don't understand why you old timers like the older versions, given the competition back in the day.

I enjoyed FS2 (Amiga 500), and FS4 (PC) back in the late 80s and early 90s, but FS5 was a complete joke. The terrain graphics were the worst that I have ever seen in a flight simulator. Calling that horrible shimmering mass of textured garbage "photorealistic" was about as accurate as saying that the Moon is made of cheese.

FS4 will always have a special place in my heart. That was when the Aircraft & Scenery Designer and Aircraft & Adventure Factory came out, thus making the Flight Simulator franchise a platform unto itself and one of the first-- if not THE first-- entertainment softwares to amass a 3rd party add-on following. Before First Person Shooters got their user-made levels, we were flying around in rudimentary, polygonal, 16 color representations of our home towns.

... Before First Person Shooters got their user-made levels, we were flying around in rudimentary, polygonal, 16 color representations of our home towns.

The simulator required more imagination back then and the (much smaller) community seemed to have gathered mostly at Compuserve.

Frankly I can only speak for the PC, but out of Falcon 3.0 , Micropose F-19, F-29 Retaliator with its modem link, Secret weapons of the Luftwaffe, and A-10 Tank Killer, FS had the worst graphics out of all of them and the worst gameplay. That's what at least 5 flight simulators for the PC in 1991 to choose from. So technically not even in my Top 5 sims of the era.

Frankly I can only speak for the PC, but out of Falcon 3.0 , Micropose F-19, F-29 Retaliator with its modem link, Secret weapons of the Luftwaffe, and A-10 Tank Killer, FS had the worst graphics out of all of them and the worst gameplay. That's what at least 5 flight simulators for the PC in 1991 to choose from. So technically not even in my Top 5 sims of the era.

Of course... not a single one of those other 'sims' allowed you to fly anywhere in the world, only FS. Also, the actual flight dynamics in those other 'sims' were... questionable... at best. Perfectly fine for entertainment purposes, but as far as accuracy is concerned... they each had some serious flaws. Even Falcon 3.0. Oh, and FS wasn't a 'game'. Seriously.

Anywhere in the world... I don't think the entire world fit on a floppy disk now did it? Second of all the joysticks were so finicky back then I don't see how you can consider the control function to be equivalent to that of a "sim" .. Thirdly of all graphics spoke more than "sim". You're more of a sim because you offer a 3D perspective... FS still uses 2D panels and artwork that most people would consider "programmer" art.

Well, FS wasn't on 'a' floppy back then.Flight simulation isn't about 3D cockpits, it's about the accuracy of flight dynamics and systems. Otherwise one could put together the most accurate 3D representation of an aircraft, have it fly like a teletubby and call it a 'sim'.

Well, FS wasn't on 'a' floppy back then.Flight simulation isn't about 3D cockpits, it's about the accuracy of flight dynamics and systems.  Otherwise one could put together the most accurate 3D representation of an aircraft, have it fly like a teletubby and call it a 'sim'.

Dude . the reciprocal is true as well.... Otherwise one could put together the best accuracy of flight dynamics and systems. ..but present it in a flying desk and call it a sim.

Dude . the reciprocal is true as well.... Otherwise one could put together the best accuracy of flight dynamics and systems. ..but present it in a flying desk and call it a sim.

Lesse... Elite, Frasca... just to name a couple.