MS F9 Patch..You know ,

[Guest Jim Burke]

I have to say something about B52drvr's comment about frame rates of 12-15 being horrid. He doesn't see how anyone can enjoy the sim with less than 20 without stutters. It's been said before in various flight sim forums that a lot of people are hung up on frame rates. I have a P4 2g with 512 ddr and a FX5200 card. I lock the frame rate at 20 and have very smooth flights with most of the sliders at 3/4 to max. Sure I get a stutter every once in a while but when I fly over a large city I don't check the frame rate to see what it is....it's smooth that's all I care about. I don't think FS9 needs a patch. If one is looking for perfection then that's a different story. If it works for me with what I have...I'm happy. Maybe everyone should just turn off the frame rate counter and not worry about numbers. I would guess that most people are happy with FS9. If you have a problem on your particular computer I hope you get it worked out. Have a great Labor Day weekend!!!Jim Burke

[Guest tascaso]

Well...well...well! I probably should not jump into this fray but what the hay its Friday!You can only predict the future by looking at the past. So with MS FS....guess what my friend...NO PATCH! Yep you betcha...so we will all tweak away until this thing runs to our liking or remove it from the old harddrive.Having spent loads of time with FS since 2.0...I have seen this posted with every version of FS. Frankly, if I was motivated and wanted to spend the money I could build a system that would run it just great but what is the point in that when all the other stuff (games) I run are doing great.I have a rig in testing right now; an Intel 2.4C 800mhz BUS running at 3.0 ghz, the thing is a beast. It runs FS9 handily but not at 100 fps, it runs it SMOOTHLY! But really where the rubber meets the road is with Unreal Tournament....WOW just awesome or with IL-2 Forgotten Battles, where in some COOP missions there are up to 50-60 airplanes locked in air combat and ground attack. Of course we play on a LAN and with two or three humans in individual planes.Look, I have spent hundreds of hours flying PSS 777, 747, the Airbuses, PIC767, RFP B747-200. I am somewhat jaded and tired of it. I think that for now FS9 is a beautiful VFR/Weather simulator. In the next months expect wonderfull landclass files...and tons of other goodies to make this think look for all its worth like the real thing. I am currently flying the PMDG B737 NG, which is now running great by the way. I am having fun with it! Is it running at 50 fps...heeck no...not on my lowly XP2100...but it does average 16 FPS and the landings are smooth with ICKY weather not to mention it runs 21 FPS averages with clear weather.So yes you might have to go out and find a PIII to really get this thing to go. No just kidding...don't be frustrated...be happy...just delete the whole thing of your hard drive and go with a cool First Person Shooter.Love, Tony

[vgbaron 3,620]

>> On your comment about it being a business....I dont agree>there either, telling it like it is with a bit of integrity is>never a bad thing, no matter what your doing.Hornit - Altho I agree with you in principal, my comment is "welcome to the real world ". You're talking MILLIONS of $$ here - tell the WHOLE truth???? Ya gotta be kidding - in a perfect world, maybe.Are there some legit problems with the sim? Yup, and most of them are caused by hardware or user incompatability. Should MS have made the code so that it could prevent this? Yup - but it will never happen - the object is to get something that works for most of the people most of the time, get it out the door FAST and make a buck.I think they've done that amazingly well. I've probably read hundreds of posts about the problems with fs9 - which only proves that those with problems are more vocal ( rightly so, BTW ) - I would venture a guess that the MAJORITY of users are extremely happy with the sim.Will there be a patch?? I would seriously doubt it because, even with the problems listed, none of them are completely reproducible in all cases. You're computer savvy - we're talking a dumb machine here that only responds to combinations of switches that are either ON or OFF - period. They don't think for themselves, they don't have evil intentions ( not really sure about that :) ) - they just do what they're told forever. If the sim doesn't work with an ATI card, it will not work with ANY of that same ATI card - if it works with one, it should work with all - if not - look to differences in the card manufacturer.In order to patch something you have to know where to apply the patch or else you create more problems elsewhere. So far, IMHO, I have seen nothing that can be patched.Vic

[Guest padds]

18fps seems a nice comfortable area for me, I dialled them down until I noticed the change, 17 I swear I noticed something so I locked at 18... My rig is running at 1600x1200 with a very high level of autogen etc... as I like low slow VFR stuff (I got the FSGenesis Mesh and Landclass too and am awed by it).Only problem I have now is some cloud issues where they meet mountains but thats all. Sound has issues but I know for a fact my sound card sucks, not just in this program LOLI know it would be nice for many to have something that doesnt need tweaking.... its like motor cycles, you want the Honda Goldwing you dont need to do a whole lot to and it starts every time... sure easy and convenient... or you want the Harley with the look and sound that just cant be beaten, but it needs TLC and knowledge to keep it that way....Some games have next to no tweaking available, they either run or just dont... at least with FS2004 you have a chance of tuning it up when you havent got the perfect system.I had it on a PIII800 and it was better then 2002 easily, now I have it on a P4 2.4C 800FSB and it rocks, doesnt crash, has stunning graphics and has relit my delight in owning an MSFS product. I have the edge that I worked in the industry so I know the background of programs like this before release, and frankly they did a damned good job.... if you close your eyes and just think of the ENORMOUS amount of information in there, how it needs to react in a full range of motions, up down sidewats, put in winds, react to throttle, heat cold, changes in aircraft config, third party items, AI traffic, failures, landscape, terrain etc... and any of these items is dynamic at ALL times.... its amazing it works at ALL. The physics and calulations behind this sort of game are scarey and the people needed to do it are rare talented people, and a lot fo that talent and detail shows in this game...Ive seen the bouncing planes (AI and my own), I have had some stutters, Ive had ATC screw me up...... but when I consider these are the visible 5 or 6 calculations that got screwed when there are BILLIONS of others going on every minute..... I cant complain that much.Only gripe I seriously have is multi-monitor use... but I think there is more to that whole scenario we dont know about to do with up and coming support for multi monitor in the OS and maybe DirectX, dunno, the interdependancies are complex...-Jonathan

[Guest FPSFREAK]

Mike,It seems I may have to clear something up here.My original intention was to show that before you go pointing a finger at Mr Gates (Or MS in general for that matter) why not take the time and make sure that you have your system in as good a shape as possible.The intention of MS with this is to "SIMULATE" flight. Those that are complaining about framerates and stutters need to sit down and find out what goes into making a simulation of this caliber. Is MS wrong for understating it's Min. Req. Yes and no. They make no mention of how it will run. Individuals here have stated that they are computer savvy and that the majority of us here are. Well if thats the case than you should be knowledgable enough to know that those Min. are going to get you just that. A minimum simulation. What is so hard to understand about that. I understand that people who spend $50 hard earned dollars have a right to enjoy the software but at whose exspense. Maybe MS should sell the Sim w a fully configured system attached that will run the sim the way it can be run. Than people would scream at the $1000 price tag.Should there be a patch. Maybe. Do I think there will be? Based on past history no. Sorry folks but thats the way it is. MS is not concerned about Joe Blow and his slow or clogged system. They want problems that are occuring across multiple platforms that are reproducible a number of times. Just because some have possible memory leak problems doesn't mean it's in need of a patch.Again I'm not happy about my 9800Pro flashing but ya know what, I'll fly till it's fixed. I understand that certain issue need to be resolved as the sim evolves. There is only so much Beta testing that can be done on so many machines. Why are people who spent $200 on WINXPPRo not whing about over 70 security updates and a servicepack. The nature of software will never change. Unless we all run the same cookie cutter machines.As far as a system that will run FS9 in all it's splendor......Intel:At the bottom would be a 2.4 to 3.06 P4B w RDRAMAt the top a 2.4C 800Mhz and up will do nicely4600/9500 at the bottom and a 5600Ultra/5900 or a 95-9800 ATI at the topMinimum 512 megs of either RDRAM or at the upper end PC32008Meg Cache Western Digital HDAMD:Any Rev B XP from 2400+ on up. My personal favorite, an XP2500+ Barton teamed with some nice XMS PC2700 running in sync with any of the above video cards.Again, contrary to some I was not intending to hurt or flame. Perhaps those that took it that way need to step back, have the reality alarm clock go off and wake them up.This has been, always will be tweaked, need to be tweaked and either loved or Bit##ed about. Nothing ever changes. :(Bobby

[Guest cw1011]

Sadly, many games are released with numerous bugs. I think MSFS2002 was a shining exception to this. I would not be suprised to see a patch - though with the program only a month into its release, I would imagine that MS is going to take their time, evaluate the reports coming in via the crash reporter and through customer service, decide what can be fixed and what can't be, prioritize those that can by how widespread is the problem, and then address the most common problems. It may take a while. Colin

[Guest jordan]

I haven't found the program to be buggy at all. I have a very modest system:WindowsME on a 1.3ghz 512DDR Ram and a Geforce4 64MBI run at about 25 fps with terrain detail at 95 and autogen at "Normal" and ground shadows "off". Scenery on "Dense".I also run the sim for long periods of time, without crashes, or degraded performance. I would have to say that I don't believe there is a memory leak there.I think many of the problems are video card/driver and DX9 related, and in many cases have nothing to do with FS9 itself.To think that a patch for FS9 could address all of the listed problems is unrealistic.

[Guest wathomas777]

>Only problem I have now is some cloud issues where they meet mountains but thats all.I have noticed that, but almost always after I finish a flight and then use the flight selector to go to another flight that has a higher altitude. (Like finishing a flight in SFO, then choosing Grand Canyon as the next departure point)If you "reset" the weather theme, by simply clicking off the theme and then clicking back on it, the theme will reset the clouds.If you are using Real Weather, you're limited to what your reporting station reports.Just a thought.

[Guest padds]

Will give that a try tonight, thanks!