State of the Union?

[phoenixphire]

On the eve of some very big releases, I was recently thinking about how long FSX has been out and I found myself being amazed that it has been out six years already! I have thoroughly enjoyed every minute of FSX and with every upgrade (hardware and software) I have enjoyed it even more. I can say that I have been sorely missing several addons. There are several addons that are soon to be released that for me are an absolute must. When they are released I believe FSX will have fully matured into the "ultimate sim". I am still waiting for the NGX the 777 and a few key airports (KLAX & PANC) that will really round out the sim world form me. I have to admit there are a few airports that I would place in the top three must have that are not yet on the horizon (KSEA, CYVR & YSSY). So the question is how content are you with FSX? Looking forward to your votes and comments. EDIT: Sorry guys something happned with the poll. give me a few minutes to fix itEDIT 2: I also for got to mention that with the TACPAC fro VRS Simulations the sim will also become a combat sim to fill both roles and forever transform the experience for those that love military sims as well! EDIT 3: Sorry guys. Don't forget to comment!

[Guest JSkorna]

How about, "I love my FS9 until Flight is released"?

[phoenixphire]

How about, "I love my FS9 until Flight is released"?

Hi Jim, I did think of that but I did not want this topic to go down the ol' familiar road of FS9 vs FSX and since I haven't used FS9 in 6 years I was primarily concerned with FSX. I will add it and hopefully it will stay on course.

[AWACS]

I was in Jim's boat for a long time after FSX was released. It was until mid April of this year (two months ago) when I built the system in my signature that I was fully able to enjoy FSX the way I enjoyed FS9 for so many years. Having said that, as with any flight sim release, I will purchase it on release day, what happens after that is all up to the sim itself.

[phoenixphire]

I was in Jim's boat for a long time after FSX was released. It was until mid April of this year (two months ago) when I built the system in my signature that I was fully able to enjoy FSX the way I enjoyed FS9 for so many years. Having said that, as with any flight sim release, I will purchase it on release day, what happens after that is all up to the sim itself.

Well even though I switched to FSX I could not run it like I can today. I had to run it without AI Traffic! GASP! After an upgrade to a duo core I was able to fill the sky once again. But my worst expedience came when my graphics card blew and I had to use a loaner. The VRS Superbug came out and all I could do was go and park it in the middle of the ocean (Midway) and learn the systems. Even a flight taxed this card to the limit.

[cmpbellsjc]

Interesting poll Mike.I am somewhere in between option #1 and #2. While I think Flight looks pretty good so far, it all comes down to one thing for me, addons.If Flight has any type of backward compatibility with native FSX products and I can quickly and easily install the majority of my current addons, then I will most likely switch to Flight rather quickly, provided it performs better than FSX does. However, if there is no backward compatibility and if it marks the start of a 1 to 2 year spell of waiting for addons to be developed for it, then I am afraid I will have to wait on it until my favorite addons become available. I made the move to FSX a little prematurely since there was very little 3rd party content available for it when I initially made the move. Now, three years later I have the majority of the airports I want for FSX and with the PMDG NGX somewhere around the corner, I will be pretty satisfied with my addon scenery/plane collection. To get a new sim with nothing available for it would make no sense for me, even if it looks better out of the box and even performs better, I just cant see myself flying the default 737/747 around to default airports.It will be interesting to see exactly how Flight pans out concering addons and backward compatibility.

[trisager]

It will be interesting to see exactly how Flight pans out concering addons and backward compatibility.

Indeed - and whether it will be open for addon development in the same way that FS has been so far, or if addon development will be restricted to those with MS approval (with MS taking a percentage of addon sales revenue).

[Johan_Dees]

How about, "I love my FS9 until Flight is released"?

I will do this, just skipping FSX, too much troubles.

[Benjamin J]

Ya know, with all my complaining, with all my thread-starting about CTDs, all my moaning and gnashing of teeth, I have just now completed a flight from YMML to YSCB using all OrbX scenery the default 737-800. It was great. As long as FSX works, it's greta fun. You know what I liked most? descending, and seeing the cars drive over the roads -.- Yes, I know, it's silly, but it's those cars that are one of the attractions for me to use FSX. I will take all the pain and all the madness, all for some silly cars. Why that is I'm not sure, but you bet it's got to do with the fact that it makes the sim come to life, which is something FSX does very well in general. And OrbX airports only make it better: taxiing to the stand, seeing the ground crew going about their business is a very rewarding thing.When Flight comes, I will get it one way or the other. FSX will slowly disappear from my hard drive as addons for Flight come out. With all that FSX does, if Flight ends up a more robust platform than FSX ever was, going to Flight will be a no-brainer and I'm looking forward to it. That last webisode sure look good, though!

[oldbear]

FS2002 all the way for me..Ian

[ryanbatc]

I'll get it the day it comes out, and hopefully my rig will still be alright lol! For now flying FSX.

[Virtualwombat]

I have chosen another option: DCS A-10c. This makes all FSX aircraft look crude by comparison. Even the VRS SuperBug, despite its high resolution textures and deep system simulation, cannot hold a candle to the Warthog. MS Flight's legacy codebase may well prevent it from offering features already available in DCS A-10. Want cockpit shadows? DCS A-10 has them already and they don't bog down the sim. How about a VC with a video monitor you can zoom in and out on the landscape? Yep. Damage modelling? Yep. ATC? Yep. Complete system and flight modelling? Yep. OK, DCS-A-10c is probably too hard core a sim for most people. And the scenery is limited in scope and not as detailed as Orbx delivers. But USA scenery release is scheduled for the end of this year and unlike MS, the sim is being continuously updated to fix the few remaining bugs and add features. Check it out on YouTube.Cheers,Noel.

[phoenixphire]

Interesting poll Mike.I am somewhere in between option #1 and #2. While I think Flight looks pretty good so far, it all comes down to one thing for me, addons.If Flight has any type of backward compatibility with native FSX products and I can quickly and easily install the majority of my current addons, then I will most likely switch to Flight rather quickly, provided it performs better than FSX does. However, if there is no backward compatibility and if it marks the start of a 1 to 2 year spell of waiting for addons to be developed for it, then I am afraid I will have to wait on it until my favorite addons become available. I made the move to FSX a little prematurely since there was very little 3rd party content available for it when I initially made the move. Now, three years later I have the majority of the airports I want for FSX and with the PMDG NGX somewhere around the corner, I will be pretty satisfied with my addon scenery/plane collection. To get a new sim with nothing available for it would make no sense for me, even if it looks better out of the box and even performs better, I just cant see myself flying the default 737/747 around to default airports.It will be interesting to see exactly how Flight pans out concering addons and backward compatibility.

I have to agree with you on this Sean. I would be in the same boat. Based on the speculation that I have read about Flight it will be a whole new code and I presume that there will NOT be backwards compatibility. This is just speculation on my part. I started the process of upgrading many of my addons because developers offered discounts to FS9 users or free upgrades. This made all the difference because I certainly was not going to start all over and I will certainly not be starting all over with MS Flight. I know that you have a lot of the same addons I do by looking at your sig and starting over this time seems daunting. The one unknown is how much of a leap will Fulight be. Will the flight dynamics be a huge change? What about scenery. I actually thought that the next big technology move would be a live "stream" where you subscribe to an online photo scenery world or download the world in relation to interest. I have seen the screenshots from flight and for now it seems like they are just catching up with ORBX like quality. Then the chase begins again. MS develops a product better capable of displaying higher resolution scenery. A developer like ORBX improves on the default scenery and I am out a lot of money because it is so much better and I can not resist. My hunch is that backward compatibility is going to be slim. In that case I really think that because of the addon base that I have I will be much more hesitant to make the switch myself. I have been without a proper NG for way too long. I did buy a competitors model and while the model and systems were decent their support and business model were horrible. Every time I upgraded hardware or reformatted I was expected to pay to have a new key delivered. I gave up and have been waiting for the NGX. It will be intesting to see how it all unffolds. However, like the original topic sates. I am content with FSX as it is and excited for the life it has left.

FS2002 all the way for me..Ian

:( Glad to see a die hard still exists out there! :(

I have chosen another option: DCS A-10c. This makes all FSX aircraft look crude by comparison. Even the VRS SuperBug, despite its high resolution textures and deep system simulation, cannot hold a candle to the Warthog. MS Flight's legacy codebase may well prevent it from offering features already available in DCS A-10. Want cockpit shadows? DCS A-10 has them already and they don't bog down the sim. How about a VC with a video monitor you can zoom in and out on the landscape? Yep. Damage modelling? Yep. ATC? Yep. Complete system and flight modelling? Yep. OK, DCS-A-10c is probably too hard core a sim for most people. And the scenery is limited in scope and not as detailed as Orbx delivers. But USA scenery release is scheduled for the end of this year and unlike MS, the sim is being continuously updated to fix the few remaining bugs and add features. Check it out on YouTube.Cheers,Noel.

Noel, I own DCS A-10 and I am ashamed to say that I have not yet really given it a go. It has been sitting on the virtual shelf , so to speak. I find these days that I am so busy that when I have time to fly I don't want to be learning a whole bunch of new systems. I am just going to have to bite the bullet and try it out. I also did not find that the models interior or exterior were all that superior. It may just be me.

[FlyAndFight]

For me it will be pretty much the same as all of the previous iterations of MS's flight sims: Continue with the current until the new "pulls me in". I'm pretty much in agreement with cmpbellsjc's assessment.

[Chock]

I think I'm one of the few people who liked FSX from day one. I had to drop the sliders a bit of course, but it was usable for me on the day it was released, that was on a far less capable PC than I have today.I use whatever takes the mood to be honest, often that is FSX and very occasionally still FS9 since the Supronov Yak-40 is yet to show up for FSX. But there are plenty of other flight sims I like as well. Being into gliding I like Silent Wings, which is expensive, but it has much more realistic weather than any other flight sim, and Condor too of course, which no glider pilot should be without. Both of those have great multiplayer with a decent online community, and both have far better aerodynamics simulation than FS, with a good emulation of incipient spins and flutter amongst other stuff.I have DCS A-10 (bought it when it was in beta in fact) but I've not really used it much yet. It looks good but for a combat sim is perhaps a little more limited in scope than Falcon is, since Falcon has a dynamic campaign and the F-16 is a multi-role aircraft so there's more variety in missions, nevertheless A-10 is undeniably good although it does slow down on frame rates when the action hots up. Some other combat sims are good fun too, such as Apache Air Assault, Wings Over Vietnam and Whirlwind of Vietnam. Looking forward to seeing Take on Helicopters as well as MS Flight arrive.There's no need to limit yourself to FS, there are tons of other great flight sims out there.Al