we are actually rethinking our approach to FS9 development given recent developments

Better late than never! :(

Ron, That would be good news. I fly FSX and FS9 and it's always good to have options. There are still a number of developers who produce for both platforms.

Same here. We were on the verge of abandoning FS9 as no longer viable for commercial development but we do still like it and will at least continue on a limited basis. :(

FSX has a looooooooooong lifespan IMO ;)

FSX has a looooooooooong lifespan IMO ;)

+1. It's only going to get better.

It's rather ironic that the release of MS Flight will probably secure the future of FSX and FS9. Who expected that?

Ha ha, who knows what MS may do down the road but for now it appears you are correct.On a side note, both FS9 and FSX are pretty good Simulators of Flight and offer much more than some appreciate. :(

Now that we know a little about what to expect from MS Flight. What do you expect the future holds for FSX and how can we keep it fresh as Microsoft will surely abandon it.

Microsoft "abandoned" FSX years ago, FSX is still very much alive.Overall FSX is getting more stable as hardware is catching up to it, catch being optimization to new DirectX versions and 32bit limitations are for the vanilla game unresolvable.Prepar3D v1 is essentially SP3, and v2 would be FSXI (compared to the FS9 - FSX relation)As for FSX's future, more add-ons will flood in as developers are no longer faced with the 'threat' of a new MSFS, we can expect more planes and scenery, both freeware and payware.P3D will benefit as more simmers gradually shift to that and the relation to the FSX engine allows for 3rd party products to be transfered with minimal complication.FSX will remain dominate over P3D, given Prepar3D's limited distribution.I wouldn't be surprised if at some point M$ "buys back" Prepar3D v2 and sells it as Microsoft Flight Simulator: [insert year], Lock-Mart would get a small cut of course, the M$ version would be sold retail, while Lock-Mart maintains P3D for "professional" use.

It started off pretty rocky in 2006, however I've managed to get it running pretty smoothly. Got rid of the stutters on my system as well as the autogen graphics spikes. So if I had to compare that to Prepar3D, which I tried for a month, I'd say that they're pretty close.FSX is my sim of choice for a long time to come.

Edited January 12, 201214 yr by magnetite

What is in the future for FSX?HW continuing to catch/surpass SW (a'la FS9)More add-on sceneryMore add-on planesPMDG 777!!! Say no more for me :)

What is in the future for FSX?HW continuing to catch/surpass SW (a'la FS9)More add-on sceneryMore add-on planesPMDG 777!!!

Ivy Bridge CPUPCIE2 (2x the BW of PCIe 2)Cheers,- jahman.

With Ivy Bridge using less power (77W vs 95W for Sandy Bridge), this probably means more overclocking which is good for FSX.

FSX has a looooooooooong lifespan IMO ;)

+1 I need a hardware upgrade just to keep up to FSX and it's latest addons. With all the great addon scenery and aircraft now available and in the works, FSX while not perfect is great and certainly keeps me happy.

Yeah probably FSX will continue as dominant platform for some years to come together with X plane 10. Thats good for me, instead of devs moving to next platform we will get more complete FSX experience.

After communing with the spirits, my opinion is that FSX will be the dominant platform for the 'hard-core/enthusiast' crowd for quite a long time to come.

+1

I don't see P3D capturing anyone's imagination in any great way like FS9/FSX did. FSX will dominate the mass market for some considerable time now.FSX is looking and running great now as the hardware has now matured to run it to it's potential..

I just wish someone would fix up FSX's engine a little to support newer hardware better (better directx, multicore CPU) and then maybe some better Ai..