@MalibuI would respectfully disagree...I understand that the amount of freeware available for FSX is dizzying, but just a little digging in most forums will elaborate the best choices.With a few nice freeware addons, you can make FSX look amazing and totally Youtube worthy.I am also doing a very space-limited FSX install right now so I'll see what I can do with all freeware and post some pics, lets see what I can do...

Until you realized that you needed to invest another couple hundred dollars in add-ons and possibly new hardware to get your $30 copy of FSX to look like the youtube videos you just saw.

Don't forget by the time M$ is done nickle and diming you with all that dlc (ya know cockpit less aircraft) your going to be in a bigger hole financially. Does not take much to make fsx look good.

Well said Alan. I'm also not US, and after I read that release-post, I was just shaking my head with disbelief.

Pretty disgusting that they would be as blunt as to release the Japanese zero for HAWAII....

Pretty disgusting that they would be as blunt as to release the Japanese zero for HAWAII....

LOL, and some static ships like Arizona or Nevada

Whose idea was it to release a Japanese fighter over Pearl Harbor? What were they thinking? I'm truly amazed. I don't even have a Zero in FSX. The last time I flew AGAINST one was in Combat Flight Simulator.Stan

Don't forget by the time M$ is done nickle and diming you with all that dlc (ya know cockpit less aircraft) your going to be in a bigger hole financially. Does not take much to make fsx look good.

This is the first thing I came to the realization of.. The money I spent was only because I *WANTED* it, not because I *needed* it. After all the trillions of posts about FSX performance I've realized something.. FSX has a horrible image for no reason. To get FSX to look good and run good you need two things.. A graphics card capable of handling at minimum 8X SSAA and a external frame limiter.Default airplane, default cfg, default scenery.. 30fps locked in tight with all scenery sliders maxed out, and Ultimate Traffic 2 running. Only thing turned off is car/boat/ferry traffic. The only thing Flight really has over FSX is stability. I'm still not 100% confident in doing any flights over an hour as both times I've tried FSX froze and crashed about an hour or so into the flight. (unknown module)In many ways... It's better looking than MS Flight's Hawaii, runs better and with a ton more auto gen.

I'm in the same boat as the OP.Finally took the time to reinstall FSX properly, got it running very well, and bought some payware to make it look good. The only thing I wish that FSX did that Flight does is the panel lighting being adjustable and the persistent aircraft location and status after exiting the program. I like coming back to a cold aircraft and having the radios set the way I left them from the previous flight and the airport I last flew into.

Don't forget by the time M$ is done nickle and diming you with all that dlc (ya know cockpit less aircraft) your going to be in a bigger hole financially. Does not take much to make fsx look good.

That assumes I want/need all the DLC that comes out for Flight. I don't need or want the whole world if it's going to look like FSX's whole world (even with GEX and UTX). I'd rather have a few really detailed, great looking scenery areas and a few planes. With Flight's current pricing, that would run me about $60. In FSX land, that's only enough for FSX and GEX or UTX. I'd need even more money still for REX and some ORBX/Fly Tampa scenery.

This is the first thing I came to the realization of.. The money I spent was only because I *WANTED* it, not because I *needed* it. After all the trillions of posts about FSX performance I've realized something.. FSX has a horrible image for no reason. To get FSX to look good and run good you need two things.. A graphics card capable of handling at minimum 8X SSAA and a external frame limiter.Default airplane, default cfg, default scenery.. 30fps locked in tight with all scenery sliders maxed out, and Ultimate Traffic 2 running. Only thing turned off is car/boat/ferry traffic. The only thing Flight really has over FSX is stability. I'm still not 100% confident in doing any flights over an hour as both times I've tried FSX froze and crashed about an hour or so into the flight. (unknown module)In many ways... It's better looking than MS Flight's Hawaii, runs better and with a ton more auto gen....

What's funny, is that IMHO, Flight's Oahu looks much better and much more like the real Oahu than the FSX screens you just posted. Good thing we have the choice to choose the one we want, right? :(

I'm in the same boat as the OP.Finally took the time to reinstall FSX properly, got it running very well, and bought some payware to make it look good. The only thing I wish that FSX did that Flight does is the panel lighting being adjustable and the persistent aircraft location and status after exiting the program. I like coming back to a cold aircraft and having the radios set the way I left them from the previous flight and the airport I last flew into.

Buy Ideal Flight 10.

Perhaps this isn't fair but based on all the speculation ramping up to FLIGHTS release, then the reaction to FLIGHT once everything was known about it... I am confident I'd hate it... so I'm sticking to FSX for now, until something better comes along.

Buy Ideal Flight 10.

After reading this thread: http://forum.avsim.n...e/page__st__425this seems like a good solution. Thank you for the recommendation.

BTW for those that caught the Flight Hawaii bug and might be interested in a decent Oahu scenery for FSX, flightsimdealoftheday currently have the MegaSceneryX Hawaii+LasVegas+Reno on sale for ~$12.It is just Oahu but I really like it, good combo of photoreal + light autogen at a decent price.PS. mods hope it is ok to post the representative screens here if not let me know.

Edited March 30, 201214 yr by kludger

Great shots John. I was fortunate enough to also get the package when they had the same sale about 10 months ago.

Awesome, kludger, thanks!I really don´t understand the "MS Flight Hawaii hype" - when it´s possible to get something like this for FSX..

Well I guess I will be in the minority in this thread at least.I have Flight, installed it on March 5th, and am still enjoying it - for what it is.It actually suprised me somewhat based on everything I had read pre-release. I did not think I would like it at all.I enjoy both Flight and FSX, two very different products that entertain me in different ways, but I do get entertainment out of both.