Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jp1018

FSX....and back

Recommended Posts

At least you can see both ends of that one at the same time. :)

 

I'll never forget my first PPL-student night-approach into Dothan... I'd done touch and goes a couple of times during the day, and the slopes aren't so visible then, but it looks like a roller-coaster at night due to the lighting making the pitches so obvious. The first third sloped down, the next third sloped up, and the last third sloped back down again. Makes it kind of hard to judge your angle in the dark, especially when you're doing that for the first time. Nail%20Biting.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why folks say it cost so much to make fsx look good, man by the time you buy a few regions for flight (if they ever come out) you could make fsx look great, and since you flight guys don't mind staying in one area just buy a region from orbx and fly there. Flight is not even close to the quality of orbx, the only thing that looked good in flight is the lighting and shadows in the cockpit, but oh ya the flight developers don't really like making cockpits. :)


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved them all! :LMAO: I have never hated a single flight game in my entire life and can't understand those who do.

 

Same here, Luis. I really do feel a little spoiled at the moment. Call me naive, but...

 

Now I have my new rig up, and using Srdan's great tweak guide (and *******' tweak tool) FSX is a dream; P3d is a dream and FLIGHT is a dream..I love them all..they all have their (different) uses and I fly one of them every night (not all at once LOL) I don't like different parts of all of them, but hey..life's too short, right?

 

Back to them all for me!

 

best

 

jae


JAKE EYRE
It's a small step from the sublime to the ridiculous...Napoleon Bonaparte
newSigBetaTeam.gif
lancairuk.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FSX is a dream; P3d is a dream and FLIGHT is a dream

 

Please point me to your feature comparison between FSX and Prepar3d, even if through a PM :-) I tried Prepar3d but didn't find it that different from FSX (?). Could you elaborate please :-) I wouldn't mind giving Prepar3d yeat another try, although I will not have the chance to do it for free like before :-(


Main Simulation Rig:

Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti, 1 TB & 500 GB M.2 nvme drives, Win11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well after not touching fsx in months, I thought I would try it out again, and go fly somewhere other than hawaii. Well, I loaded up a free flight in a cessna, and wow!!! I immediatly noticed how unrefined everything looked.(no addons) the scenery and autogen-yikes! And the cockpit lighting-wow! I doubt I will ever use fsx again since I would need lots of addons to bring it anywhere near flight. Also, the performance....yuk. Anyway, I know lots of people hate flight. ( haters gonna hate) ,but I say it's a 100% improvement over fsx in so many ways...just be patient and positive and more will come to flight in time...all in good time.

 

I rather take whole world in FSX quality than Hawaii, Alaska or even complete continental US in Flight quality as I never fly in those areas.

 

To me no graphics can make me interested in game that has no areas that interest me in real life, and that goes with lots of FSX users.

 

Also Flight is still missing whole addon community of FSX, ATC, everything. MS is not going to make even one percent of what this community has created.

 

So comparing Flight and FSX is really pretty useless, Flight is not improvement from FSX, its completely different kind of game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, I use them both (FSX and Flight). Pre- MS Flight launch, I hadn't touched FSX for many months, I had totally lost interest in the flight simulation genre. Once MS Flight came out I was back in the game and loving Flight. Over the last month or so, I have started to get bored and impatient - looking for more Flight content that interests me. Since there was nothing, I turned back to FSX and loved it (again). Purchased some ORBX (never used that in the past) and started running FS Captain with short PNW cargo/pax assignments (don't care for airliners personally) and it is/was absolutely great. Even with that, I still enjoy coming back to MS Flight for all the reasons listed by everyone in this and other threads. Once Alaska comes out, I will probably be spending my time more with Flight for a few months and then probably go back to FSX while I wait for something more. So for those that are new to this simulation world, get them both, be prepared to spend some money on them both and use them both! You won't regret it.

 

Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flight is not improvement from FSX

 

Some things are certainly improved. Many things were left out, but the things that were included generally improved, some substantially.

 

Apples and oranges, though.

 

Like all things in life, if it's for you, then it's good. If it's not, then it's bad. :unknw:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cute.

 

Months ago, Flight was criticized because you would have to pay for add-ons. Now, it's pointed out that you have to pay for add-ons just like in FSX.

 

Progress of sorts, I guess.

 

There is a basic difference. In FSX you can do a lot without buying addons (sure, planes and scenery could not be the best but you got a lot anyway, including autopilot, GPS, ATC, AI and so on). In Flight you can do very little if you don't, although standard visual quality is better - and that's the very reason behind the "freemium" business model. I read somewhere that FSX became more an "aviation simulation" than just a "flight simulation". And what you prefer may depend on what you actually are looking for. If you are looking for sceneries Flight gives you what you need out of the box - even if you end up to pay for them exactly the way you do in FSX (although the latter has more choice). If you're looking for a comprehensive aviation simulation probably Flight is too "little and narrow".

 

But from a money spent perspective, I don't see differences - both will make you spend money in buying addons, in FSX because there are far better one than standard one (i.e. http://www.realairsimulations.com/home.php?page=home), while in Flight because you will fill the need to expand the its world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read somewhere that FSX became more an "aviation simulation" than just a "flight simulation". And what you prefer may depend on what you actually are looking for. If you are looking for sceneries Flight gives you what you need out of the box - even if you end up to pay for them exactly the way you do in FSX (although the latter has more choice). If you're looking for a comprehensive aviation simulation probably Flight is too "little and narrow".

 

That's a fair assessment, though I will say that Flight does offer more than improved visuals. It actually simulates some "hard core" things that FSX does not, such as the effects of terrain on radio propagation (creating VOR dead-zones behind mountains, for instance).

 

For VFR "low & slow" GA, Flight is a great option. Assuming you can accept the limited terrain coverage and aircraft selection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It actually simulates some "hard core" things that FSX does not, such as the effects of terrain on radio propagation (creating VOR dead-zones behind mountains, for instance).

 

Fsx does do that in my experience.

--------------------------------------------------

 

Why is thread even still alive though?.. Fairness has to go both ways..My piont is if i go into the flight forum and start slaggin it off...i'd be banned without warning.And my post deleted.

 

I can only assum that somewhere along the line someone is sat in MS's back pocket. ( but thats a bit ''out there'', i know)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FLIGHT solved one of the most irritating bugs in FSX, and one that I encountered replicated in Prepar3d too and was one of the main show stoppers for me regarding that new, apparently rather promissing, but at the time too expensive platform - visibility effects in FOG/HAZE.

 

This is probably one of the major breakthroughs in FLIGHT, and one that makes quite a difference in terms of realism...

 

Fsx does do that in my experience.

--------------------------------------------------

 

Nope! It never did....


Main Simulation Rig:

Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti, 1 TB & 500 GB M.2 nvme drives, Win11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nope! It never did....

 

Yes, it did.

 

Take a flight around Switzerland ( i have Switzerland ProX) tuned into SIO VOR 112.15..You will loose the signal behind mountains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is thread even still alive though?.. Fairness has to go both ways..My piont is if i go into the flight forum and start slaggin it off...i'd be banned without warning.And my post deleted.

 

Well, there is a big difference between politely discussing shortcomings in a product and repeatedly insulting/harrassing the people who made it and/or like it.

 

Which one of those do you mean by "slaggin it off"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a flight around Switzerland ( i have Switzerland ProX) tuned into SIO VOR 112.15..You will loose the signal behind mountains.

 

Oops! I really wasn't aware? Was it a feature of those "ProX" sceneries???? Thx for correcting me anyway! Major failure from my side... :-(


Main Simulation Rig:

Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti, 1 TB & 500 GB M.2 nvme drives, Win11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, if so. Possibly part of the 3PD effort, I guess.

 

Very interesting.

 

I've been wondering what mechanism Flight uses to create the effect... whether it's all pre-calculated and availability of each navaid is identified by table look-up according to location of the aircraft, or if it's actually using something similar to the lighting code to create "shadows" from a "light source" at the station.

 

Probably pre-calculated, but you never know...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...