Can it be done ?...

[Luis Hernandez 568]

The thing I miss (a little bit!... :Whistle: ...) in FS 2004, is the absence of moving road traffic, as in FSX.

I have "stationary traffic" on my FS 2004 (Bernard's Roads) which helps a little bit to make the scenery more "realistic"...in both default roads, and Ultimate Terrain USA/Canada road networks...

What are those roads you're talking about? Sounds interesting, I've never heard anything about this. Where can I find them?

 

Best regards from Colombia,

Luis Miguel

[Fozzer 1]

What are those roads you're talking about? Sounds interesting, I've never heard anything about this. Where can I find them?

 

Best regards from Colombia,

Luis Miguel

 

Try this Luis...>>>

http://www.fsdome.com/showpage.php?url=http://web1.m036.magenta.fastwebserver.de/library/scenery/345.htm

 

FS 2002 Scenery....(works with FS 2004)

 

Bernd's Road Textures_v1

Bernd Junge

 

375 KB

bsrts v1.zip

 

Have a peek at the .BMP screen shot in the folder to see what it looks like. Quite effective once above 500 feet ASL!

...and no effect on frame rates.

(Also compatible with the "Ultimate Terrain" road system)

 

Makes the roads look...busier!.... :dance: ...!

 

Paul...have fun with FS 2004... :Party: ...!

[Bryn 72]

FSDT's GSX and Flight1 Soundstream are two FSX utilities that are keeping me over at FSX at the moment.

[Deltaguy 45]

I got into this hobby when FSX first came out. I used FSX for about a year and kept hearing about FS9 and all these great add ons for it so I decided to give it a try. Honestly, I could never imagine going back to FSX. To me, the colors, graphics, etc. actually look better in FS9. I have spent thousands of dollars on both FSX and FS9, but my sim of choice will always remain FS9.

[FIVE-BY-FIVE 453]

I got into this hobby when FSX first came out. I used FSX for about a year and kept hearing about FS9 and all these great add ons for it so I decided to give it a try. Honestly, I could never imagine going back to FSX. To me, the colors, graphics, etc. actually look better in FS9. I have spent thousands of dollars on both FSX and FS9, but my sim of choice will always remain FS9.

 

Me 2, I can't believe how my home city looks better in fs9 than fsx. I took a break from fsx and I'm on fs9 all the time flying airliners at 70-100fps with REX and many other addons.

[Javiz 104]

Yes, i think i'm happy i took the plunge too. I just bought and installed UT for FS9 and was amazed by the nightlighting ! :Hypnotized:

 

Still, FSX can be totally breathtaking, not only re scenery ( Orbx is a virtual world on its own ! ) but also re aircraft external models and VC's. The PMDG 737NGX VC got to be the most impressive and beautiful VC i have ever come across ( not to mention the functionality ! ). I bought the CS 777 external model for 9 bucks the other day and, likewise, this got to be the most impressive and beautiful external model of a jetliner i have ever seen in FS. I couldn't stop just looking at it ! Until now.... now i certainly can...

 

I know now i'll trade superior impressiveness and beauty for superior fps and smooth, troublefree running any day !

[Javiz 104]

Jan, with that rig of yours you shouldn't have any issues at all!!

 

Yes, i know !

 

Actually this new rig ( Alienware Area51 ALX, just about 2 years old now ) started off on the wrong foot. Nothing but BSOD's, already during my first flight with a virgin FSX. Alienware sent me a new vidcard and memory sticks. After installation no more problems whatsoever. Until a couple weeks ago when, during an FSX flight, the system suddenly choked again. ( i don't actually get a 'normal' BSOD, i.e. a blue screen with all kinds of info on it. The screen just turns all black or grey and there's a 'pprrrrrrrrrrrr' sound coming from the speakers. Then the system restarts.. )

 

I am now doing a memory test. Remove one memory stick ( 3 x 4GB ) and see what happens. No more BSOD but now FSX closes down with an OOM message. ( isn't it true that FSX doesn't even care about memory higher than 4GB ?... I seem to remember having read something about that... )

 

FS9 runs absolutely troublefree with this one mem stick removed.( no OOM, no BSOD, no CTD, just plane fun if you pardon the pun )

 

Thanks for the tip about the DXT cloud textures in FSX. I'll certainly try that !

 

And yes, i know about NickN's setup guide. I find it quite overwhelming ! And actually, just flying low and slow VFR in FSX, there's nothing wrong with it. It's just when i started flying the amazing PMDG stuff i got in trouble again...

 

But, in the mean time, i think i found the solution. Keep PMDG, CS and stuff like that for FS9 only ! ( atleast for the time being... )

 

Thanks again for the tips ! B)

 

cheers,

jan

[Javiz 104]

Jan, try FSRecorder.

http://www.fs-record...t/downloads.php

 

Thanks,Rafal. Have it ( FSX version ) on my HD for a long time already but never got round to install it. Seems a wonderful proggy ! Now installed the FS9 version but i'm using Active Camera too. There's nothing to read in the manual about that.... Does FSRecorder actually work with AC or is it mandatory to remove AC first ?.....

 

cheers,

jan

[out 769]

FSX can be totally breathtaking (...) also re aircraft external models and VC's

 

I don't doubt FSX has advanced graphics possibilities. Hovever it would be misleading to assume that models and VC's cannot look really great in FS9.

Although I don't fly in FSX, I have it installed together with some addon aircraft, and I must tell you the most beautiful and immersive virtual cockpit (with crushing night lighting) I have personally seen is the AirSimmer A320 cockpit I use in FS9. Also, from what I read (for now), the new QW146 has an incredible VC and effects too.

It is possible that PMDG 737NGX's VC looks best of all in respect of details and resolution, but I don't have it, so I will take your word.

 

As far as airports are concerned, I can see no significant difference. Many developers (e.g. Aerosoft, FSDT or UK2000) give you both versions (FS9 and FSX) for one price.

Thanks to that I could install a lot of airports for my test flights in FSX. I was really curious to see some clear differences in quality but I couldn't find any, even in screens.

Except for the fact I have FS9 airports with shadows and 100% AI traffic (that's how I like it), which would kill my FSX performance without a doubt (I did try).

VFR scenery, like OrbX, is another story. But, as I mentioned in another post, I am not a GA type simmer, so I have no interest in them. But yes, they l-o-o-k great.

 

 

Does FSRecorder actually work with AC or is it mandatory to remove AC first ?

 

No problem with using them together. This is exactly what I am doing.

Thanks to Active Camera I can move my viewpoint with a mouse (have to do it since my TrackIR4 died a year ago).

At the same time I use FSRecorder to have preset VC views available with just one click (overhead panel, pedestal, mcdu, even wings, etc).

[Javiz 104]

Thanks Rafal ! Great to hear AC can work together with FSRecorder. I have seen many vids of what can be done with FSR regarding formation flying. Love to have a go that too now that i have the time. ( not with airliners, mind you.. )

 

Sure external models and VC's can look great in FS9 too but it is the 'X Factor' that is missing...

 

FSX has so much more to offer in the graphics department compared to FS9, not only because of the many available texture options ( f.i. in FS9 we could never have good working specular lightning, bump mapping and selfshadowing was not available yet ), a developer doesn't have to worry that much anymore about the polycount of a native FSX model which was still of high importance while creating an FS9 model.

 

Devs of FS9 models are clearly stuck with a limit of what is possible while ' the sky is (almost) the limit ' when it comes to creating native FSX models.

 

While FS9 was still our main sim it could easily happen that atleast once or twice a week a new aircraft model would be presented, payware or freeware. Now that FSX has become 'the main platform' months can go by without anything new released. 'The sky is the limit' does come with a price...

 

I don't have any of the big add-on airports in FSX. Big default airports already attack my fps to such extend that it is no fun anymore. Also one of the reasons i only fly GA in and out of smaller airports in FSX. I will certainly try a few in FS9 though ! I don't expect my fps to go anything lower than 40/50 at Heathrow, Schiphol or Frankfurt which were real spoilsports in FS9 on my old rig. Looking forward to find out ! B)

 

cheers,

jan

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

As far as airports are concerned, I can see no significant difference. Many developers (e.g. Aerosoft, FSDT or UK2000) give you both versions (FS9 and FSX) for one price.

Thanks to that I could install a lot of airports for my test flights in FSX. I was really curious to see some clear differences in quality but I couldn't find any, even in screens.

 

Yes, I agree as well. About a month or so ago I re-installed FS9 on my FSX rig just for the hell of it and installed some of the FS9 versions of my FSDT airports since they are free having purchased the FSX versions.. At the ground level while taxiing around the differences aren't too noticeable between both sims, the FSX versions seemed to look just a tad better, but frankly not really that much different and it would be difficult to see in screen shots. In actuality, the only thing between the two sims that keeps me in FSX or made me switch to FSX is just the ability to run higher res ground tiles and I like the way the water looks in FSX. Aside from those two features, I dont mind FS9 at all and would have kept using it had FS9 not improved those two areas. Even after putting FS9 back on my rig last month and installing GE Pro, I still cant take the look of those ground textures after having been used to FSX. Even when they are in focus they still look a little blurry to me just due to the native resolutions.

[out 769]

the ability to run higher res ground tiles

 

Exactly! This is the single best feature of FSX I miss in FS9.

Clearly not something I can't live without, but I would surely love FS9 to have it.

Well, just three years difference between the sims and such resolution change...

[LesPaulGuitarsRock 0]

I`ve gone back to FS9.

Spent a lot of money upgrading my PC with i7 2600K clocked at 4.8gz, 16G Ram, and GTX560 card and VERY dissapointed with FSX.

I`m through with searching various fixes, and flying with 5 frames per sec in heavy cloud.

FSX is rubbish.

Long live FS9

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

Spent a lot of money upgrading my PC with i7 2600K clocked at 4.8gz, 16G Ram, and GTX560 card and VERY dissapointed with FSX.

I`m through with searching various fixes, and flying with 5 frames per sec in heavy cloud.

 

Lol, maybe you should talk to the guy on page 1 who posted those 2 screens and has 1/2 the rig you got and gets 26 FPS at JFK even with the UT night lights turned on.

 

Seriously though, I cant believe you only get 5 FPS, sounds like something is way out of wack. Maybe you should follows Kostas suggestions, he has a rig similar to yours and does better than 5 FPS.

[Glynn 405]

flying with 5 frames per sec in heavy cloud.

 

Hello

Something is very wrong there, you should have no performance issues with that machine.

I rarely drop below 30fps in FSX no matter what the conditions or aircraft I am using.