I've been reading allot of reviews or should I say opinions about add-ons in another thread that in many cases have me shocked. People are consistently commenting negatively about 'Regretful' add-ons who's counter part in FS9 is great or well above satisfactory in so many areas for the most demanding simmer (or so I thought). Examples include:

 

1. Captainsim's 757

2. Feelthere's E-Jet series

3. FSDT KORD

4. Epic LT Lionheart

5. Aerosoft: Mega Airport Heathrow

6. Ultimate Traffic (version 2 is FSX only)

7. Wilco/Feelthere 737 and A320 series

8. Caranodo aircraft (this one had me shocked)

9. CLS 747-200/300 (lite add-on but for what it is it's great, visually very impressive inside and out)

 

I can go on and on. These same add-ons in FS9 are great. Yes some may not have the stellar VC graphics of FSX but they are very functional and shine in other areas. I'm very appreciative of the 'Regretful purchases for FSX' thread because for no better word it's an eye opener. So my question is, is it the add-on or the platform? How can these same add-ons shine in FS9 and not FSX. Things like performance issues and features not working is surely not what I'm experiencing from this list I have above (which is by far not the whole list in the other thread). The repeated disproves shows this is not one person's problem. We need more critical critiques like this as this informs people as well as holds payware developers to the fire. That being said it seems in developers quest to exploit all the eye candy of FSX things like performance and features aren't fully vetted out. Some of the things reported shows something must not have carried over from the FS9 version. In the list above on my system I can't see anyone not liking these add-ons. Yes night lighting in the VC might not have all the options of PMDG's 737 but the good out weighs the bad at least in FS9.

FSDT KORD - In FSX and FS9 it is a beauty and I love it. Where'd you get this from?

Carenado - Have yet to by one thing from them I regret.

FSDT KORD - In FSX and FS9 it is a beauty and I love it. Where'd you get this from?

Carenado - Have yet to by one thing from them I regret.

 

Read through the 'Regretful Purchases for FSX' thread.

Read through the 'Regretful Purchases for FSX' thread.

 

Yes, but really read through it - and then take it with the appropriate grain of NaCl. And I say that as a thread participant who, among other things, listed a Carenado plane, and two pieces of Orbx scenery - yet I have many products from both that I love. Sure there are some consistent and obvious vendors in that thread, but some of the products you mention have many fans in the FSX world as well. Many of the products mentioned were "regrets" simply because they were bought on impulse or didn't fit a users particular need, or...

 

Scott

it's all subjective as you should know Dillon, what works for one does not always work for another. You also know that FSX has less headroom for addons, and more design options for addons than FS9 does, so it's a double edge sword. there is a big difference between stellar and functional.

Hello

I think the main issue is that on FSX everything is judged against the PMDG NGX, for instance something as poorly programmed as the CS757 is always going to come up short when compared to the NGX

FS9 has nothing in the same class as the NGX

Yeah like Mike said. Its to each his own (great grammar I have huh).

 

In some cases it is a matter if the FSX port over. For example the FT 733. I loved it in FS9 even tho it had its quirks. In FSX it is terrible, half the switches do not work in the VC and it is brutal on frame rates.

 

So it may be a little of both.

FS9 users have lower standards than FSX users, and the high end addons are on a totally different level for FSX compared to FS9. That's probably why an addon which might be great compared to its competition in FS9 is not so good in FSX. The high-end level is that much higher

The funny thing being that the topmost systems aircraft in FSX may well be the Maddog, a more or less direct FS9 portover. ^_^ Pull a CB, fly multicrew, mind the icing, check the random failures in three categories. Oh, weather radar.

 

But more on Dillon's opening question, I don't think that the platform causes any problems. Well, not more than the older one.

 

And the regrets and darlings? As the others have said, personal preferences are the key. Sometimes the very same title is on both lists. Last time I looked, some explained their regrets pretty detailed, which formed up the interesting part for sure.

People's regrets might be different, but the top 3-10 are very similar. I agree with most of the list you posted above being letdowns because there are so many other planes that are better. The bar could never be raised too high with FS9. In FSX, the bar is basically infinitely high these days with planes like the NGX and every single thing A2A and Realair put out. Everything else does seem like a letdown in a way.

 

 

I still refuse to purchase the maddog 2010 professional because it is a stupid portover. If they made that for FSX it would sell like hotcakes. Oh well, it is never going to happen. Can't cry over it too long when the NGX is there.

It's FSX which is a lot harder to develop for, and as a result very few master it. The more complex the simulator grows the harder it will become to make good addons for it. Back in the FS98 days all addons were great, bevause everything was so simplistic anyway.

In FSX, the bar is basically infinitely high these days with planes like the NGX and every single thing A2A and Realair put out. Everything else does seem like a letdown in a way.

 

I don't disagree about "the bar", but do with some of the specifics here. It really depends on what you want and what's most important to you. I'm not a tube or military guy, so I don't have anything PMDG or A2A (yet - but looking forward to their upcoming GA efforts), but I do have and fly both RealAir Dukes, and their highly regarded Lancair. I like them all, but for a variety of reasons, these aren't even in my top 3 most flown planes. Not a knock on RealAir at all, but there ARE other good planes out there that hold up well depending on what you enjoy. And again on those pesky preferences - "the list" now has several mentions of Milviz' B55 Baron which is probably my second favorite plane.

 

Read the comments, decide how they relate to the kind of things you do, and add a bit of a fudge factor. The thread IS worth a good read, but Gospel, it is not. ;-)

 

Scott

I don't disagree about "the bar", but do with some of the specifics here. It really depends on what you want and what's most important to you. I'm not a tube or military guy, so I don't have anything PMDG or A2A (yet - but looking forward to their upcoming GA efforts), but I do have and fly both RealAir Dukes, and their highly regarded Lancair. I like them all, but for a variety of reasons, these aren't even in my top 3 most flown planes. Not a knock on RealAir at all, but there ARE other good planes out there that hold up well depending on what you enjoy. And again on those pesky preferences - "the list" now has several mentions of Milviz' B55 Baron which is probably my second favorite plane.

 

Read the comments, decide how they relate to the kind of things you do, and add a bit of a fudge factor. The thread IS worth a good read, but Gospel, it is not. ;-)

 

Scott

 

And that's the point people need to realize. I for one love the Feelthere Airbus package in FS9 (not the 'Evolution' hack, the original effort). I had to make a couple modifications but hey I was a beta tester on the project. Fs2crew and the Airbus package is great. Reading what FSX simmers have to say is surreal. I could care less about a visual bar being raised in FSX a great add-on stands the test of time hence Ready for Pushbacks 742 or Leonardo's MD80 (when it comes to systems modeling). The bottom line is if performance is an issue in FSX and basic systems are not functioning as they did in FS9 (Feelthere 737) why would a developer push this on FSX users? The FSX engine is a hard sim to operate in on many levels and cutting corners doesn't work. Hacking otherwise great efforts just so it can load up in FSX is a loosing proposition. I honestly didn't know so much of this was going on.

Hello

Run FSX on good modern hardware and stay well away from FS9 portovers and you will find that FSX is much better than FS9.

Insist on using low end hardware (pre i7) and use your old FS9 addons and you will be bitterly disappointed with FSX.

Hello

Run FSX on good modern hardware and stay well away from FS9 portovers and you will find that FSX is much better than FS9.

Insist on using low end hardware (pre i7) and use your old FS9 addons and you will be bitterly disappointed with FSX.

 

This seems to be the big elephant in the room although developer compatibility promises are very misleading to FSX only users with no history using the same product in FS9...