I know very well what FS9 can do. I cant even begin to process how many add-ons I had purchased for it and yes, I enjoyed it every single time I fired it up and took a trip on vatsim.

 

I have a new.system coming in next week and I'm returning to simming after a 5 or so year departure. The only reason I'm going to FSX is for widescreen support. If that wasn't such a big issue to me, I'd gladly stay on ACOF.

widescreen support. If that wasn't such a big issue to me, I'd gladly stay on ACOF.

Not sure what you mean? I run a 1920 x 1200 OK, together with a second monitor at 1280 x 1024.

Sometimes I run FS9 on a widescreen 42" television...

That rig would be very satisfactory at a complex FS9 airport, say EHAM, with 200 AI planes, AES, GE Pro and RW weather from Active Sky.

You could take a nice PMDG or iFly product in there too. 

There's still a lot of free stuff available for FS9.  Try this for complexity.

http://library.avsim.net/search.php?SearchTerm=New+Vickers+VC10+panel&CatID=root&Go=Search

The funny thing with the FSXers, is the argument regarding the age of FS9?!

A very poor argument IMHO. To be quite honest, FSX is not that much younger. :-)

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

The fact it is 2013 and we are still talking about FS9 with a lot of FSX'ers get so worked up over it speaks volumes for the longevity of FS9... The post about why developers shouldn't develop for FS9 anymore in the FSX forum is a prime example.  Why do they care?   Was anyone talking about 2000 in 2009?  Was anyone speaking about 98 in 2007?  No, the fact FS9 is even still part of an active conversation says it all, as FS9 users we don't need to say anything, FS9 has done the talking for us...

 

To the OP, as others have said, in terms of airliners I think we are done, in terms of Scenery it is amazing to me what FlyTampa can do with Dubai and Montreal, what Aerosoft can do, what UK2000 can do yet FS9 is holding FSDT back???  Come on...  If you don't want to develop for FS9 fine but don't dissuade those who still do!

I have to apologize for my post. I wasn't in the best of moods yesterday when I made the post. While FS2004 is older, it still clearly is capable. The point I failed to state properly that I was trying to make is that FSX is capable of more visually.

 

Please forgive me and do not let this affect your views of AVSIM.

From Flight to FSX this is how you feel about FS9 and it's lingering users, plain and simple. Your view is well known on the subject just as mine is. All we ask is that none of this is needed especially in the FS9 forum. If we went into the FSX forum with a full on debate or offered one up here then your comments would be justified. But to just throw slams out there for no reason is wrong. You've apologized but I can't say it won't happen again. Maybe you can help convince the admins to have a better way of differentiating FSX recent posts from FS9 recent posts on the main forum page. I believe this is the cause of the problem where well meaning FSX users are posting unflattering comments in the FS9 forum thinking their in the FSX forum.

The fact it is 2013 and we are still talking about FS9 with a lot of FSX'ers get so worked up over it speaks volumes for the longevity of FS9... The post about why developers shouldn't develop for FS9 anymore in the FSX forum is a prime example.  Why do they care?   Was anyone talking about 2000 in 2009?  Was anyone speaking about 98 in 2007?  No, the fact FS9 is even still part of an active conversation says it all, as FS9 users we don't need to say anything, FS9 has done the talking for us...

Outstanding point!!! I couldn't have said it better. This says allot about FSX. Sure wish FS11 could have been realized...

Is this the FS9 camp vs. the FSX camp?

 

Why???

 

Both sims have their rights and advantages relative to the other.

 

You want FSX? Fine!

 

You'd rather choose FS9? Great!

 

You keep both installations, each one for a good reason? Now, that'll leave both camps confused ...

Just remember Scott - the dinosaurs were an incredibly successful species that flourished for far longer than us mammals have been around. If current science is correct, they didn't die out because they were inferior. They would still be dominating the earth if they hadn't been wiped out by an environmental catastrophe.

 

There's no insult in being a dinosaur, even if idiots who don't know what they are talking about use it as an insult. So let's all embrace our inner dinosaur and just keep on flying... And if you're a T-Rex and want to eat the occasional troll or moron who thinks dinosaurs are good targets for insults, go for it! I'll provide the pepper and salt if you need it...

Long live the FS9 dinosaurs!

Didn't we used to be the FS9 rhinos before? -

I guess we've evolved! or is that devolved..... whatever the case we're still here, flying and happy. :lol:

 

******************************

 

 

on a separate note:

Folks lets stop the FSX v FS9 stuff and the other conflicts in this thread too please (we've already had to remove some posts). C'mon, we all know that leads nowhere. It would be a shame to have to lock the thread because of that same old reason. So lets all get along.

 

We all know both sims have their benefits (so does X-plane, DCS and etc...) and its a lot down to personal preference in the end. Best to try them all and pick what you like, kind of like a salad bar!

Thank you mods...

 

 

 

We all know both sims have their benefits (so does X-plane, DCS and etc...) and its a lot down to personal preference in the end. Best to try them all and pick what you like, kind of like a salad bar

  Brilliantly said...  I would have said buffet but salad bar works...

FS9 is good for laptops as it places almost no stress on the (notoriously weak) GPU. On a 2008+ desktop PC, FSX makes the day.

 

While you end-users can debate all day, all night, all week and till the end of time, anyone doing more than a bit of developing for FSX *will* admire the huge increase in possibilities in doing stuff for FSX.

Bump maps, specular maps, larger textures, better transparency settings, more polies, bones, a SDK documentation that finally lives up to its name, better tools, etc...

The only thing that FS9 can still score with is that all of its capabilities are known and described very well in various developer forums. Regardless, I've cursed quite a lot during developing for FS9 because it's like going from a F-16 back to a F-104.

 

 

And to get back to topic:

Head to the TinMouse forum, download the VC model and be glad that someone finally did one.

I've even got one final update up my sleeve, so yes, there's basically a new airliner add-on coming.

I have FSX and it appears to run fine for me, but I don't use it and probably never will.  If and when I decide, if ever to leave FS9 it won't be for FSX, P-3 will be my choice. FSX, it too is an old sim and unless updates to airports etc. (for those who worry about such things) happen I really don't see any real advantage to dumping thousands only to spend it all over again. Keep in mind, this is a toy, a pretty neat toy but a toy and some I fear have lost or are losing that concept. Just enjoy the fact you can play and pretend for this is much better then using your hand or some metal/plastic plane to fly make believe.

 

P.S. I have not seen FSX in the stores for sometime now, so where does that leave the developers or us ? To stay in business you have to have a client, we are that client currently, but is the hobby growing or has it already peaked? Time will tell, but don't develop FSX products for this simmer, you are wasting your money and efforts. :rolleyes:

Not sure what you mean? I run a 1920 x 1200 OK, together with a second monitor at 1280 x 1024.

Sometimes I run FS9 on a widescreen 42" television...

That rig would be very satisfactory at a complex FS9 airport, say EHAM, with 200 AI planes, AES, GE Pro and RW weather from Active Sky.

You could take a nice PMDG or iFly product in there too.

The 2D panels is what I meant.

 

It probablying would of helped if I stated that...

When I switched to widescreen I also thought the out-of-round gauges would drive me dilly.

But sit in a cockpit and take a picture -  you are looking down and parallax makes them a bit oval.

It's just a question of convincing your mind to suspend its disbelief, as ever.

 

But if you must, I see a whole bunch of WS 2D panels being produced, and this will surely continue

http://library.avsim.net/search.php?CatID=root&SearchTerm=wide+screen&Sort=Name&ScanMode=1&Go=Change+View

This thread should have been fun, informative and polite until some came and threw unnecessary comments. Despite the hardtalks, this thread has more fun, politeness and hospitality than most similar threads in FSX forum, which are hardly "being monitored" that easily.

 

Many fsx simmers are "flying south" over FS9 forum and dropping bombs and flying outbound to "north" again, but this time, it appears to be us who is left to blame and pay the price of "being monitored"

 

When you're questioning why one is sticking with jurassic FS9, you are not questioning FS2004 as a simulation oftware, you're arguing "them", you're arguing their tastes, preferences and how/what they do for fun.. and they are something personal because for some, FS2004 has become their identity, and arguing that, is the last thing you wanna do in FS9 forum

Standing against the status quo is not a violent manner. If the way this discussion goes is considered subversive, North Korea should be the right place for those who think so. IMO, FS2004 is the only place where you can discuss every relevant topic with maturity.

Back to topic:

 

I'd love to see new airliners in FS9. But if there wont be any, I think FS9 has it all.

If you can see my sigs, AXE is one of several fsx addons which I use. It is simply because I have to meet my monthly deadlines in writing reviews for a local aviation magazine. Do I like those fsx aicraft? like them? I LOVE them, I juts hate what the autogen and all that scenery stuffs are doing to my computer performance. With what I am doing for the magazine, I can easily move to FSX. But I didn't.

 

All the advantages in fsx are surely something. But what's in an eye candy when your sim runs at a low level of FPS, if not crashes most of the times with a very expensive PC specification.