fsx-se Are people making the switch to FSX Steam?

[robert young 2,897]

Of course not. Simply, those milk producers who can still sell at the market price will continue do so. Those milk producers (small /inefficent?) who can't  will go out of business.

 

That's how free markets work worldwide. It's the customer how decides how much it's prepared to may - not the producer. If, for example,  you decided to increase your add-on prices to PMDG's level what would be the effect on your sales?

 

But the milk market is NOT a free market where everyone just pays for what they choose. It's rigged, by exactly the means explained in the article, and much better articles if you would take the trouble to read them. You have an entirely distorted view of what a free market is. Free markets really ARE free. Milk (or if you like produce) markets are rigged by over-powerful monopolies who resort to very late payments for goods received in order to enslave their suppliers, who cannot supply anywhere else because the monopoly driving the distribution has no challenging competitor. Imagine if your paycheck didn't arrive at the end of the month and you had a mortgage to pay and a family to feed. That is not a free market. It is a monopoly distribution system. You sidestep this by saying you'd simply find another job. But what if that job had exactly the same conditions, and the next, and the next. Enjoying your "free" market now?

 

What if you looked for a job and all of them were below or at the minimum wage. What if you were paid two months late and could not afford to pay your rent or feed your family and were threatened with eviction. Is that what you call a "free" market, because it happens to exist? Is a free market in your perception just something that happens to be, so that qualifies it as a "free" market. How about 18th century slavery? That was a "free" market at the time. Is that ok with you just because it has the label a free "market"?

 

When large corporations dominate distribution and prices, it is no longer a free market. That's why we have anti-monopoly bodies, but unfortunately they do not function properly.

 

When the market is full of cheap goods where the producers get little for their produce, it drives quality down. If you want crap goods then carry on searching for the cheapest price for everything. That's why half of Europe and three quarters of America eat rubbish food. Sorry to quote again, but your argument is a classic repeat of the Wildean concept of knowing the price of everything but the value of nothing.

 

I'm done with discussing with you. Go and read about it. 

[Spam3d 54]

Ive used steam for about 8 years, its one of the best and most solid pieces of software i've used, its been a pure joy for all the games that they support! They guys at Valve are very very good at what they do.

[777 340]

I have Steam for Arma 3 - bought FSX SE but not yet installed - with all the Addons/AI etc etc need to plan for it, also my FSX is running fine for me, so holding of the install as of yet.

[mgh 89]

 

 

I'm done with discussing with you. Go and read about it.

 

Why didn't you deal my  point about  working of the market?

 

If, for example,  you decided to increase your add-on prices to PMDG's level what would be the effect on your sales?

[Bina 59]

You hear wrong. Steam gives you an option to install immediately or wait after purchase.

 

Unfortunately, you confirmed that I heard right - Steam does NOT allow installation from a disk (later use). It still offers installation through Steam app which becomes a serious drawback - imagine downloading 13Gb of files each time you reinstall Windows...  :blink: Pfff, I better stick to my native FSX for now.

 

PS: "Immediate" or "wait after purchase" installation is the same thing, if one cannot download the files and save installation files for later use.

 

Thanks anyway!

[AviatorMoser 353]

Unfortunately, you confirmed that I heard right - Steam does NOT allow installation from a disk (later use). It still offers installation through Steam app which becomes a serious drawback - imagine downloading 13Gb of files each time you reinstall Windows...  :blink: Pfff, I better stick to my native FSX for now.

 

PS: "Immediate" or "wait after purchase" installation is the same thing, if one cannot download the files and save installation files for later use.

 

Thanks anyway!

 

I don't understand. You want to download the installation to a disk for later use? Well you can. Easily.

 

Just let it download to your hard drive and then archive the FSX folder onto a separate disk. Then, when you reformat just unzip the archive into your Steam folder, and then install FSX through Steam. Steam will recognize you already have the files installed, and it won't download anything except for any config files that lie outside the root FSX folder. It'll complete the registry stuff and then you're set. I've been doing this for Steam games for 8 years.

[tf51d 284]

Unfortunately, you confirmed that I heard right - Steam does NOT allow installation from a disk (later use). It still offers installation through Steam app which becomes a serious drawback - imagine downloading 13Gb of files each time you reinstall Windows...  :blink: Pfff, I better stick to my native FSX for now.

 

PS: "Immediate" or "wait after purchase" installation is the same thing, if one cannot download the files and save installation files for later use.

 

Thanks anyway!

That would depend on the speed of your internet connection. Mine is 86Mbps sustained. My FSX-SE installation was faster then my DVD FSX installation ever was. Unlike other installations that download an installer then extracts and installs from that, or a DVD that has to decompress it's data before installation. The Steam app installs as it's downloading, saving that step. So if you have a fast internet connection, it is an improvement, where slower speeds may be longer.

[radorabatin 24]

This is not true,

my steam FSX folder is full of addons, I needed to reinstall FSX-SE last week after removing old FSX and what I did was only copy back FSX SE folder back from temporary location and started fsx.exe,steam just checked files integrity and than FSX-SE started without any issue. I also keed original FSX-SE instalation on backupdrive and when needed I use it,so I don't have to update it. Of course,If FSX SE is updated than there will be version mismatch, but steam will probably take care of it. The same thing happened with my train simulator 2015 from dovetail,I just moved it to different drive and started, steam took care of it without downloading anything.

 

Rado 

[gfd 15]

This is interesting. However, in the end, we are arguing about 3 flawed systems (FSX, FSX:SE, P3D) that are glued together by helper applications such as FSUIPC; attempting to run complex addons they were never designed to work with.

 

It's kinda like trying to install an 11 litre diesel engine in a 10 year old Chevrolet. We now have hardware and addons that push all of these simulators beyond their design limits (oops...I think I made the same point twice).

 

I am looking forward to a 64 bit system that takes advantage of DX12. Maybe that won't happen. If it doesn't, we will have to dial back our expectations. But if someone does this, they will IMHO, own the market. I don't buy the argument that the addon market will be permanently disrupted. There is a lot of flawed addon software written by well meaning amateurs and professionals, who don't have the time to do a complete job. I believe they will fall by the wayside. This is not any kind of criticism. They filled a void and deserve our thanks. They put in a lot of work and I can't imagine many of them got rich doing so.

 

I really hope that whoever gets this right, will set rules for addons to 'play nice' and those that don't, won't get to run in the simulator. Perhaps we'll end up with a system, with fewer addons, that more accurately reflects the intent of the designer.

 

I really don't care who it is. I use P3D right now. But if Steam/DT do it, that works for me. I did buy the Steam edition. We'll see. In the meantime, I'm sitting at gate 174, at FlyTampa CYYZ (amazing airport), in the PMDG 777 (amazing aircraft); trying to figure out how to eek out some additional addressable space.

 

Sorry this a bit off topic. So's the discussion on today's spot price for potatoes.

 

Cheers

 

EDIT - My comment about flawed systems does not refer to their quality. It speaks to the fact they are 10 year old systems, running on current hardware, associated with complex addons. I dont have the mental wherewithal to discuss the technical merits of the simulators.

[dave2013 1,130]

Just bought FSX:SE on sale for $5.00.  Heck, even if I ultimately decide not to install it the loss is acceptable.

 

I plan on waiting a while before uninstalling FSX and Acceleration and all my addons to make the switch to SE(don't want to have both versions installed at the same time). Right now, and based on the posts I've read so far, I'm cautiously optimistic that FSX:SE will be an improvement over stock FSX - and any improvement at all is a good thing.

 

Dovetail Games taking over FSX and having the rights and know-how to change the FSX code could very well turn out to be a wonderful development.

 

I'm hopeful that they'll not only fix most of the bugs inherent in FSX, but that going forward they'll perhaps improve/add DX-10 features and improve the core graphics engine.

 

Dave

[CaptKornDog 284]

Add me in the "bought FSX:SE for $5 and keeping it on the shelf for now" category.  Perfectly happy with my FSX boxed version running with DX10 right now.  I'm happy with my balance of visuals and performance.  Smooth enough to hand-fly the complex planes on takeoff and approach, and still take in the airport scenery and sunsets once in a while. 

 

I rarely do any tweaking anymore unless a DX10 Fixer update, new video drivers, or the like come out.  And it certainly has taken me years to get to this point after several iterations of hardware and just as much benchmarking and adjusting.  Who knew when Aces said "FSX is designed for the hardware of the future", they meant THIS far into the future? 

 

I have no desire to play the "compatibility game" or "license question game" with P3D with add-ons that I love from FSX, or re-purchase new licenses for products I already own.  Not to mention, start ALL over tweaking a new sim.  At this point, it would have to take something convincingly ground-breaking (to me) to reconsider making the switch.  That new ground is likely going to be when P3D 64-bit is released, at which I'll probably at least reconsider a little bit.  I'll keep my eyes on it and do my research when it comes out, but I'm going to withhold judgment until then and stick with what is enjoyable and works for me.

 

I bought FSX:SE yesterday, as a $5 investment when it was on sale.  For the price of less than a burger and a milkshake, I figured if Dovetail continues to update and starts to transform FSX (even if it turns out to be just an SP 2.5 or something), then it may be a lot cheaper than jumping to P3D but still see some benefit.  However, again the "compatibility game" is still a lingering question for some products I have, so maybe a dual-install would be in order.

 

My own opinion, and I'm not looking to be swayed or convinced one way or another by posting it, just sharing my personal thoughts.  Take it with a grain of salt, I'm slow to accept change in the sim industry.  90% of my flying was FS9 until about 2 years ago, and even today, it's probably about 30% FS9, 70% FSX.  FS9 performs rock-solid for me, and for a while looked better than what I had to run FSX at.  Not to mention, there are still some add-ons near and dear to my heart that are FS9-only, and never made the compatibility jump to FSX.  Also, for the record, I do have XPX and use it occasionally, but for my big iron flying, it's FS.

[mabe54 17]

But the milk market is NOT a free market where everyone just pays for what they choose. It's rigged, by exactly the means explained in the article, and much better articles if you would take the trouble to read them. You have an entirely distorted view of what a free market is. Free markets really ARE free. Milk (or if you like produce) markets are rigged by over-powerful monopolies who resort to very late payments for goods received in order to enslave their suppliers, who cannot supply anywhere else because the monopoly driving the distribution has no challenging competitor. Imagine if your paycheck didn't arrive at the end of the month and you had a mortgage to pay and a family to feed. That is not a free market. It is a monopoly distribution system. You sidestep this by saying you'd simply find another job. But what if that job had exactly the same conditions, and the next, and the next. Enjoying your "free" market now?

 

What if you looked for a job and all of them were below or at the minimum wage. What if you were paid two months late and could not afford to pay your rent or feed your family and were threatened with eviction. Is that what you call a "free" market, because it happens to exist? Is a free market in your perception just something that happens to be, so that qualifies it as a "free" market. How about 18th century slavery? That was a "free" market at the time. Is that ok with you just because it has the label a free "market"?

 

When large corporations dominate distribution and prices, it is no longer a free market. That's why we have anti-monopoly bodies, but unfortunately they do not function properly.

 

When the market is full of cheap goods where the producers get little for their produce, it drives quality down. If you want crap goods then carry on searching for the cheapest price for everything. That's why half of Europe and three quarters of America eat rubbish food. Sorry to quote again, but your argument is a classic repeat of the Wildean concept of knowing the price of everything but the value of nothing.

 

I'm done with discussing with you. Go and read about it. 

+1. There hasn't been a Free Market in anything in years on planet Earth and it will get worst.

 

Cheers,

[LAdamson 240]

 

 

Why didn't you deal my  point about  working of the market?
 
Quote
If, for example,  you decided to increase your add-on prices to PMDG's level what would be the effect on your sales?

 

As a long time business person myself. It wasn't a comparable point. PMDG commercial airliners & RealAir  GA airplanes are like comparing the cost of a real twin engine GA to the cost of a Boeing 777.  If you tried to sell the twin, for the cost of the 777, what do you think the effect on your sales would be?  Obviously, the hours to recreate a simulation of a fully functioning 777 will be much more than a twin Duke................wouldn't you think?

[coa1117 53]

i am driven in my life by logic ... therefore on this issue i am bound to ask what kind of logic is it that inclines anybody to cling tenaciously to a piece of software virtually unimproved since its release 8 years ago?? ... when there exist adequate alternatives which are of the moment ........... i think most people would accept the fact of aviation being a leading edge, pushing the boundaries, sort of activity ... so one would imagine anyone wishing to place the seat of their pants in the virtual aeroplane seat would prefer a simulation of it that is, at least current ...... apparently not .... maybe it's a cult thing ... who knows???????

 

It's hilarious how many FSX:SE advocates come unhinged when an FSX:MS user states they can't see a reason to switch. They're accused of being illogical, stubborn, even "cultish" inhabitants of the Dark Ages in refusing to go with the flow of technological "advances." This is all such rubbish. I am a case in point. I've spent 5 years carefully building an FSX:MS system that simply works. I use only PMDG aircraft and lots and lots and lots of highly detailed 3rd party airports, global sceneries, REX textures and ASN. I have never had an OOM or CTD. I am totally satisfied with the performance of FSX:MS.

 

Every simmer who doesn't want to switch to FSX:SE has their own reasons. In short mine is that I don't have the time, patience or need to completely reinstall and tweak another version of FSX including all of my aircraft, sceneries and utilities. Based on everything I've read, and I've read most of the opinions and observations about FSX:SE here and elsewhere, there is absolutely no incentive for me to do everything required to made the switch. I also like not having to deal with the stuff each new FSX:SE update has and will continue to break. Give me a stable unchanging core program that I know will work everytime I want to fly. Whatever deficienes FSX:MS has, and there are none that diminish in the least the immersion factor for me, I can live with them. The bottom line in my logic is: if it ain't broke don't fix it. Is that logical enough?

 

So, FSX:SE adopters, I'm happy for you if you've experienced improvements to your simming experience. But, FSX:SE advocates with an attitude, how about lightening up, eh? I've seen way more snarky comments and name-calling from you folks than from simmers simply content to stay with what they have.

[n4gix 4,947]

Being a forum moderator is a prerequisite to make nominations?

No, anyone is allowed to make nominations for non-existent awards. I was being facetious...