My dilemma with the FSX launch.....

[Guest FooFighter]

I have to admit that I have my moments with flightsimming and sometimes I take long, long breaks from it.But I recently rediscovered the joy of this great hobby. I also suddenly found myself spending quite a bit of money on some great add-ons for FS2004.I think it is a really pretty sim. Sure, flight dynamics wise etc, it needs some work still.Now, that I am getting comfortable with the way it looks and plays, along comes FSX, I know I will buy it as soon as it comes out.But all my beautifull add-ons etc what of them....The question I am really asking is how many will still play FS2004 once FSX comes out. I think I will for a good while to come.Thanks,Gian

[John_Tavendale 453]

Like other releases, I believe FS2004 will be on my system for a while to come!

[ubersu 78]

I suppose it depends on the FSX feature set. If FS9 plus add-ons is as good or better than FSX, I won't bother changing over. If FSX is a great improvement, I will go to the new release.DJ

[RFields5421 1]

Based on the steady volume of FS2002 questions across the various forums almost daily - almost three years after the release of FS2004 - I'm sure FS9 will be here for a few years.More than features, I'm thinking system requirements will be the limitation for many simmers. Many of the questions today come from people whose systems are barely able to run FS2004 at a decent, flyable level. I'm sure that those systems will not be able to make FSX work well.It's much more than a $50 game - it's a $1,500 computer and add-ons, etc.Another matter which I think will have a big impact is how well developed a person has done their FS2004 world. I know my FS2002 world was not extensively modified - so I move to FS2004 almost immediately - but had to wait six months to be able to buy a computer which could handle detailed clouds.However, my FS2004 world is very well developed with addon scenery - mostly freeware, but also too much payware, great AI traffic and airplanes I love to fly.Dropping it will be a much bigger deal to me than dropping FS2002 was.

[Guest Roadkill]

I'll echo your observation about system requirements. I had FS98 and when FS2000 came out I bought it...and returned it. My system simply wouldn't run it. My present computer is 10 months old and was state of the art when I bought it (except for the video card), but with FS9, Ultimate Terrain, the FSGenesis 38m mesh, BEV, and some frame-hungry payware planes, it still gets a little stretched. I doubt that I will be migrating to FSX for quite some time after its introduction.

[MD83 1]

I'm still using FS2002, as FS2004 never really appealed to me. Yes, FS9 has improved weather etc, but I couldn't justify upgrading to FS9 only 20 months after FS2002 was released!I will be upgrading to FSX come what may :)

[Guest jboweruk]

There's a little bit o' me says that makes sense. I think you will come outta this deal best of all of us. :)

[Guest Ray CYYZ]

It really depends on Vista with me ...It's tough to shell out the money for Vista just to run FSX ... frankly, for what Vista is going to cost, FSX should be bundled with it for free.The thought of having to buy FSX XP then Vista then FSX Vista just makes me feel like taking Bill out back with a baseball bat.Couple that with the lack of AERO in the cheap versions of Vista and you really start to want to hurt people at Microsoft.Can see it now, Vista Ultimate, Office 2007, FSX ... there goes $1000 for what ???

[Guest thedoggg]

My friend there is no reason not to keep your current setup and play FS9 as long as you wan't. I still use FS2002 sometimes and even have FS98 and Fly II on my hard drive with related add ons. There seems to be this myth about us having to abandon older software just because a new version has come out. I certainly do not subscribe to this ideology. Yes I will be among those buying FSX when it comes out but I will be adding it to my collection of sims not replacing them.Regards, Carlos

[Guest thedoggg]

The advantage with Vista remains to be seen. Microsoft want's very bad to sell it so they try to make us think performance will be improved over XP. I have read reports of Vista being very resourse hungry. Of course this is not with the final version but how can a OS that needs more resources be better for running a resourse hungry sim which I am sure FSXwith all that eye candy will be. Who knows. With MSFS the sim (software) has always been a few years ahead of the hardware needed to run it. As a matter of fact it is now 3 years after it's launch that we have the hardware to run FS9 in all it's glory (sliders).Regards, Carlos

[MarkRey 16]

I agree - the existence of a new version is not sufficient cause for me to move. Hardware wise I'm not rich enough to change machines just for FS. It's not unusual for me to even skip versions at times.My problem is that certain addons I'm eyeing for next year will be FSX only - like the PMDG A320. If FSX can run on my machine at all I may have to run dual versions for the first time while steadily transitioning.regards,MarkXPHomeSP2/FS9.1/3.2HT/1024mb/X700pro256

[1mikel151 71]

Pretty much the same way FS9 was for me, got it the day it was released and a week later uninstalled FS2002. FS9 ran better on the same rig for me an looked much better. Vista or not, from what I have seen of what was taken on an XP rig, I see no reason to not do the same when it is released. As for any addons not working, most payware should be upgraded and with new features we'll see new aircraft as well. PROGRESS!Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/mcdcvabanner.jpgCalVirAir International

[Guest JIMJAM]

Its not like you have got to delete it.The hard drives today are HUGE so its not like there is no space. Or in my case I have 2 hardrives with my last fs9 install on one. I used it to save planes,sounds,sceneries ect and rebuilt my latest install.Hard drives are cheap so maybe I will use one just for fsx.If I really thought FSX was going to solve the blurries,stutters,dumb controllers and I would never have to edit another fs9.cfg, I would delte the whole mess along with all my $1000 addons and never look back.

[Manny 1,293]

ITs a good Topic.for me, I'll get FSX the first day. It would be like a $40 addon to my FS9 sitting in the side.I'll ocassionaly fly the FSX and probobably get tired of it or keep going back to it IF I find something interesting.Then a Vendor may give an upgrade to their aircraft that I have or come up with a new aircraft (that BETTER BE BETTER THAN THEIR FS9 if its not a flat out upgrade for me to shell out). Another vendor and/or freeware may come up with a sceneary ....Well at this stage.. I'll Fly that particular scenary and that particular aircraft add on for FSX. and when I get tired of it.. I'll go back to FS9 and keep reading, tweaking, and whining here. :)That'll probably take a year or two... .by then, my utilization of FSX would have gone 80% over 20% of FS9. (ofcourse that 80% of FSX utlization would be split between spending 70% tweaking the FSX vs 30% flying the FSX).At that point.. If I move to a new PC.. I'll Install FSX only and keep the FS9 in my old (Actually my current PC).By then, The anticiapation for FSXI would have started since that would be announced by then.:)Manny

[turner112 52]

I think one of the most interesting things is how much better 2004 ran than 2002 on the SAME SYSTEM.... So while I'm baffled as to why anyone might stick with 2002, I'm also interesting in finding out how efficiently X will run. It's safe to say, I'm sure, that it will need greater resources - but I still wonder just exactly how it will run.I've only very recently upgraded my video card in an old machine, and already 2004 was like a new sim. Yes, X will push systems at first, but I'm thinking it may still be pretty good on existing systems.Andrew