Sign in to follow this  
Guest grapesh

Already disappointed

Recommended Posts

Oh I see. I just saw the CES 2006 presentation video and yes - FSX is just what I expected, same story as with every new edition of FS. Bad framerates (imagine what kind of computer that is) and nothing really new except a super demanding application with a few new features. I don't even try to imagine the framerates with some scenery addon on my computer. 5fps is probably optimistic.Well some of us will probably have a good videocard for FSX at the end of 2008 (let's start saving money already). Until then I'll just keep flying FS9 without bothering about the newest videocard which costs $350. Instead I'll use the money for some real flying.I just don't get it. Why not make a good game?? Why not realease a truly *BETTER* product (to make a difference)Well Microsoft - here are a few things I'd like to see fixed in FSX:ACCEPTABLE framerates - Yes it is possible. Remember "Crimson Skies"? It used to run perfectly on my old computer (ATI rage fury 32MB, Pentium3 600MHz). If you don't remember the game - it looks A LOT better than FS2000 in my opinion, yet the framerates are about 10 times higher.Why not "fix" some important features in aircraft behaviour? - Aircraft ever since CFS2 tend to "flip" upside down when you stall them - that's true for every low-wing aircraft, because the centre of gravity is *above* the wingsWhy not fix some OLD problems in FS? - with most aircraft you have to apply nearly *take-off power* to start rolling on the ground. Which is fixed for some add-on aircraft by "artificially" increasing the static thrust. Now you get the other problem, you need 2000 pounds of fuel just to taxi to the runway.*Realistic GROUND EFFECT* - probably #1 on my wishlist - ok, the landing is like the happy end in a movie. Bad framerates, no realistic ground effect (and lots of other things actually) make each landing a nightmare. I remember I read about landings somewhere on the internet. The last few seconds before touchdown were covered in 1 or 2 full pages - very detailed. Every landing in MSFS is like 3 words on those pages only.I still remember my first time behind the controls of a real aircraft (I already had a few months of flight simulator "experience") when I said to myself - man, real flying is so easy, yet it requires some real input from the pilot... So how about reality in FS? Well I heard the MS guy talk about "realistic reflections". Yea right!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Those are, indeed, "interesting" (though not too insightful) comments. Trouble is, I think you've confused us with someone who cares. Trolling can be such a difficult task...Anyone got a padlock?Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't we be a little more positive? We have some Microsoft Flight Simulation programmers who frequent this site. We don't want to run them off any time soon. Besides, FSX is still in the development stage. RH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that AVSIM should make all new users take an IQ TEST before allowing registration into the forums.If not > 50 then IGNORE REQUEST

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is this serious or candid camera? 'why not release a truly better product'?!? hey, you havent even seen the final release. this is really a great post. ROFL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give 'em a chance. FSX + DirectX10 + a good PCIE video card will run much better and on Vista even better than that.Let's face it, new software demands new technology. If not for that, you might as well run FS9 or earlier and stick with it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanna laugh my a$$ off at the lameness of that post. Oh, waitaminnit, I already did.Dude needs to get a life, err, grip on what's been going on the last several months!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, Some valid points tarred within criticism.I can relate to some of his frustrations *at certain times* and voicing your opinion is what gives feedback colour.Who says that FS should only be enjoyed by people of like mindedness?It should hopefully be for everyone.Lets face it though, competition is tough, just look at the latest manifestations of Linux, they are crisp, they work, look good (gui interface) and best of all, its absolutely free! I think its amazing.Imagine then how hard it is to compete with that?Don't get me wrong, I am very pro Microsoft, they have great quality products and I'll happily pay for it too.I suspect that the future of FS is indeed related to other freeware flight sims and their quality, because they are 'getting there'.What most of us 'hardcore' simmmers are interrested in, is 'cutting edge' even though quite a few still use FS98/2000 and in a few years time, freeware products will presumably take over that share in the market.I don't mind that neither tdragger or pixelpoke don't post regularly or even update their webblogs frequently (though I do miss that), they are real people with real families and 'real life' to contend to as well. They are dedicated to the spirit of quality and that 'label' is far better than a few glitches in FS over the years :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. Some of you guys are *harsh*! :)But in all fairness, I do think it's kind of premature (that's a euphemism. Bell206Freak is closer to right on) to comment about a piece of software that none of us have actually used yet.After I fly FSX, if I still get 5 fps after tweaking, THEN I'll do a post like that. haha.Rhett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Oh I see. I just saw the CES 2006 presentation video and yes>- FSX is just what I expected, same story as with every new>edition of FS. Bad framerates (imagine what kind of computer>that is) and nothing really new except a super demanding>application with a few new features. I don't even try to>imagine the framerates with some scenery addon on my computer.>5fps is probably optimistic.>Well some of us will probably have a good videocard for FSX at>the end of 2008 (let's start saving money already). Until then>I'll just keep flying FS9 without bothering about the newest>videocard which costs $350. Instead I'll use the money for>some real flying.>>I just don't get it. Why not make a good game?? Why not>realease a truly *BETTER* product (to make a difference)>>Well Microsoft - here are a few things I'd like to see fixed>in FSX:>>ACCEPTABLE framerates - Yes it is possible. Remember "Crimson>Skies"? It used to run perfectly on my old computer (ATI rage>fury 32MB, Pentium3 600MHz). If you don't remember the game ->it looks A LOT better than FS2000 in my opinion, yet the>framerates are about 10 times higher.>>Why not "fix" some important features in aircraft behaviour? ->Aircraft ever since CFS2 tend to "flip" upside down when you>stall them - that's true for every low-wing aircraft, because>the centre of gravity is *above* the wings>>Why not fix some OLD problems in FS? - with most aircraft you>have to apply nearly *take-off power* to start rolling on the>ground. Which is fixed for some add-on aircraft by>"artificially" increasing the static thrust. Now you get the>other problem, you need 2000 pounds of fuel just to taxi to>the runway.>>*Realistic GROUND EFFECT* - probably #1 on my wishlist - ok,>the landing is like the happy end in a movie. Bad framerates,>no realistic ground effect (and lots of other things actually)>make each landing a nightmare. I remember I read about>landings somewhere on the internet. The last few seconds>before touchdown were covered in 1 or 2 full pages - very>detailed. Every landing in MSFS is like 3 words on those pages>only.>>I still remember my first time behind the controls of a real>aircraft (I already had a few months of flight simulator>"experience") when I said to myself - man, real flying is so>easy, yet it requires some real input from the pilot... So how>about reality in FS? Well I heard the MS guy talk about>"realistic reflections". Yea right!you really have no idea! Yawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you'll be able to save some money by not buying it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two points to your email and I don't know which ones to answer first. One point is that frame rates will be lousy as usual! Your other point is that there are no improvements! We heard the same exact comments regarding FS9. We heard.. "oh blah..only clouds changed and some dumb old airplanes were added". I admit it; I was one of the skeptics of FS9. But most including YOURSELF are running FS9. Why did you upgrade from FS2002 to FS9? Let me try to answer it on your behalf. Many subtle improvements added-up to make the sim a much better one than the older version. None of the improvements, by themselves, look like much. But it is the sum of all those subtle improvements that truly transforms the simulator! I bet you would hate to go back to FS2002!I also don't underestand how you could assume so much about functionality of the sim based on a video or some screen shots! By the way I think the screen shots look amazing!As for Frame rates; Just because the designers have given you the choice to trade off eye-candy for frame rates, does not meant that they made a software that doesn't perform properly! Rather than leaving a feature out, isn't it better to give YOU the choice to turn it off? I think FS team is not afraid to push the limit of the technology and I applaud them for it. This allows the user to improve the simulator as they "catch up" with technology. Think of it as getting a new simulator as you upgrade your hardware!!! It gives the software a lot more life!! Perhaps you see why FS is the longest running game franchise in PC history!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Avsim has set the record recently with the most bans of users under 5 posts in a short space of time.It seems they are coming out of the cracks recently. Please, someone get some putty and close up those cracks. Albeit some interesting points, but slathered with a disregard for decent criticism, and no real facts presented.[hr color=#000000][table border=0" width="98%" id="table1" height="4" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="2][td width=500]Jason CYOO - Formerly MYNN[br /]General Aviation Fan[br][/b]P4 3.2Ghz, 1GB Ram, FX5900 128MB, XP SP2.[br /][br /]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy you really hit the nail on the head. With each new release of FS I hope the stutters of the previous version will be fixed, but this never happens. I like many aspects of flight sim but the performance is always an issue. Games like Pacific Fighters don't have these issues. It just runs perfect, never a stutter not once.Spending many thousands on the fastest PC available and tweaking it to the max has little effect in flight sim. Going to a major airport and turning up the weather and AI (even half way) and its stutter city. Why FS the engine is so inefficient? Why is it drawing planes on the other side of the terminal that aren't even visible? The big hope this time is DX10. If FS can be optimised for DX10 and 64 bit compiled for Vista I think there can finally be a version of FS that runs fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> If MS would only eliminate it without adding a single new feature this in itself would be worthy of a seperate release.Thats correct, and theres absolutely no reason against having a 'double dip' and releasing a separate DX10 version. Alot of users would eventually buy both versions so its makes good commercial sense and keeps customers happy :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny that you actually answered yourself when you said you get stutter around major airports! Does Pacific Fighters have major airports around major metropolitan areas? (Major airports are around cities with lots of scenery objects and are usually full of add-on AI.) You also implied that your system runs okay if your AI slider is set at half. FS team could have, easily, limited the maximum number of AI and taken that choice (of adjusting AI level) away from you. And sometimes I think they should have, so people like you wouldn't insult them for being inefficient programmers. I assure you that FS team is as talented as it comes. I doubt that they have any less programing skill than people who did Pacific Fighters. To see how talented the FS team is, note that they have been invited to present two of their top technologies at Games Developrs' Conference next week! http://www.steve-lacey.com/blogarchives/20...imulato_7.shtml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about the stutters. That is the single most annoying issue with FS for me personally.It seems no matter how much we tweak, we can reduce it but never come close to eliminate it. I personally will wait till after FSX is released and see what users say about it in this regard before jumping in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I assure you that FS team is as talented as it comes.Few doubt it. But I am afraid that stutters were never high priority with the MSFS team. There are ways to reduce stutters if graphic engine was designed to throw away some eye candy when it comes to crunch time (perhaps according to user's selected priority list). Maybe not everyone would like the result but at least some users could have opted for this no-stutter nirvana. I kind of identify with the first poster - you go and watch the promotional video and scratch your head when you see every frame being delivered to you with outmost 'stress' and you realize that priorities of the development team are mostly 10 miles from your own.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> You also implied that your system runs okay if your AI slider is set at half.Read it again mate. I said that with the cloud and traffic at only around 50% there are stutters. The video from CES not only stutters, but the other thing is the autogen houses are popping in late. This is only a default chopper flying somewhere around Hawaii. Theres no major city or airport in sight, no traffic around (except a car!) and the weather is fine! It's a real concern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Users...[hr color=#000000][table border=0" width="98%" id="table1" height="4" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="2][td width=500]Jason CYOO - Formerly MYNN[br /]General Aviation Fan[br][/b]P4 3.2Ghz, 1GB Ram, FX5900 128MB, XP SP2.[br /][br /]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this