FSX is Good - Really it is

[Guest archtx]

OK....that's 3 of us (counting your girlfriend)! And, BTW, may I say she is a great girlfriend if she likes Flight Simulator. I DEFINITELY would not ask my wife to vote!In all seriousness, if people think about it in terms of the hardware upgrades required for a PC, I think there would be more interest than MS realizes. MS might discover a new un-tapped market for the XBox from a different generation, as well as interest the XBox generation in Flight Simulator.

[Manny 1,293]

Rayed,Yeah.. I got that nvdieo 7600XT for a $130. Its a segway for the DX10 card. I didn't want to spend moeny on Video cards. I am even thinking of replacing that 24" widescreen with 3 X 19" and Matrox TripleHead2Go.And yes..FSX is very very very very good. Its amazing. Its trying to get it to run with all its glory on the hardware...I am glad and they did the right thing with certain key decision. Like provision for mindblowing high resolution textrures and mesh etc... These are all fowardlooking architectural moves. This way, when there is hardware available, all you would have to do is give the system data (High resolution textures and mesh data) and you are off. No problem there with that concept. Again,,,Intel and AMD and CPU architecture is a contributing factor for this. The idea that you could tear appart a code and rewrite it is pretty tough. Can't underestimate the effort and the economic viability of such a thing. But thats the situation and its not going to go away. Hence many are pleading, cursing, persuading ACES to do exactly that. Is it right, is it fair.... Oh well!:)

[Guest Rayed]

>OK....that's 3 of us (counting your girlfriend)! >>And, BTW, may I say she is a great girlfriend if she likes>Flight Simulator. I DEFINITELY would not ask my wife to vote!>Hehe, you know... it works like that.. you get your kid interested in aviation to the point that she demands (or cry!) to see "airplane" (2.5 y/old daughter) then gf will follow. Also, it helps to live in area far enough from Heathrow to not be annoyed by noise, but at the same time to be able to see all engines in 747 (I have airways crossing right above my house) w/o binoculars (RAF base 5 miles away helps a ton too ;) ;) ).>In all seriousness, if people think about it in terms of the>hardware upgrades required for a PC, I think there would be>more interest than MS realizes. MS might discover a new>un-tapped market for the XBox from a different generation, as>well as interest the XBox generation in Flight Simulator.Well, you can always get Over G Fighters for now... (don't have it yet, but I doubt it's anything more than a shooter) but some sort of FS Lite (no need to cover whole world for example), with fun missions etc.. that would be really great to have on 360 and yes, I believe that would introduce many new players to "real" simulation.p.s. What you mean by XBox generation, I am 38 and I love my xbox ;)

[Guest archtx]

Many are looking>for new things to do as a hobby, especially the men. And, they>have the time, money, brains, and desire. Many of them are>former pilots.>Ouch!! What an insult to us old f**ts!! We have time, money, brains and desire....but we can't learn how to tweak a Flight Simulator? At the very least we can learn to move the sliders! Maybe a few tutorials on your website would be in order, as opposed to a blanket assumption that retirees aren't ready for prime time?

[Guest babua]

Bill wrote:"Take a length of string and tie the two ends together to form a loop. Now you have a visual representation of flightsim's render loop. Once started, the loop will run forever, unless stopped manually (or by a program crash!).Now, take scissors and cut the string anywhere in two places. What do you have now? Two lengths of string that aren't connected any longer. This is what would occur if they were to break the render loop into two segments so they'd run on separate cores. How then, could you programmatically "splice" the two discrete sections of code stream back into a seamless whole?"Bill till now I had some residual respect for you. Its vapourized completely now with these ridiculous analogy of yours. Have you ever seen a level d simulator? Forget processors, that"string" of yours is cut and run on four different computers and put together in one screen!!! render loop and similar very less understood by you jargons dont impress anymore!! Rendering is a just one part and it could have been very well be tied up to one core and the the gpu freeing the other core for FDE( this precisely is the technique used in all modern games). Infact, modern GPUs do the rendering all by themselves, only old archaic programmers use GPU for pixelling alone and tax the cpu!!Run olydbg and check out the instruction set you'll be pleasantly surprised!!Softwares are "first" speed optimized then debugged and stabilized making them slower. Betas are always faster than final product. Out here we first debug and stabilize then look for speed! After all its MS and they know best!The fact is MS all of a sudden felt they had enough of being flightsim producer and wanted to become GOD and created their own whole world in a box. Slight problem-Their programmers, my hardware manufacturer and me missed this divine design and now we can't keep pace with acts of GOD.

[Guest archtx]

>p.s. What you mean by XBox generation, I am 38 and I love my>xbox ;)>Oops! I was thinking of my sons...they love their xboxs also! Hey, come to think of it, you're younger than one of my sons!It would be interesting to see the demographics of XBox sales.

[Arklight1 140]

I'd buy it for XBOX 360.I'm 29.

[Guest Pike]

>DDDDDDDDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!>Please...>"My FS9 with $150 worth of addons looks better than a $70>product out of the box".>FS9- $24.98 Amazon.com>Ground Environment- $29.95>Flight Environment- $22.95>Active Sky 6- $37.99>Total (without any addon scenery)- $115.87 plus shipping (as>necessary)>Or, $70 out of the box for something that was said during>development was being created for computers yet to come.>>>>No kidding....>You're arguing against yourself here...>And for your "Addons", you bought a Flight Simulator 2004>addon. There's no guarantee that it'll work with any other>version. That's about the most foolish thing I've heard from>you nay-sayers. It's like saying "I bought a headlight for my>old car, but it doesn't fit into the new car! They're both'>cars, they're both the same model, just different years, why>doesn't it work!"-sigh-Are you really that dense sir? I mean really...if a clue came up behind you, bit you on the a$$ and yelled I AM A CLUE, you still wouldn't get it would ya fella?Never once did I cry out that my old addons will not work in FSX. Not once. But for some reason you keep missing the target. Let me repeat--I never once said I was upset about old addons not working in FSX. Let me clarify, again, what I said..... In order to get FSX Demo 2 (needed to add that) to run decently (24 FPS or above) I had to basically strip it down to a point where FS9, with 3 addons, thats 1,2,3, looks better than FSX. Does FSX look better ratcheted up? Sure! Can you run it smoothly that way? Obviously not!You were so #### busy trying to think of a clever way to call us 'naysayers' foolish, that you made yourself look like a clown by not paying any attention to what I said. When I talked about addons, I didn't say a #### thing about getting old addons to run on the new platform. I was talking about new addons, and the difficulty they will have in developing for perhaps the most unfriendly FS ever!!!Of course I wouldn't expect old addons to work. But when company reps from Fly Tampa are saying IN THIS THREAD that it will be difficult to develop for FSX, PAY ATTENTION!!!!The collective point of my post is that I would expect a Next-Gen product to be better out of the box in at least a few areas than my suped up current gen product. Granted, all I have is Demo 2. Maybe the retail will be worlds different. From those that I know have it, it wouldn't appear so. I would expect it to take advantage of current tech, and the multi-core tech of the future. It doesn't. I would expect it to perform well enough that it not only runs well on a TOL system today, but leaves room so we can realistically expect it to run complicated addons in the future. It doesn't. Maybe I'm not being real about this. I dunno. But how anyone can stick their head in the sand, ignore the problems, and then pop up and criticize people for being concerned is beyond me.

[GHarrall 494]

Manny,Core 2 Duo is not the 'magic bullet' for FSX either, at least not from my experience with the demo (v2). It's not bad, but throw in AI and LVLD 767 type addons, it will be hosed for sure.FS9 really flies now though.....;)

[Toys_R_Us 0]

ArchtxThis has nothing to do with age. It has eveything to do with buying a product that works to a reasonable expectation out of the box and on an average to even well above average computer. That's what these people have right now, and they expect a product that works to a reasonable degree when it is recommended to them by a friend on his website (namely me).How would you feel if you went and bought a brand new car, and then found out it wouldn't go over 35 miles per hour. Then when you reported that, you were told that if you "tweak" around with the ignition, and then buy a complete new fuel injection system coming out next year that MIGHT help some. You are also told, "your problem" is that "we actually built this car for uninvented new systems that are expected to be completed within the next one to three years".I can't in good faith recommend a product like that to my readers and still retain credibility with them. They are not hard core simmers as we have here. MS has gone on record, that certain features of this new release were designed to attract new users. It is my opinion that this release sets a bad example for many of the newcomers that are likely to encounter it.This is not about me, as I am rather technically advanced, as most the readers here are. I will make it work one way or the other. But I am not going to say I like having to do it that way.Bob (Las Cruces, NM)

[Guest flynman3]

These long threads are killing the speed on this site...http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...id=355978&page=

[Dillon 2,197]

Ian you have to take into account Bus speed which has always been the bottleneck of machines in the past. Having a 2gig processor piping through 400mhz board is not going to be as fast as say a MAC Dual Core 3GHz with a 1GHz EI (Elastic Interface) bus. I don't know what Intel's current bus speeds are for their Dual Core boxes but I hope it

[Mace 1,902]

Well, they could also read Masters & Johnson, too, but I don't see the point...RhettAMD 3700+, eVGA 7800GT 256, ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, etc. etc.

[Dillon 2,197]

Job market wasn't looking to good, eh (just kidding)... ;-) If it was the job market we understand, it's always nice to have that safety blanket especially at a place like Microsoft. I wouldn't leave if I were you either... Hopefully you got some nice going away presents from your co-workers. There's nothing wrong with Christmas coming a little early in the year...

[Mace 1,902]

>>Enjoy away but respect the fact that your precious FSX is not>all it should be. This little sub-thread is exactly why everyone should make the effort to not respond to glass half-full posts. That was a brilliant suggestion by a mod here and I think I'm gonna take it up.I'm going to do that because I don't like to !@## on others and I, in turn, do not feel the need to be !@##ed on myself just because I like what I'm seeing in the new sim now, or just because I don't like what I'm seeing in the new sim now. So anyone who is over-optimistic about FSX can be that way, and anyone who is under-optimistic about FSX can be that way, too!Don't worry about it, it will all work out as time progresses.RhettAMD 3700+, eVGA 7800GT 256, ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, etc. etc.