Interesting to see what folks outside our community are saying

[Hornit 3]

Check out this link and read the reviews. It supports what I have been saying.http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-...onDate&n=468642Hornit

[peppy197 165]

GOOD GRIEF I read some of those 60 reviews, and some poor chap was on hold for 110 minutes with Microsoft, his FSX wouod not install, etc... (reviewer = Graphex)Now what is going to happen when we have to activate after installing our precious DX10 cards? And this can be requireed often. Since when is installing a videocard a change of computer anyways...wait 2 hours on hold?>?

[Guest bdg]

Well I am not sure that "outside of our community" would be a fare statement. Judging by some of the detail and length of the reviews, I believe it would be fair to say that most of these reviews were by people directly within the community.Bob

[Bray 1]

Wow...not often see that many reviews at Amazon...And some people think all is going well....Bill

[Guest babua]

Not only some people think all is going well, they even have the gall to say that all of us are BS. 50 odd of those 64 gave FSX a pathetic review-take that!!

[GHarrall 494]

Well, that's pretty bad. ~50 bad reviews out of 62.I really like the POTENTIAL of FSX, I just cant come to grips with how bad it runs even on new hardware. I admit, I didn't buy THE best, but it's still pretty good.I have tried the tweaks, but still not good for me. FS9 with UT, Level-D and AS runs easily for me at 28+ FPS.Most of the 'defenders' on here must be either 'official' beta testers who dont want to bite the hand that feeds them the ego boost, or payware developers who are worried that no one will buy anything they develop for FSX for fear of a slideshow! Have no fear payware devs, I'm currently gobbling up all the FS9 addons I had put on hold pending the FSX release!!!This situation reminds me of the FS98 - FS2000 fiasco.FS2002 - FS2004, why do some people go on about this being the same as now (FS9 - FSX)?? Performance wise, it wasn't much different from FS2002.I had very few issues with the jump to FS9. Once the autogen fix was known it's pretty much been plain sailing.I certainly don't remember the forums being this vocal back then.Well, FSX is installed and it will probably stay installed. I like it for low level GA flying, but that's about it. My tricked out FS9 will do for another 12 months or so which does run very well on the hardware I assembled for FSX.....go figure.

[Paul Kane 0]

>Not only some people think all is going well, they even have>the gall to say that all of us are BS. 50 odd of those 64 gave>FSX a pathetic review-take that!!Being a lover of aviation and flight sims in general, I'm saddened by the fact that FSX is taking such a hit. Some of the flak deserved, some not. But what I find most pathetic Santanu, is that you seem thrilled that FSX getting those bad reviews. What a guy.....

[Hornit 3]

I agree with Paul, it sucks plain and simple. Its going to be up to us to do something about it in a professional and mature manner. By community, I meant those of us right here on a day to day basis. There might have been a few there on that site from here, but most dont appear to be.Hornit

[Guest allcott]

It deosn't matter where they came from. To Granny looking for a Xmas pressies for Little Jimmy, FSX just got knocked off the list.That is what will hurt MS the most. Not us Few. Our 70 bucks is pretty irrelevant to them, we are a few dozen, maybe a few hundred. But when the many stay away in droves, it will hurt MS right in the only place they can feel it - in the wallet. Retailers demanding refunds on orders that aren't shifting off the shelves. A new release product heavily discounted within a week of release. A product activation that seems determined to keep purchasers from actually palying the game, not helping them to do so. And a bra made of clouds offers better customer support. All these things cost MS money. Good.And when certain product managers may find themselves forced to explain to Board Directors what went wrong, and what is being done to correct it, before those Board Directors have to face the wrath of the shareholders, something may get done about it. Allcott

[Guest]

Imagine what some buyers, who are not aware of the various forums, think.

[vgbaron 3,620]

>I agree with Paul, it sucks plain and simple. Its going to be>up to us to do something about it in a professional and mature>manner.>Hornit - With all due respect to your experience in the community, I disagree with that statement as far as *I* am concerned. What I mean is - there is a poster I communicate with on one of the newsgroups - he's a long time IT pro and an avid FS fan. His system is a 3.9G dual core with2 G high speed ram, dual SLI 7950 512/M video cards, 42" windescreen monitor that he runs at some ridiculous resolution - for *him* FSX sucks - doesn't take advantage of dual core, dual SLI, etc. He doesn't want to have to reduce resolution to get the sim to run, etc -so - for *him* and for *you* - it sucks! But I have P4 3.4 - what the heck do I care if it supports dual core - big whoopee. I would venture a guess there are more of us who do NOT have dual core processors than not, and I also venture a guess that we do NOT think it sucks. Not perfect, even by 3.4 standards yes but eminently flyable, beautiful eye candy in the areas that I like eye candy and so on.I guess I object to knowledgeable folk like yourself who paint the FSX product AND the FS franchise with *your* paint brush. You do not speak for me. I do NOT object to your voicing your opinion, nor do I object to your opinion itself. Just that it goes no farther than your nose and those of he folks who share your view - right or wrong - and the same goes with my opinion.Absolutely no disrespect intended - I hope it came out that way.BTW, if I had spent what my friend spent on his 42" system ,etc - I would probably have the same opinion.Just another viewpoint and as always, just MHO,VicVisit the Virtual Pilot's Centerwww.flightadventures.comhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Proud SupporterRadar Contact Supporter: http://www.jdtllc.com/

[Dillon 2,197]

Since a point is always made by Geofa (and others) we went through the exact same thing with previous releases of Flight Simulator. Go check the reviews on Amazon for FS9 and FS2002 before it. This proves more than anything FSX is in a class of it's own... Even FS2000 came in with better reviews. I'm going to search some other sites for reviews on all the different version of FS. Thanks for sharing... :-)

[Geofa 108]

Here is one:http://www.flightsimaviation.com/FS2004/?fs2004=fs2004_pollshttp://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest nem]

To put things into perspective: LOMAC has a rating of one whopping HALF star more than FSX. After all this time.http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-...42&s=videogamesDon't forget that flightsims never had much mass appeal compared to other games.Regards,http://www.bremmekamp.com/img/misc/avsim.jpg

[Dillon 2,197]

O.K. this poll doesn't give any reals stats and/or opinions.