Proof that FSX can perform with correct hardware.

[Guest FxF3]

Still he is stating that he has done it. Its his money plus he is right many people have stated FSX want run on any machine. He just proved them wrong. It happens everyday the ones who say it cant be done are fewer because some of them are not buying into some of the things being posted. They have started helping them selfs and finding with just some easy Cfg changes FSX can come alive.Changing out the AI also helps tons. So set on the corner and watch or get in the game and play its your choice.I can run FSX just fine on my computer which is far below his specs.

[Guest Jimbofly]

"Oh sure it is stupid. As stupid as releasing a game that won't run decently in 99% of computers."Well that's your misguided opinion and you're entitled to it. :)James

[Geofa 108]

"I can run FSX just fine on my computer which is far below his specs"Me too-but some are determined to believe otherwise for a cause which frankly eludes me. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest Jimbofly]

I think it'll be hilarious when PMDG make their addon look way better in FSX than FS9 (because now they can) and people are playing it with reasonable framerates, and you're stuck with FS9!James:-xxrotflmao

[Geofa 108]

It is interesting to me that I had absolutely no interest in flying 3d cockpits before fsx-now that is all I want to fly. In the last few days I have been placing some aircraft that were designed for fs9 in fsx that don't have fsx updates yet-and guess what-I can't stand to fly their 3d cockpits. A good example is the aopa 6-it looks much better in 2d and the instruments respond much better in 2d-the 3d cockpit just doesn't make it after seeing and flying the typical fsx one. Talk about slow fps-the 3d cockpit is like tar-compared to fsx designed 3d cockpits.The improvements to the 3d cockpits in fsx is huge-both looks and performance-and I eagerly await the upgrades. I am sure when the big jet upgrades come out they will blow away what was before-but that is progress. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest Valkyrie321]

Exactly. I stopped using 2d cockpits back in FS9, and now with FSX I never look back on that decision. It seems so much more immersive to pan around your cockpit looking for the generator switches!

[Guest]

proved who wrong? I am wondering who this mysterious straw man is that some of you keep eluding to... ?

[Guest]

>I think it'll be hilarious when PMDG make their addon look>way better in FSX than FS9 (because now they can) and people>are playing it with reasonable framerates, and you're stuck>with FS9!>>>>James:-xxrotflmao nice try, but you are dreaming, if scenery developers have almost given up on FSX, I have no doubts that frames in the FSX virtual cockpit of a high quality airplane like PMDG will not be "better" in any sense of the word

[Guest]

>>The improvements to the 3d cockpits in fsx is huge-both looks>and performance-and I eagerly await the upgrades. I am sure>when the big jet upgrades come out they will blow away what>was before-but that is progress. Looks and performance? I'll take the Dreamfleet A36 or B58 in FS9 any day of the week. And that landclass, shores and river placement, yikes. Top all that off with being stuck with default airport scenery and you have one failing package. Can anyone say CFS3?

[Geofa 108]

Say what?http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest lalo lolo1]

Oh, you are right, I must be short. 99.5% let's say then, or do you believe that simmers have average computers. No sir, we have very, very sophisticated machines compared to the regular user. So if only about a half of us, with very sophisticated computers , can run FSX decently, what is left for the others.Leo

[Geofa 108]

Well I have the dreamfleet b58 working fine in fsx-except the flight model needs some work, the 3d cockpit looks lackluster as a lot more is modelled in fsx. Landclass-easy fix with fsgenesis-waiting for the other worldwide package review.CFS3-well I'm not bombing anything-but go for it if it turns you on.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[LAdamson 240]

>Looks and performance? I'll take the Dreamfleet A36 or B58 in>FS9 any day of the week. And that landclass, shores and river>placement, yikes. Top all that off with being stuck with>default airport scenery and you have one failing package. Can>anyone say CFS3?Make all the anti FSX points you want. But after getting lot's of enjoyment out of CFS2, I junked CFS3 rather quickly. FSX is getting a lot of play on my computer. Crisp looking cities, that look more like photo's, and a much better simulated airmass.Yet, I do have FSX and FS9 installed side by side. If I need additional frame rates for some fps hogging addon, I can always go back to FS9 and put up with those less than pleasing textures and lack of changing airmass. :-hah L.Adamson

[Geofa 108]

Anyone notice the smoke coming out of the office building heaters/air conditioning vent in Stan's pict?It is the little things....http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest Jimbofly]

I think I've arrived at the conclusion that you really don't know that much at all about FSX, or haven't bothered actually spending much time with it.Notice how more and more people are being converted to it? Including previous "naysayers"? I never touched CFS3 but CFS3 this aint. For starters the atmospheric modelling is far better, the flight modelling is better, the graphics are seriously better, etc etc.I'll be laughing a year from now when the vast majority of simmers are regularly playing FSX and getting a great experience from it, and only a few narrow-minded people remain with their dated FS9.btw I've had Flight Unlimited 3, which had great flight modelling, and FSX for the first time gives me that feel of flight that I enjoyed from FU3. Never again am I going to touch FS9.James