>>My vote would be for Mike T. to do the Avsim FSX review. >>He's put in some serious work trying to get the sim to>>function properly. He's even tried all the tweaks which is>>more than I can say about L.Adamson.>>So? I haven't done all the tweaks and I enjoy FSX. A review is>supposed to be objective/unbiased with the pros and cons>pointed out for new users to get an idea about the program.>The one posted at SimHQ is a perfect example and right on the>money. Based on Mike's posts here as of late, he has lost>any credibility as an unbiased/objective reviewer for this>software.>>>Regards, Michael>KDFW>>

Asus A8N32-SLI>Deluxe nForce4 SLI-x16 / AMD

>For someone who has decried ad homimens you sure can freely>engage in them when it suites your interest. What about an>unbiased reviewer who comes to a negative conclusion about>FSX? That's how I see Mike. Of course in your world "unbiased">means someone who can come to a positive assessment of FSX or>one that makes you happy.>Not at all, I have admitted there problems with it as well, but you only see what you want to see which is why most of my posts tend to be against the ones who are one sided and completely negative. I agree it needs more head room for addons, I agree that there are some messed areas that need fixing, I agree that backward compatibility is less than expected, but I also see the great things about it as well, of which there are many.I see him coming to a negative conclusion AND keeping on with the crusade despite whay others are experiencing, that is biased!Regards, MichaelKDFW

Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI-x16 / AMD

>>>For someone who has decried ad homimens you sure can freely>>engage in them when it suites your interest. What about an>>unbiased reviewer who comes to a negative conclusion about>>FSX? That's how I see Mike. Of course in your world>"unbiased">>means someone who can come to a positive assessment of FSX>or>>one that makes you happy.>>>>Not at all, I have admitted there problems with it as well,>but you only see what you want to see which is why most of my>posts tend to be against the ones who are one sided and>completely negative. I agree it needs more head room for>addons, I agree that there are some messed areas that need>fixing, I agree that backward compatibility is less than>expected, but I also see the great things about it as well, of>which there are many.>I see him coming to a negative conclusion AND keeping on with>the crusade despite whay others are experiencing, that is>biased!>>>Regards, Michael>KDFW>>

Asus A8N32-SLI>Deluxe nForce4 SLI-x16 / AMD

FSX has gotten good reviews from almost all the sites and why not it is so much better then FS9 was. I like the fact that it also can help new people into flight Sims with its missions which are fun I have been trying a few myself.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/161430.jpgPlus it just looks so darn Good out of the box.

>You're not answering my implied question though. Would you be>able to countenance anyone coming to a negative conclusion>about FSX and not use an ad hominen on them that they're>biased? And I don't mean some negative aspects critique>I mean a negative conclusion.Of course, if the review points out the pros and cons based on fact and not ad hominem. I don't expect everyone to feel the same about the software, that would be wrong, but for a review that can persuade a new user as to his purchasing or not, it has to be fair and objective despite the conclusion. To be honest, I do feel for the casual gamer that gets a copy for Xmas as he will probably have a bad experience since the sliders will have to be turned to low for him to enjoy, but that doesn't take away from the fact I am enjoying it and that I am wrong or lieing (which has been implied) to have a good experience with it.In theory, if I was thinking of buying FSX and saw a review based soley on what Mike has posted since he has gotten FSX, I probably wouldn't buy it, BUT if I based my buying decision based on the review at SimHQ I would buy it as it gives me more insight into the actual program and not the users interpretation or experience of which everyone has had different.There is a big difference between saying "FSX really sucks!!" and saying "FSX did not meet my expectations as there is no headroom for addons and the landclass is off" Regards, MichaelKDFW

Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI-x16 / AMD

Hi there,in my opinion it's not really possible for a single person to write a complete and informative review about FSX simply because there's no one who would have the knowledge to comprehend and evaluate the many different aspects of the sim. I'd much rather have several people look into different, specific aspects of the sim. This would also help alleviate concerns about personal bias of a single reviewer. Mind you, I'm speaking about in-depth technical reviews. The forums are flooded with "user reviews" already and I don't think we need another one elevated as an "official review", here or elsewhere.What I find a bit odd is people arguing about who is or isn't suited for writing a review about FSX when those people already have formed their own opinions. So what are they looking for? Front page confirmation? Or perhaps someone to fight with in case their own opinion isn't reflected in the review?Cheers, Holger

I agree with Holger's perspective on this!FS (any recent version... much less FSX itself!) is so multi-faceted and detailed in its scope, that any one feature set could easily cater to an entire special interest group just to grasp its operation and potential.I value a general review sometimes, but when one considers the extensive complexity of FS, it would be both interesting, and I believe, appropriate to the task if FSX received a series of reviews by several authors, each of whom are both interested and intimately familiar with the FSX feature set to be covered in their review.GaryGB

....Not to mention the fact that this software has been 'reviewed' dozens, if not hundreds, or maybe even thousands, of times on here by all the people giving their op-ed's on here daily since it's release. It would be nice to see an official review by Avsim, but then again, I have a hard time thinking of anything much new to say at this point until Aces gets a patch out.

Holger,You've hit the perverbial "nail on the head" with your comments. In the past, you'll see that we here at AVSIM have always taken the high road when it came to reviewing the meat of our hobby, the foundation flight simulator itself. You're also correct in that an indepth review, of something as complex as FSX, simply cannot be justified from the mind of just one person either.If you check out our (AVSIM's) past reviews, in the archives, of FS8 & FS9, you'll note that it was a "team" of staff reviewers here that covered all of the various aspects of Flight Simulator (in the past I usually covered those aircraft listed as General Aviation). A quick check on my part shows that the AVSIM review of FS2004 was conducted by "7" individuals, all from the review staff and all 7 posted their part of the review based on their personal experience or area of expertise.To put together a review, worthy of our posting, requires several weeks and I would assume our (AVSIM's) review will appear some time after the first (of next year), which is only 5 or 6 weeks away.Steve (Bear) Cartwright

FSX is looking very good.Only large European cities like Amsterdam use a texture that is very unsharp.That texture is there since Fs2000.For American cities very sharp textures ofcoarse.