Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LAdamson

FSX or FS9? What's the verdict

Recommended Posts

LOL! I agree, the autogen gives a sense of depth and substance to especially in the urban areas, but they just don't really do very well in either FS9 OR FSX. Actually...YOUR, pics look great, I've been amazed at every one of your FSX shots, down to the rivits, et al. As I always said, the day I put the heavy away and move more to the GA side of things, I'm throwing FS9 outta da window! Unfortunately, I don't think that that level of detail and FPS can be had in Chicago (with autogen - which is needed to make it look like a city...instead of a map), and that's where I fly into-out of as a heavy guy.No doubt though, I am waiting with baited breath for the first FSX patch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL!!!! Come On! The ONLY thing that looks better in that picture is the water. The mountains are still blurry, the autogen tries are, what, 350' tall? Your add-on scenery is what it is and looks good in either FS9 or FSX but your screenshot shows absolutely nothing, except for the water, that looks any better. As I said, all of your sceneries look good, but in the case of FSX, besided hi-definition oil spots, point out what you see in that picture that jumps out at you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I agree! I actually thought that screenshot was taken from fs9 before reading the rest of the post. 3.5 years is a long time between versions and considering the overall graphics haven't changed that much. Compare it to the shorter releases between Far Cry --> Crysis or Unreal Tournament 2004 --> UT 2007 or Halo 2 --> Halo 3 or Call of Duty 2 --> Call of Duty 3. FSX doesn't cut it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering a NW jet at dtw made an emergency a few days ago after ingesting a few-I almost hit a few landing in Sarasota a few weeks ago-the King air landing before me at Baton Rouge hit one on his wing a month ago-and at my local airport they are very often mentioned in atis as a cautionary-it is about time!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard about that one, glad they made it down safely. Preliminary NTSB reports that the pilots couldn't avoid the birds because all they could get was 5 FPS over DTW. :-lol Couldn't resist...Microsoft Bird Simulator! :-lol All in fun Geofa, all in fun...who would make your life miserable if I didn't come around every now and then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest iwantmydc3

Well my view is, it depends. If you have the hardware (I just bought a new computer, because it was time), FSX is excellent, very enjoyable. If your computer is a couple years old, it will have problems running FSX smoothly. I remember on my old presario that I finally retired, FS9 had to be "dialed down" quite a bit, and that was disappointing to me because FS2002 ran so much better (in fact, FS2002 ran well on a wide assortment of hardware, including the laptops of the time). But, many who had a lot invested in FS2002, eventually moved to FS2004. With time and new hardware, many will move to FSX, I have and I love it.For those of you that haven't gone to FSX yet, the main things you need to know-the "real" minimum requirements are basically this:Intel Core Duo (or AMD Dual Core) CPU 2.13 minimum 2GHZ RAMLate model 512MB Video Card (NVIDIA 7900 class or comparable ATI minimum)The biggest, fastest HDD you can afford.I have a Dell XPS 410 and it runs great all sliders right except for air/ground/sea traffic set at 50%. Also I run ONLY those applications necessary (volume control/firewall/av). I've said this a lot, but so many people miss turning off unnnecssary programs!!! I have seen friends with their taskbars half full of Quicktime, Hello, Yahoo Messenger, Real Player, the WInZip picker,their packet writing program, Bonzo Buddy, BearShare, the Adobe Photo Downloader, and God Knows what all. YOU MUST TURN THIS STUFF OFF-it takes up system resources, even with 1 or 2GB of RAM it makes a huge difference! AFter all that, I would cast my vote as, if you can, why not run both? Why must it be either/or? If you just insist on one and just can't sleep without making a CHOICE, I vote for FS9 for now because of the wider support it has. As some one who prefers general aviation planes (don't fly airliners too much), I just care about does it fly nice and are the airports where they should be, "nice looking" scenery is just gravy.Finally stop worrying and enjoy whatever or both sims That's the point, right? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>The mountains are still blurryMy fault, I've forgot the scenery size parameter to medium, now I've put it to large, the scenery it's much sharper (even with the image quality loss because I've resized to 1024x768, original was 1600x1200) and there's no fps loss:http://www.virtualisoftware.com/binaries/i...ergen_large.jpgLet's do it again, let's turn on rain:http://www.virtualisoftware.com/binaries/i...bergen_rain.jpgThis shows both reflective and bump mapped materials, now try this with FS9. So much for "reflections and bump mapping kills the fps, hence we have to turn them off, and revert to FS9 flatness".What you are failing to understand, it's that FSX better graphic quality it's not so easy to demonstrate with screenshots. Even this one, although it's cleary showing something that simply can't be done with FS9, looks WAY better live, because all the new FSX effects are all related to the concept of materials that reacts to the CHANGING proprierties of light, and that can't be seen on a still frame. Expecially bump mapping, you have to see it live.Once you get accustomed to those kind of graphic, it's hard going back to FS9. In fact, FS9 is perfect for screenshots, because what you see is what you get: a flat appearance. Real world is not like that, is constantly changing, and it doesn't look like a screenshot.regards,Umberto Colapicchioni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...