Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Geofa

I don't want to sound ungrateful, but..........

Recommended Posts

Guest Kev_Is_Soaked

>I dont want to harp on this too much, but>>"Why would they continue and complete a SLI and DC incapable>FSX">>is just plain wrong. I made a blog post about this, since it>comes up so often, here>http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007...multi-core.aspx.>>Incapable is wrong, we are not only compatible we are capable>- its just a matter of how capable. Precision in language>matters here.No, what I said was quite accurate. FSX is not SLI and Dual Core capable. It is, as you said, compatable, but I wouldn't qualify it as being capable... capable would mean you actually use it to your advantage instead of rendering the technology absolutely worthless as FSX does.I'll stick with Incapable :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed about personal attacks! By the way-I am very happy with the default Fsx Baron-consider the handling qualities better than my favorite fs9 Baron-the Dreamfleet-and a huge improvement over the fs9 one-and will be very happily be using it until hopefully Dreamfleet comes out with a new improved fsx one.I only have 210 total hours in a real Baron so I still have a lot to learn about flying it out of my 1000 total hours-but I don't consider myself a non serious /non diehard simmer/gaming simmer. Why imply so-from a keyboard to use your words! :-) Ain't true in at least my case.Yes-I am ready for the snow to melt-I have had enough of preheating engines in sub zero weather. It looks like you must fly fairly close to where I do-the scenery is very much alike.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some fair questions here.First,though, the commitment to SP1 is all about addressing the concerns about RTM. It might be nice to wait to see what we have cooking before assuming we are doing something wrong.As I have said, SP1/DX10 is one set of people and XPack is another. Repeat, the team working on SP1/DX10 is distinct from the team working on XPack. Given that I dont understand the negativity to the announcement.Plus I have made broad hints about going to beta on the SP next week - one would hope the community would see the XPack announcement as happening on the cusp of SP1 being done and as "the next thing we are working on" and in no way decreasing or taking away from our commitment to SP1.Now with that out of the way, I dont understand your comment wrt versions. SP1 requires RTM, Std or Deluxe. So will DX10 and XPack. SP1 will make add-in authoring easier, not harder because the performance gains and other fixes will help make FSX a better platform. SP1 will change the version number, so add-on setups can detect its presence in the add-on setup and inform the user to install SP1 if for some strange reason an add-on turns out to have a dependency ( or give them a link to it in your setup, or whatever action you want to take ). However, given the purpose of SP1 I think a hard dependency is unlikely and I dont see it complicating add-on development.Its not clear yet what tool changes DX10 might require that would influence how a 3rd party developer would author content. We will be very careful to no make any changes unless it is absolutely necessary since we are sensitive to this concern. But even there, the DX9 content will run on FSX whether its XP or Vista. So its only if you wanted to target something DX10 specific we come up with that there would be any additional work. And that would be the add-on developers choice.XPack is an update to RTM since it will require RTM. It will bump the version number so it too can be detected. Only if your add-on depended on the additional content in XPack would this have any effect. And you would have to choose to be dependent so I also have a hard time seeing that as an issue since its again your choiceIt will be completely possible to author a bog-standard add-on using the SDK that will work in all updates to RTM. So while I understand the concern, I dont believe it will work out as a combinatorial explosion.Does that help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Yes indeed, criticism is never welcome when needed, eh?>As the wise sage has spoken many times,>man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. >the Eleventh Commandment,>"Thou Shalt Not Criticize Microsoft">Woe to he who does, eh buddy?There is a HUGE difference between criticism and ranting. Go ahead and criticize. More power to you. However, people posting illiterate rants that level unfounded accusations and call people liars is just plain wrong and shouldn't be tolerated by any so-called "community."Members of the Aces team have been on this forum responding to whatever civil criticism there has been, and asking for a dialogue. If it were me in their shoes, I'd have given up and gone home a while ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If it were me in their shoes, I'd have given up and gone home a while ago."Really? You'd give up your six figure salary and MS stock options because your feelings were hurt?I don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hello Gang!>>As the title of my message states, I don't want to sound>ungrateful with this post and my intention is not to start a>flame war at all. I am grateful that Microsoft/ACES is>dedicating time and effort to expand FSX and make it better ->- - - we all know it needs fixing/patching in many areas. I'm>glad to see that a patch is in the works and that we may see>it in a couple of months. By the same token, I'm OK with the>DX10 patch coming (strategically around X-Mas time), because>by then, there would be a couple of proven/tested DX10 GPU's>and Vista would have been patched and updated at least 20>times.>>What bothers me in some ways is this:>>Why is ACES spending time creating new airplanes and trying to>come up with new prodcuts to add to FSX and fundamental things>such as ATC and performance are still an issue? This whole>ATC issue is somethignthat they have avoided addressing like>the plague. In fact, the ATC engine did not change from FS9. >I don't want to go into the details because ATC issue topics>are all over the history of these forums, and I also realize>that the ATC engine is allright but things such as SIDS/STARS>and other basic things need to be enabled.>>Bottom line - I believe they need to improve on the already>existing FSX before the start adding new things such as>airplanes and stuff; leave that to the third party devs.>>My 2 cents!>>>Sincerely,>>Dennis D. MullertI hope this thread gets locked ASAP, nothing but the same crap overand over.Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>I agree, plus months before FSX came out they told us it>was>>made to take advantage of dual core cpu's.>>>>Whoa there!!! Where did you ever see this? MS to this day,>>never gave any indication FSX was programmed to take>advantage>>of multi core processors, nor SLI, nor Crossfire! Let's not>go>>round spreading false information!!>>Quote from Shawn Firminger, Aces studio manganer for FSX.>>>"It's clear that the new dual core systems will enable you to>get the most from FSX, but it's also clear that it will run>very well on your existing Windows XP, 3 GHz, single core>system. "FSX is a multi-threaded application so by its very>nature the performance will benefit from dual-core. We do not>benchmark hardware and the test phase for dual-core will not>occur until the summertime," Shawn elaborated.">>Here you go>http://www.flightsim.com/cgi/kds?$=main/feature/firming.htm>>More nuggets from the article>>"Flight Simulator X is still on track for a holiday 2006>release and will be optimized for Windows Vista when Vista is>released," according to Shawn."I have to admit, I haven't seen this article. I don't get over to flightsim.com that much. I prefer to get my news and info here at Avsim, which in this case turned out to be more accurate. If you search tdraggers posts, which was also reiterated by Phil when he came on board, you'll see that they consistently said FSX was not optimized for Multi Core, or SLI from the very beginning. The fact is though, that FSX does run better on Intel Core Duo's due to it's more efficient design, so the suggestion in the article that it runs better on those systems is accurate, although not because it's multi-core.


Thanks

Tom

My Youtube Videos!

http://www.youtube.com/user/tf51d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also pose the question as to what exactly a mission creator is supposed to be doing in regards to a performance patch. I seems as if there is some kind of misconception that everyone on ACES is a graphics programmer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Avsim used to be a nice place to visit, but the discussions>here have become childish and violent for the most part. FSX>"a really excited user" as those who enjoy the simulation are now called are>being attacked for defending the sim after ridiculous half>truths and twisted logic have been posted bashing FS, MS, Aces>and others. What has this place come too?>>I love aviation and flightsimming, I love flying FSX, loved>flying FS9, FS8, 7....Fly, Pro Pilot (even bought the kids>version for my son).... I've been on avsim for over 10 years>I believe reading the discussions, taking in information and>laughing and lurking at the humerous posts, but now it seems>it's nothing but acidic posts without an ounce of respect or>thought I flying left and right.>>Few intelligent discussions, too many ego slapping and>taunting over and over. Considering this is the FSX forum>don't we have a right to defend the reasons we enjoy the sim>and point out any mistruths being spun by the antiFX party?>>The OP posted a well worded concern which I believe can simply>be answered with one group is working on the service packs,>the other the DX10 and Xpack. Has the FSX launch gone as>planeed? One could assume the delay of Vista through it out>of whack, but who knows. >>If you don't like FSX don't use it, switch to x-plane or>continue to use FS9. Venting frustrations spouting a really excited user and>M$ and a really bad dude to a bunch of people who enjoy FSX and respect>the development team will in high probability only annoy and>encite a flame war. Why post it then? If it's an>intelligent, well founded complaint you will most likely get a>better response. It's human nature.>>Ian.Just look at it this way, you can take a break whenever you want :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest paulvanharte

Phil. In case you have not noticed MS is damned if they do and damned if they dont. There are a lot of MS Bashers around ( not me) and my hats of to you for still responding to some of these naysayers!Keep up the good workPaul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"If it were me in their shoes, I'd have given up and gone home a while ago.">Mike T wrote: >Really? You'd give up your six figure salary and MS stock options because your feelings were hurt?I don't think so.Regards,Mike T.Give it a break Mike. There is no requirement for Aces folks to be a doormat for the kind of vitrol shown in this and other posts in order to keep their jobs. We've all been here long enough to know that Phil, Hal, and others don't even have to show up. Aces team reaches out to keep folks informed and in turn they get hammered by everyone with an "axe to grind".The mindset of some here seems to be that folks like Aces are "fair game"...an absolutely ludicrous way to handle any issue and certainly adds nothing in the way of solutions.That's my opinion, add .75 cents and it'll get you a cup of coffee:-)


Best Regards,

Ron Hamilton PP|ASEL

Forumsig16.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Hocking

Here is my simple message to ACES/Microsoft,1) Develop your new flight simulators to run on currently available hardware, and forget your "future proofing" theory silliness.2) Develop a new flight simulator every 5 to 8 years, no sooner. We don't need, nor want, a new flight simulator every 2 to 3 years like you have done in the past. Go develop a train simulator or something.3) Improve your ethics when it comes to marketing your products, and don't make claims about your software that are not true in an effort to build up hype. You over-built peoples expectation about your latest simulation, and this is why people are so upset now.You do these three things, and you would eliminate most of the frustration that is being directed at you. It is not hatred for Microsoft, or for ACES. We are upset because of our actual experiences with a product that we paid $70 for that we thought was going to be much better than what it is. Most of us don't even have this $70 software installed on our computers right now, and probably won't for another year from now.As far as you a really excited user out there, you are becoming one of the big problems of the PC gaming industry. PC game developers are starting to skip the testing phase of their products before releasing them because they know they can depend on you to do the testing for them after you buy the game. You seem to be happy playing these unfinished games, so they just keep releasing unfinished games to you so you can BETA test them. They will then release a patch for the game after you spend several frustrating months testing it for them. Don't willingly take this unfair treatment from game developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron:You give it a break, if Phil, Hal and the other's don't show up because many are upset with the product they delivered so be it. What you call vitrol some see as a legitimate gripe.You seem to be of the opinion that we should shut up and accept what we get so we don't make Aces mad at us. You seem to have it backwards. If THEY don't get their act together its OUR dollars that they don't get. I'm not paying for the privilige of having someone to talk to me and make me feel good...I have a dog for that.I don't see any posts attacking anyone in Redmond personally. The perception that FSX is substandard is just as vaild as FSX being the greatest thing since ******* walked the earth. The Aces team is working on the problem and it is more than fair to leave them alone to do their work but in the world, outside the FS Community, do you really think that a game that only half the audience can use 6 MONTHS after its release wouldn't have end-users burning the developers in effigy? If you think that we're being unfair, you might want to take a peek at the Nvidia or Creative Labs forums...it would seem their efforts have been substandard too.I'll take that cup of coffee now! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Here is my simple message to ACES/Microsoft,>>1) Develop your new flight simulators to run on currently>available hardware, and forget your "future proofing" theory>silliness.>2) Develop a new flight simulator every 5 to 8 years, no>sooner. We don't need, nor want, a new flight simulator every>2 to 3 years like you have done in the past. Go develop a>train simulator or something.>3) Improve your ethics when it comes to marketing your>products, and don't make claims about your software that are>not true in an effort to build up hype. You over-built>peoples expectation about your latest simulation, and this is>why people are so upset now.>>You do these three things, and you would eliminate most of the>frustration that is being directed at you. It is not hatred>for Microsoft, or for ACES. We are upset because of our>actual experiences with a product that we paid $70 for that we>thought was going to be much better than what it is. Most of>us don't even have this $70 software installed on our>computers right now, and probably won't for another year from>now.>>As far as you a really excited user out there, you are becoming one of the>big problems of the PC gaming industry. PC game developers>are starting to skip the testing phase of their products>before releasing them because they know they can depend on you>to do the testing for them after you buy the game. You seem>to be happy playing these unfinished games, so they just keep>releasing unfinished games to you so you can BETA test them. >They will then release a patch for the game after you spend>several frustrating months testing it for them. Don't>willingly take this unfair treatment from game developers. Let's see, your here less than 2 months with a whooping 28 posts and you have the audacity to claim you are talking for us! Be careful how you wield the word WE around.


Thanks

Tom

My Youtube Videos!

http://www.youtube.com/user/tf51d

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...