FSX SP4 Beta Posted.

[Guest LSflyguy]

Astrodave, it's great to say that FSX should have been released in an "SP1 state" four or five months ago, or even two years ago. Unfortunately we don't live in your ideal world. If you wish to criticize ACES, you also need to have a realistic understanding of the circumstances they faced with this release. They had to develop FSX for their parent company's new operating system that was constantly being changed, delayed, tweaked, and then delayed some more. And they also had to ensure compatibility with WinXP. Even more difficult, ACES had to predict in 2003/2004 what the state of PC hardware would be at the time FSX was released. ACES expected the progression of ever-higher CPU clock speeds to continue, but what actually happened was a paradigm shift to multiple core CPUs. Very few people could have foreseen this three or four years ago. I feel it is very unfair to ACES when you allege that "they ultimately brought [this] on themselves." The fact is, many of these circumstances were well beyond ACES' control. I seriously doubt that anyone else could have done much better under the conditions ACES had to deal with. However I am very much in agreement with your point that FSX will "shine" once SP1 is out, and the high-quality add-ons hit the market. I also feel that the next generation of CPUs which will hit the market later this year (notably Intel's new 45nm "Penryn" line) will make us forget the initial hiccups with FSX, just as few of us remember the initial glitches when the now-beloved FS9 was released. It, too, had its initial problems and required a patch to achieve its full potential.

[DadJokeCinema 145]

>>Not that I don't appreciate the hard work ACES must be>putting>>in, but I think I'm about to start refering to this as the>>Duke Nukem Forever SP.>>HAHAHA! I was going to use that analogy a while back myself>but I figured none of the old timers in here would understand>what I was talking about. This patch definitely seems like a>myth at this point but the longer they take the less excuses>they have for it not being perfect. Hope is alive.>>>________________________________________________________________________________________________>>Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz>| 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | >Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA>RAID-0 | >OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW |>Matrox Triplehead SetupThe important difference is that DNF was talked about and talked about for a long time, and every once in a while they come back and say "Hey, we're still working on it" but outside of that, we know nothing about it. Right now people are using beta 4 and testing it, and we're getting tons of feedback from people like Phil and Mike Z about what will be changed with the patch. And on top of that, we're getting release estimates, which of course, are exactly that (estimates). DNF has just been "YES! IT WILL COME OUT EVENTUALLY" without any sense of when that may be.I don't think you can really call something vaporware when community members here are actively testing it and moving closer to a release build.

[Guest]

>Astrodave, it's great to say that FSX should have been>released in an "SP1 state" four or five months ago, or even>two years ago. Unfortunately we don't live in your ideal>world. >>If you wish to criticize ACES, you also need to have a>realistic understanding of the circumstances they faced with>this release. They had to develop FSX for their parent>company's new operating system that was constantly being>changed, delayed, tweaked, and then delayed some more. And>they also had to ensure compatibility with WinXP. Even more>difficult, ACES had to predict in 2003/2004 what the state of>PC hardware would be at the time FSX was released. ACES>expected the progression of ever-higher CPU clock speeds to>continue, but what actually happened was a paradigm shift to>multiple core CPUs. Very few people could have foreseen this>three or four years ago. >>I feel it is very unfair to ACES when you allege that "they>ultimately brought [this] on themselves." The fact is, many>of these circumstances were well beyond ACES' control. I>seriously doubt that anyone else could have done much better>under the conditions ACES had to deal with. >>However I am very much in agreement with your point that FSX>will "shine" once SP1 is out, and the high-quality add-ons hit>the market. I also feel that the next generation of CPUs>which will hit the market later this year (notably Intel's new>45nm "Penryn" line) will make us forget the initial hiccups>with FSX, just as few of us remember the initial glitches when>the now-beloved FS9 was released. It, too, had its initial>problems and required a patch to achieve its full potential. >>>Well you are entitled to your opinion just like me but it sounds to me like you are just making excuses for them. :) I am not blaming Aces per se since it was their project managers and 'handlers' from above that made the call to release the sim in its current state. The programmers did what they could in the time that they had. I also remember how tired looking they all seemed when I met them at the conference last year and how badly I felt for them. It really did look like they had been burning the candle at both ends. I just feel that I should remind folks that instead of holding hands and singing the praises of Aces for releasing a patch 7 months later that we should all keep in mind the fact that some bad decisions were made last fall to release it in its current state and that they are just doing what should have been done in the first place. Business is business. It's not personal. In the grand scheme of things none of this is really that important anyway. :(As an aside, it looks like Alcott finally got a badly needed timeout in the corner of the room. Will she be back or is she gone for good...________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz | 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA RAID-0 | OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW | Matrox Triplehead Setup

[Guest MauiHawk]

...I was just trying to express how the wait is starting to feel to me.

[Guest skyhawk21]

my two cents after following this FSX msg forum since FSX release... if they just released beta 4 after stating the FINAL would be in APRIL 07, and they have two or three more BETA builds then a Release candidate then the final release world wide.. sorry to break it to you guys this is microsoft and that means it wont be out in may either.. you guys go figure.... also i wouldnt count on june. and I like how most of u guys say well they can take as long as they want as long as they "DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME" well they released FSX without optmizing the dam thing.. so that wasnt done right the first time. and second of all as an example look at VISTA(windows ME 2). anyhow im upset as well its taken this long and it will be another two months or so before they let this SP1 out and to all the guys who say let them take there time, what if SP1 is a failure to most? then all the guys who said "let them take there time thank you aces" will be so dam dissappointed even more so than when they released fsx with all the bugs....JUST my opinion, and ive been flying with flight sim since back when they released whatever version it was back on tandy 286 motherboard computers with 8/16 megs of ram... when i was 12, now im 29.. of course fsx makes all prior versions look like crud, but still if it was performing as expected every one would be much happier.. maybe if they just optimize the scenery and texture loading process and how the cpu uses a thread to process that stuff without touching autogen or AI or anything else, we would get a FPS increase and everything else would be fine and they just fix bugs that were currently there, not make a whole new way fsx SP1 does something then create new bugs then having to go back and fix those new bugs... but im just A User of software.. and of course they dont listen to us... anyhow... skyhawk out..

[Guest]

>You're saying because its "complex" we can expect it not to be >perfect ?Even the computer controlled fly-by-wire system in the Airbus A320 is full of bugs, which have been the cause of at least one crash (Air France 296), and to top it off they cannot even FIX the bugs for fear it will cause other bugs. If actual airline manufacturers cannot turn out a product without a few bugs, how can we expect video game manufacturers to do the same?

[acmem 0]

>>You're saying because its "complex" we can expect it not to>be >perfect ?>>Even the computer controlled fly-by-wire system in the Airbus>A320 is full of bugs, which have been the cause of at least>one crash (Air France 296), and to top it off they cannot even>FIX the bugs for fear it will cause other bugs. If actual>airline manufacturers cannot turn out a product without a few>bugs, how can we expect video game manufacturers to do the>same?Good Lord, even though that may be true, please use something else as an analogy. I travel a lot by air, now you got me thinking of programming bugs on a REAL PLANE!:)

[Guest]

>Good Lord, even though that may be true, please use something>else as an analogy. I travel a lot by air, now you got me>thinking of programming bugs on a REAL PLANE!>:)Don't worry, this list from the RISKS Digest database of A320 computer bugs will make you feel better. ;-)http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/php/risks/search.php?query=a320

[Donstim 109]

>>>You're saying because its "complex" we can expect it not>to>>be >perfect ?>>>>Even the computer controlled fly-by-wire system in the>Airbus>>A320 is full of bugs, which have been the cause of at least>>one crash (Air France 296), and to top it off they cannot>even>>FIX the bugs for fear it will cause other bugs. If actual>>airline manufacturers cannot turn out a product without a>few>>bugs, how can we expect video game manufacturers to do the>>same?>>Good Lord, even though that may be true, please use something>else as an analogy. I travel a lot by air, now you got me>thinking of programming bugs on a REAL PLANE!>:)>>Rest assured that no airplane crash (including Air France 296) has been caused by software bugs. The fly-by-wire system for the A320 is assuredly NOT "full of bugs."

[bob.bernstein 0]

Because they told us they were working on it, they are harshly criticized for continuing to work out the bugs and letting schedule for release be dictated by the bug status.If Aces hadn't informed us about the prospect of sp1, there would be calm in fs land...and then, upon release, great joy over the unexpected patch that improves the sim.Wouldn't that be a better situation?Just think how badly some of you are handling information that you would have only dreamed of having just 1 short version ago.Bob

[Guest]

>The fly-by-wire system for the A320 is assuredly NOT "full of bugs."LOL Hopefully you're right. :(

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

Hey Duke Nukem Forever is coming! They already have multi-core support in...http://www.duke4.net/news.php?item.130:):):)

[Geofa 108]

I also have visions of a cooporate Microsoft type who for years has been advising the Aces team not to interact or become a part of the flight sim community shaking his finger and saying "I told you so...".http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest]

>I also have visions of a cooporate Microsoft type who for>years has been advising the Aces team not to interact or>become a part of the flight sim community shaking his finger>and saying "I told you so...".>>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgThat same corporate Microsoft type is the one responsible for this entire situation from the beginning anyway. That's a catch 22 for you! ;)________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz | 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA RAID-0 | OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW | Matrox Triplehead Setup

[Geofa 108]

Not really-but you are more than welcome to view it that way if you wish to. :-)http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg