Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Geofa

FS 2004 files...I'm amazed!

Recommended Posts

>Having seen quite a bit of FSX on other machines, I really>don't see that it looks any better than FS2004 - once the>latter has PMDG, Active Sky, GE Pro, FS Genesis mesh (and so>on and so forth) installed on top of it - and most users of>FS2004 will surely have many of these available add-ons>installed by this time.>I still use "both"; just because of the addon's for FS9. But in regards to looks & eyecandy, FSX usually wins hands down for all those areas not covered by 3rd party addons. And this includes using GE Pro, FS Genesis, etc.Putting it another way, I can't stand using FS9 for all my Rocky Mountain area flights, in comparison to the very noticeable difference with FSX. I'd have to fly clear up to Oregon to use FS9's Flight Scenery's Portland, to be as content! :-hah Yet, as FSX is "shorter" on headroom, there are still compromises to be made. Therefor, FSX won't be the "one and only", anytime soon...L.Adamson -- FSX, FS9, X-Plane 8.6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Len

Looks like another weak day for FSX releases in freeware. Only a Scenery submission but a whole bunch of FS9 stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry, haven't you got any Fly Tampa stuff as well?I think they are the tops and better than anything available for FSX.


Dave Taylor gb.png

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Still trying to figure out what the fuss is about, funny>enough I'm having a wonderful time with the sim and oddly>haven't felt the desire to land at JFK although with the SF260>I can fly around most other cities with a good 17-21 (locked)>without problems at the settings I enjoy.Me too Ian. As someone who typically flies 'low and slow', FSX is a great step forward IMO. Even with my FS9 chock full of UT, GEPro, etc, I still think in most all cases FSX beats the heck out of it. I love FS9 with my add-ons, but it is really missing the complexity and detail of FSX, except in some mountainous regions (although per your hint below, that just got allot better)...Also, the feel of flying is just better in FSX. FS9 seems somewhat 'static' in comparison. And I'm not talking about the 'head latency' included in FSX, as I use TrackIR, that is not a big factor to me.I also have ASX and XGraphics, which are really great programs, but both will be improved as move into the future I'm sure. There are still times where I think FS9 and ASv6 did look better, but that is probably simply some further tweaking on my part.Frame Rates? Yea, they are lower, but much smoother than what we had to deal with before. And if you can fly typically in the mid-teens to mid-twenties, I think FSX is very acceptable, and as good as my smoothness in FS9 in most cases hitting much higher frame rates. As usual, as hardware progresses, so will frame rates, but I don't see this as a major draw-back except in the most detailed urban areas....but those are areas I don't fly in much.What I have found thus far though is that many times FS9 with all my goodies looks better outside the aircraft (I believe because of the 'camera views' and zooming may have gotten more complicated that it is worth at times, and helps in looking blurry outside the cockpit), but FSX is much better while inside the cockpit, and lets face it, that is where we fly the aircraft from ;)>Same here, and have been riding the FSX coaster ever since>and things seem to be smoothing out nicely with Ultimate>Terrain, Scenerytech landclass, MytrafficX and ASX/AGX.I believe one of FSX's biggest issues is the landclass. I have UTUSA for FSX, and it improved things allot, but I was still unhappy with some of the more hilly regions and mountainous regions. Tried FSGenesis's landclass, but wasn't too impressed. I just downloaded the SceneryTech landlass and I gotta say, that is a nice improvement. Thanks for the 'heads up'.>Reallylooking forward to UT Alaska and Canada.As am I, and also Europe.........As far as file updates, so be it. They will come. Whats the rush?I have almost all the aircraft I flew in FS9 in FSX now. Some simply 'ported', but most FSX updated. Repaints for those in FS9 can be made to work in FSX, so if I see a FS9 repaint for and aircraft I have for FS9 & FSX, I can always use it in FSX as well. Some require some work, but it isn't a 'biggie'.Scenery is where I would love to see some updates....Glacier Bay, VicPlus, Norway Airports, etc are all scenries I would love to have in FSX, but I'm sure that will happen sooner or later.I can't believe I jumped into this fray, but I just think the whole 'argument' is kinda silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Larry, haven't you got any Fly Tampa stuff as well?>>I think they are the tops and better than anything available>for FSX.I have Fly Tampa St. Maarten for both FSX & FS9. This scenery is actually a good example of where FSX displays much better ground textures, once your away from the Fly Tampa "revised" airport scenery. It's just far better resolution and doesn't portray swirls of pastel colored mud at lower altitudes, as does FS9.But, it's still a compromise with FSX, as I need to judge how much autogen to use for island vegetation, while limiting lower frame rates & cartoon autogen houses. FS9 has more headroom on my machine for all that stuff! When it comes to MegaScenery, it's no contest between FSX and FS9. The FSX version is about 12 (or was it 16 ?) times sharper, and there is an amazing look of photo-real three dimensional depth at the same time. This is where autogen cartoon subdivisions at 1000'+ can sometimes destroy the effect.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"swirls of pastel colored mud" Haven't seen it on FS9, but I've been using GE payware for a while. With decent frame rates, ground texture looks just fine.I did see better part of U.S. turn into a desert on FS10, but it's been gone from the HDD for 8 months so maybe it was improved on SP1.Enjoy,Pat AMD A64 4000+ @ 2.65GHz, Zalman7700Cu cooler, Corsair XMS 1GB DDR, LTK6800GT-OC, Asus A8V MoBo, RaptorHDD, TrackIR4, CH FSYoke+TQ+peds, Eclipse RED KB, XP-hsp2


i9-10900k @ 5.1GHz 32G XMP-3200 | RTX3090 | 3T m.2 | Win11 | vkb-gf ultimate & pedals | virpil cm3 throttle | 55" 4k UHDTV | HP R-G2 VR | DCS

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure FSX's framerates are lower but the lack of add ons was what caused me to revert back to FS9. With the changes MS made to designing airports (which are beyond my understanding), they seem to have killed scenery design. It seems that they thought that FSX could stand on its own with its scenery improvements. IMHO, they were wrong.When FSX came out I completely uninstalled FS9 on my system and jumped on the FSX bandwagon. Until last month, I only flew FSX. I like FSX but the add ons have not caught up at all - particularly high quality airport scenery. We have seen virtually nothing as far as payware, freeware, updates or patches. Beautiful airports with lots of traffic is what I loved about FS9 and it is the reason that I switched back to FS9 last month. Luckily I had the sense to back up my FS9 installation from last year.I still have FSX on my system but I have only used it for hurricane hunting. ASX is a big jump from AS6.5 but that is the only advantage to FSX IMHO other than the improved flight dynamics (I love the way turbulence is modeled). FS9 with GEPro, FE, FSG, AS6.5 and all of the great scenery add ons is once again doing the trick for me.I have even begun to purchase FS9 payware again. Over the last year there were so many products that were released for FS9 that I wanted to get for FSX. Sadly, the FSX versions never came. One that comes to mind was the FlyTampa TNCM package. Yes, I know they released TNCM for FSX but I really was dying for the complete package with St. Barts.


MSFS Premium Deluxe Edition; Windows 11 Pro, I9-9900k; Asus Maximus XI Hero; Asus TUF RTX3080TI; 32GB G.Skill Ripjaw DDR4 3600; 2X Samsung 1TB 970EVO; NZXT Kraken X63; Seasonic Prime PX-1000, LG 48" C1 Series OLED, Honeycomb Yoke & TQ, CH Rudder Pedals, Logitech G13 Gamepad 



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest danny68

There are a few things here that EVERYONE on both sides of this fence needs to consider.The pro FS9 users have already invested a lot of money in FS9 to get it working. There is a contradiction here though because if they do have a lot of add-ons then they should have money to buy these add-ons and thus have plenty of money to buy a new high tech machine?Of course one fact that is a FACT is that of software users an amazing 70% of them don't pay for the software they use? So it could be some of the hard core FS9 users have got illegal copies of the FS9 add on's and because they don't pay for things then it's likely they can't afford high tech machines either? Or more likely they don't like to pay for things even if they do have money to buy things...Sorry, not meaning to offend any genuine FS8 users out there.The other side to this massive add-ons is that we get used to all the feel and going to a new sim like FSX means it may look good and feel good but there are missing add-ons that make the difference like AS9, FE, GE and so on.The big thing that EVERYONE has to consider here is the developers.The fact is that FSX is much harder to develop for and sales right now for FSX products is very, very slow and frankly not at all profitable for developers. The other problem developers have is how much harder it is to make add-ons for FSX. It probably takes around 4 times the effort it took to make a good product for FS9. Think about his for a moment.We've got developers getting less sales and taken longer to develop and we the buying public that like to buy are not buying because can't afford to? A paradox and something that will kill of many developers and many good products.Even Aces are making add-ons now and that could go 2 ways by helping or hurting developers? It's an unknown and I'm sure many developers are considering new ventures outside developing for FS now. The point is all this lack of supporting FSX is hurting our community and it's up to us, the buyer to help keep it alive.We can help in many ways but the best way is to spend our money on FSX products and thus encourage developers to keep banging them out.If the hanger ons to FS9 have money please start buying FSX and FSX upgrades and add on's. It is this that keeps our hobby alive.If there is no growth in an industry it's not long before it's dead.FSX sales for add on's is slow.Piracy is one area that's become more rampant than every and as soon as a new product comes out people go to the illegal sites and steal it.Other big areas of illegal trading is the giving copies to our friends. That's VERY WRONG and we should condemn this and report anyone giving copies to us or that try to.So let's start pulling together and start helping the future of FS and help the developers and start paying more for things and start transitioning over to FSX sooner than later.I haven't touched FS9 since FSX came out. Sure I miss some things but as soon as a new version of a product comes out I got out and buy it as long as it was something I would have bought for FS9 if you get my drift.So come on let's start making the future of FSX brighter for EVERYONE and that includes the retailer, the publisher and the developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

There are very little decent addons for fsx. It's been out almost a year now and it seems that nobody wants to make aircraft or scenery addons for it. My beloved dodo chopper is still mia for fsx, flightscenery refuses to honor their fsx update and is not making an upgrade any time soon. The list goes on. Until there is considerably more developer support for fsx then i dont see me uninstalling fs2004 any time soon.________________________________________________________________________________________________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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>There are very little decent addons for fsx. It's been out>almost a year now and it seems that nobody wants to make>aircraft or scenery addons for it. My beloved dodo chopper is>still mia for fsx, flightscenery refuses to honor their fsx>update and is not making an upgrade any time soon. The list>goes on. Until there is considerably more developer support>for fsx then i dont see me uninstalling fs2004 any time soon.>________________________________________________________________________________________________>In reality, RealAir does produce highly revised aircraft for FSX, although they are not complex airliner type panels and systems. But when compared side by side to the same FS9 models, the new FSX RealAirs look much better thanks to bump mapping, and actually impart a much better feel of flight; as well as some improvements in the already great flight modeling.As I still use both versions of these airplanes for FSX and FS9, the differences are very noticeable, and I could only wish that the FSX version would be compatible with FS9. But it won't, as it requires the improved technology of FSX to make it all work! :D L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fly FSX almost exclusively. I find that FS9 looks dull in comparison. I go back to fly two airplanes in FS9. Dreamfleet


John
My first SIM was a Link Trainer. My last was a T-6 II
AMD Ryzen 7 7800 X3D@ 5.1 GHz, 32 GB DDR5 RAM - 3 M2 Drives. 1 TB Boot, 2 TB Sim drive, 2 TB Add-on Drive, 6TB Backup data hard drive
RTX 3080 10GB VRAM, Meta Quest 3 VR Headset

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whine, whine, whine. I've never seen so much "crying over spilt milk." You only have to look at the history of FS to see that this negative reaction towards FSX and Vista is the very same reaction that accompanied FS9 and XP. History really does repeat itself.I transitioned to FSX and have not looked back. I don't have blurry textures, I don't have "out of memory" problems, and I'm one of the satisfied customers using FSX. Yes, I upgraded my hardware - so what. Every once in a while you have to do that anyway. Yes, I transitioned to Vista. Let me tell you, once I got rid of all that heavy security, Vista turns out to be so much better than XP it is not funny. ####, I even installed MS Office 2003 (XP application)yesterday just to see if it would run - no problems what-so-ever. I run all my FS software under Vista including Traffic Tools without any problems.If you want to use FS9 go ahead. No one is stopping you. If you want to use FSX even with Vista go ahead. But, stop all this BS and whinning and get on with it. This thread must be the 100th such thread with comments just like these that has appeared in these forums. Neither the software nor hardware is going to turn backwards so get over it.fb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Len"In reality" what the poster said is correct, there are very few addons available even you cant deny this Len :-)While the Realair SF260 is very nice, after nearly a year on the shelves you have to admit support for this Sim is poor.Even PMDG and FSD who took a FSX only stance when FSX was released have backtracked and announced that there next releases will be for FS9.Freeware the situation is just as bad, if the hobby programmers dont come on board the the outlook is bleak.It is a sad situation to be in and i worry that if the Acceleration pack from MS does not sell well it could be the last MS flightsim we see for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the success of the Fs series has ever been determined by the number of add ons made or sold which is I am sure a very small part of the total market. I am not worried that the smaller lack of present add ons for fsx real or imagined will have anything to do with us seeing a fs11.http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fbass, that's by far the most logical and eloquent post I've seen in here in a long time, a breath of fresh air, thanks mate.Seriously. FS9 was awesome. FSX is far far better. FS9 lovers, please please just upgrade already, as you've had to do for every other release of the franchise, and stop complaining. Once you do, and start purchasing current FSX addons then your precious pmdgs and flytampas and whatnot will come. I've purchased six FSX aircraft in the last four months, and the full suite of FSGenesis scenery, FSUIPC etc, and I love them all.Danny, you're totally correct on the piracy issue, and it's ridiculous. Despite the fact that I worked in the PC and console games business for ten years and have been personally burned by piracy constantly, I can understand it, if not condone it, in one case only: If people use it as a means to ascertain whether they want to buy a product, and should they enjoy it, then actually BUY it. I'm crediting people with more scruples than they have I know. In reference to the gentleman who was burned by that Ariane 737 nonsense, how much can people really tell from a few screenshots? The VC and model may look pretty but it may fly like crap and none of the systems may be functional.I can understand people not wanting to pay for a product that they can't try out first, especially considering the cost of some addons. Would you buy a car without a test drive or even a book without reading the back cover for a minute? Of course not. Just about every PC game features a demo, as did FSX itself, but addons do not, and they cost nearly as much as a full game, sometimes more.Every time a new plane or software comes out there's inevitably a post in this forum 30 seconds later titled "Anyone try out (insert addon name here)?". So how about this for an idea... Demos. Why not? Cloud 9 managed to create time limited demos for most of their FS9 stuff. Is this not possible in FSX? I really don't know, so I'm asking.You can ascertain a lot about an aircraft or scenery in a 10 minute demo version, including its framerate penalty. It might also take some of the wind out of casual piracy if people had the 'hands on' means to determine for themselves whether they wanted to purchase an addon.On the flipside I constantly promote the planes I love in my multiplayer flying. I can't even count how many planes I've sold for Realair, Iris, and Alphasim, it has to be in the dozens by now. If I love it I tell other flyers I meet in multi about it constantly, to the point that I think it drives a few of my regular wingmen a bit batty. :)All that is to say that you can help the situation. Upgrade your gear, buy FSX addons. Promote the ones you like, pan the ones you don't. The market will take care of the rest.-Mike


Mike Johnson - Lotus Simulations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
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...