AVSIM Is Very Supressive When People Complain About FSX

[boshar 6]

Positive and negative comments are always posted with superlatives.Positive comments are overly nice while negative comments are overly rude because to make their point they both use exagerations. Now when a negative comment gets a little bit to rude the thread is locked or the post gets deleted. In order to defend the negative opinion the negative poster has to adjust his prose and make it more possitive and appreciative to pleasure the almighty moderator.In other words when I'm out with my friends and talk about this passionate hobby my normal comments about my experience would get me locked, deleted or banned here. The only thing I'm doing is voicing my opinion and yes its great to vent some of the frustration that the wrong expectations and overly optimistic FS marketing department created.Moderation of the negative FS-X experiences only causes this forum to become out of sync with the real world experience. A heated discussion between pro and not so pro FS-Xers would harm nobody. I think we need a bit more leeway in the discussions.I'm an flightsim fan and I hate FS-X. Do I need to go to FS haters anonymous or has the largest flightsim internet forum a place for me and other people that think that way.

[Guest tmholopa]

recommended specs for FSX:future system from 2010 with 80 cores and 2 GB of 3d memory doing 5 teraflops and 10 GB of normal memory, SSD drives with 1000Mbs throughput.just waiting for the hardware to exist.........sp2 screenshot showing comparison shot with state of the art machine 3.6 Ghz core2 (overclocked) and 8800GTX and 4 GB of memory have 9.1 FPS in Seattle everything maxed. heres the link:http://www.flightsimworld.com/forums/index...ic=128136&st=40P.S. this Mango and Cell have best runnin FSX in the planet i thinkso still waiting for the hardware to pop out.........

[Geofa 108]

Again-no problem with fsx hater who states their cases with good manners. I don't mind heated discussions-I rather like them. If your definition of heated discussion is rude behavior-that is not gonna fly on this site.There are (or used to be) sites that don't require civil behavior.This site does. I didn't make the rules-but I happen to like them. Perhaps why the largest flight sim site?http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

[bob.bernstein 0]

Lee, I enjoyed your post, and from the point of technology and engineering, I think you've said it best.From the point of the ranters, I think this is really a non-technical issue. Now correct me if you think I'm off base, and I'll put my flame suit on in a minute, but I've thought hard about why some of the people are so angry that they can't stop namecalling and imagining negative motivations on the part of ACEs. There is a natural interest on all of our part when a new sim version is pending, but only a subset of us are willing to spend large sums of money on hardware based on their reading of marketing literature. (I see this choice as a SEED FOR FUTURE ANGER). And why would one do that? There is plenty of time to upgrade hardware later after the sim is released and users can report performance. I can only surmise, the reason is cuz they "can't help themselves"...just "do darn excited to wait"...hmmmmm...That's a lot of money to be spent on "just do darn excited to wait". And its the seed for future anger that we now have the pleasure of reading. How many posts have included the notion that the writer feels ripped off cuz the system they bought can't run fsx like they think it should. Then they conclude with "If they'd only known, they wouldn't have wasted their money...." The population of users here is large and varied, but those of you who think marketing messages are vetted sufficiently to justify spending large sums of money, please learn from this. For how long have we hear the phrase "Caveat Emptor"..or "Buyer Beware". Perhaps this is a lesson needed by the youth amongst us who just haven't leaned this yet. Marketing people have a tough job, they are not evil, they do not want to rip you off by saying something you later disagree with. They are obligated to predict the future, and that's a tough job. Of course they are also charged with the responsibility to excite the buyers, and you can't blame companies for that. Its your job as a consumer to not let marketing rob you of your ability to think. So, next release, DON'T upgrade your hardware until you see the reviews of users. DON'T buy the next release until you see the reviews of users. And then take actions that make sense, actions that leave you in control of your money.Then you won't feel like making public attacks on the hardworking people at Microsoft.And if you realize you are in this camp, that you let marketing messages overcome your better judgement in spending your money, can you please internalize this rather than continuing to expect to find an external guilty party. Enough name calling will never remove the fact that you bought your hardware based on unproven marketing.And finally, we have to be grown up enough to be able to seperate commonly held negative feelings over Microsoft's market leverage from the individuals that work at ACEs. I've met them personally, they are people. They love flying and simulation. They don't deserve the anger they've received.Best,Bob

[Guest n99wb]

"hmmmmm...That's a lot of money to be spent on "just do darn excited to wait". And its the seed for future anger that we now have the pleasure of reading."Bob, I have been thinking the very same thing for about a month.I read a comment, I think on PT's blog, where some guy was mad thatDX9 users got a boost from SP2 also. He complained, "Why did I geta DX10 card." Even though the 20% DX10 boost is above what the DX9users got. The most outright case of "Dog in the Manger" I have seenin a long, long while.Also, there is another sub group of FS9 addon buyers who are upset theirinvestment doesn't work in FSX. Somehow, FSX has ruined their FS9experience. They will beat up on FSX all day but rarely complainabout the software authors. Don't get me wrong here. Unless theauthors promised upgrades, there is nothing to complain about.Right here, in this thread, I read, "I hate FSX." Then, the author went on tosay how he should be able to discuss it. I don't make the rules or knowif he "should" be able to, but what's to discuss? Doesn't "I hate FSX"say it all? This forum, the FSX FORUM, is, as I understand it, here to help peoplewith issues and to provide feedback, ideas and dialog to further enhancethe FSX experience. The FSX bashing falls just a wee bit short of that runway. Here is another sub group that has been laying on the lash. Folks whoeither won't read or can't read."I can't believe I have to pay $30.00 to get SP2/DX10."Of course, that is not true. SP2 is free and will be released afterthe Acceleration Pack, which brings us to:"MS is just a bunch of money grubbing back stabbers."Well, you don't get to have a market cap of 278 BILLION dollars byignoring opportunity! Liberty_8

[Guest 2002cbr600f4i]

I think part of the problem is that a year later and we're still hearing the same complaining...Listen, GAMING (and that's what we're doing folks) on a PC is NEVER going to be the same as on a console. Everyone has different hardware, different software installed on their machines, different driver versions, AND DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS!Personally, I haven't seen any problems with FSX on my machine, but I also have a very modern machine. It's only gotten better with SP1. At the same time, I didn't really play 2000-2004 at all, so I walked in with lower expectations than others...Honestly, I am getting royally sick and tired of people complaining about not getting the same performance out of FSX as they did with FS9, when they're running on 5+yr old hardware that wouldn't even qualify as a BUDGET machine these days. Of COURSE it's not going to perform as well!If you're not happy with FSX, fine, go back to FS9. BUT, there are MANY of us who enjoy and love FSX and have no issues with using it. There are more than enough rants out there about personal issues with the software. Why is it that many of us can run it fine and others cant? Probably has a LOT to do with hardware differences, setting differences and expectation differences.Complaining doesn't solve the problem and it only comes across as whining at this point. 11 months ago - fine... Now - get over it, buy new hardware and quit your bellyaching... Geesh!

[BobP 56]

>I think part of the problem is that a year later and we're>still hearing the same complaining...>Hi,One reason might be that after a year, one service pack and a boat load of tweaks, FSX performance still stinks for that individual? Might I suggest that if you don't agree with the subject, don't read the post? :) I agree with Dick (OP) that there are some very knowledgeable simmers who skip this forum for the reason's Dick stated. Our loss.The moderator's and members in this forum are waaaaaaaay to serious. I hope the worst thing that happened to all of you today was here. The idea is to make the moderator's job easy by keeping the post civil and non inflammatory, although I don't think "half baked" is anywhere near that. We all deserve a slap upside the head (by Tom) for allowing our great hobby to be split between two transitory versions of FS. I love/hate FSX but above all I am a simmer. I'm also old so when/if Tom slaps me I expect a near miss. LOL. Bob..

[LAdamson 240]

>>I'm an flightsim fan and I hate FS-X. I'm a real flight fan, and I guess that's why I enjoy FSX! :-jumpy L.Adamson

[LAdamson 240]

As a side note, I sometimes see FSX being compared to FS2000. The program was certainly harder on CPU's and had a problem with constant scenery "morphing", especially in mountain areas.However, with FS2000, it's the first time that Microsoft went all out, by using actual Jeppesen databases for navigation and airports. MS also threw in a much more accurate topography database, along with virtual cockpits, much more realistic clouds..............and airplanes that didn't truely fly on rails for hour after hour!Once again, MS has upped the realism factor with FSX. It's very evident in percieved "feel", yet many don't appreciate the fact, or don't seem to know what it is. I'm often stunned by the fact that I would get "mocked" for explaining improved "airmass" on FS9 forums. But whatever, because it's very noticeable every time I switch between the two sims. L.Adamson

[Geofa 108]

"I hope the worst thing that happened to all of you today was here."Maybe there is the difference. I would like coming to the fsx forum to be one of the best things that happens to someone all day-good conversation, good advice, and good debate. The rudeness I get 2 hours a day on my daily driving commute-I don't come here to get more. As a side-does anyone find it slightly embarassing that Phil Taylor who comes here on his free time on a regular bases to let us know what is developing for flight sim prefaces his post with "If we can have an intelligent, rational discussion I will participate".Is there really any usefullness for any of us here in using this forum in any other manner?http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

[BobP 56]

>>Maybe there is the difference. I would like coming to the fsx>forum to be one of the best things that happens to someone all>day-good conversation, good advice, and good debate. Are you implying I'm hoping all have a miserable experience on AVSIM. LOL. How about lives that are so rich that arguing here is the worst thing to happen that day? Like now. LOL. Have a great evening Geof.

[Geofa 108]

I thought I was pretty clear. I think you were too.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

[slashed2 53]

I've noticed you've said that the airmass has improved many times and am really curious if other real world pilots agree? I'm not a real world pilot but there does seem to be a difference, a more realistic feel to the flight. With that said I can see the other side of the coin because you need smooth performance to feel that change and will agree that's a major setback although with fully optimized FSX aircraft such as real air and the defaults among others performance isn't hindered at least for me and that feeling of flight is one of the top reasons I am enjoying FSX.

[Guest Len]

DickGood points. The issue, however, is not as simple as some posters suggest. I've seen civil expressions of dislike or criticisms of FSX have the converse of what is mentioned regarding the locked post, i.e., derisive, objectionable and insulting comments if the poster didn't laud FSX. In other words, I've seen the moderators less inclined to lock or warn posters when the shoe was on the other foot.Just an observation.:-)

[slashed2 53]

That's a good point Len, although I have seen warnings go out to both sides in a heated argument. Most threads, as far as I've seen, are locked when someone continues to push the issue and becomes derogatory or the initial post is so blatantly, obviously an intent to illicit a fight from someone. Keep in mind also that these guys are not getting paid and do it on thier free time and I'm sure they sometimes lose patience themselves or just plain want to prevent an all out slugfest. I sure as heck don't envy their job that's for sure.Edited because I added my name in the bloody signature and keep typing it in anyway out of habit. Old dog new tricks sort of thing.