Flight Simulator 2004 - opinions?

[Guest otter55]

najii am looking for mesh for the texas hill country (austin, etc)don

[JimmiG 244]

Those who like gliding would be better off with FU3. The flight model is still basically the same, it feels slightly smoother and not as "bouncy" but still not as fluid as FU3. There's always addon files (free and payware) which improves the situation (e.g. Steve Small's Baron files or RealAir's Cessna 172 and 182 plus various payware aicraft).For doing touch 'n go's at the local airport or flying cross-country (mostly on autopilot anyway), the flight modelling is "good enough", though.I agree that FS is becomming too commercial. A few addons that used to be free for FS2002 are now payware for FS2004 (FSUIPC, Active Camera).I also find the planes a bit overpriced. I understand there's a lot of work involved in making a good FS200x plane with a virtual cockpit, good flight model etc, but $30-40 for a single plane is a bit expensive considering the actual sim (with several decent aircraft and worldwide scenery already included) costs $60-70.For those who like the helicopter in 2002 but can't fly it, there's a new helicopter in FS2004 which is alot easier to fly than the uncontrollable Jetranger III.Reviews are unfairly giving FS2004 credits for a lot of "firsts" that FU3 actually did several years ago.Some reviews claim that FS2004 is the first sim with good haze effects - I still like the FU3 haze better, and they also claim that FS2004 has the best weather effects. Sure the clouds and sky look good, but the wind effects and weather changes are more realistic in FU3. In FS, you can either download real weather, or choose from a very limited set of preset weather "themes". FU3 has a very flexible and dynamic weather simulation which can generate anything from hazy summer skies to thermals and ridge lift to nasty thunderstorms and anything in between.About the scenery. The generic textures themselves actually look better than FU3's blurry grey and brown city textures. However, FU3 is of course more accurate with a lot more detail. The default landclass for FS2004 over SFO and SEA looks about the same as it did in FS2002.To put it simply; I think FS2004 offers enough news for anyone who likes FS2002 to upgrade, but if you didn't like FS2002, you'll probably not like FS2004 either.

[Naji 5]

I just purchased a few days back the West Coast and the Rockies 32-m mesh from FSGenesis. They are quite good and the price is now acceptable. Check their site for the package that covers Texas if you don't mind to buy it.Hope this helps.

[Guest Rich Wren]

Hi Chris,The Virgin Atlantic scheme for the flyable 747 was mine (with some help from Ansgar). Circumstances at work have kept me from my personal projects and have prevented me from being an active poster here for the last few months. Hopefully that's all over now and I can resume something approaching normality, I'll find out when I go back to work tomorrow.In answer to your question though, I fully intend to do an updated version of the Virgin scheme. I'll probably end up doing a different aircraft in order to differentiate the two versions, but it'll be the new livery.Cheers,Rich.

[Guest R_Driscoll]

You mentioned reviews claiming firsts for FS2004 - of course reviewers did this with FS2002 as well - for a long time I kept a copy of the Computer Pilot review which was so glowing about FS2002 and its new features - I can't remember them all now but it included ATC, seaplanes, autogen scenery (how long have flight sims had autogen - at least since MicroProse used it in their sims) and about 10 other "novel" features, coupled with fairly poor quality generic scenery area photos showing the worst stretched graphic cliffs you could imagine. Don't misunderstand me - I don't want to be stuck with FU3 for ever - I do want to see substantial progress towards better realism. And I don't want the whole world modelled crudely, I would rather have a small area modelled well.The things that do frustrate me about FU3 are lack of colour range, and framerates (I still use a 500 MHz computer and can't upgrade in the near future). But even if I could see that FS had solved its basic problems (look-up table flight modelling, high price of add-ons, lack of glider support) and it has solved many recently (ATC, mesh terrain, volumetric clouds) I still would not be happy to switch, since I have invested much time and effort in making and adapting FU3 to my needs. And it does just what I need, extremely well. Just like Chris enjoys San Fran, I love the Cascades and the mountain regions there. RobD.

[Guest jonpoint]

Ah, the Cascades!Yeah, MSFS has a good mesh of Mt Rainier (dunno if it's standard) but...I won't go into the argument here. I have a neighbour who bought 2002 before realising his 366MHz Celeron wouldn't cop it. I tried it out but it felt like a heavy-duty FS98. My then-current video card (GE2MX) worked OK but I found it wanting for 'feel'.Besides, I was just getting into doing new stuff for FU3 and wanted to keep the momentum up! This has paid off I believe. There's at least one comment here about how my aircraft look as good or better than some 2002 planes. I did this to prove that FU3 already had this ability - in 1998 :-beerchug Sure, we don't have the latest 3D engine, but the one we have ain't bad ;)Speaking of new planes, I also read here some comments about gliding. Well, we have a new, un-powered glider coming (Blanik L-13) with another (ASW28) coming soon after. These gliders are setup for a 'winch' launch or you can just 'page up' to where you want to be. If you thought the Stemme was nice to glide, try this! I will post some shots this week and will post the pre-beta out to any interested parties before I release it through Avsim.:-waveJon Point*************************(effyouthree@hotmail.com)*************************

[Christopher Low 5,352]

Robert,One reason for my current upgrading of the small airfields in the Seattle region was to increase my enjoyment of flying in this region. I am still more interested in the SanFran region (simply because I have ALWAYS been fascinated by this area), but now I can look forward to flying in and out of "slightly" more interesting airfields in the Seattle region. I haven't done this yet (I've been too busy building the damn things), but I know that my desire to do this has increased considerably.Chris Low,ENGLAND.PS. I should be able to complete the runway and parking area upgrades this week. Final "trimming" (adding other objects and stuff) will then be all that is required. Most of this should be very straightforward, although getting the sections of fencing to join convincingly will probably be the most time consuming work.It is also worth pointing out here that 95 per cent of the upgrade work has been done in the Seattle region. Only three airfields have been modified in the SanFran region, and the other modifications are mostly just tweaks and minor upgrades. I hope to be able to add a new scenery package (Infineon Raceway), but that isn't a top priority at the moment. I will need to have a look at this to decide what I am going to include in this package. Gimmicky stuff like racing vehicles on the track is NOT what I have in mind :-)

[Guest Staggerwing]

Yeah, Avsim seems to have made another software change or something... it's just not working well for me here. My favorite view of the forum keeps changing each time I get here and for some odd reason, I now have to sign in each time even though I check the "keep me signed in" button.Oh, and my "Back/forward" page control in my browser no longer works with Avsim....but still works with all other sites. ??BTW, I don't have FS04 yet and not sure if I will or not... however I do use FS02 and get enjoyment out of it. (which is the whole idea of simming IMO) Sure, many things could be improved but I just HAVE to be able to fly in other parts of the world outside FU3 now and then.

[Guest]

I wish I had spare money like you rich lot! Fancy being able to just go out and buy FS 2004. I will have to save up and just when I get enough pennys together....the washing machine will blow up or the car will want a tyre or a road hump will claim yet another coil spring!Paul...........UK.

[Guest twsimfan]

Stag,Don't let them kid you... FS04 is a major improvement over FS02... first version I have really found to be a joy to fly since 5.1... or maybe FS95. The new mesh is the main thing but the weather and other things come into it too. Also it loads in about 20% the time of 02... and flights load much faster too. Textures also load much quicker which does add to a feeling of realism.Of course if you want real scenery as opposed to realistic scenery there is always FU3. :)Pretty fancy rig you made for GPL_Bert... I'm definately jealous! ;-)

[Christopher Low 5,352]

Yes, but just imagine how much money you're REALLY saving ? Buying Microsoft's Flight Simulator is never enough for a satisfying experience. You then have to buy all of those add-on scenery packs, aircraft packages, FS Traffic.......blah blah blah. You could literally be saving hundreds of pounds !That could buy you a brand new PC to play FU3 on ;-)Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[Guest otter55]

chrisi am running 2004 "out of the box" and am tickled pink with the default aircraft (major improvements)default scenerydefault ai traffic is also vastly improved (the sky is full)default atcdefault clouds/weatheri have no need or intention to add anything to this version. ms finally got it right, though it took many years :)have a good onedon

[JimmiG 244]

I spent a total of, I believe about $12 on Flight Simulator 2002. The only thing I purchased was an AI Traffic utility. I still had detailed scenery, updated landclass files and more airplanes than I had time to fly. There's a lot of freeware stuff available for FS too.For those who want satelite scenery in FS, remember that there are (payware) sceneries that offer this. There's a 14,000 sq. mile area of the LA/San Diego area just released for FS2004 and more are in progress, including Boston. There's also a photoreal UK scenery available.If you feel that you do have the money, you should really check out FS2004. It does offer a lot of entertainment and you can still keep FU3 ;)

[Guest Robert_S]

"RallyBert", Tom, RallyBert.It says so right on the wheel hub. :-)[table][tr][td valign=top]http://www.avsim.com/other/usaribbon.gif[/td][td valign=center]Bob "FlyBert" StilesAVSIM Moderator[/b][/td][/tr][/table]"Don't stall on me, I have to soar!"~Richard Harvey, 1/21/2003

[Guest twsimfan]

Jimmi,Better if Chris doesn't buy it... if he does we will never hear the end of his complaints. Of course not having it wont stop him from commenting on it. ;-)I have that LA/SD scenery on order but I must say that I am quite impressed with the included scenery. It isn't accurate beyond the edges of the downtown area of major cities but it sure does look realistic. That water fix of yours helps a lot too... thanks again on that one. :)