• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

137 Excellent

About vortex681

  • Rank
    Member - 1,000+

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,285 profile views
  1. The problem with setting something other than the native monitor resolution is that the screen image will almost certainly look worse. You are trying to make one physical pixel represent more than one pixel generated by the graphics card so it will always look less detailed and fuzzy compared to native.
  2. It only affects some FSX users. FSX works normally for me after 1709 and the latest update.
  3. It doesn't appear to have anything to do with .NET according to this recent update from Microsoft: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4054150/issues-when-windows-10-fall-creators-update-calls-createwindowex-for-s
  4. FSX-MS

    Not according to the FSrealWX homepage: "Weather add-on for FS2002, FS2004, FSX, P3D and Xplane. It decodes METAR and upper wind data (additional weather information such as types of clouds are in preparation) and sends it to the flight simulator. FSrealWX will always remain freeware" They also say:: "FSrealWX can be us as unregistered version but some features are not available in this case. These advantages are given with registered version: flight planner load editor weather finder better weather display for FSX and Prepar3D loading past weather loading and saving of weather data FSrealWX as client on a further computer more features are developed…. direct wind control You can activate FSrealWX by buying a key."
  5. If FSW was the only sim available, then I'd agree with you. But it's not, so it has to compete against other, well-established sims and it needs to be good to do so. DLC (or 3rd party add-ons) is nothing new. It's not as though DTG have somehow invented a new way to separate us from our money. More to the point, the very concept of 3rd party development means that, in the main, DTG won't be responsible for it. If the base sim isn't good, no one will want to sink their resources into developing for it - this alone should be sufficient incentive for DTG to get it right. But the difficulty for the other sims is that this would probably take considerable re-writing of the base code to retro fit it. As we've seen already, trueSky changes not only the weather but also many aspects of the environment such as lighting and colours. Having just made major changes to their code to move to 64bit, I'd be very surprised if LM would want to do that again to incorporate trueSky (and at what cost to customers?). More to the point, because their primary focus is commercial aviation and the military, they will probably not see any cost benefit from changing what they have already - the lack of real-time weather being a case in point. FSX will not change and LR already consider X-Plane to be superior to everything else and have only recently released XP11 anyway - even fairly basic things like seasons are probably a full version change away. The FSW team have cleverly incorporated trueSky at a very early stage of development so the sim will be built around it.
  6. You have my sympathies. However, it's puzzling how the update could have caused the same problem to sims which are so radically different, particularly in the way they generate their graphics. Luckily for me it hasn't had any noticeable effect (good or bad) on anything I run.
  7. Why? Are you a shareholder in DTG? They can do whatever they like and the only thing we can do about it is to not buy their products. There is no risk to flight simmers. We won't be the least bit endangered by whatever DTG do or don't do. We might be disappointed or excited but we're definitely not at any risk. Nor is the flight sim genre. The only risk is for DTG. People are getting much too emotive about what is, essentially, just a game. DTG have the fate of FSW entirely in their own hands. If they want it to be a commercial success they need to make something which is at least as good out-of-the-box as what the other flight sims have to offer (preferably better) and with some really original features to attract established enthusiasts. They know that and, so far, they seem to be on the right track. If they don't succeed, we won't all be sat staring at blank screens and bemoaning the end of the flight sim as we know it. We'll just go back to using FSX or P3D or X-Plane, dreaming wistfully about what might have been, and DTG will realise that they've missed a great opportunity. I'm hopeful that this won't be the case. They've done a lot in a short space of time and I suspect/hope the best is yet to come. I think we should stop making demands and let them show us what they can do.
  8. Not true. It's fairly straightforward to turn off just the automatic driver updates in Windows 10: https://pureinfotech.com/exclude-driver-updates-windows-10/. As an aside, none of my sims, FSX:SE included, have had any issues after installing the Fall Creators Update (1709).
  9. FSX-SE

    Scott, do you have anything by FSLabs (which seems to be another common denominator)?
  10. Whilst it's not specifically for flight sims, over at Guru3D they have a GPU Shootout table which they update after each new review which gives a good idea of the comparative performance of most popular graphics cards: https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_geforce_gtx_1070_ti_strix_gaming_review,45.html
  11. Three points. One - I turned off game mode when it was first released and I've just checked the registry and it's still off after the Fall Creators update. The update doesn't force it back on. If you hadn't previously turned it off, then you're correct that you've lost the easy option to do so now. Two - it's not just Windows store games that it works with. See: https://www.addictivetips.com/windows-tips/game-mode-on-windows-10/ where they try it with Hitman and Witcher3. Three - even if you leave game mode on in the registry, Microsoft says it will only be activated automatically for games that have been specifically whitelisted to use it. For most games, you need to activate it on a per-game basis using the Windows key + G to call up the game bar whilst running the game and then select it on in the settings option. That said, unless your system specification is borderline for being able to run a particular game (where it could well make a difference), there's probably no reason to keep game mode on globally.
  12. Whilst it does just seems to be repeating what has already been repeated many, many times in numerous posts and in different forums, FSW is early access - it's not even in beta yet! You've only got to look at some other early access titles to see that they're often virtually unplayable, which is certainly not the case with FSW. You chose to buy it (or even got it free) knowing that it was at a very early stage of development without a target completion date - no one forced you to spend your money. There were no promises of particular features, just an aspiration by DTG for it to become a flight sim that people would want to buy when it was complete. There are many expectations here based on experiences with other sims which have taken many years to reach their current state and which initially had very few of the features which are being demanded from FSW from the outset. Apart from some missions, none of the DLC for FSW has been produced by DTG - it's been produced by 3rd party developers dipping their toes into the waters of what looks, to them, as if it may be a promising new product. Again, you don't have to buy it and FSW runs just fine without it. As has already been pointed out, when FSW was first announced there were many comments about 3rd party add-ons and how FSW would be dead in the water without them. Now they're starting to appear people are complaining that they should either not be produced at this early stage or that they should be part of the core sim. No one seemed to make the same complaints about X-Plane or P3D. In those sims, 3rd party add-ons are seen as enhancements. Where are all of the cries of "Active Sky/PMDG/A2A/REX etc. should be part of the core sim!". There are none because not everyone wants the same thing and add-ons give you options which you can choose to have, or not. How many of you have installed a flight sim and never added anything to it? There are probably some who are happy with default aircraft, textures and so on but I would imagine that they're very few and far between - and they probably don't realise just how much better the experience could be by adding things to it (and I'm including freeware here). Those who are complaining that even FSX has airliners, helicopters and classic aircraft (to name but a few things) out-of-the-box forget the fact that they are really basic and, although they look different, fly nothing like the real thing and are just there to make the sim look more diverse. Personally, I'm hoping for a really good base to which I can add my own choice of advanced aircraft and features. When FSW reaches it's release version, I can't imagine that new customers will want to pay an inflated price for the privilege of having many payware quality, default features they may never use. For example, I've never flown heavy metal in any flight sim and have no desire to do so, so filling them full of study-sim quality airliners would just be a waste to me. I want realistic weather (already well on the way), good global textures, good ATC, good AI, convincing night flying/lighting and shadows where they should be in a well-optimised sim which uses my hardware effectively rather than stretching it to breaking point (or beyond, in some cases) and I'll be happy. Adding what you want to the sim is part of the fun and makes it a much more personalised experience. I'm the first to admit that DTG still has a long way to go, but I have other sims which I can use until they get there (which I hope they will). Like everyone else who downloaded FSW, I knew exactly what I was letting myself in for and I'm happy to be patient - at least for the foreseeable future.
  13. FSX-SE

    Does anyone with this problem NOT have a PMDG aircraft installed?
  14. My experience has been that it makes no noticeable difference to performance. If I run FSX without it I don't see an increase in FPS.