carbonbasedlifeform

Every couple versions there are people who have this attitude. At some point one has to move on. (There are ways to minimize the telemetry with Windows. You can disable Cortana with the registry.) The game I saw with DX12 was a lot faster compared to their DX11 version. Smart developers should be working on both versions but DTG might not have the resources. New software is what pushes people to upgrade operating systems and hardware.

Have people with the ground issues tried increasing the flight models per frame?

There's no reason a game can't be a serious simulation and fun for gamers. Unless you're a pilot or training to be one, you're flying imaginary airplanes. It's odd people try to make it a status thing.

You can make shortcuts but I've noticed it doesn't make much difference if you install everything on the HDD.

P3D hasn't changed the landscape. The people blown away by it are the ones who have used FSX/P3D so much that slight improvements jump out at them. Yet I still use FSX more than XP11 because overall, after you spend the money, the world is more immersive. XP still needs the same things as before: seasons, customized regional scenery, more third party support, and a bit more polish. At this point I'm not sure how much further Lockheed and DTG can push FSX. It's a testament to the ACES team that their software is still standing and in use. X-Plane and Aerofly have way more potential and I want them to gain market share. In the meantime I'm probably going to focus on landing in some unique bush airports in Orbx fjords.

I do think they should have called it FSX Plus but people would have complained that they were being charged for an update.

I like froogle's videos including this one. But he shouldn't lead off talking about the "community" views when the "community" was complaining even before release. He's also giving a one-sided account of the third party development issues that doesn't seem to take into account what DTG has said about it. On the other hand he does point out its early access. He also does a good job showing how ugly FSW in certain areas including the problematic LOD. Looking forward to more videos. Hopefully DTG makes improvements by the next video.

So is the proper way to turn the J3 the same as other planes just less forgiving? Or does it need to be turned differently?

Is the difference accufeel by A2A?

Are new features or addons going to be announced at the convention?

To follow up on this, are other forums full of people criticizing the subject of the forum? Is XP full of people that disdain it? I can understand people giving their initial reactions (although they frequently lack context and are repetitive). But why keep trashing it and watching this subforum? My theory is that they're worried they'll have to ultimately reconsider their favorite sim and where they invest their money. Maybe not in the next year, but eventually.

Comparisons to real life seem like a stretch. I'm OK with slightly updated clouds and DLC like REX. Just like with ground textures: OrbX global is a step up but you have to buy DLC to truly make sims shine.

As chock said, there is already 3rd party involvement. It's part of OrbX's project roadmap too. There are a few developers who don't want to support FSX but there playing with fire if LM decides to enforce eulas and pull the rug out from most of the user base. In this time of rapid change in the sim business, Orbx is smart in that it is working on almost every platform including small ones like aerofly. The exception is XP11, which has always had a lot of trouble attracting third party developers.

Steam will be a differentiator. It opens up a huge base of customers. P3D is a ticking time bomb because of its EULA issues. Personally I need the following to leave FSX: A2A Rex orbx As far as I know all three of these have already stated or shown their support for FSW.

Correct. And by the way one of the first posts on OrbX is "move aside P3D." So WHEN this product matches FSX, XP and P3D in terms of completeness and systems, it would beat all other sims, not just FSW. Why single out FSW? I dare OP to use AF2 exclusively for six months. You don't want to because it's not close to matching other sims in other areas. And for the record, I'm rooting for AF2 and basically every other sim. AF2 has a ways to go outside of graphics. I tried it.

It wasn't necessarily aimed at you, but I'm not going to comment further because we're not allowed to discuss EULAs. I probably shouldn't have brought it up.

For free or as a new product? They need to make money so free is out of the question. If they charged for it, most of the community would have been enraged, just like they already are. Also, everyone would complain that the billions of addons are broken. You should watch the grumpy old men video explaining the programming difficulties involved here. They're starting small for good reason. It's not like "poof, done."

Good video. I don't think people understand the software development aspects. The programmer and QA guys point out this is a late alpha/early beta. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy this right now. I'm not buying it right now but I hope it succeeds.

Please. Lockheed Martin doesn't care about the private flight sim market. Even if you think you are hardcore. They are a huge defense firm that makes actual planes! If so many people are abusing their EULA, it's because they probably don't care enough to enforce it.

People talk about features but probably don't understand that updating someone else's software is hard and that they need to start small to ensure any functionality. People are already figuring out how to make scenery and planes work in FSX.

Is it possible this is not something that either DTG or 3rd party developers can easily agree upon or talk about? It might not be up to DTG alone and 3rd party licenses might not allow it.

FSW IS FSX:SE v2 They can't guarantee compatibility with the millions of addons. That's probably why they're starting with a certain amount of native planes. It's cheap. People would have complained regardless.

What is the problem with DLC? Most people are already spending huge amounts of money for addons. Steam and DTG taking cuts hasn't stopped Trainsim DLC. I do think they want this to be FSX 10.5 but people would crap on them if they tried to make money on updating it ("why am I paying for an update and bug fixes!") and if the billions of addons didn't immediately work ("They shouldn't have released it if all expensive addons don't work with DX11 and 64 bits). They're starting small. Again, it's lose-lose for DTG.

Agreed. DTG is in a lose-lose-lose position with respect to this community. The community doesn't seem to understand where software entertainment has gone in the last 10 years. (No, spending hours learning to fly a B-17 doesn't mean it's not entertainment, and FSX is no less a game than FSW). DTG is just doing what many other developers are trying to do. They want to benefit from what is almost a universal platform at this point: Steam. The open beta is really cheap. If they didn't have a beta people would complain that they didn't engage with the community. Personally, I often wait months after an official release by big companies because it takes time for bugs to be worked out. Steam and other developers take a cut from DLC and yet we're in a golden age of PC gaming, largely because of increased accessibility and availability. Everyone is benefiting. It's fine if people are saying, "this is not replacing my favorite sim" but I really don't understand why people expect DTG to act differently than other game developers or to meet the coding standards of Microsoft (which still has people complain about it all the time). They may not succeed, but I hope they do.

How is FSX less of a game than FSW?