|
|
Post by ravilamir on Feb 8, 2008 21:24:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by benh on Feb 8, 2008 21:53:54 GMT
I totally agree with Tom Gibson here. A very valid point. But thats my point of view.
Cheers Ricardo, good thread....
Ben
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Feb 8, 2008 22:00:42 GMT
I understand that guy .... "FS AVIATOR" .... has an absolutely brilliant reputation for the quality and fidelity of his FDE.
Mark C
AKL/NZ
|
|
|
|
Post by Tarasdad on Feb 9, 2008 0:16:20 GMT
While I am of the opposite track, and am on the verge of totally removing FS9 from my system in favor of FSX.
|
|
|
|
Post by ravilamir on Feb 9, 2008 3:51:55 GMT
Hi Taras! As I said in my post over at the Calclassic, you'll need to understand who FSAviator is and what he does! Obviously, if you are more interest in the "package" instead of the "content", fsx is for you as it is just a video game. But don't expect us, airliners who like to follow airways procedures, who plan a 4D flightplan and who impose realistic airliner operations upon a simulator by following matching handling notes written by an expert; to jump in what is a messy software which for its disgrace has the name of fs, made to attract the masses and not the aviation enthusiast and it doesn't even improve what is really important: the Flight Model, ATC or even AI Traffic. Had fsx improved airliner operations... we would not be having this discussion!  Soft landings! |
|
|
|
Post by Tarasdad on Feb 9, 2008 7:02:13 GMT
You assume a lot when you say "don't expect us, airliners who like to follow airways procedures, who plan a 4D flightplan and who impose realistic airliner operations upon a simulator by following matching handling notes written by an expert" and risk insulting others who you do not know. Nothing I said indicates that I am any less precise in my application of real-world flight regimen than you are. To belittle my comments in such a way is asinine at best, overbearing and elitist at worst. I use real-world flight plans for every single flight, including SID/STAR procedures, crossing restrictions, full charts and plates, aircraft performance data from real-world sources. With every flight I strive for as close to real as possible, given the limitations of the software. FS9 is and always has been nothing more or less than a video game. The difference is in HOW YOU USE IT, just like with FSX.
Apparently you choose to take the word of another as absolute gospel, literally the Word of God as far as FS is concerned. I, on the other hand, choose to let my own experiences guide me. What separates us is that I can live with the differences between FS9 and FSX and you apparently cannot. They aren't significant enough for me to consider them earth-shattering. Neither GAME comes anywhere close to being a full-fledged flight simulator. They are missing 20-30 million dollars worth of hardware, software and technicians to be anything more or less than what they are - COMPUTE GAMES. Trust me, if they were more then Microsoft wouldn't be selling them for the paltry sums that they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by ravilamir on Feb 9, 2008 9:52:06 GMT
Taras! Calm down! Go on and have a nice cup of tea!  Yes, I do take the word of someone who has more knowledge on the subject than me as the truth until he is proven wrong! In this case, FSAviator has proven behind any doubt to be an authority who I respect and has taught me a lot, especially on airliners operation in the 50's. You pointed out the basic difference between fsx and FS9: the first is a computer game, with missions and a lot of "eye-candy" and the second is a simulation. If striving for perfection is to be elitist, so be it!  End of discussion and soft landings everybody! |
|
|
|
Post by Dan K. Hansen on Feb 9, 2008 9:54:52 GMT
I sense that this thread could become either a good argument or the other, so I'll be watching this. Arguments for and against are welcome, but please don't be nasty ;-)
For the sake of a good argument thread.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Tarasdad on Feb 9, 2008 10:15:18 GMT
Nowhere did I say FSX was a game and FS9 a sim. I said both are games, neither is a true flight sim. This from someone who has watched the franchise grow from its first days with subLOGIC.
In my years I have learned to take everything with a large dose of salt until competency is proven to my satisfaction. I do not question "FSAviator" and his possible expertise on airliner operations in the 50's. Neither do I take everything he has to say as gospel truth until I personally have taken the time to thoroughly research the subject as well. That is my way, and has served me well over the years.
If I sound offended and defensive, then maybe you should look at the quote I listed for the reason. You, with that quote, set yourself above me without any knowledge of my practices as regards FSX, FS9 or simming in general. You chose to exclude me from your elite circle of "airliners" in the use of accurate flight planning and execution. That, sir, is incredibly offensive from someone who has never, ever seen what I do. The fact that you did so tells me a lot about you, enough that I know that I have no more interest in communicating with you via this thread or any other medium.
Good day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan K. Hansen on Feb 9, 2008 10:23:47 GMT
Okay each have had their share of mud casting here so please take this discussion elsewhere, it is not wished for here.
Some like FS9 some like FSX some like both, everyone has their rights to do as they wish without bashing others for not having the same opinion.
Thread locked!
|
|
