|
|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Aug 31, 2006 17:47:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by botamern on Aug 31, 2006 17:58:37 GMT
Very nice. Pretty much sums up my opinion of the demo. And even if it does get fixed before release, I won't be switching until I see reports of a computer configuration that runs it smooth enough to make it flyable. Then again, the new computer comes AFTER all the bills and other more important needs, so I just might be able to upgrade to FSX sometime around the release of FSXI...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Claus on Sept 1, 2006 5:33:56 GMT
Man, that video is hillarious!!!! ...and like most things we laugh because they're funny and we laugh because they are true. I am a strong supporter of FS9 and until the bugs get fixed in FSX there is no way I'm gonna spend the effort and money to configure a system just to get some more eye candy. I can still get my kicks with FS9 as long as I got my favorite HJG birds in the library.
Jay
p.s. I didn't know that Adolph had 600 hours on FS9?! LMAO
|
|
|
|
Post by speedbird591 on Sept 1, 2006 8:00:44 GMT
;DLove this video! What a cruelly accurate comment on some of the lunatic rantings and ravings about FSX on some of the forums. I haven't even downloaded the demo so I'm not in a position to comment. But I won't let that stop me! I'm ignoring FSX for the time being, but only because my machine won't run it and I'm holding off for an upgrade until Windows Vista.......  (let's not go there). When I eventually do get there, it should all be sorted out for me - one way or another. As we all know, FS9 has evolved really well and with all the fantastic add-ons available, there is no urgent need for a replacement (for most of us!). But compare it to MS Train Simulator where MS have pulled the plug on the planned replacement and left the gricers with a very dated program. Their only chance of an improvement in the future lies with a commercial developer. It nearly happened to FS, didn't it? FSX has to be better than no further upgrade - at least it's optional. My feeling is that MS decided that they would only put money into a new FS if the market could be expanded. The obvious way to do that is to retain most of the existing specialist market (us!) and attract the impulse buyers who fancy flying a 747 under Tower Bridge. So the front end/packaging has to be "arcade" and easy-play, but the advanced features have also to be there in depth for enthusiasts. Which seems to be what's happening. The advertising will be towards new, casual buyers and they will rely on word of mouth and momentum to attract the FS community. It also explains the two versions. Meanwhile, I've got at least six months of wonderful flying with my personal fleet of 10 airliner types in FS9 and no decisions or upgrades or soul searching or ranting or raving to bother me ;D Utter bliss! Cheers for now - Ian |
|
|
|
Post by Tarasdad on Sept 1, 2006 18:15:35 GMT
My computer runs it fine at high settings. Well, "fine" is a relative term, since framerates are good but there are some absolutely horrible graphic glitches caused by a horribly buggy beta demo. For those interested my system specs are:
AMD Opteron 146
ASUS A8N-E motherboard
XFX GeForce FX 7900GT 256MB PCI-E video
2GB Corsair ValuRAM
With all the eye candy turned on I get good (visual, don't know the numerical value) framerates. Unfortunately there are enough serious graphical issues that it more than offsets it. When going from outside views to the cockpit, all the outside terrain will render a bright neon green, particularly bad in the VC views. You have to cycle through the views again to get it to clear. As that video alluded to, the flight model and ATC AI are the same. I don't forsee any significant changes to either from MS before release, either.
All in all FSX is one I'm going to adopt a strict "wait and see" approach to. I've bought enough beta-level software over the years, not really ready to do it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on Sept 1, 2006 19:35:03 GMT
Hi tarasdad The threads not really about FS.X  .....have you watched the video?   Garry |
|
|
|
Post by Tarasdad on Sept 2, 2006 7:28:05 GMT
Oops!! That post above was in responst to Nick Botamer's comment on a computer configuration that will run FSX. Went a little overboard, which is something I'm prone to on occasion...
Yes, I did watch the video. I feel sorry for the "medals guy" though - looked like he was about to wet his pants there for a minute! And 600 hours? Pfft!! I was around 2,000 in FS98. What a wimp.
|
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on Sept 2, 2006 9:57:06 GMT
I'm glad you've seen it now, as that's one that's really worth watching  ATB Garry |
|
|
|
Post by poirot on Sept 6, 2006 0:49:32 GMT
Thank god, theres humor in all this. I wonder what those fellas at Microsoft were doing considering that in the time between the release of FS9 and FSbleah there were a considerable amount of payware and freeware that added so much eye candy in relation to the bulk of flight simmers (such as follow me cars and moving airport buses as opposed to elephants and birds). I suppose they added the animals for those who like the bush safari flights. Unfortunately to some like us who are so deeply empassioned with the heavy metal, all of this will just be a fuzzy frame out pixel while we cruise at 3XX altitude with the maniacal ATC and the 1 fps we will get on landing. Sorry, but the reason I rarely used FS2000 was because of the 'polaroid photo' landings. Man, to have pissed off Hitler himself, and enough to have possibly make him switch to Apple computer with a Linux operating system. |
|
(let's not go there). When I eventually do get there, it should all be sorted out for me - one way or another. As we all know, FS9 has evolved really well and with all the fantastic add-ons available, there is no urgent need for a replacement (for most of us!).
.....have you watched the video? 
