Stall warning!

[fxsttcb]

..Then we can talk about how even an i7 at 5ghz can't maintain a stutter free session.. and lets blame it on the CPU even though Flight obviously proves that was never the problem...

I've got an OLD 3.1GHz AMD with only 2GB of RAM(all the mobo supports) and that lowly rig runs FSX, stutter free, better than it does Flight. Sure I can't max the FSX sliders, but I can't do that with Flight either, and fly stutter free.
Flight still BSODs on occasion(Nasty, Nasty, Hard Restarts with errors) while the worse FSX does is give me an OOM now and then.

Besides, I wasn't talking about using old code for the instrumentation, or modeling. The new code is already in place.
Poly Bending, is Poly Bending, and writing the gauge code is simply conforming to the Events and Variables that are available.
The Artwork isn't that hard either.

...when you look at the millions of people now using P3D...

Millions? IMO, Doubtful.
I'm pretty sure LM didn't completely rewrite the ESP core code. I'd bet they have examined it with a microscope, and probably eliminated redundancies and sloppy programming. That, along with the introduction of new Events and Variables, to accommodate their vision of the Sim, still doesn't make it a consumer item.

They've proven that the original code is a viable Sim Engine. Maybe MS should purchase the tune-up and offer FSX SP3 as $$ DLC.
Any Takers?

MS Flight has taken me from Bitter Disappointment, to Enthusism, to Boredom. All in a very short time.
All stated while I await the next spoonful from your beloved, Flight team...Don

[Paxx]

...
They've proven that the original code is a viable Sim Engine. Maybe MS should purchase the tune-up and offer FSX SP3 as $$ DLC.
Any Takers?
...

We need to be careful in what we ask for. An FSX SP3 that improves performance would be great in theory. Having said service pack come from a convicted monopolist with ulterior motives and an agenda mentality may not bode well though if they were so inclined to step over the line of trustworthiness again.

It is my opinion that current MSFlight leadership would dance a jig if FSX were to "go away".

[fxsttcb]

It is my opinion that current MSFlight leadership would dance a jig if FSX were to "go away".

I'm inclined to agree with that. Fortunately, for the simmer, the MS Flight sector is only a part of GFW.

FSX must be still selling quite well, or MS wouldn't have the $29.99 discounted Gold Edition available on their X-Box(??) site.

Besides, Flight and FSX are so vastly different, IMO, that they can both do well for the label. The ball is in their court...Don

[Paxx]

...

Besides, Flight and FSX are so vastly different, IMO, that they can both do well for the label. The ball is in their court...Don

No doubt about it Don. Why Crabs keeps comparing them, beyond his obvious agenda, remains wrapped as a Chinese 50¢ party favor. Can't even get that right.

[loki]

Then we can talk about how even an i7 at 5ghz can't maintain a stutter free session.. and lets blame it on the CPU even though Flight obviously proves that was never the problem

Who ever blamed FSX's performance issues on the CPU?? Just about everyone knows the ACES team got caught with the move to multi-core processors midway through their development. The issue has always been the sim itself.

but the sloppy code that FSX developers are still so proud to build on

Care to provide specific examples of this sloppy code? Sure, the FSX engine is in need of an overhaul and modernizing, but that doesn't mean it was full of sloppy code.

[loki]

Paxx has it nailed. MS are missing the (flying) boat with Flight.

[alaskancrab]

Care to provide specific examples of this sloppy code? Sure, the FSX engine is in need of an overhaul and modernizing, but that doesn't mean it was full of sloppy code.

Lets see they took what was base of C code and wrapped it for C++.. that's sloppy code. any other game company would have thrown everything out and started from scratch.. wait isn't that exactly what this team did?

[fxsttcb]

Lets see they took what was base of C code and wrapped it for C++.. that's sloppy code. any other game company would have thrown everything out and started from scratch.. wait isn't that exactly what this team did?

C, C++, C#, XML. None of that matters if the end result doesn't appeal to the consumer.
OR, if there isn't enough content to sustain the client's interest. Which is the subject of this thread...Don

[loki]

Lets see they took what was base of C code and wrapped it for C++.. that's sloppy code. any other game company would have thrown everything out and started from scratch.. wait isn't that exactly what this team did?

No, that doesn't prove it's sloppy code, it just shows they were being pragmatic. Re-writing everything from scratch takes time and money, and isn't necessarily worth it for each new version. If ACES had re-written the sim engine for every version, it would also have broken add-ons every time. Yes, at some point, a re-write does need to be done, which is exactly what ACES was working on when they got canned. However, doing it each time for something as detailed as MSFS engine is not realistic.

Other game engines can be more easily re-written because they will be used by a much larger audience, making it easier to justify the expense, and there are rarely concerns with backwards compatibility. Also, often the core rendering engine is written by a different team or company than the physics engine, spreading the work out. Basically there are so many differences that comparing MSFS to other games is comparing apples to oranges.

And do you have proof that Flight is actually complete re-write? I haven't seen anything yet that proves they actually started from scratch on the code side. Much of the performance improvement can easily be explained by not having any ATC and AI, combined with more tweaks for multi-core CPUs. The way textures and scenery objects appear in Flight bears a striking similarity to FSX.

[Paxx]

Lets see they took what was base of C code and wrapped it for C++.. that's sloppy code. any other game company would have thrown everything out and started from scratch.. wait isn't that exactly what this team did?

Since you are now to the point of just making stuff up to close the thread, I think I'll trump your pettiness fetish by conjecturing that MSFlight hasn't released Alaska yet because of performance problems.

Something I predicted.
Touche.