Which is the best Flight Sim?

[avturdriver]

Hi everyone.

I've got FS2004-ACOF and would like to start adding to it to build up a more realistic sim.

However, I've noticed a lot of files on FSX too and with that being the more "upto date sim" (as opposed to FS2004) would I be better of buying that and then adding to that sim instead?

I like FS2004-ACOF and my pc runs really well with it, but I dont want to invest loads into it if FS2004 becomes "obsolete" in the near future as the FS brand continues to develop.

I'm just thinking of whats best in the long term and where the focus of development is.

Best Regards from FS Rookie!

Avturdriver.

[NASTAR]

Hi!
Although the newest sim is ms flight-which has been abandoned, both fsx and fs2004 have still a lot of addons with more coming out every day. Personallly I don't think FS9 has a chance of being obsolete any time soon- Specially as the FS line has been (reportedly) discontinued by MS. Fsx is certainly newer and therefore has great scenery and extra features but that also means that it needs a great pc to go with it (Especially if you plan to add detailed stuff to go with it). There is no point in having the newest sim if your pc cant run it. So if you've got a really killer pc then move up to X otherwise stick to the sim which your pc can handle (post your specs too). If you still dont want to add payware to fs9, there are still 77,105 freeware files on this site

[turbodak]

Hello and welcome to the community.

This question has sparked lots of debate over the years, but to put it simply, it depends what you want from your Flight Sim experience.

I run both, but will always return to FS2004 as it runs faster frame rates than FSX, the add-on scenery is as good as, if not better than, that in FSX and I can run two log books. One to deal with my Virtual Airline flying and one for my general aviation flying.

The focus of development is FSX, although there is already a lot of add-ons - both payware and freeware - already out there for FS2004.

However, my advice would be look around for good freeware, both aircraft and scenery, and see what you can get to enjoy your FS2004 experience.

Enjoy!

[fxsttcb]

Hi! Welcome to the Forum.

FS9 is still being actively developed for, both freebies and payware, but, not quite as much as FSX has been recently.

With the advent of Lockheed Martin's Prepar3D, a commercial sim based on FSX core code(ESP), many commercial developers are redoubling their efforts. Because the SDKs are very similar, it's easy for them to produce for both FSX and P3D and kill two birds with one stone.

I use both FS9 and FSX, with most of my paid enhancements going into FSX lately.

FSX does add a lot in the visuals department, but, it requires a LOT more to have a smooth experience.
The Acceleration version also adds Carrier Ops for those of us who are fans of Naval Aviation.

Basic FSX requirements(Don't believe the mins noted my MS!):
Computer; 3GHz+ CPU with GTS250/450/550(equiv) for Med+ settings, 4GHz+ CPU GTX 460/560 for High+ settings.
Though FSX is a 32bit app with a 4GB RAM address limit, a 64bit OS and 6-8GB of memory will help a lot.
To date, no computer will max it out. If your rig isn't close to, or above, 3GHz, stick with FS9.

FSX needs plenty of active involvement by the end user for installation and tweaking. Be prepared to need workarounds on Vista/7...Don

[Silverblade]

As Turbodak said, there are a lot of reasons on both sides. All I can do is give you my personal experience and opinion.

A Flight Simmer since 1988, flier of SubLogic Flight Simulator 3.0 before Microsoft bought them out. Since then I've logged more than 32,000 hours of Flight Sim time.

I am an advocate of FS-2004 (FS9). I have installed and uninstalled FSX five times since it was first released, not replacing FS9 but in addition to FS9. I have tried it with all manner of addons, but finally decided that FS9, when given the right terrain, weather and airport scenery, more than out performs the basic FSX environment, and has superior performance as well as a wide selection of available freeware aircraft. Also, it seems to be a much more friendly experience - which is a purely subjective opinion. I feel as though FSX was change for change's sake instead of a genuine improvement - but that's just me.

Enjoy whichever you decide!

[avturdriver]

Thanks to you all for your great replies and welcomes!

Yeh my computer is ok (dont know my specs just yet and I'm using a work pc at the mo!) and runs FS2004 well but would probably suffer if I went to FSX so looks like I'll stick with what I've got for the moment and start "building"!

Working my way through the lessons on FS2004 and hope soon to see what being a virtual airline pilot is like...when I clock enough hours!!

My job involves fuellling the Airbus Beluga and Hawker/Beechcraft aircraft so mabye I should start with them for familiarity!!

Thanks again for your help and advice Guys.

Avturdriver.

[MdMax]

I was also a FS2004 user, then I switched to X-Plane 9. X-Plane 10 is now my favorite sim. Just try the free demo:
http://www.x-plane.com/desktop/landing/



Happy flying.

[avturdriver]

I'm impressed MdMax!!

I've watched both videos and downloaded the demo.

I dont think my computer is good enough in the long run for this clearly immensely detailed sim but I'll give it a shot anyway.

Thanks mucka.

Avturdriver.