Jump to content

What would be a reason you would NOT get FS2020?


Recommended Posts

Simply not true. FS9 was great, and I enjoyed it for years, but FSX (even the default version, but especially with add-ons) is a FAR more advanced flight simulation program in so many ways. There is just no comparison. Except for those who have had difficulty running FSX on old computers that are not up to the task (and in 2019 that would be pretty old!) it is hard to imagine an informed FS user saying otherwise.

 

I say otherwise and consider myself informed. lol

 

Graphics are the main difference between the two. Ground texturing is the main area. Aircraft, airports, physics, there isn't a huge deal of difference. In order to benefit from FSX graphically over FS9 you then need to deal with VAS. I don't think it's worth it and the better option for me is FS9.

You also need to run equivalent quality sims to evaluate. Don't compare a default FS9 to a pumped up FSX. If you really pump up FS9 with the right stuff, it slaughters a default FSX. FSX will only beat it when you pump it up to the same degree. Once you do this, you must then deal with VAS.

 

I shake my head sometimes when I see people having running problems with FSX be it VAS or FPS, see what their sim looks like and know they could have a graphically far superior FS9 with zero VAS or FPS issues. You can only lead a horse to water...

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Motion blur is a option in the graphics settings of some games I have. I usually leave it off. Will just have to wait and see if it is a switchable option or a flaw in FS2020. But it wouldn't be a deal breaker for me when you consider how fuzzy some of the graphics can be in FSX until you add ORBX.

 

That definately isn't deliberate motion blur. It's also been suggested elsewhere a tweak of a number in a cfg file during beta testing should fix it, that also won't be the case.

 

It's too early to judge graphics, especially on that one trailer. The only certain thing, a complete world to the level of detail in the trailer won't exist. We will need to see what the graphics reality is in due time.

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, germs and bacteria would look fuzzy too.
Win 10 Pro, MSFS Premium Deluxe Steam, i7-8700, 32 GB RAM, GTX 1070ti, hardwired 950 Mbps, wifi 5 Ghz 50+ Mbps, Gsync 27-in 2560 x 1440 Dell monitor, Logitech 3D Pro joystick, and Quest 2 VR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who missed it...

 

 

July 11th, 2019 – Development Update

 

As the team enters the dog days of summer, we’ve been hard at work putting the finishing touches on many of the big updates we’re planning to share toward the end of summer. Our excitement continues to build, as does our impatience to share this information with you. So we press forward counting down the days until we can open the hangar doors and dive into the details with you.

 

There are many very important topics being discussed in the community (e.g. New Flight Model/IFR-VFR Flight/Weather Simulation Depth/VR Support, etc.). The team is constantly monitoring the feedback/suggestions being discussed and please know that many of these topics and more, will be covered thoroughly in near future updates.

 

In the meantime, here’s a work-in-progress screenshot, and confirmation that the Insider Program will be starting in early August as part of our development roadmap kickoff.

 

On July 25th, we will be releasing another update on our plans for August and September. Until next time, know that the team is excited and anxious to share more information with you.

 

Sincerely,

 

The Microsoft Flight Simulator Team

 

https://fsi.microsoftstudios.com/

Gigabyte GA-X99 Gaming G1, i7-5960X, Noctua NH-D14, Crucial Ballistix Elite 64Gb, Nvidia GTX Titan X, Creative ZxR, Ableconn PEXM2-130, WD Black SN750 250Gb & 2Tb NVMe/Gold 10Tb HDD, Sony BDU-X10S BD-ROM, PC Power & Cooling 1200w, Cosmos C700M, Noctua iPPC 140mm x6, Logitech M570/K800, WinX64 7 Ultimate/10 Pro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say otherwise and consider myself informed. lol

 

Graphics are the main difference between the two. Ground texturing is the main area. Aircraft, airports, physics, there isn't a huge deal of difference. In order to benefit from FSX graphically over FS9 you then need to deal with VAS. I don't think it's worth it and the better option for me is FS9.

You also need to run equivalent quality sims to evaluate. Don't compare a default FS9 to a pumped up FSX. If you really pump up FS9 with the right stuff, it slaughters a default FSX. FSX will only beat it when you pump it up to the same degree. Once you do this, you must then deal with VAS.

 

I shake my head sometimes when I see people having running problems with FSX be it VAS or FPS, see what their sim looks like and know they could have a graphically far superior FS9 with zero VAS or FPS issues. You can only lead a horse to water...

 

I, too, consider myself well informed. I used FS9 for several years and was very happy with it. When FSX came out, I bought and installed it, but kept FS9 running so that I could do side-by side comparisons. Which I did -- I set up flights in FS9, ran them, and then ran the identical flights (same planes, location, weather, and settings) in FSX on the same computer. I did this repeatedly many times, over many days -- I was in no hurry. The end result is that I was blown away by FSX (default version, even!) and how far superior it was to FS9 in every respect. Among many other things, just the sense of realism in how things look was so far advanced in FSX over FS9 that there was no comparison. And this was just one aspect -- there were numerous other advances in FSX that demonstrated its clear superiority. After this, deleting FS9 was a no-brainer. I will add that I have a system that allows me to run FSX with most sliders maxed out and no FPS (or VAS) issues -- generally very smooth.

 

I respect your arriving at a different conclusion, but I have to think most other flight simmers have long since arrived at the same place I did -- just seeing the far greater activity in FSX vs.FS9 forums indicates this. But the bottom line is, we are both happy and that's all that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, was that FS9 and FSX with or without Ultimate Terrain?

 

Without. When FSX first appeared there was no Ultimate Terrain, as far as I know. UT improves the detail of terrain (coastlines, rivers,etc.) but does not affect the ground textures. (GEX does, of course). But my FS9-FSX comparison employed the brand-new FSX with no enhancements. With UT, GEX, and other add-ons available today, FSX is so far ahead of FS9 it's over the horizon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...deleting FS9 was a no-brainer.

 

A-A-A-A-H-H-H-H... I couldn't do it. I have so MANY favorite POSKY models and a few Carenado payware models installed to FS9. Didn't see any reason not to keep them BOTH.

 

Hell, I even keep Flight Simulator 2000 Professional Edition installed for nostalgia.

Gigabyte GA-X99 Gaming G1, i7-5960X, Noctua NH-D14, Crucial Ballistix Elite 64Gb, Nvidia GTX Titan X, Creative ZxR, Ableconn PEXM2-130, WD Black SN750 250Gb & 2Tb NVMe/Gold 10Tb HDD, Sony BDU-X10S BD-ROM, PC Power & Cooling 1200w, Cosmos C700M, Noctua iPPC 140mm x6, Logitech M570/K800, WinX64 7 Ultimate/10 Pro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back on topic...

 

It does seem FS2020 will need on-line streaming. Just hope perhaps that it will have a OFF-LINE mode maybe using the streamed data cached (1 terabyte buffer?) from your last flight so you could at least do a 1 hour off-line flight.

Gigabyte GA-X99 Gaming G1, i7-5960X, Noctua NH-D14, Crucial Ballistix Elite 64Gb, Nvidia GTX Titan X, Creative ZxR, Ableconn PEXM2-130, WD Black SN750 250Gb & 2Tb NVMe/Gold 10Tb HDD, Sony BDU-X10S BD-ROM, PC Power & Cooling 1200w, Cosmos C700M, Noctua iPPC 140mm x6, Logitech M570/K800, WinX64 7 Ultimate/10 Pro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I respect your arriving at a different conclusion, but I have to think most other flight simmers have long since arrived at the same place I did -- just seeing the far greater activity in FSX vs.FS9 forums indicates this. But the bottom line is, we are both happy and that's all that matters.

 

Totally agree, each to their own. Should mention I have FSX, boxed and Steam and have had it installed since release. I choose FS9 over it. Nothing to do with system or anything else, FS9 is just better for me as I'm not prepared to deal with VAS. You can argue over add-ons but each has appealing add-ons you can't have in the other. Graphics, not a deal breaker at all in any type of game. I always go for gameplay and everything else over graphics.

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fsx doesn’t come close to fs9 which is the last of the true flight simulators before it went ‘plastic’ to appeal to the gamer kids in their fake worlds. .

 

If this statement makes any sense, it escapes me. What in the world are you talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree, each to their own. Should mention I have FSX, boxed and Steam and have had it installed since release. I choose FS9 over it. Nothing to do with system or anything else, FS9 is just better for me as I'm not prepared to deal with VAS. You can argue over add-ons but each has appealing add-ons you can't have in the other. Graphics, not a deal breaker at all in any type of game. I always go for gameplay and everything else over graphics.

 

Thanks for your post. FYI, I will mention that I have an Alienware computer that is more than a decade old, with an i7-2600 processor @ 3.40 CPU, and an NVIDIA GEX-1060 display adapter (3 GB), and have never had VAS issues. On this rig FSX runs smoothly with most sliders maxed (except traffic), and generally high FPS. I guess this would account for the fact that moving from FS9 to FSX was a no-brainer for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this statement makes any sense, it escapes me. What in the world are you talking about?

 

The same thing people complained about for years with FSX and why most of us saw the light and moved back up to FS9.

 

Occasionally I go back to FSX with updates not textures, orbs, rex etc. Look st it, say yuck and quickly load up fs9.: much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same thing people complained about for years with FSX and why most of us saw the light and moved back up to FS9.

 

Occasionally I go back to FSX with updates not textures, orbs, rex etc. Look st it, say yuck and quickly load up fs9.: much better.

 

Most of the complaints when FSX was in its early years came from people trying to run it on computers whose CPUs and/or graphics cards were not up to the job. That changed over time, and now the average rig is capable of running it satisfactorily with proper choice of settings. The ratio of folks viewing the FSX vs. FS9 forums is pretty indicative of where things stand now. But, whatever works, is fine with me. Glad you're happy. In reference to your original post, I am neither a kid nor a "gamer", don't live in a fake world, and I have no idea what a "plastic" sim is. Would that be polyethylene, polystyrene, or some other variety?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same thing people complained about for years with FSX and why most of us saw the light and moved back up to FS9.

 

I really don't think that most of us have "moved back up" to FS9 - this is the FSX forum, remember.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’re a little late to the party, Cobalt.

All this was discussed around the 2006-2008 time period.

 

Indeed it was, and long since resolved. To me this is a non-issue and frankly boring, like debating whether my 2001 Honda Accord is a better car than a Mercedes XL. It isn't, and never will be, even if we Honda owners resort to irrelevant posts about plastic, gamers, and whatnot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your post. FYI, I will mention that I have an Alienware computer that is more than a decade old, with an i7-2600 processor @ 3.40 CPU, and an NVIDIA GEX-1060 display adapter (3 GB), and have never had VAS issues. On this rig FSX runs smoothly with most sliders maxed (except traffic), and generally high FPS. I guess this would account for the fact that moving from FS9 to FSX was a no-brainer for me.

 

I am leaving it open to go to FSX one day maybe. I'm just happy and content at this point in time, no rush to do anything. I still have a million things I want to do and get out of FS9. It's good there are several sims to choose from depending on wants and needs of individuals. Enjoy your FSX'ing!

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My old Dell runs FSX fine. With all my addons, including the now defunct Sim Savvy photoreal scenery, plus the planes in my hangar, I've no desire to go back to FS9 nor move on to P3D or FS2020..
CLX - SET Gaming Desktop - Intel Core i9 10850K - 32GB DDR4 3000GHz Memory - GeForce RTX 3060 Ti - 960GB SSD + 4TB HDD - Windows 11 Home
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would be a reason you would NOT get FS2020?

 

What kind of community it created...

 

Pretending to pilot an aircraft is fun, but so is sharing things with others (screenshots, fun facts, etc).

 

However, if I found the community (on the whole) to be unfriendly, I wouldn't even consider it.

 

Behind every word typed in a forum, there is a person, and many people (from across a wide spectrum)...seem to forget this.

 

Flight simulation is fun, but the ego trips which often go with it...are a real turnoff!

 

W33

X-Plane 11, P3D. 32GB RAM, i7 8700k, 1080Ti, Oculus Rift, 1TB SSD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...