After 19 years, why do we still use FS9?

[pilotposer]

On July 29th 2003, FS9 was released.

Why do we still use this sim after 19 years?

With so many good sims available, FS9 is still very relevant in the community.

FS9 users, post your reasons we still get a kick out of this remarkable platform.

[Roger Wensley]

Because at the time it was a big jump forward and now includes 19 years worth of real airports and airfields not to be found elsewhere?

[ViperPilot2]

Because it'll run on just about any old computer out there; if it's got a stand alone Graphics Card, so much the better.

 

What better way to introduce someone new to FlightSim?

 

For us old gummers on a budget, FS9 is an ideal platform, with decades worth of content to draw from. :)

[piet06273]

1 of many reasons: Lago FSSE..............

 

 

win10 - 5 5600x - 1050TI

Edited September 8, 2022 by piet06273

[leuen]

Because such things wouldn't be possible with any other sim.

 

 

 

Bernard

[NMLW]

Because I like to fly propliners in and out of 1950s and 1960s period airports.

 

Click to enlarge

 

 

 

 

That's why.

[UPHILL3]

The same reason, say, a whole bunch of people still prefer talking on land lines.

 

I for one have not used FS9 since the end of 2015 when bought a gaming rig and switched to FSX.

But FS9 was about the best sim out there at the time, but then something cooler came along...

[JSMR]

I still use FS9 as the same reason as everyone above. The smoothness, the ease to add varied aircraft of every generation, airports and scenery from every era possible. Not even MSFS 2020 can do that.

 

You can butcher it, slice and dice it and try and maim fs2004, but it never dies. Always a simple fix.

 

I keep it because nothing cooler has come along. Nothing even close…

Edited September 9, 2022 by JSMR

[Leo112]

I used FS9 all the way up to FS2020's release. I understand everything that's mentioned here. I had my setup looking just as good as FSX without the tweaking performance headaches of FSX. I always knew the steep hardware requirement for FSX was smoke and mirrors that actually had people accepting as fact that extreme hardware was actually needed for modern sims to platform well. The kicker is no matter what you threw at FSX it didn't perform well. The reality was FSX was coded badly and never fixed before Steve Ballmer axed the Aces team. P3D suffers the same issue despite Lockheed's best effort do to it being FSX for the most part. LH was never able to have full access to the code to make proper modifications in the way Asobo has. Fast forward FS2020 came along and validated what proper coding looks like even with it's various nuance issues upon release. So now I keep my rig with FS9 installed just in case the party's over with FS2020 (loony new management that usually upends a good thing to justify their new positions). FS2020 suffers from too much corporate control on the back end. It's always an advantage to have your own CD's, installers, etc to keep going should the parent company pull the plug on the franchise. With FS2020 your dead in the water the day Microsoft decides to shut off the servers. Now that XPlane 12 has come along which looks and functions like a cross between FS9 and FS2020 we have our fall back. So FS9 may officially get uninstalled after all this time on my end but for reasons I just outlined I understand why some are still using it and it makes since. XPlane 12 for me will be that same reasoning. Edited September 9, 2022 by Leo112

[anaismith]

For me, it is comfortable like an old pair of slippers. It is stable and a flying simulator, not a scenery sim. You can have multiple installs for various eras and it doesn't take up terabytes of data. I use FSX in the main but I do keep going back to 9.

[douga66]

As an AI fan and developer FS9 does the best job without all the tinkering needed to get all of the available ai aircraft to work in any other sim. Anything that is not available for FS9 I just adjust or make for myself. Still the least amount of fussing and messing around needed.

 

Maybe you can call me lazy but after over 15 years I don't want to start over again. Simple as that.

Edited September 9, 2022 by douga66

[caphavoc]

Emma Field.

 

Regards,

Dorian

[DirkDP]

Hi,

 

Maybe you can call me lazy but after over 15 years I don't want to start over again. Simple as that.

 

+1

 

DDP.

[MAD1]

Wow NMLW (poster 6), 18,183 posts! I agree with ViperPilot2 (poster 3) 'it'll run on just about any old computer out there ...What better way to introduce someone new to FlightSim? For us old gummers on a budget, FS9 is an ideal platform, with decades worth of content to draw from.'. Good design and a good product will last. The fact it has endured in the sim community (with many sharp critics), if it continues to be heralded by those critics, it must be good. As a professionally trained IT guy, similar to a bicycle, once the fundamental design is sorted out, there's nothing to change except tweaking around the edges, pretty cosmetics etc. And if it does a reasonably good job as a flight sim, not just eye candy or a gamey thing, then it will endure. Other posters here also give the evidence of 'why?' And if endorsed by the 'old boys', as it has in this thread, then the jury is in, it's simply good! (For me, being FS2002, its predecessor, I feel much the same way about FS2002, seems to have everything I need as an occasional user, again not wanting to blow a load of cash on hardware. I hope to upgrade to FS2004/FS9 sometime. As the saying goes 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' might be morphed to 'if it makes you happy, don't change nothin'! Edited September 11, 2022 by MAD1