Back with FS9

[ScottishMike]

I am back with FS9.

In April I purchased MSFS2020 and installed it. You can read my initial reaction as I compared the two sims in my post “Am I Trans or Bi?” posted in the MSFS2020 General Discussion section of the forum. (It would be good if the Admin team could copy it to this FS2004 section). At the time I was not sure if I would transition to MSFS2020 or use both sims.

I have gravitated back to FS9.

There are several reasons. One is my love of watching my aircraft in flight, this is possible through the spotter window in FS9, MSFS2020 could have been even better but the external camera view cannot be opened in a separate window; why? The only way to control the plane and see it in flight is that dicky seat at the back of the rudder (see original post).

Secondly the cockpit instruments are difficult to see without panning around the cockpit (when they are not so dark as to be invisible), meaning one has to set up multiple short cuts to pre set views or invest in a VR headset. The last thing you want when on short final is trying to remember which key combination will show the required lever or gauge, oops too late you've hit the tree short of the runway!

The third disappointment was the disappearance of the GPS; the MSFS2020 VFR map is a poor substitute (at least it can be opened in a window) for the FS9 GPS or the FS9 Map.

The fourth is the investment in aircraft and scenery built up over 19 years of using FS9 now with over 2000+ aircraft and 1800+ add-on sceneries. This is not a fault of MSFS2020 but an inevitable result of any new software having to compete with older well established and stable software.

[PhrogPhlyer]

I just posted this on your original tread "Trans or Bi" and felt it should be repeated here.

 

"I find this thread to further highlight the crossroads I find myself at, whether or not to purchase MSFS 2020.

I use FSX and have even reconsidered reinstalling FS9 to fly some of the aircraft that are only available there.

The ground visuals and enhanced aircraft details of MSFS 2020 make a strong case, but with so many threads discussing updates and memory requirements, it is a difficult decision.

Perhaps waiting for MSFS 2024 (not that far away) is the best for me.

It is a shame that we must lose so much to gain one thing, visible details.

I am sure I will purchase, but at this moment, not quite yet."

[JSMR]

Welcome back 

[jgf]

I fully concur.  My opinion (and we know what those are like) is that any new version of any software should be everything the previous version was, and more.  I still use a twenty year old program for 90% of my graphics work because subsequent releases have lost filter functions and even support fewer formats.  I was thoroughly disappointed with the rpg Oblivion which, while having graphics, animations, and sounds a magnitude better than its predecessor Morrowind, had about a fourth the gameplay (someone once estimated you could play Morrowind for 60 hours and never touch the main quest;  you could complete everything in Oblivion in 25 hours).

 

FSX should have been everything FS9 was, and more;  MSFS should have been everything FSX was, and more.  But the trend in modern games is sacrificing everything else for eye-popping graphics;  driven by a generation of gamers whose prime concern seems to be "can I display this at 4k across three monitors and make youtube videos".  Not disparaging this, but is it the prime market?  I would love to have FS9 with MSFS graphics.

 

(And I'll not open the cam of worms regarding constant internet connections, telemetry ...."phone home".)

[Skywatcher12]

3 hours ago, jgf said:

I fully concur.  My opinion (and we know what those are like) is that any new version of any software should be everything the previous version was, and more.  I still use a twenty year old program for 90% of my graphics work because subsequent releases have lost filter functions and even support fewer formats.  I was thoroughly disappointed with the rpg Oblivion which, while having graphics, animations, and sounds a magnitude better than its predecessor Morrowind, had about a fourth the gameplay (someone once estimated you could play Morrowind for 60 hours and never touch the main quest;  you could complete everything in Oblivion in 25 hours).

 

FSX should have been everything FS9 was, and more;  MSFS should have been everything FSX was, and more.  But the trend in modern games is sacrificing everything else for eye-popping graphics;  driven by a generation of gamers whose prime concern seems to be "can I display this at 4k across three monitors and make youtube videos".  Not disparaging this, but is it the prime market?  I would love to have FS9 with MSFS graphics.

 

(And I'll not open the cam of worms regarding constant internet connections, telemetry ...."phone home".)

How come every time I say the above someone jumps in and says I don't know what I am talking about as I have never even tried it? lol

MSFS has nothing other than graphics. Personally, even the graphics don't tempt me. The clouds look terrible imo and there is nothing more annoying than flying over places where Bing maps shows problems with the scenery. I'd rather have consistent lower quality scenery than higher quality scenery with a bunch of flaws.
It would be a novelty to whizz around gaming style for maybe an hour or so in MSFS and then I would be totally done with it.

FS9 we have it all and as far as I'm concerned, even better graphics!

[Nels_Anderson]

I can't help but wonder why you guys feel the need to continually defend you choice of sims. If FS2004 works for you, that's great, but it's almost like you have an inferiority complex over your decision.

[JSMR]

34 minutes ago, Nels_Anderson said:

I can't help but wonder why you guys feel the need to continually defend you choice of sims. If FS2004 works for you, that's great, but it's almost like you have an inferiority complex over your decision.

 
Since it’s the most complete sim available, it’s more a superiority complex knowing there’s nothing better.

And when someone can compare FS9 with MSFS, you know Microsoft didn’t achieve that much with it. 

 

Maybe it’s just that we jump in early before someone comes in to unconvincingly convince us it’s not. Hello Jim.

 

Anyway, there’s still much to enjoy with it. I’ve barely touched what’s possible with FS9. Rock on.

[Skywatcher12]

49 minutes ago, Nels_Anderson said:

I can't help but wonder why you guys feel the need to continually defend you choice of sims. If FS2004 works for you, that's great, but it's almost like you have an inferiority complex over your decision.

When there is an almost 2 decade newer version available of what we use, of course we will discuss why we haven't bothered to change.
We are also soooo happy and we like to express it.
Why do those who have gone to an almost 2 decade newer version still even come here to check on what happens in this forum?

[lnuss]

1 hour ago, Skywatcher12 said:

Why do those who have gone to an almost 2 decade newer version still even come here to check on what happens in this forum?

For some folks, it could actually be that they want to help folks having trouble, and they still remember lots of helpful things about previous (for them) sims. Perhaps some of them use multiple sims and want info if it becomes available. There may be other perfectly valid (for each individual) reasons, whether they makes sense to you or not.

[JSMR]

28 minutes ago, lnuss said:

For some folks, it could actually be that they want to help folks having trouble, and they still remember lots of helpful things about previous (for them) sims. Perhaps some of them use multiple sims and want info if it becomes available. There may be other perfectly valid (for each individual) reasons, whether they makes sense to you or not.

That’s not what he meant. 

[ViperPilot2]

For me, there are other considerations...

 

I'm on a fixed Income. I cannot afford the expense of a 'new' Computer with all of the latest bells and whistles. I'm using an older W7 Laptop, so for me FS9 is the only option to enjoy Simming. My WiFi connection to the Laptop is wonky at best, so I cannot even use RW Wx.

 

I have the SIM "World" I've created over the years, and that works just fine for me. So I'll stick with FS9, and be proud that there are others who enjoy it as much as I.

 

Have fun with what you use; we're all in this Hobby for the same reason, right? 

 

One other thing... If you've got Knowledge about FS9 don't keep it 'secret'. If it can help someone, spill the beans. Enough of the "oh, it's Proprietary, gotta have the Secret Password in order to play" already. Those Reindeer Games went out of favor a long time ago.

[Nels_Anderson]

Again, let me say that I totally get why you guys stick with FS2004 and I don't see any reason you need to defend your choice.

 

But just to make things interesting, let me throw in some stats from the 2022 Navigraph Flightsim Community Survey...

 

Percentage of people who use FS2004 as their primary sim: it's shown as a graph but looks like about 1%

 

Percentage of people who use MSFS 2020 as their primary: 55%

 

But this is interesting...percentage of people who use FS2002 as their primary sim: 4%  ... explain that result!

 

Discussion often mentions the importance (or lack thereof) of  the visual world the sim creates. The survey has an interesting question that includes this.

 

The most important feature (chosen as "very important") is realistic aerodynamic model at 60%

 

But in second place is realistic world graphics at 50%

 

This answer indicates why so many people like MSFS 2020 despite its other weaknesses.

[PhrogPhlyer]

5 hours ago, Nels_Anderson said:

I can't help but wonder why you guys feel the need to continually defend you choice of sims.

It's not so much a defending ones decision as it is acknowledging that for many long term FS users this is not an easy decision, due to the many stated reason (cost for new computer or upgrades, regular updates (and with the many hours to update windows every other week a valid concern), and other issues brought here by the actual 2020 users). Keeping tis discussion current and valid, at least for me, is helping to determine the when for my to move to 2020 or 2024.

5 hours ago, Nels_Anderson said:

it's almost like you have an inferiority complex over your decision.

Interesting... I see nothing inferior to the efforts being put into the legacy versions.  Buy that logic, people who defend not buying new cars must have an inferiority complex.

[PhrogPhlyer]

52 minutes ago, Nels_Anderson said:

This answer indicates why so many people like MSFS 2020 despite its other weaknesses.

I don't think ANYONE here is disparaging those who use 2020, they are just discussing the plusses and minuses between versions and their reasons for using one over another.

It appears the 2020 users are the only ones disparaging those who have now moved up to what they feel is best.

Let's get back to what is the important point, ALL FLIGHT SIMS ARE FUN AND HAVE THIER PLAVE IN THE SIM WORLD.

I, for one, and tired of this SIM BASHING!!!

If asked an opinion as to why I use FSX, and my thoughts on if I might move to another version, then and only then will I share on this topic.

Back to the Solo Cross-Country article I'm writing, should be done in a week or so.

Happy Simming.

 

[jgf]

1 hour ago, PhrogPhlyer said:

It appears the 2020 users are the only ones disparaging

 

Exactly.  It seems the FS9 users are looked down on for preferring an "old" program.  Just like those who prefer Win7 are considered Luddites for not wanting Win10 or 11.

 

"Everyone follows their path in life.  That I am not on your path does not mean i am lost."

[lnuss]

3 hours ago, JSMR said:

That’s not what he meant. 

Interesting- so you reply instead of him. Himmm...

 

Perhaps a re-phrasing???

[jgf]

3 hours ago, ViperPilot2 said:

I cannot afford the expense of a 'new' Computer

 

Especially with the cost of new components rising exponentially.  I shake my head in disbelief at email flyers hawking a new Ryzen on sale for $500, or a $3000 vid card.  And while every electronic device in the world now uses less electricity than its counterpart of twenty years ago, computers have gone from 450W power supplies to 1800W supplies ...as much as a small window air conditioner.  How long before you will need a 220V electric range outlet in your living room to power your gaming rig.

[JSMR]

1 hour ago, lnuss said:

Interesting- so you reply instead of him. Himmm...

 

Perhaps a re-phrasing???

He’s sleeping. Or was. 

[Nels_Anderson]

1 hour ago, jgf said:

 

Especially with the cost of new components rising exponentially.

 

OK, that just is not true. With the exception of the highest possible end video cards which you refer to, computer components are cheaper these days.

 

I can remember years ago paying $2000 for a 300 MB disk drive. Last year I upgraded my PC with a 1 TB SSD drive for $130.

 

300,000,000 bytes @ $2000

1,000,000,000,000 bytes @ $130

 

Or compare monitors...a high end CRT monitor would weight 50 lbs and cost several hundred dollars. The last LED monitor I bought weighs probably 10 lbs, has a much bigger screen, and cost about $150.

 

 

[jgf]

9 minutes ago, Nels_Anderson said:

OK, that just is not true.

 

I'm going by the email flyers i get from online vendors.

[Skywatcher12]

9 hours ago, lnuss said:

For some folks, it could actually be that they want to help folks having trouble, and they still remember lots of helpful things about previous (for them) sims. Perhaps some of them use multiple sims and want info if it becomes available. There may be other perfectly valid (for each individual) reasons, whether they makes sense to you or not.

You are watering things down. No, they come here to tell use we are behind the times and should move on with the rest of the world.

People can use whatever sim they want. I really don't care but people can't handle reality. FS9 is a strong flight sim across the board. There is absolutely no way anyone can say this honestly about MSFS. It has graphics and lags behind in a million other areas. I accept FS9 for what it is. MSFS users don't. Let's face it, you are all wanting from your sim, wanting things to be better and improved. You are not a happy bunch.

[Skywatcher12]

8 hours ago, Nels_Anderson said:

But this is interesting...percentage of people who use FS2002 as their primary sim: 4%  ... explain that result!

Clearly 100% wrong! lol
Pretty easy to see from activity across the internet the Microsoft flight sim popularity runs per release date back to FS2002. (MSFS, FSX, FS9, FS2002.)

You have to take into account the sample base if conducting a survey. Very few FS9/F2002 users would have been involved in that survey so the results would be totally unreliable regarding FS2002 and FS2004.

Most of the world will run to MSFS. I don't deny this but what the majority of the world wants is graphics and the latest and the greatest. It's not just flight sims, it's anything. Been like this forever.

Over the past few years however, many people have come to the realization the latest and greatest is often not the greatest, it's only the latest. There are many benefits to not rushing forward. Some are considering a little more why they are rushing forward and thinking about what they are leaving behind.

I'm not just using an old flight sim. I have many things in my life I have not moved forward with. Once I came to the realization I mentioned above and considered the true pros and cons of each, I find I'm moving forward with more and more things less and less.
On almost all occasions, I find I am very, very happy while those who are still charging forward are constantly complaining and miserable.
That's their choice.


 

[lnuss]

3 hours ago, Skywatcher12 said:

Let's face it, you are all wanting from your sim, wanting things to be better and improved. You are not a happy bunch.

Are you thinking I use FS2020? Nope- I've never even seen it operate. Nor do I praise it nor condemn it- same for FS9. I just answered a question.

[PhrogPhlyer]

12 hours ago, Skywatcher12 said:

I'm not just using an old flight sim. I have many things in my life I have not moved forward with. Once I came to the realization I mentioned above and considered the true pros and cons of each, I find I'm moving forward with more and more things less and less.
On almost all occasions, I find I am very, very happy while those who are still charging forward are constantly complaining and miserable.
That's their choice.

Sums it up for sure. Thx

[ViperPilot2]

20 hours ago, jgf said:

 

Exactly.  It seems the FS9 users are looked down on for preferring an "old" program.  Just like those who prefer Win7 are considered Luddites for not wanting Win10 or 11.

 

"Everyone follows their path in life.  That I am not on your path does not mean i am lost."

 

Guilty on both Counts!

Yikes!

Guess it's time for me to be led behind the Barn and put out of my misery!  (j/k)

 

You know, this is an old argument which rears its ugly head when ever a new Sim is released; it happened with FSX a Decade plus ago, then with Flight years later.

 

When the whole FSX row was in full bloom, I had just made the jump from FS2002 to FS2004. At that point I knew that I'd never migrate to FSX because of the System Requirements (which I recall was moot because there wasn't a rig short of a Cray that could run FSX 'properly'... CPU Architecture), and frankly, because of the Issues everyone was having. It's been five years since I was given the Laptop I currently run Nine on, and I'm clueless about the current System Requirements 2020/2024 requires. My Laptop doesn't even break the 2.0 GHz barrier, but runs Nine at 20 fps which is good enough for me.