Skywatcher12

It was interesting to read the P3D and X-Plane bash fest over at the other site. Of course the other site doesn't like anything that does not demonstrate the site and membership as being "A happy bunch of coconuts!" so the threads were soon deleted. Of particular interest, were the complaints that applied to those sims but did not apply to FS9. There were quite a few. What came out there was the plain old truth from P3D and X-Plane users as they are all convinced they will never need these sims again. The new MSFS will be their future. FS9 holds it's own. As has been mentioned in this thread, you need to compare a FS9 run today against FSX, not one that you might have left 12 years ago, never touched since and use that for comparison. I won't add any more to the discussion but in 10 years from now, I still think there may be a good possibility I'll be using FS9. As for the new MSFS, I'll be fascinated to see how many, and how quickly, people run back to their old sims.

I like Kelly, at least she won't melt in the sun. I think it's better to look old than look wrong.

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!

What team are you after? I have Penguins for iFly 737-700 which is a much better option for a 737-700 than the PMDG.

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.

Seen it Commented at AVSIM Comment not fantasy Comment removed Suspended Not much else to add Latest update is of no surprise, screenshot or text, confirmation.

Haha, you do need a save option for the longer routes. Regarding wheels, I was thinking 270 degree rotation PC wheels. A 900 degree rotation wheel should feel much more realistic although the physical size of the wheel still feels wrong. They need to make some big contraption wheel you have to totally lean over! I'm probably asking too much. lol

I'll give you a trucking tip, brake slowly and gently to increase reality. The one part you can't do anything about is wheel rotation due to PC steering wheel hardware restrictions. To turn a real truck you need to heavily rotate/work the wheel. To make a turn in a truck sim, it's nothing like the real world. That's an area you really can't do anything about and feels incredibly wrong. I haven't played with the truck sims long enough yet to give a highly detailed analysis. From the quick play I have had, I think if they sorted the braking and someone developed a purpose made wheel/shifter for an 18 speed road ranger gearbox, you could have a really great sim. In the future maybe. AND they have to make distance/time real-time! lol

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.

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...

Yes, exactly. I believe this is what occurs when the game requires rendering power. I believe the grass in the giraffe scene and elephant scene is identical. The difference in visuals/blurring is what occurs when you introduce speed/movement as you would see if flying low from the cockpit. The grass in the giraffe scene looks sharp and detailed because it is not moving in the frame. When you introduce movement, it all falls apart.

Totally agree. I think there are many who are actually running a FSX which looks graphically inferior to my FS9. It all depends what add-ons you use and how you pump them in to each sim that will determine how good it will look. In regards to the OP question, there are a million reasons I have pointed out in various places why at this stage I would not buy it. I have now found another reason after watching the trailer a second time. The trailer is carefully constructed to sell the game and show it's best assets. They avoid anything that will show potential graphics flaws. What is below I believe slipped through and has not been picked up in any of the billion posts at the other site discussing the trailer or by an ACES expert as far as I know. It's imo the most critical and most blatantly obvious scene in the entire trailer.

You clearly don't enjoy my videos. lol

I've tried Euro Truck Simulator 2 and have also driven a real truck. The truck handles more like a F1 car than a truck in truck sim. I use FS9 and have flown a real plane. Not takeoffs or landings, just 2-3 hours in a 172 flying at altitude, doing some climbs and descents, a couple of 360 degree turns. I found FS a closer experience to real life than the truck sim.

FS is a simulation game, others might play first person shooter games, they are all games. I was actually disappointed to try a truck sim, not very realistic. FS is at least a little more realistic. Some sims are closer to what they represent in real life than others. End of the day, they are all just games.

Yes. It should also flip your pancakes in the morning I think someone was saying.

While this thread is still up top and I won't be bumping it back up, I'll comment on one more thing that hopefully people will see. If the new MSFS will be what people are expecting, a continuation of the franchise, the need to state this from MS would be blatantly obvious and in no way be a statement that will come back to bite them. They have instead decided to use the term "Simulator" which is the biggest giveaway imo that what we will be getting will be a typical modern flight game. Don't get me wrong, it may still be the best and most realistic modern flight game but that certainly does not mean it will be a fully fledged flight sim or replacement for anything that we are currently using. So far they have promoted a "Flight Planner" from the outset. It's was mentioned from the beginning. Now, if the best they can do is promote a flight planner as part of their "simulation" campaign, we are in trouble. A flight planner isn't a feature, it's a base tool required in any flight sim and to be fully expected. It doesn't need to be mentioned and certainly if this was to be a fully fledged flight sim they would have a million other better things to make mention of than the everyday flight planner. I'm so on my own! lol

I answered above. It's a MS survey, not independent, it's based (according to my calculations) on a massive 0.003% of current Xbox users and we have no idea what criteria MS used to select this incredibly select group of it's users and for what particular purpose. Those figures just may possibly be a little misleading! lol This is what I am trying to get across to people, look beyond the marketing and pretty presentations. How far and how long has it taken to get flight sims to where they are now? FSX took decades, LM had to use MSFS, how far have they progressed it in all their time? X-Plane has come how far over how long??? An all-in-one super flight sim just isn't going to happen and be sold to a market that just isn't there.

From what I am finding regarding demographics having only a quick look at independent sources, under 35 appears to be 60% of the gaming market. That's PC and consoles. Simulation games as always, fall near or right at the bottom of specific genre listings. It's very difficult to find any kind of accurate representation of all these things. Thinking through all the adults and children I know, they certainly don't match those MS Xbox figures. You could debate who uses an Xbox more than you could debate what MSFS will be. Time is the only real solution for real answers.

I absolutely would not believe that to be anywhere near an accurate representation. We can only wait and see. Will it be a MSFS built from the ground up with all the features packed into one sim that no other developer including MS has ever been able to achieve in one game or will it be a rebadged, reworked FSW? I wish there was some betting available on all these things going on! lol

Geez, it's like looking in the mirror! lol Play all those games except N2k3 and would substitute it with F1C in my case. Been on Rally Trophy quite a lot lately. They just don't make great games like these any longer.

Only skimmed the thread but have you tried disabling all the other scenery except for the airports you are flying from and too?

An easy way to upgrade the sim's AIRAC data to match navigraph cycles. Above is a typical want, wish, request for the new flight sim from a member of the other site. Could you imagine trying to explain this MSFS feature to a 14 year old on his Xbox??? lol

Xbox is capable of running a lot. The new Xbox will be very capable for sure. The point is, the demographic using Xbox's is young kids who have no real interest in hardcore sims. Serious gamers or simmers still tend to be the desktop PC crowd. A hardcore flight sim on XBox will attract how many of those 63 million current users? Answer is hardly any. What is a concern is looking at the market. Our generation is no longer what developer's are aiming at. The young generation come from phone games, tablet games, start the game up and learn as you play. They are not like us who miss our 100+ page printed game manuals and want every detail explained for the game we are playing. They want it simple, fast, get into it and start moving through the game at a rapid pace. A hardcore flight sim is anything but this. MS have carefully chosen their words which really confirm nothing. Will this be a continuation of MSFS as we know it? Stating the focus is "simulation" means nothing. Most of the flight games on phones are apparently flight simulators as well along with the Goat Simulator! lol The way they described content is very suspicious. They are clearly leaving details out. What modern game doesn't have DLC's to strip your bank account? I'm sure there will be content but exactly what type of content created by who and how I have no idea. I'm not being negative, I'm being rational. Heck, I would love to see a new flight sim too but the market and times are not what they were 15 years ago. Every game being developed today demonstrates this. A fully fledged flight sim today is just so out of place let alone one that will function across two platforms.