Jump to content

jeanl2

Registered Users
  • Posts

    28
  • Joined

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Student

Interest

  • Interests
    Flight Simulation, Aircraft, Sceneries and Cars

jeanl2's Achievements

Expert  Simmer

Expert Simmer (3/7)

  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare

Recent Badges

10

Reputation

  1. You definitely are unfairly bashing MSFS, starting with the fact that all you know about the sim comes from "i have read". Well, let me yell you, no, when you switch your engines off, it shows you a screen that shows the flight has been logged to your logbook and gives you the option to exit to the main menu, look at your logbook, or continue with your flight. And even that screen is possibly getting removed because people have complained that it's annoying. That's what's great about a sim that is still being supported: You request something and if enough people agree, it's changed! It's really unfair that you talk about MSFS having no realistic jets considering that vanilla FSX also had no realistic jets, unless you bought something from PMDG or Aerosoft, because MSFS is less then a year old, and the addon devs haven't had the time to convert their massively complex planes. Even then, as I said before, it's not true that the MSFS has no realistic planes: PMDG has already released the DC-6, Aerosoft has released the CRJ, and community mods bring the default A320 and Citation to payware quality for free. Other community mods that focus on specific planes, and the ones that improve the G1000 and G3000 makes many of the other planes payware quality for absolutely free. The only payware quality freeware plane I can think of for FSX is the great Manfred Jahn DC-3 but that's about it. And the US is not the only country in the sim, every country in the world has satellite imagery, so with just that it's already better than FSX, and Asobo launches free updates every few months that focus on perfecting regions of the world. Out of the 5 world updates, only 1 has focused on the US. The rest have been on the UK, France and Belgium, Nordics and Japan. Even if the region you like to fly in hasn't been in one of these world updates, you can still fly to it and it will still look fantastic. There's also lots of community sceneries that you can get if you don't quite like the default one. There's 178 of Australia alone and also many hundreds for other countries.
  2. Just because I enjoy playing arcade games doesn't mean I don't want MSFS to be as realistic as the other sims. I used FSX and P3D for many, many years, do you think I and many other people would've moved to MSFS if I thought it was a game? No, that's my MS Flight was a complete failure, because it wasn't a flight simulator, it was a game. And I have never met anyone who plays golf games because no one plays them. Instead, I have met many people whom I have flights in VATSIM with, and others who I race with on realistic racing sims. I'm also not sure how my examples don't prove my point, just because I occasionally like to sit down and have a go with some of my other friends at some first person shooters. There's a reason I use MSFS and not a game like Ace Combat.
  3. You want examples? Ok, here's some examples of recent games that have gotten popular and DON'T have the most realistic graphics: Among Us Valorant Apex Legends Fortnite Cuphead Team Fortress 2 Pretty much every game on the Nintendo Wii (1595 games) Pretty much every game on the Nintendo DS (2042 games) Most games on the Nintendo Switch (154 games so far) In the racing sim world, some new releases with arguably better graphics, have been complete failures because they're not as realistic as their predecessors, and are worse games overall: DiRT 5 was a complete failure compared to the previous DiRT game by Codemasters, DiRT Rally 2.0 Project Cars 3 was a complete failure compared to Project Cars 2. That's 3978 examples, and most of these are games that people actually have played and were popular. I have never in my life met someone who plays golf games. Let me know if you want my examples on how you're wrong about MSFS users only caring about graphics.
  4. That's not true at all but ok. Again, I have a great answer for this but I won't bother because it's pointless
  5. Yeah this is the exact type of person I was referring to in the edit of my previous post. You know, I have a great answer for the middle part of this but I won't bother since it won't change anything.
  6. I'm no dev myself, (not for the new sim at least. I used to make sceneries for FSX/P3D) but I like reading development updates from my favorite addon devs and in there they usually explain why they are no longer developing for X platform and why Z platform provides A, B, C, etc. Advantages over X. And yes, it's true that at launch, MSFS was quite buggy, but Asobo has been hard at work fixing the big issues and bringing us free content updates as well. They are dedicated to making this new platform the best it can be. And sure, if your favorite plane is not in MSFS then keep using what you have, but you really shouldn't expect people to still talk about your 14 year old flight sim when a newer, better platform has arrived. One which provides both the addon developers and the end user a better experience for the most part (unless your favorite plane isn't in the sim, but hey, it's less than a year old) and if it doesn't, it's in continued development, so chances are that any issues you have with it will be fixed in a future update. And personally I can't say I've had "bug-free" experiences with FSX and P3D. They were both, in fact, quite buggy, mostly because it's using more than 14 year old, 32-bit code on modern 64-bit computers and that makes the devs have to develop in 32-bit also, which in turn makes addons break more often. When i moved on to the new sim I was, quite frankly, relieved that I didn't have to deal with the many bugs I had on FSX/P3D. About the systems depth, like I said, we have some pretty good addons already in the sim like the A32NX, the Working Title G1000, G3000, and Citation CJ4. These addons are payware quality and completely free and are much better than anything I ever had for FSX/P3D for the price. And on the payware side of things we have the Aerosoft CRJ and PMDG DC-6. All this less than a year since the sim's release, and there's still more to come from the big devs. Maybe you don't think you're a badass, but I certainly see some people here who think it's a d*ck measuring contest on who has the oldest software. Edit: I'd like to clarify that if you still use FS9, FSX, P3D, XPlane 10, whatever, I don't have a problem with that. What I have a problem with is people who say the new sim is bad or unrealistic and say that their outdated sim is better or more realistic in an aspect that it clearly isn't. If it works for you then that's great, use it, but accept that it's outdated and that because of that, people won't talk about it and addon companies won't support it.
  7. As others have mentioned, all the addon companies have moved on to the new platform because the market has grown on it, and it would be the smart financial decision to do. But not only that, FSX is too old and limiting for addon makers to seriously still develop for it. You guys might think that it's realistic, but the fact is, that FSX is simply worse in every way unless you spend thousands of dollars on addons. The new MSFS features much improved flight dynamics compared to the awful lookup tables from FSX, and the eye candy is not only beautiful, but functional: VFR flying is a million times more realistic when the whole world has satellite imagery and you can use the same references you can when doing a real flight, something you can't do in FSX unless you use up LOTS of space on your computer to download your own satellite images, which won't look nearly as good because azure won't be there to fix things up. Weather is much, much more realistic and wind simulation is also much better: passing over a city or a mountainous area will give you a realistic amount of turbulence, which is something you don't get in FSX. It's probably also a lot harder and more expensive to develop for FSX than it is for MSFS at this point, because with MSFS, addon companies can implement all of the new technologies that have been developed over the years and, most importantly, addon makers can actually now talk with Asobo and ask for things to be added to the SDK or fixed, which is something that could never happen with FSX because of course, it's a dead platform from Microsoft's perspective. In terms of stuff like systems depth, things are going really well. PMDG has already released their DC-6, which is probably the first study level plane in MSFS and they are soon to release the 737 as well. Aerosoft has also already released the CRJ and they are working on the Twin Otter. Freeware mods like the Working Title CJ4 and the FlyByWire A32NX get you payware quality systems and, because they are based on the aircraft made by Asobo, they also look really good and you don't have to pay a cent! You could never do that in FSX because most freeware aircraft for it were crap. You will always be able to use FSX of course, and it was a great sim in it's time, but the fact of the matter is that it is old, outdated software that was actually already being phased out from development by addon companies well before the release of MSFS, as they were moving on to the 64 bit platforms like P3DV4+ and XPlane 11. You can't seriously expect everyone to keep using the same sim when almost every alternative is better in every way. Everyone should try things out and not be so quick to judge something just because it's new. Using old stuff just because it's old doesn't make you a badass, it just makes you miss out on the best that more modern technology can offer. Personally, I also spent thousands of hours and dollars on addons for FSX and P3D, but when MSFS came out, I knew that It was time to move on because I value realism and innovation more than tradition.
  8. Thank you!!! The SIMULATOR will come out and they will still complain because they can't run it on their dinosaurs.
  9. Mark, i suggest you take a look at their site now that it has been updated and give it a good read: https://fsi.microsoftstudios.com You are very wrong on your assumptions sir :)
  10. Pretty decent and works with P3DV4
  11. If you want to use OZx itself you can still do so using the Wayback Machine. It's super useful for stuff like downed websites. Unfortunately you can't download anything, as it hasn't archived the download links. Here's the link for OZx using the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20170701002457/http://aussiex.org:80/forum/index.php?/discover/ Hope this helps :)
×
×
  • Create New...