Jump to content

Does FSX exist anymore?


Recommended Posts

Anyone else getting sick of the developers obsession with MSFS? Even frooglesim has deserted FSX/XPlane on youtube!! Its like we never existed 😕 I know things move on but this has been a very sudden demise imho.

Thank god for you guys here 👍

 

,

i5 4690 (350mhz) with Arctic Cooler, 8GB Corsair Vengeance 1600mhz, ASUS Rock H97 performance MoBo, MSI Ventus XS OC 1660GTX 6GB, Windows10 64bit, 256GB and 500GB Crucial SSDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I play a bunch of old abandoned games. The masses always will go to the latest. I only go to the latest if it’s also the greatest and MSFS is not.

For a flight game which MSFS is, X-Wing from 1993 leaves it for dead imo!

 

As for flight sims, heck, I will always happily use FS9. Could not care less everyone is gone.

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been with FSX since the beginning and all of its predecessors before that.

 

With a strong compliment of added aircraft and added instrumentation, it is en excellent flight simulator that I'm sure I'll use till the my computer fails. It's hard to beat as a flight simulator for flying and for gaining an understanding instrumentation and navigation.

 

For those rare times when I want to look at things, I forgo FSX in favor of Google Earth's new "on the web" experiment. It's a great sight seeing simulator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its like we never existed 😕 I know things move on but this has been a very sudden demise imho.

 

Sudden? Never existed? No more so than from FS8 to FS9 or FS9 to FSX. It's a new market, so they can do things with the "new kid on the block" that have been done, redone and overdone in FSX and before, and it's brought a lot of new folks into the sim world, so their market has expanded and they'd be foolish (business wise, perhaps art wise) to not take advantage of that.

 

FSX is rather old (late 2005), which is ancient in computer terms, and there are thousands of free downloads, as well as huge numbers of commercial products available for it, so why do you think they should remain stagnant? After all, they have limited resources and so they have to decide where the business can prosper.

 

I went to P3D many years ago, as did many other folks, though I still have FSX on the computer, and my 10 year old Win 7 machine won't run FS2020 (nor the latest P3D, for that matter), but I'm satisfied with what I have and with what's available (commercial & free) for it. I don't see any cause for complaint, just because something is new out there. Besides, there are some folks still making stuff for FSX (and FS9, for that matter), though the numbers are a lot smaller.

 

Larry N.

As Skylab would say:

Remember: Aviation is NOT an exact Science!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, I still race NASCAR Season 2003. With mods still out there it’s like a new game every year.

 

Same with FSX.

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

I still play links 2003. However, with MSFS it’s only natural for developing to move on from ancient platforms. There’s still idles of Addis’s you can buy for it, I highly doubt you have them all.
Thermaltake Ryzen Gen 9 3900x 12 cores, 4.6 ghz 32 gig of Ram, Liquid Cooled Everything.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find no reason to take up MSFS and still run FSX albeit now the Steam edition. I think MS left it too long to allow a follow up to FSX. In my case I have accrued thousands (literally) of $$$ in addons which make FSX look wonderful. What can MSFS offer at this stage other than graphical improvements and from what I see they ain't all that anyway. Very limited selection of a/c and lets be honest about it, it is still a Beta program. I will prob get it later like I did with P3D v 1,3, & 4 and XP11 as I am a flight sim sucker. :rolleyes: Also DCS, IL2 Great Battles and IL2 1946. It's an obsession but I am getting better nurse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find no reason to take up MSFS and still run FSX albeit now the Steam edition. I think MS left it too long to allow a follow up to FSX. In my case I have accrued thousands (literally) of $$$ in addons which make FSX look wonderful. What can MSFS offer at this stage other than graphical improvements and from what I see they ain't all that anyway. Very limited selection of a/c and lets be honest about it, it is still a Beta program. I will prob get it later like I did with P3D v 1,3, & 4 and XP11 as I am a flight sim sucker. :rolleyes: Also DCS, IL2 Great Battles and IL2 1946. It's an obsession but I am getting better nurse.

 

Exactly. MSFS looks fantastic scenery wise, but lacks many other things.

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

Believe it or not, I have been a Flight Sim Enthusiast and player ever since the days of Flight Unlimited 3, Fly!2k and of course, Flight Simulator 2000. And I must say, I loved the relaxed voice in Flight Unlimited 3 compared to the more stronger and direct voice that Rod Machado has (i.e. no puns intended). They both have inspired my enthusiasm for flight sims. And yes, both have even helped for a slight training I had in a Cessna Skyhawk!

 

Microsoft's Flight Simulator series has been an enjoyable experience for me. I have tried 2002, and even the 2004 Centuries of Flight. This, however, excludes the current 2020 version, but from reading and watching videos it seems to have great "eye candy" (i.e. personally, I would rather wait for more current hardware).

 

There has been a gap in time where I haven't gotten back into flight sims for years due to my busy life. However, now that I have more time, I recently had gotten back into FSX, the Gold edition. With the computer system I have now, I can now use any add-ons without a scratch and it doesn't drain as much as it used to on an older system! In fact, I have it on Ultra heavy settings and still get a great experience out of it.

 

X-Plane 11 is also something I recently purchased. Every article I have read said that X-Plane is the best when it comes to realism. However, can't the same be achieved with the right add-ons?

 

And finally, the other great thing about FSX is that you can specify "Easy" to "Hard" settings in your flight training experience. In fact, I add an extra challenge by enabling my rudder pedals with each lesson!

 

Later, I intend to try the planes out in X-Plane for ultimate realism, according to what article writers have said.

 

So, in essence, I use FSX for the lessons and enjoyment, and I even bought and use several add-ons that go nicely well with it! I intend to try out the same in X-Plane 11.

 

P.S. I have considered trying out the recent Prepar3d, however my current system wouldn't be able to handle it! The next time I upgrade I will try it! It seems to be an "improved FSX," from what I've seen and read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very much is! I bought FSX when I was 9 years old and ever since then learn of something new in the game every day! And it's fueled my excitement of the aviation industry ever since as well.

 

MSFS can't compete with FSX. There's something that's "off" about that game personally to me but I have to give full credit to the developers for the game overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been flight simming since I got SubLogic 1.0 on my IBM PC jr, then I got Mircosoft Flight sim 1.0, then ATP, then every MS Flight sim since then...Also the P3D versions 3-current, and X-plane, which I dont use much... I was getting tired of the memory limitations of FSX and the CTD's all the time. Even P3D v5 is slowing down with all the scenery and other addons I have, so it was nice to see MSFS run so well without the performance hit. Its still not up to par yet as far as complexity but as 3rd party publishers release items its getting better.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

X-Plane 11 is also something I recently purchased. Every article I have read said that X-Plane is the best when it comes to realism. However, can't the same be achieved with the right add-ons?

 

 

I also bought X-Plane 11 out of curiosity. I have to say there is some great scenery over there, but overall I did not find it nearly as intuitive, UI was IMO very clumsy, and I didn't like the cockpit views.

I get the feeling it is a good platform for those who want to build their own sim-airplanes. I'm not in to that personally.

 

I plan to get P3D installed, on some rainy day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've flown MSFX 2020 via Xbox on my PC to give a go - but I find it way overly-complicated than necessary esp. "drone" views, and the camera angles. Plus I need a new gaming PC to run it (It drives up the temps in my GPU NVIDIA GForce GTX 970 way up in the danger zone).

 

I too have been using FSX for years and have mucho $$$ in it - so I'll bide my time a while until the price of GPU's perhaps comes down some(?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies you have restored my faith in FSX staying around for a good while yet! I cant run to a rig upgrade which would comfortably run p3d, xplane or msfs so im sticking with my faithful FSX 😊

 

Upgrading to dedicated SSD for FSX tho

i5 4690 (350mhz) with Arctic Cooler, 8GB Corsair Vengeance 1600mhz, ASUS Rock H97 performance MoBo, MSI Ventus XS OC 1660GTX 6GB, Windows10 64bit, 256GB and 500GB Crucial SSDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd probably spend more money on a PC capable of running MSFS at high settings without crashing, than I did on FSX in total, which still works on the old reliable Windows 7 OS.

 

Yeah, I'm not big on change, lol......

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

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.

 

You seem to be very knowledgeable about what developers think and do, so I assume you are one, or are deeply involved in some way. Awesome.

 

I have FS9, FSX, X-Plane and MSFS2020 installed. I spend time with all of them, and they all have something to offer. Not everyone plays flying games the same way or for the same reasons. Not everyone is focused on the visuals. Flying the CLS 742 between KJFK and EGLL in FS9 is a pretty good experience, didnt notice any wonky behavior from my autopilot either. Similar bug free experiences can be had in XP11, and FSX also. You can't seriously expect everyone to just drop what works and run off chasing the new shiny. I expect MSFS 2020 to eventually crush the competition, and sadly most developers will start developing for them exclusively, it is progress, like it or not.

 

I value an enjoyable flying experience over everything else. Realism isn't only in the visuals. Systems and functionality immerse me more than buildings and trees. MSFS is fantastic for low and slow. When they iron out the issues with default aircraft, and we get more airliners in game, it will be great.

 

I for one would like to thank all the people who have given their time and hard work in creating aircraft, scenery, and other things as freeware. I would never refer to it as crap. Not all of us can afford all the pricey perfect addons that the more discerning virtual pilots swear by.

And I honestly have never felt like a badass for using old stuff. That doesn't even make sense. I use old stuff because i get entertainment value from it. Aside from those that are real world pilots, the rest of us are playing pretend. It's ok, it doesnt make you not a badass that you pretend. It's a hobby, enjoy. I drive a real truck, and the oldest truck simulator can be as realistic as the newest, it's all what you want from it.

People still use FS2002, Viva 2K2!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Edited by jeanl2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

I'm currently playing Star Wars X-Wing, a space flight shoot'em up from 1993.

Blows my mind how much better the flying feels compared to anything MS have ever offered with FS. I haven't tried MSFS but from masses of reports I've read, the controls in MSFS are even worse than all the past FS versions.

 

I'm one who plays games from the 70's through to present day. I always play what has good game play regardless of graphics as I really don't care about modern graphics.

 

It's very clear that many MSFS users are sold and only care about graphics. In all reality they ignore everything else about the sim. An example of this is a thread that ran in the MSFS forum asking for the 3 things people would like to see implemented most in the sim. In a sim that lacks so much of the "simulation" aspect compared to past sims, you'd think the thread would be filled with simulation requests like, "give me a decent study level aircraft" or "I want a better flight planner" etc etc etc.

Nope, all the posts were graphics related wishes with people wanting to see things like cute little splashies on the side of their plane when they land in the water etc. lol

 

There are now two sets of FS users:

Those who live for graphics.

Those who live for flight simming.

 

Depending which you are, will depend if MSFS or one of the older sims is for you.

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm currently playing Star Wars X-Wing, a space flight shoot'em up from 1993.

Blows my mind how much better the flying feels compared to anything MS have ever offered with FS. I haven't tried MSFS but from masses of reports I've read, the controls in MSFS are even worse than all the past FS versions.

 

I'm one who plays games from the 70's through to present day. I always play what has good game play regardless of graphics as I really don't care about modern graphics.

 

It's very clear that many MSFS users are sold and only care about graphics. In all reality they ignore everything else about the sim. An example of this is a thread that ran in the MSFS forum asking for the 3 things people would like to see implemented most in the sim. In a sim that lacks so much of the "simulation" aspect compared to past sims, you'd think the thread would be filled with simulation requests like, "give me a decent study level aircraft" or "I want a better flight planner" etc etc etc.

Nope, all the posts were graphics related wishes with people wanting to see things like cute little splashies on the side of their plane when they land in the water etc. lol

 

There are now two sets of FS users:

Those who live for graphics.

Those who live for flight simming.

 

Depending which you are, will depend if MSFS or one of the older sims is for you.

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

I'm the exact type of person as I pointed out who judges on everything except graphics. Since the 80's people have been drawn to games because of their graphics. People move on to the poorest games because of graphics and no other reason. They will of course swear otherwise. Take golf games for example. Major fundamental elements that were there 2 decades ago have been removed from new golf games but it's the new golf games the masses play. They play the games because of their graphics.

 

Graphics are one of the reasons so many games get away with having all the flaws and bugs MSFS has but will still sell in bucket loads.

 

I play many old games because graphics alone won't sell me and I call poop...poop.

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an old saying in the industry that I spent a lifetime in.

 

Putting it to use in my personal life has saved a fortune.

 

In my life, the same applies to FSX.

 

It is:

 

"Use it up.

Wear it out.

Make it do or

Do without."

 

Following that advice is like money in your pocket!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...