General Category > General Discussion

New Scenery Old Scenery or A REAL GOOD FORM FSDT!!!!!!

<< < (2/3) > >>

SirIsaac726:
So you are complaining because of lack of FS9 support??

If so...why?  FSDT still supports FS9.

And as Christian said, even 1K and some common tweaks found on the internet can get you running FSX very nicely.

bradl:

--- Quote from: ckaack on October 25, 2009, 02:00:38 pm ---1) FSX provides more features than FS9, therefore it is required to invest. For sure $10K are not needed but $1K is a reasonable number. At the end it is your decision whether you want to migrate or not.

--- End quote ---

Required? on the contrary. And just because something is newer or has 'more features' does not mean that it is more economical or better for someone. FSX requires a hell of a lot of tweaking than FS9 (I've heard some stories of people getting less than 25FPS on a $2000 machine that they could get 60+ FPS on with all sliders maxed in FS9).

Not all features that one may need is available for FSX. one big case in point for me, FSNavigator. They closed up shop, and while FSCommander is close, it does not provide what I need, that FSNavigator does. Some aircraft aren't available for FSX that are available for FS9.

So no. A number of reasons can prevent someone from jumping to FSX, so it is definitely not required.

BL.

ESzczesniak:

--- Quote ---...(I've heard some stories of people getting less than 25FPS on a $2000 machine that they could get 60+ FPS on with all sliders maxed in FS9)...
--- End quote ---

I've heard this argument before and it is just terrible.  True, FS9 will run at 60+ FPS with all sliders to the right while you can get maybe 25-30 fps in FSX with mid to mid-high settings ont he sliders.  However, even at that point default FSX looks a lot better than FS9 with all the sliders to the right.  While add-ons can make FS9 look better, FSX has much better graphic texture handling and there are some add-ons in FSX that are just mind blowing.  I can't tell you whether or not FSX is an efficient code and agree that right now it is a beast to run, I am sure that once hardware becomes readily available for FSX (the way it is for FS9 right now), FSX will be the standard.

SirIsaac726:
Yet another FS9 vs. FSX argument.

Seriously, we know some people prefer one over the other, but what is the point of arguing over it?  What sim another person decides to use doesn't directly affect you in any way.

Alliano Ricot:
Wow I must rough up the topic a little to much? ???
1. this is not a whinning session I plan just a topic about why I think it not about going over one developers back and just a term of sjills on creating a better brand of FS9/FSX add-on scenery.

2.My $10,000 price range goal is a figure of speech.

3.Im just giving FSDT I little more incentive to pushing there already limited time on development a positive push in the right direction Like how I said Aerosoft was the King of European Airport creation. I was hoping FSDT lean A littel more on The USA and Canada side but I I see that this a bad way of going about it(FSDT KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK).

4.I was trying to spur up some debate as to why I see so much help me about just finding a way to make the FS9/FSX alot more than the out of the Box hand out that Microsoft made with so little support.

But In all Im just talking (a bad To do on the Internet) to see if Im the only one how feels if a demand for a certain level of support should arise that Good FS addware developers will answer the need. Keep On fly the Virtual skies Simmers!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page