Classic British Flight Sim

The problem is I think the kind of MSFS user who visits FS sites on the internet, installs addon aircraft and scenery etc etc is in the minority.

The vast majority of people who buy MSFS simply install it from the disc and don't take it any further.

That's why it's fairly difficult getting new features implemented that are of real value to us as FS hobbyists (is that a real word?). The average Joe who goes into PC World and plonks down his money for FSX doesn't care about realistic ATC or flight models. He just wants to fly a Jumbo Jet over some pretty scenery. MS knows this and as such they will tell the development team to put lots of effort into making pretty graphics and such like. I'm sure the developers would like to implement some more features on the simulation side of things, but it has to be balanced against the "eye candy" stuff that makes average Joe in PC World pick up the box and say "Ooooh, pretty! I want!". Having said that, knowing the graphics setting that FSX defaults to out of the box, average Joe is going to be sorely disappointed, and unless average Joe has a quad core monster with a 500 quid graphics card he will never be able to get his FS to look like the pics on the box....

However, this time round we have got a sim that is problematic to say the least. It's not that I don't like FSX, it is currently residing on my external FS HDD alongside FS9. It's just that given the problems with performance and compatibility, and the lack of new features that interest me as a flight simmer, it cannot hope to supercede FS9 for a long time yet.

I've no doubt the people at ACES are well aware of the total bag of crap that the FSX release has been and they have (hopefully) learned from it.

Hi Folks

Just to put this in perspective.

AFAIK,
the only claims made were for items compliant with the SDK.
Compliant == We've followed all the SDK rules.

And not -
Compatible == Bugger the rules, this is what we think we can get away with.



If you bear that perspective in mind -

You'll most likely find that anything which followed the SDK
and was genuinely compiled with the FS9 compiler, (i.e. compliant),
has none, or mininmal texture issues, (transparency).



Where the real issue lies is -
a) users assuming/believing that models/sceneries are -
or
b) creators & marketers who passed off their models/sceneries as being -

- FS9 compliant.

Whereas in fact they were only ever FS9 compatible.



Likewise this applies to items being sold for FSX.

If they say they're "for FSX" or "FSX compatible",
I suggest you withdraw your bargepole, immediately.

If however,
they say "FSX compliant" or "compliant with FSX",
then by all means rake 'em in.



HTH
ATB
Paul

EDIT for clarity

I've no doubt the people at ACES

So who are ACES?? I always thought ACE stood for.... Arse Covering Exercise.... Is this the same and if so what does the "S" stand for then??? Maybe its my age... STUPID

Tony, it's plural - lots of exercises!

Chris

Hi Legion.You didn't mention the third rule of servicing:= If you screw it up,make sure someone else gets the blame.Or is that politics?
In general,I have been observing the the debates on FSX and have decided that there is no point in 'upgrading' until my perfectly serviceable pc, which runs FS9
fine, needs to be replaced.Even then I will not buy the first incarnation of whichever version of FS that is on the market.It seems wrong to me that a new product should require so much patching so soon after being released.ATB EricT.

Interesting "new toy".

I'm in touch with a guy who's setting up a commercial operation based on this "ESP" thing. He's giving it positive comments, but it's taking him a while to get it to work properly. He's already building a "proper" sim system for it in anticipation. Even so - and now that it is - it will probably make a good procedures trainer and "pay as you fly" sim for fare paying users. I wonder if it will catch on though. Price tag is rather high.

Buy a standard FS add FSUIPC, XGraphics, hi-res meshes, FSCommader, numerous scenery addons, Active sky, Voz, and all that jazz and you can end up spending as much. But as I haven't seen it in the flesh... I guess ESP is the "Photoshop" of the Fsim world now, and our FSxyz the "Photopaint"

P.S.

My contact sent me this link - if you haven't seen it:

http://download.microsoft.com/download/ ... asheet.pdf

I guess he may be an early commercial user, if he gets his act together.

Minimum requirements
Windows XP SP2 or later, a 2.0GHz or higher
CPU–single core, 1GB RAM, 20GB or more
of free hard drive space, 32X DVD drive,
DirectX9- or higher-compliant video
card with 128MB or higher video RAM,
DirectX9 or higher hardware compatibility,
sound card with speakers or headphones,
and a mouse or other hardware device.

yeah ........ooooooKaayyyyy