Classic British Flight Sim

What was I thinking?

With much reluctance because FSX ran so bad I avoided it until SP1 but wanted the multiplayer cockpit so succumbed and installed it. Acceptable frame rates but the pretty world seems a bit bare after FS2004, the place I spend most of my time is in the pit so having a pretty plane interests about 5 mins it takes to look round, and having a dire panel is what the norm in FSX seems. Without the Grumman Goose, the Beaver and the Dakota I would not have bothered, the jets are Dreadful, I was expecting much more.

Anyway bought add on's for me now had to be FS2004/ FSX compatible before I parted with any cash and to be blunt, so far it been nothing but disappointment with FSX so far.

Anyway fun was had flying online sharing the flying duties with buddies in a just about acceptable FSX experience


So I get FSX acceleration and find it buggers up all the multiplayer, wells that’s a major one.

Then I find the other point of interest the Merlin helicopter simply bloody awful, it looks cartoony, don’t fly right and has all the essence of a Merlin helicopter missing and the panel, you would be hard pushed to find poorly done freeware panels this bad… what can I say…avoid.

FS2004 has taught me not to load any old crap because it often can upset a fine running system.

And now I have gone and done it…. No wonder MS avoided producing add on’s in previous FS additions, Christ they know how to make a bad one

What was I thinking? (that they had a clue?, clearly not on the evidence presented so far)

Add on’s for me now MUST have fs2004 compatible to get my loot. I’m thinking FS2004 is going to long outlive its “successor”, at least for me.

Looking on the bright side I am going to get a lot of disk space back from FSX when I delete that sucker, and I almost got to like it, not sure I can face the pain re-installing it is going to be back to SP1, if even possible.

All the warning signs about FSX have been their a while but alas I was blinkered

what was i thinking...shakes head..wanders off

still the buggers got what they were after....money, who cares what the customer thinks :flying:

I too have been hugely disappointed with FSX and Acceleration, save for one particular area which is well worth trying. Do the Training mission for gliders to get the hang of it, then go get Dornbirn Soaring Mission Day 1 filename dornbirnday1.zip at Avsim and also the Austrian Soaring days 2, 3 and 4 from FSXMission.com. Dornbirn adds a new glider and the Austrian Soaring Days make use of the default FSX glider which actually is really very good.

The missions are essentially a timed race around various courses in the Alps, It's surprisingly fun to do, quite challenging and even replayable as your route choices and handling efficiencies in thermals and ridge lift mean you can try to improve your times.

So far, that's been the only saving grace for FSX, I'd recommend giving it a go before deleting it off your hard drive.

Allan

Hi Tomb,

Can you give us your hardware specs please, as most of the chaps who have recently given FSX a go on here seem to have had a better experience.

Cheers

I echo the sentiments in the first post, which is a pity as I wanted FSX to be as amazing as the MS publicity said it would be. The MP flying is an improvement as is the gliding, but not much else is, in my book.

In a year or so, when I think about a new PC system or a major upgrade (and this DX10 or not, stuff is sorted) I will install it again, but not before. FS2004 with add on sceneries such as Godzone and Flightzone are the pinnicle of home PC flying for me and with Active Camera I have that head movement that gives FSX its 'more realistic' feel of flight.

By the time I swap (when FS9 stuff is not being made), I hope I can put up the sliders and see all those features that MS told me I would enjoy in 2006!!!!

It does strike me as a little strange as to why people have such different opinions about FSX, and I've no idea why!

Tomb wrote:Then I find the other point of interest the Merlin helicopter simply bloody awful, it looks cartoony, don’t fly right and has all the essence of a Merlin helicopter missing and the panel, you would be hard pushed to find poorly done freeware panels this bad… what can I say…avoid.

Although I couldn't comment on it's flight dynamics, seeing as I've never flown a Merlin, or the panel (though I'm not sure why flying from anything but the VC can be considered realistic ;-) ), I don't really agree about it being cartoony. In my opinion, the default/Acceleration models are some of the best I've seen, and I can't picture anyone complaining about them had they been produced for FS9.

I do seem to defend FSX a fair bit, but a lot of the time, I get the feeling that some just want to bash FSX just for the sake of it. I can see no point in this thread, other than to stir up another arguement about which sim is better! Some people haven't had a great experience with FSX and so stick to FS9, and some have, so continue to happily use the sim. We just have to agree to disagree on the matter. ;-)

We just have to agree to disagree on the matter.

I totally agree and to avoid yet another thread arguing that one person's thoughts are better than another (beauty being in the eye of the beholder) I will save myself a lot extra typing (as I am one of the FSX doubters )and lock this thread.
Have both sims, get the 'best' out of both MSFS worlds!!!!