Search the archive:
 YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
  Simviation Forum › Current Flight Simulator Series › Flight Simulator X › There is no denying...
(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5
Send Topic Print
There is no denying... (Read 839 times)
Oct 23rd, 2006 at 8:54pm

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
 Posts: 6920
 *****
 
Since we've been having a string of negative around here, I just like to make a thread that points to the positive side of FSX.

The following are FSX-based features that FS9 will NEVER support:

1. 18,000-mile height barrier which allows the user to travel beyond low-earth orbit and better enjoy trips in a SR-71 Blackbird [the hot rod of jet travel IMO].

2. The capacity to finally reach the poles. Therefore, no more invisible barriers near the poles.

3. Skin and bones that are both animated using inverse kenetics [ie: wing flex] and are affected by the wind [ie: wind flags].

4. Moving surface platforms that allow you to land on them as they're moving.

No, this thread is not about the graphics. It's about the features that you don't normally see in a screenshot. If you like to talk about how bad a stupid ground texture looks in the US or how ugly the UK appears to be in FSX, then do that on another thread as this thread is about non-graphical features.

This thread is also NOT about performance. If you like to talk about that, do it another thread.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - Oct 23rd, 2006 at 8:57pm

SkyNoz   Offline
Colonel
Project Kfir!

Gender: male
 Posts: 1720
 *****
 
Quote:
4. Moving surface platforms that allow you to land on them as they're moving.




I've had a thought and possibal project that I might persue, which is doing a aircraft carrier with functional Ramps that rise and fall, to the lower deck. Do you agree with my hypothesis, Kat? Smiley
 
Project Kfir!&&...&&My Gmax page&&Aircraft modeler/Aircarft painter&&&&Aye the key!&&[GeneralEngineData]&&//0=Piston, 1=Jet, 2=None, 3=Helo-Turbine, 4=Rocket, 5=Turboprop
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - Oct 23rd, 2006 at 8:58pm

flyboy 28   Offline
Colonel
Jacksonville, FL

Posts: 13323
 *****
 
Quote:
I've had a thought and possibal project that I might persue, which is doing a aircraft carrier with functional Ramps that rise and fall, to the lower deck. Do you think that is possibal? Smiley


I think it's been tried in FS9 with minimal success. If you want to give a shot for FSX I'd support it. Smiley
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - Oct 23rd, 2006 at 8:59pm

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
 Posts: 6920
 *****
 
Quote:
I've had a thought and possibal project that I might persue, which is doing a aircraft carrier with functional Ramps that rise and fall, to the lower deck. Do you think that is possibal? Smiley


My knowledge with scenery is still limited, so I don't know.

FS95 or FS98 use to support rising and falling platforms, but they were jerky and are sometimes the cause of crashes in those versions.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - Oct 23rd, 2006 at 9:00pm

Hagar   Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159
 *****
 
Quote:
No, this thread is not about the graphics. It's about the features that you don't normally see in a screenshot. If you like to talk about how bad a stupid ground texture looks in the US or how ugly the UK appears to be in FSX, then do that on another thread as this thread is about non-graphical features.

If that's what you think the complaints are about you're completely missing the point Kat.

Quote:
4. Moving surface platforms that allow you to land on them as they're moving.

This is hardly a new feature. We had it in CFS2 6 years ago.
 
...

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - Oct 23rd, 2006 at 9:01pm

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
 Posts: 6920
 *****
 
Quote:
This is hardly a new feature. We had it in CFS2 6 years ago.


I'm talking FS series. Not CFS. Wink Grin
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - Oct 23rd, 2006 at 9:06pm

Hagar   Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159
 *****
 
Quote:
I'm talking FS series. Not CFS. Wink Grin

Well, like it or not FS & CFS were originally the same program. CFS2 is FS7.5. If they'd developed this properly we could have had those moving landable platforms in FS2002.
 
...

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #7 - Oct 23rd, 2006 at 9:09pm

SkyNoz   Offline
Colonel
Project Kfir!

Gender: male
 Posts: 1720
 *****
 
Quote:
Well, like it or not FS & CFS were originally the same program. CFS2 is FS7.5. If they'd developed this properly we could have had those moving landable platforms in FS2002.


They bothe imply different parameters, which only designers can really imply too. Which means, it' will require a altereation in it's function. Smiley
 
Project Kfir!&&...&&My Gmax page&&Aircraft modeler/Aircarft painter&&&&Aye the key!&&[GeneralEngineData]&&//0=Piston, 1=Jet, 2=None, 3=Helo-Turbine, 4=Rocket, 5=Turboprop
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #8 - Oct 23rd, 2006 at 9:15pm

Fly2e   Offline
Global Moderator
It's 5 O'clock Somewhere!
KFRG

Gender: male
 Posts: 199132
 *****
 
Quote:
Since we've been having a string of negative around here, I just like to make a thread that points to the positive side of FSX.

The following are FSX-based features that FS9 will NEVER support:

1. 18,000-mile height barrier which allows the user to travel beyond low-earth orbit and better enjoy trips in a SR-71 Blackbird [the hot rod of jet travel IMO].

2. The capacity to finally reach the poles. Therefore, no more invisible barriers near the poles.

3. Skin and bones that are both animated using inverse kenetics [ie: wing flex] and are affected by the wind [ie: wind flags].

4. Moving surface platforms that allow you to land on them as they're moving.



1. Don't care as I like to fly the bush!
2. Don't have any reason to fly to the barren poles of the earth.
3. Posky invented wing flex and to be honest, does not really add anything except a split second "wow" when the wings do flex.
4. Don't need to land on anything moving.


Ahhhhhh,
Love me FS9!  Grin
 
Intel Core i7 Extreme Processor 965, 4.2GHz/8MB L3 Cache, Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Intel X58 Chipset Cross
Fire & SLI Supported, Mushkin Redline 6GB (3X2GB) Memory, eVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285, Vista 64.

...

Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #9 - Oct 24th, 2006 at 12:18am

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
 Posts: 6920
 *****
 
My, my, my. Just by looking at all these posts, I can tell that this forum is really feeling down at the moment.















Roll Eyes

















Why am I not surprised? Grin
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #10 - Oct 24th, 2006 at 2:15am
Bindoe   Ex Member

 
fs9 dosn't support shaders
fs9 dosn't support missions
fs9 has bad camera system (excluding Active Camera)
fs9 has bad studders
fs9 dosn't support bump mapping
fs9 dosn't support shadows from VC.
fs9 has terrible low visability weather, with high frame hit from clouds. fsX has no hit. (512x512 DXT3 textures on X850)
fs9 dosn't have ships driving around
fs9 has bad sky blending
fs9 has terrible sound
fs9 terrain engine is weak
fs9 UI is bad
fs9 multiplayer is one work, terrible
fs9 now supports DDS
fs9 reflections aren't very good
fs9 dosn't support shared cockpits
fs9 has bad trees

fsX corrects all of them

Eh. Only disadvantages are:
Low frame rate
messed up terrain in some areas
bad terrain textures sometimes

Quote:

3. Posky invented wing flex and to be honest, does not really add anything except a split second "wow" when the wings do flex.

The wings don't bounce correctly and the wing flex animations aren't smooth. (Not saying bad things about POSKY, only the fs9 engine).
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #11 - Oct 24th, 2006 at 5:09am

pepper_airborne   Offline
Colonel
Voorhout - The Netherlands

Posts: 2390
 *****
 
My thoughts Bindoe and kathahu.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #12 - Oct 24th, 2006 at 5:20am

vololiberista   Offline
Colonel
Vieni in Italia

Posts: 1042
 *****
 
Quote:
fs9 has terrible sound

RUBBISH!!  Get yourself a decent sound card.
I run FS9 with 7.1 surround Creative Audigy. When I open the throttle of the 4 conway jets on my VC10 I get the same roar and crackle that takes me back to when they were in commercial service.
Reverse thrust has to be heard to be believed!!!
If anyone has heard Concorde take off then they will know what I mean!!!
Vololiberista
 
Andiamo in Italia&&...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #13 - Oct 24th, 2006 at 5:57am

Nexus   Offline
Colonel
The greater of two evils...

Gender: male
 Posts: 3282
 *****
 
Quote:

RUBBISH!!  Get yourself a decent sound card.
I run FS9 with 7.1 surround Creative Audigy. When I open the throttle of the 4 conway jets on my VC10 I get the same roar and crackle that takes me back to when they were in commercial service.
Reverse thrust has to be heard to be believed!!!
If anyone has heard Concorde take off then they will know what I mean!!!
Vololiberista


FS9 doesnt fully support surround sound anyway  Roll Eyes
What it can do is to emulate the sound so it is distributed to 4 speakers (like when we listen to Mp3's on 5.1 systems...mp3 is only stereo)
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #14 - Oct 24th, 2006 at 6:52am

pepper_airborne   Offline
Colonel
Voorhout - The Netherlands

Posts: 2390
 *****
 
Without a expensive speaker set makes the FSX sound way better then the FS9 sound.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5
Send Topic Print
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
  « Home ‹ Board Top of this page

Simviation Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge