im taking a VERY slight graphics hit and only to the aircraft itself, i get great performance (maybe even better than FS9), the default aircraft in FSX are very nice this time around so I'm not worried about clogging it all up with add-ons jsut yet (to date i've only downloaded an Easyjet livery for the default 737), and the missions justbring a whole new aspect of FUN to the sim.

if you guys need better performance, buy more RAM, or a better vid card, and so on!

well that's my two cents

FSX sound is better.. The difference in what you hear, relative to your position, is very distinct.. (that would really shine in a fly-by)

As far as sound quality goes .. card and speakers being equal.. it's all about the number and quality of the .wav files.. and the complexity of the sound.cfg.

Quote:


Forget that. Vololiberista is just able to say the following things, without bringing any argumentation:
- FSX is FS9.3
- FSX is a downgrade
- FSX is not better than FS9 because the graphics are not good
- FSX has nothing more than FS9 excepted elephants

That's it basically.

If you try to discuss with him by bringing real arguments, he will ignore your answer, or leave the topic and start again in another one. That doesn't really help the discussions, I would say.

Ok, so I totally agree anyone is alowed to voice an opinion, but coming into the FSX forum, in a PRO FSX thread and trying to smash it is not the thing to do.

     Vololiberista, if you dont like FSX, simply stay out of the FSX forum... let us who havent spent $5000 on FS9 enjoy ourselves. I personally feal FSX's sound, flight dynamics, and most textures are 100x better then FS9. Now your argueing FS9 PAYWARE ADD-ONS with FSX DEFAULT not exactly a fair competition.

     In a few months I garuntee FSX will blow FS9 out of its unrealistic water. And yes you needed to buy/download updates to FS9, we will need to do the same with FSX. Yes you need a monster computer to run it on full but only time will fix that. More capeable cards are being developed and soon will be affordable to the general public. Untill then FS9 PAYWARE will be better then FSX DEFAULT.

just my 2 cents...

Quote:

Heh.
I am new to this awsome site but I aren't really a newbie at the MSFS.

Quote:
I DO!!1
You're right though, but who knows what interesting scenarios modders might come up with?

Quote:

I don't get stutters either, but comeon, that's after TONS and TONS of tweaks.

Quote:

Hook them upto fsX, then you'll have smooth visibility transitions (when climbing above hase), and better low visibility conditions. The sky blending is better than fs9.

Try putting Peter Wildings textures in fsX, and you'd probably notice the sky looks better than fs9, even with the same textures.
Quote:

fsG is great. However, fsX supports 1m mesh, with textures accurate to 7cm.

So yes, the terrain engine is fairly weak in comparisin

If someone takes advantage of those, imagine the results.

Quote:

But fs9 multiplayer atleast for me, is jumpy. I play other multiplayer games dosn't matter if the server is located in the USA or UK, it's still smooth, unlike fs9.

fsX has an all new mp experiance where everything is smooth.

Quote:

Awsome, which ones are you using? Though fs9 still cannot use advanced reflections using shaders.

The water in fs9 is also severely lacking in reflections.

Quote:

fsX trees are more 3d, since they're made using textures facing horisontal and vertical, so forests actaully look thick when flying above them.

Quote:

The messed up terrain is only in a few areas. Seattle, and Sydney (Where I usually fly), both look amazing, with no faults. The 1m textures there both rock, it looks like you're flying above a photo.

MY frame rate is awsome, I only mentioned the fps because of whingers who turn on bloom and max 2.0x water and expect it to run on there Geforce 5.

The textures, well, fs9 will never support the 7cm textures. Wait for GE pro for fsX with 7cm textures. Imagine the results!

Also if you somehow put bump mapping in fsX ground textures it will make them appear more 3d. Example:
*Note: Both 3d models are actually completly the same, and the 3d'ness of the surface is created entirely by bump mapping:

Without:

With:

Water, runways, and aircraft all use some kind of bump mapping. fs9 dosn't support it.

Shaders do bump mapping. Shaders do water, shaders can do almost anything without a big frame rate hit.
If you think it's a big fps hit, disable shaders all together then do all the effects by manually, using 3d models.

If you think shaders are a useless feature, you may as well disable all shadows in ALL new games, and not buy DX10 cards.
It may be just graphics, but I love graphics, it builds a more immersive game.

Quote:

Sorry, I meant UI. User Interface.


Keep in mind, I am arguing for the fsX engine, and not so much for the actual game.

Quote:

Sure, I'll make a video w/ sound.

Quote:

I counted one which was:
Quote:


Quote:
I'm sorry, but you're argument is unconvincing. You are only focusing on the graphics.

Look at the missions, space flight, new helo dynamics, thermals, amazing MP experiance and how the game is easier to mod.

STOP PRESS ------ EDIT ------ SEE END OF POST

Tell you one of the things that's cheesing me off - it's the sheer unpredictability of FSX.

I installed it originally on my main PC drive (ATA 160GB Samsung) on which I have my '04 and '02 both of which work really well. However, due to 'issues' I decided to put my FSX on a dedicated drive (ATA 120GB Maxtor) with a minimal XP Pro install and physically swap the drives when I wanted to fire up FSX.

It was a good plan because I've achieved much better performance on the dedicated drive even though I've got the same drivers, settings and everything.

But I find that my FR varies each time I run FSX! 'Yesterday' I was pretty happy popping along with my steady 15FPS but 'today' it's as jerky and hesitant as anything, and when I look I see I'm getting fluctuations from say 3 up to my 15 figure.

So I decide to reinstall FSX on my main drive, now I've made my changes to my cfg file and I know what settings to apply.

But what do I find (same drivers etc mind) - when I fire it up I get the wildly flickering screen back, that I had in the demo too, which only stops in windowed mode (but then your AA and graphics definition are shot to pieces).

For goodness sake why? I moved 04 all over the place, from drive to drive on my PC, with never a problem. Why should FSX be so different? Or more realistically, why should FSX be so FLAKEY?

EDIT - NEXT BIT ADDED

In the interests of making fair unbiased comments I'm adding this bit. Better to add it rather than delete the posting because it might help someone else.

After typing the above I went back and reinstalled by graphics drivers (nVidia 81.95 - not the latest but I've found them to be the best so far for my card).

Result - the flickering screen disappeared and I now appear to be getting similar performance on my main drive as I was before on the dedicated on.

Can't say more at this stage.

Touché Bindoe!