PDA

View Full Version : I bought MSFSX..



wehyam
10-14-2006, 02:33 PM
What have I done..
I couldnt believe they could do it again.. and I really wanted to fly a De Havilland Beaver around Alaska..(been inspired by a really good book.. think like a bird by allen Kimbell, army pilot).. It arrived two days ago and I've stuck with it as long as I could BUT I had to give up and get back to IL2 addons etc.. I dont know anything about flight models (or their implementation) but I know what I like. MSFSX runs with some infelicities (one field in texas is at 10ft QFE!). but the GA flying is what? unreal? Maybe I've picked up some bad habits with IL2+addons etc but at least it feels a bit like flying and the world doesnt jerk about and Trackir fits 'seemlessly' (and you're not tempted to use a CH joke!). Anyway thought I'd get off my chest. Only 50 from amazon!

FoolTrottel
10-14-2006, 03:57 PM
Don't feel bad about it.
Just a small mistake.

A bit like the one I made.
Got me FS2004 (EUR 20,-) and 'VFR The Netherlands' (EUR 40,-). Turns out, they (http://www.horizonsimulation.com) could not properly model bridges in that add-on.

Can you imagine, The Netherlands, with all that water, no bridges? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

As for FS2004 by itself... first thing I tried was the Curtiss Jenny... could not get it airborne... turns out it's flight model wasn't okay ... one needed a patch for that.... 'A century of flight', made in the USA, and the Jenny does not fly right http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif that's MS for ya....

Me the fool, as I'd already got me CFS 1, 2 and 3, I should've known better...

Thanks for sharing, it will save me some money! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v668/fooltrottel/FtMoon.jpg
(Multicontrollered pIL2ots in need of tuning sensitivity settings:IL2-Sticks (http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=332)
might come in handy, IL2 Joy Control (By Oleg_BS) (http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=1021) can even be more usefull!)

x6BL_Brando
10-14-2006, 04:05 PM
As I was reading this a quote from the 1969 Guy Hamilton film, Battle of Britain, flashed across my mind......from the scene in the RAF plotting room just before the ceiling falls in....

"Tin hats, everybody!"

I'll bring the popcorn http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

B.

leitmotiv
10-14-2006, 06:26 PM
I don't have mine yet, but I have some mild reservations because the demo gave me grief and I dumped it. While it was running, I thought the effects were immersive, and the FM was not supposed to be definitive so that doesn't matter. As for FS9, having judiciously or injudiciously spent a bit of coin uprating the weather and land graphics, I am happy with it. All the upgrading and fiddling is a pain in the neck. Having written that, I have no problems with the aircraft. The Cloud9 and Captain Sim F-104s are fascinating beasts to use. I like heavy bombers, and I mean heavy---I can "fly" a B-36 or Tu-95 in FS9. I can fly a Lanc at night through devilish skies in downdrafts, rain and ice from Scampton to Berlin. I am also able to enjoy 6 DOF in FS9. I don't need to affirm my liking for Maddox products by trashing Microsoft. They compliment each other, and FS9 improves my basic piloting skills. If you think FS9's FM is easier than Il-2 ETC, try taking off in a Shockwave Fw 190A-3 and compare it to Oleg's. FS9 gives you real torque.

SS_Bubblehead
10-14-2006, 07:48 PM
When new-comers to the IL2 series come here and post silly things like " this series is terrible, the AI stinks, the FM is terrible, I am going back to (other sim game), yadda, yadda, etc." most others who have played the game more thoroughly and have a few years of experience rebuke those negative claims with positive comments.

I have a similar repsonse when I read posts against the FS series. I have been using FS9 and the other versions since it was released. I will say that out of the box the game leaves much to be desired, but with a little patience, tweaking the graphics, learning the flight characteristics (with realism sliders all the ay to the right), the FM is very dynamic and realistic.

I have flown several GA and WWII era aircraft including a T6 Texan and a B17. I like the responsive feeling of the MS flight model with many aftermarket and free third party add-ons.

For instance check out the MAAM SIM Douglas Skytrain, or the excellent Shockwave Productions Warbirds. These particluar sim aircraft totally define what PC Flight Simming is with superb 3D cockpits and external models that no other Sim can touch, period. That have to be seen to be believed.

Shockwave's recent release of the he-219 Owl is simply awesome, along with its Spit MK I and the Zero, these all feature ultra realistic engine performance characteristics that enable the use of the actual flight manuals with altitude fuel charts to be used. The engine sounds are also superb.

These alone make FS9, in my opinion, still one the best flight sim options out there.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y90/Burt_sp/sig.jpg

leitmotiv
10-14-2006, 08:25 PM
Shockwave He 219 is the future---what a model! You even have to put your head in the right position (6 DOF again!) to use the gunsight! I would buy FS9 just to fly it!

wehyam
10-15-2006, 08:26 AM
Whooo.. Bubble head and leitmotif ..toughies hey..
1) I been playing IL2 for ever (badly of course) , and I had the steam MSFS in windows 95 and I certainly dont need to snivel round any body associated here.. And if I have to buy Shockwave I probably will do... after all I had to buy about 350 plus scenery air fields and addons for 2004.. and maybe now I'll reinstall it all (computer upgrade). Just so happens it seems that some addon sales are a little uncertain about MSFSX (will it wont it work?) and we'll have to wait and see how you get on with Shockwave(?) addons with MSFKAWI.. BUT the bottom line 'advice' would be (much like yours I guess..) dont uninstall 2004 yet.

roybaty
10-15-2006, 08:49 AM
Wehyam what are your specs? I've been thinking about MSFSX myself but don't think my machine will handle it, also it's probably gonna work best work DirectX 10. But of course this is all the eyecandy stuff (i admit i love eyecandy).

As for the secenery accuracy well the best way to deal with that are third party add-ons/user made terrains. I remember trying to fly around the massachusetts area (my home) when I got MSFS and was shocked at how horrible the terrain was, pioneer valley was unrecognizable http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif.

Strange considering MS has access to these resources:

http://local.live.com/<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-------------- QUICK SPECS --------------

-------------- HARDWARE --------------

SYSTEM: DELL XPS 600 3Ghz/P4/630
VIDEO CARD: nVidia 6800GS/256
RAM: 1 Gig DDR2 4200
HOTAS : Thrustmaster COUGAR
PEDALS: CH Pro Pedals USB
OTHER INPUT: Track IR2


-------------- SOFTWARE --------------

OS: Win XP Pro SP2
VOICE COMMAND: Shoot 1.6/VR Commander
COMMUNICATION: Teamspeak 2 R2
DX Ver: 9c

Chivas
10-15-2006, 11:12 AM
I was going to buy it right away but trying to hold off until Vista and DX10 are available. I tried the demo and it runs great on a Conroe, but I still hate the look of buildings siting on the out of focus guagmire ground textures. Maybe it will be fixed with Vista and DX10 or it may be a function of having to model the whole planet. At higher altitude it looks great but I tend to fly on the deck using road signs for direction. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

Old_Canuck
10-15-2006, 12:17 PM
FSX is running ok on my old 3.2 with a little tweaking. Just came out of an online gliding session at Rio and the frames were ok. Caught a thermal and went from 2500 to 10,000 and that was ok. Host suddenly terminated .. not ok. That's my only gripe so far. You can be having a great time and suddenly .. "host terminated .."<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

OC

"War is hell but playing should be fun" -- blakduk

"The price of uberness is eternal vigilance" -- Waldo.Pepper

BurnerGPL
10-15-2006, 08:47 PM
Just want to add that as a real general aviation, single engine pilot, msfs2004 was a real help in my training (and for entertainment)

IL2 and MSFS are a bit of two different beasts. However, and even more so with the add-on aircraft you have a real tool for yourself as far as a flight sim tool for training (AND FUN!)

joeap
10-16-2006, 01:54 AM
It sure looks like a great sim, and a break from the past 2 versions. I suggest upgrading before getting it to benefit from the new eyecandy and stuff. I am still on FS2002 and will stay there til I upgrade next year.

wehyam
10-16-2006, 04:43 AM
Roybaty..
I've Nvidia 7600 GS
Pentium 4 3.6GHz and 3.25Gram.. the box is well good enough TofR stuff bought last month.

I dont want to over state it. The scenery around some FSX missions is absolutely wonderful. And I've seen on the Shockwave forum some gorgeous pictures of a spitfire showing off so it looks like some addons go straight across..
BUT like you say out side those areas you've got to get your addons for elsewhere.. I 'flew' a route over lincolnshire that I know from my hacking about and it was completly unrecogniseable. And even with the scenery addons to 2004 below 3000 ft it's all pretty ugly.. I think its the roads/railways etc get blurred up to ridiculous proportions . But.

Old-Canuk.. if you do gliding do you have Silent Wings? or Condor. I think they are wonderful.. the first for floating about Minden or at v. high resolution, Norway! the second for training. You can even set up wind shear/gradients etc.. 'serious' weather control.. can you do that on MSFS ? and of course there is an on-line community

Burner GPL.
I'm glad you say that because I'm trying to do the real thing (C152 and a 3 axis microlight, I'm **** at it and too old really.. but NQDY).. and thats why I moan..
I dont know how to tweak the controls to make the thing feel like a real plane (who does? I wont ever fly a FW190). But I suspect a lot of the jolts I get in the low end GA stuff in MSFS on 'finals' are 'really unreal' and are nothing to do with turbulence as I know it. At least in the gliding sims there seems to be some similarity at least in the K13! and it feels quite convincing.

And yet.. MSFS provides the sort of wrapper goodies needed for GA ..radio QFE etc NAV VOR-DME etc, a , flight plans, almost real maps (buy your own charts) weather and wind etc and potentially provide the almost perfect 'practice' facilities. Non have done so yet!

Does any one know a Trackir compatible addon specifically designed for the PPL license course which is truly integrated into the sim and just uses a fleet of the classic (cheap) old school training aircraft(C152, Piper Tomahawk etc (maybe with a trail dragger conversion?). Is the C172 really a training plane who can afford the avionics?

regards madone/wehyam/who am I?

BrotherVoodoo
10-16-2006, 09:00 AM
I know this one is on my buy list. I want to use it for private pilot training, I think the sim will be good for that. The 2004 version gave me some grief during the training, I am hoping this one is less buggy. (fingers crossed)<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o140/99th_RockStar/rocksig.gif

There are only two types of aircraft ? fighters and targets.

? Doyle 'Wahoo' Nicholson, USMC.

roybaty
10-18-2006, 05:18 AM
At least they have a demo this time:

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulatorx/downloads.html

Visually still doesn't impress me *sigh*, though it looks like they have integrated multiplayer atc, which used to need third party addons.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-------------- QUICK SPECS --------------

-------------- HARDWARE --------------

SYSTEM: DELL XPS 600 3Ghz/P4/630
VIDEO CARD: nVidia 6800GS/256
RAM: 1 Gig DDR2 4200
HOTAS : Thrustmaster COUGAR
PEDALS: CH Pro Pedals USB
OTHER INPUT: Track IR2


-------------- SOFTWARE --------------

OS: Win XP Pro SP2
VOICE COMMAND: Shoot 1.6/VR Commander
COMMUNICATION: Teamspeak 2 R2
DX Ver: 9c

MiamiEagle
10-18-2006, 06:54 AM
Gentelmen no Sim is perfect and its up to the user to fly in the Sim the he likes the most. You guys have to remember that FXS is a different type of Sim. Its not a Combat Sim period.Its a civilian Sim where you spend most of the time flying around the World and thats it. There is nothing to shot at and nothing or anyone trying to shot you down.

Its a different beast and there is no comparison between the two Sims.

Now if Microsoft would develope a Combat Sim with some of the Features like the ones in FS9 and with a world map like the one in CFS2 through its Mission Builder then that could make difference in the Combat Sim Hooby.

That would improve the quality of the combat Sim World in ganeral. That would be a upgrade for every one in this Hooby.

Oleg would be force to upgrade his newer Sims to higher levels and other would have to follow.

In the mean time lets enjoy what we already have. I believe that FS9 and FSX are probable the best Sim in the Market now,that in no ways means that Pafific Fighter merge or CFS2 and CFS3 are secound hand Sims.

I say they are masterpeaces and lets enjoy them and shot each other and the Ai as often as we possibly can.


Miamieagle

Dexmeister
10-18-2006, 08:01 AM
I snagged FSX on the weekend and after minimal tweaking (on a new rig), I've got it looking freaken awesome. It's definitely an improvement, but takes some intelligence to tweak it properly, so don't pay too much attention to people that complain after cranking the sliders all to the right.

As with FS9, there's a little bit of initial tweaking, then people start putting out add-ons that make it run better, and soon enough we can have a miraculous sim and great FREE add-on planes etc.

It's a great hobby to me, I just love getting in and flying in real places, with real navigation, ATC, and real-time weather.

Nothing against IL2, it's awesome for what it is, as FSX is for what it's intended.

Personally, I can't understand how you guys can NOT get it. If you like the feeling of flight on a PC, it's a must-have, as long as your PC is up to it...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.asic.ca/images/simevol.jpg

roybaty
10-18-2006, 09:01 AM
I myself do think MSFS is a good simulator, hell when I was going for a license I was practicing navigation/instruments/etc. on it (unfortunately I couldn't complete training due to the expense).

SquawkBox is a great third party app as well.

I just wish it looked prettier outta the bax though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. I have MSFS 2004 and not seeing any compelling reasons to upgrade to X.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-------------- QUICK SPECS --------------

-------------- HARDWARE --------------

SYSTEM: DELL XPS 600 3Ghz/P4/630
VIDEO CARD: nVidia 6800GS/256
RAM: 1 Gig DDR2 4200
HOTAS : Thrustmaster COUGAR
PEDALS: CH Pro Pedals USB
OTHER INPUT: Track IR2


-------------- SOFTWARE --------------

OS: Win XP Pro SP2
VOICE COMMAND: Shoot 1.6/VR Commander
COMMUNICATION: Teamspeak 2 R2
DX Ver: 9c

Dexmeister
10-18-2006, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by roybaty:
I have MSFS 2004 and not seeing any compelling reasons to upgrade to X.

Doesn't being cool count for anything? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

joeap
10-18-2006, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by Dexmeister:
Personally, I can't understand how you guys can NOT get it. If you like the feeling of flight on a PC, it's a must-have, as long as your PC is up to it...

Last words are why I won't get it yet. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif Well I don't expect to run it sliders to the left, in fact I never do always wanting to leave some comp juice for addons. Still, I skipped fs2004, first one I've skipped since FS2002 so I am really interested in getting this one.

Fighterduck
10-18-2006, 11:58 AM
only tried the first demo, little bit bugged..but that was only a demo and maybe the final one is better. But i have to say that is really great.How someone already told, there is a huge difference between il2 and this one and making comaparaison between them...well no sense at all! It great and i think it will give third party developers great opportunities. I flew fs9 when i was "bored" to combat, and it was a great sim..especially if you have Shockwaves add ons or RealAir one that are simply amazing. And again, if Ms decide to develope some combat sim based on X one...well..a little bit of competition wont hurt.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof"

Philipscdrw
10-18-2006, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dexmeister:
Personally, I can't understand how you guys can NOT get it. If you like the feeling of flight on a PC, it's a must-have, as long as your PC is up to it...

Last words are why I won't get it yet. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif Well I don't expect to run it sliders to the left, in fact I never do always wanting to leave some comp juice for addons. Still, I skipped fs2004, first one I've skipped since FS2002 so I am really interested in getting this one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What was that film, taking the pi.. making fun of rock bands... "Our amplifiers are extra loud, the volume goes up to 11 instead of 10!"
"Surely that's the same thing as making 10 louder?"
"... our amplifiers go up to 11! So they're louder, right?"

Worrying about where the sliders are is purely vanity - if the sliders are left, then you're going to get nicer graphics after your next upgrade, but FSX low-quality graphics are nicer than FS9 mid-quality graphics (allegedly)!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------------------------------------
PhilipsCDRw

PF_Tini's Simple Guide to Switching 4.04m, 4.05m, and 4.07m. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7351046415)
Flying on Hyperlobby as EAF_T_Dozer

AFJ_rsm
10-18-2006, 06:11 PM
the movie was "this is spinal tap"

highly recommended. it's hilarious

Beirut
10-18-2006, 07:25 PM
FSX was released more than a week early here so I've had lots of time to get to know it and it is a great flightsim. (It's also bloody huge. 14 Gigs installed.)

First things first, upon initial install, FSX ate my AMD64-300/1024RAM/AGP7800GS and spit it out laughing. FSX is a serious CPU/GPU/RAM hog. That's the bad news, the good news is that within 48 hours of my having it, tips and tweaks were on the forums that gave me an honest 50%+ on my FPS. And more tips and tweaks are hitting the forums every day.

With the tweak files installed and a bit of idiot proof editing in the FSX.cfg file, I can fly over forest and mountain scenery with very high settings at 1280x1024 and it looks gorgeous. The terrain in FSX is an order of magnitude better than FS9. I have to lower the settings for city flights, but I still get decent FPS and it still looks great.

(All this is done with zero AI traffic, air or
land. That is an FPS killer that definitely needs a fix.)

The planes are nice enough and the selection is pretty good. Some of the cockpits are the usual FS ugly and some are downright gorgeous, as good as FS9 payware (and better). There is also a G-force head movement in the cockpit that's kind of cool.

FSX isn't perfect, not even close, but it's a fantastic base to build on. I can't wait to see what this sim offers during the next few months when the add-ons hit the net and more tips and tweaks allow even better performance. If you want to see what the cutting edge of flightsims wil be in the next year or two, you'll have to have FSX.

As for those who cry about lousy FPS, first off, get the tips and tweaks, you'll see great improvements, also, all flightsims are built beyond the hardware of the day. From Falcon 3 & 4 years ago, to Lock On, right up to IL2+ACE+PF today. It's a flightsim fact of life.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"Official Lancaster whiner"

AFJ_rsm
10-18-2006, 09:23 PM
roger
i've fiddled with it relatively a tiny amount of time (too busy with school). Probably haven't spent one full hour with it yet, but I've gone through some tweaks and I'm close to figuring out the sweet tradeoff in details vs fps spot.

I'm already loving it. It's much more immersive than FS9 (eyecandy has a lot to do with it, as well as the tiny new details like head movement, land traffic, etc).

Here's a compilation of most tweaks found so far:
http://www.fox-fam.com/wordpress/?page_id=41

MoPai
10-18-2006, 11:47 PM
Always is tempting to buy the MSFS when ever a new version comes out but it never has failed to disapoint me. It always looks so good in the box but play has always seemed , for lack of a better term , sterile.

After 2 versions of MSFS and 2 versions of CFS that all pretty much blo, I think ill pass on this one. thanks for the heads up

msalama
10-19-2006, 12:36 AM
Hmmm... to be honest I'm not sure if I'm going to get this one. Well not just yet, at any rate.

Now as is known there're some great WWII-era and other vintage AC available for FS9. Robert Sanderson f.ex. is an excellent modeller, and his Hurri IID and Stearman both perform to the numbers much better than some IL-2 AC. But there's still no denying that MS's basic flight modelling is somewhat incomplete, and even the new(?) FSX sim engine doesn't to my knowledge model prop & gyro effects and near-the-envelope-edge (and beyond) flying like stalls and spins properly! Heck, when was the last time you had to trim out the rudder in any FSxxx plane when your changed your power settings or AoA???

None of which, BTW, is saying that MSFS doesn't do some things admirably. It does, and the better prop planes out there are just soooo cool - the torque is realistically strong, the start-up prodecures just as they are IRL, etc. And let's also remember MS's great weather and navaid modelling - they're something you just can't find in any other sim, or not to that LOD at any rate. But still: what exactly would be the reason for buying yet another version of their sim if they clearly are NOT interested in fixing some the more glaring omissions and / or bugs in the basic flight modelling, I ask??? "As real as it gets" - yeah rite http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

So I'm sticking with FS9 for the time being, thank you...

PS. I'm willing to stand corrected, however, should it come out that my criticisms here are unfounded. So what are your impressions - is the basic propeller AC flight modelling the same as before, or have they actually done something to it?

PPS / EDIT: Some clever modellers like Sanderson et al. have invented workarounds to FS9's missing spin modelling, true, but that's hardly the point here. Heck, those workarounds are often very difficult to get to work, and yes, very kludgy too to say it politely... So hey M$: isn't it the time to finally FIX the bugger for good, eh???<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hippies FTW!

gdfo
10-19-2006, 04:42 AM
FSX might be MS entry back into the Combat Flight Sim arena if they can overcome the image the public has after CFS3.

I did really enjoy CFS2.

MiamiEagle
10-19-2006, 06:23 AM
GDFO you shouls see the improvements they have done to it since you left it by its community. You would be amaze!

That does not mean its better than Pacific Fighter merge. They are both different Sims with different qualities. But at this momment CFS2 is a great Sim as well after all the improvements done for it by its community.

I"am just enjoying this Hooby more than ever.

Miamieagle

wehyam
10-19-2006, 08:41 AM
OK I really wont complain anymore.
BUT please help me..
My TrackIR wont run FSX (its changed the name in the profiles which used to be MSFX(beta) to MSFX and I've downloaded the updates BUT now the TrackIR wont play with MSFX: the green light's still there but the blue lights gone. Of course I darent say this but it still works with IL2 etc.
SO if anyone out there has got the MSFX eye candy flying with TrackIR help me please and I'll never say **** MS ever again.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

Dexmeister
10-19-2006, 08:58 AM
For anyone tweaking FSX, I ran across this, seems to be a great source for tips:

http://www.fs2004.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=92583

major_setback
10-19-2006, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by Dexmeister:
For anyone tweaking FSX, I ran across this, seems to be a great source for tips:

http://www.fs2004.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=92583

Yes, I found that too. Here are the other FSX threads, forums and FSX tweaks

http://www.fs2004.com/forums/index.php?showforum=103<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

Old_Canuck
10-19-2006, 11:48 AM
TY for the links Dexmeister and major_setback.

Dexmeister, I've been wanting to ask your opinion of Matrox's Triplehead2go. Have been thinking of upgrading from 2 to 3 monitors but haven't been able to get the second monitor to stop flickering with an FSX nav and GPS window dragged over to it. With an Nvidia Geforce 7800 GS video card at present and - yes - the screen resolution is the same on both monitors. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I'd like to give Triplehead2go a try but if it simply spreads the flickering problem to another monitor ....<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

OC

"War is hell but playing should be fun" -- blakduk

"The price of uberness is eternal vigilance" -- Waldo.Pepper

Dexmeister
10-19-2006, 12:54 PM
Hey OldCanuck. I think Triplehead2Go is an awesome piece of gear. As you know I've run the Matrox Parhelia for years, and only now did I finally settle for a singlehead setup for FS, but that's because I'm now FS'ing on a projector.

3 Screens for simming can't be beat. Check your specs against Matrox's requirements and hit their forums to double-check how it'll work with your setup, but if it'll work I'd say it's a no-brainer.

I may do it in the future but as I'm set up now I have 3 screens for work, then a new PC in the living room for simming, so 3x won't really fit with me because I'd need 3 switcher boxes to be able to use 2 PCs, one with Parhelia and one with THTG.

Still, I'd give it two thumbs up, and I'd have it already if I didn't want to keep my Parhelia in play.

Blanche2005
10-19-2006, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by x6BL_Brando:
As I was reading this a quote from the 1969 Guy Hamilton film, Battle of Britain, flashed across my mind......from the scene in the RAF plotting room just before the ceiling falls in....

"Tin hats, everybody!"

I'll bring the popcorn http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

B.

I was thinking more,

"Bumps a daisy.. s'nuff to make you weep" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Old_Canuck
10-19-2006, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by Dexmeister:
Hey OldCanuck. I think Triplehead2Go is an awesome piece of gear. As you know I've run the Matrox Parhelia for years, and only now did I finally settle for a singlehead setup for FS, but that's because I'm now FS'ing on a projector.

3 Screens for simming can't be beat. Check your specs against Matrox's requirements and hit their forums to double-check how it'll work with your setup, but if it'll work I'd say it's a no-brainer.

I may do it in the future but as I'm set up now I have 3 screens for work, then a new PC in the living room for simming, so 3x won't really fit with me because I'd need 3 switcher boxes to be able to use 2 PCs, one with Parhelia and one with THTG.

Still, I'd give it two thumbs up, and I'd have it already if I didn't want to keep my Parhelia in play.

Thanks, Dexmeister. Will run the system specs. by the tech. people at Matrox before making the order. I'm still a bit "old school" using CRT monitors: 21" and 19" Trinitron flatscreens and there's another 19" available locally at a good price so there's not really that much standing in the way.

A projector for simming? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Have been using two monitors for awhile now in part time work (3D industrial modeling) and one more monitor is almost a necessity. If only these flights sims would leave me alone long enough to get some work done. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

OC

"War is hell but playing should be fun" -- blakduk

"The price of uberness is eternal vigilance" -- Waldo.Pepper

msalama
10-19-2006, 11:12 PM
Hmmm... sorry to butt into yer conversation - I see the topic has shifted a bit - but I guess my dilemma of purchasing / not purchasing FSX really boils down to this:

What FS9 and FSX both do, do it brilliantly - weather and navaid modelling f.ex. are very good.

What both of them do poorly as per default - stalls and spins, prop effects, gyro effects - M$ seemingly has no intention of fixing.

Thus: would I really gain anything by buying FSX as a vintage prop enthusiast?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hippies FTW!

joeap
10-20-2006, 02:29 AM
Well as I said, I skipped FS2004 and am planning an upgrade anyway so the answer for me is yes. Still I wish MS would get some of the basic stuff fixed rather than depending on 3rd party people.

major_setback
10-20-2006, 03:39 AM
Originally posted by msalama:
Hmmm... sorry to butt into yer conversation - I see the topic has shifted a bit - but I guess my dilemma of purchasing / not purchasing FSX really boils down to this:

What FS9 and FSX both do, do it brilliantly - weather and navaid modelling f.ex. are very good.

What both of them do poorly as per default - stalls and spins, prop effects, gyro effects - M$ seemingly has no intention of fixing.

Thus: would I really gain anything by buying FSX as a vintage prop enthusiast?

I really want to try FSX out a lot more before passing judgement, but...

...at the moment I'm finding it hard to fly with good frame rates with auto-gen switched on (at any level). FSX has so much to offer even without any of the ground objects that I don't mind that too much, and I haven't experemented much with the tweaks yet so things might improve. What I have noticed though is that the aircraft are far more responsive - I actually love flying the Extra 300 (?) stunt plane, it rolls etc. very, very quickly. I don't know if this is because the flight models have been optimised for this new sim or if there is a totally new game engine (does anybody know?), all I know is that planes seem more fun to fly. At a guess I would say that control imput and the flight model have been given higher priority over scenery. Planes will handle well even if the scenery takes time to load. I always felt that it was the other way around in FS2004, ie that joystick authority was the first thing to suffer when frame-rates lowered.

I was very diappointed that all the default FS2004 aircraft weren't included.

water effects are better than FB/PF from altitude but become obviously 2D nearer to ground. They still look good low down though, just not as good as we are used to in this sim. They still remain good when water effects are lowered (this alters reflections of ground objects and aircraft), aircraft reflections in the water are quite amazing.

There are drop shadows (aircraft parts cast shadows on the aircraft) which are very good though they could be a bit more distinct (darker).

There are military aircraft in the game (I have the Deluxe version), the Grumman Goose comes with a military skin, as does the DC3.

The Goose is a real beauty. I love this plane now, this model alone is worth half the price of FSX. The exterior is really very good, it has a very neat US Navy (marine?) skin. I have had great fun landing it on lakes and in the sea. These landings are a lot easier to do than landing on runways; which has always seemed excessively difficult to do in the FS series, and there is no improvement there. Planes still seem to drift unrealistically much to one side of the runway on landing aproach. I crashed on 9 out of 10 approaches the first time I tried the sim.

The are some very good G effects - on take of the view point moves back and up as if the pilots head is being pressed back by the force. this is done very realistically, and moves proportionally to motion. The same happens when braking.

You can now pan with the mouse, but it seems like you have to press 'space' at the same time (phsically impossible if you use a joystick). The mouse is very responsive though, they seeem to have put a lot of effort in getting the views right. The zoom funtion is excellent, the zoom is gradual (not stepped) and feels like it's dampened (no jerky zooming) at the start and finish of the zoom.

Ground textures look goood even without add-on scenery. Also the default terrain is infinately better than that in FS2002/2004. There are now mountains in Wales, and cliffs around the coast of Britain. Near vertical slopes are better rendered,they used to look like the scenery textures had been stretched on sloping areas. Hills look better even at low settings.

Lots of airports are badly aligned with the scenery mesh - they sit on platforms high above the rest of the scenery. Some of the scenery mesh is a mess - The Thames at London has several rapids that shouldn't be there, these show even with low scenery detail.

I was very suprised that my system had such a hard time coping with FSX, though I am used to running FS2004 at high settings. FSX runs OK at lower settings, you have to have a good system to run it though, and even then (it seems to me at the moment) you have to choose whether to prioritise scenery or buildings.

I wouldn't recommend buying FSX if you have a modest system. There is though enough new stuff to make it a worth-while purchase. I am sure that after trying a few tweaks I will get much better performance, but even as it is at the moment I am pleased with what I've got. I only fly prop planes myself, and I wish they had included at least one WWII aircraft, if only an acrobatic P51. The sim is crying out for a fast single engined prop aircraft, especially with all that georgeous scenery around. Remember, you have the whole world to explore.

My system:

XP
AMD64 x2 4600
NVidea 7800GTX 256 MB
2 Gig memory
XFi sound card<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

msalama
10-20-2006, 04:49 AM
OK, thanks for the info. I think I'll wait for the dust to settle a bit and then review the situation...

S!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hippies FTW!

wehyam
10-21-2006, 03:22 AM
Major setback.. As you say..
"The Goose is a real beauty. I love this plane"

me too absolutely..

However...

"Planes still seem to drift unrealistically much to one side of the runway on landing aproach. I crashed on 9 out of 10 approaches the first time I tried the sim."

Me too and I'm still crashing.. how do you fix it. Is it too much P or what! I dont fly well enough to reliably judge the effects of changing the settings BUT I suffer exactly the same problem in my microlight (1/5th share 3-axis). ie. very realistic(!) instructor panicking drifts off runway mid line.
Is a weight/momentum thing? interacting with skill because I can land heavier sim things much better than the lighter C172 and cub.

How do you reply to a specific posting?

regards wehyam..

BY the way. I think I blamed the wrong team..
I think my earlier problems with FSX also involved Trackire. There is a swarm of posts about a FSX and TrackIR problem on the Natural point website. What ever.. I'm using SFX for what it does best.. weather flying and navigation in the Beaver and Goose..

regards wehyam

major_setback
10-21-2006, 06:09 AM
How do you reply to a specific posting?


If I understand your question, you wan't to know how to quote a previous post. If you just mark a passage (with the mouse) and then click on the 'reply' tab at the bottom of all of the posts , the passage you marked will appear in quotes. You can also quote the whole of a post by clicking on the 'reply with quote' tab at the bottom of THAT post. You have to make your reply at the end of the quote that appears: ie under it.


I don't even kow what that drift is supposed to be simulating (wind, torque?), it just doesn't feel real. I get that drift even with wind turned off. It affects the smaller planes (and microlight) more; as you said. I would hate to try and land anything light with the wind turned on!

It might be that these lighter planes behave much more differently than the heavier ones we're used to in FB/PF. If you look at the training section in FS2004 they suggesrt a very high angle of approach for landing a Cessna; only levelling out at the bottom of the approach - just before landing. Maybe they are very prone to drift at low speeds. Could a real life pilot please comment on this if you are reading...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig09LowResPlane.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-21-2006, 12:36 PM
I just tried FSX's glider and got the hugest thermal:

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/space.jpg

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/space2.jpg

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/space3.jpg

Just kidding. I slewed it up to 9 million feet.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/sig2.jpg
Escadron virtuel RCAF 438 (http://438cityofmontreal.googlepages.com)
<span class="ev_code_red"> Are you from Montreal? French is good? JOIN US! RCAF 438 "The City of Montreal"</span>

"You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life."

major_setback
10-21-2006, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by Skunk241981:
I just tried FSX's glider and got the hugest thermal:

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/space.jpg

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/space2.jpg

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/space3.jpg

Just kidding. I slewed it up to 9 million feet.

I'm surprised it would go that far even slewing.

By the way: You can get rid of the menu bar by holding the 'Alt' key for 2 seconds (it's new to FSX).<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig09LowResPlane.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-22-2006, 07:51 AM
Ah, thanks for the tip Setback.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/sig2.jpg
Escadron virtuel RCAF 438 (http://438cityofmontreal.googlepages.com)
<span class="ev_code_red"> Are you from Montreal? French is good? JOIN US! RCAF 438 "The City of Montreal"</span>

"You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life."

SuperFudd
10-22-2006, 06:14 PM
Here is my FSX situation. I have a AMD XP 2000+ CPU, 512meg of RAM, Gainward FX5700U video card and plenty of hard drive space. This system has no problems with Pacific Fighters and works well with Trainz TRS2006. I read that FSX has a min requirement of 1GHz CPU.
So what can I expect on my system, with sliders to the left? With tweaks?
Over cities such as Union City Ca, (San francisco area east bay) where I live,will I be able to recognize major streets and railroads or will the city scapes be generic as in my current MSFS?

SuperFudd

SuperFudd
10-22-2006, 10:02 PM
I have tried the demo just now. I don't see how to change settings as in with sliders. It seems FSX looked at my computer and decided to set up with low detail. FRAPS sez I get 15fps in a baron just cruising around. It is so solidly 15fps that I suspect some sort of fps limiting is automaticaly aplied.
Over all, not bad. I hope in the full version I can increase the ground detail so it is not so blurry and still have a useful fps. 15fps is fine. If you know how to do so with the demo, let me know so I can see how it affects fps. I don't see any instructions in the demo on how to fly, keyboard control wise. fortunatly this is not my first MSFS experience so I am getting by.

Dexmeister
10-23-2006, 07:51 AM
Hey Superfudd, as with IL2/PF there are CFG file edits that will help you out, and replacing textures with downsized versions (available for download) is also a must-do. These things will help you get more eye candy at less cost. You may be able to pull it off okay, but I'd still suggest more RAM.

SeaFireLIV
10-23-2006, 10:34 AM
Seen it in the shops; an expensive version and even more expensive version. But the price means nothing. CFS3 took the longest time before the price went down (and was expensive), in some places it`s still top price and this is like 2 years later even with FB selling at 9.99!


Is it really that good? I can`t see why it`s so expensive.

SuperFudd
10-23-2006, 10:34 AM
I found the sliders, set the two "detail"(?) sliders to medium high and it worked very well. my fps actually went UP to 20! It looks plenty good to me. I will get this program, probably the deluxe version.
I expect to go to at least 1G of RAM for Christmas.

XyZspineZyX
10-23-2006, 11:31 AM
Fudd, I've found that the demo gave me more fps than the full program, I dont know why but it just does.

With the specs you posted I would play FS9 no problem, but I would be hesitant with FSX.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/sig2.jpg
Escadron virtuel RCAF 438 (http://438cityofmontreal.googlepages.com)
<span class="ev_code_red"> Are you from Montreal? French is good? JOIN US! RCAF 438 "The City of Montreal"</span>

"You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life."

TheGozr
10-23-2006, 04:24 PM
Marketing is still king<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.gozr.net/iocl/images/NN/NNserverlogo.jpg http://www.gozr.net/iocl/images/NN/Historiaserverlogo.jpg
NormandieNiemen & HISTORIA available on HL
Stats for both servers http://www.gozr.net/fbdstats

I.O.C.L | International Online Competition League (http://www.gozr.net/iocl/)
Oleg_Maddox:
"In terms of Sexy looking aircraft I like very much Mustang and less Yak-9U post war production. In the last case it doesn't means that I will model Yak-9U to the trials before manufacture speciafications. We model it with all the problems of aircraft of the first series."

joeap
10-24-2006, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Seen it in the shops; an expensive version and even more expensive version. But the price means nothing. CFS3 took the longest time before the price went down (and was expensive), in some places it`s still top price and this is like 2 years later even with FB selling at 9.99!


Is it really that good? I can`t see why it`s so expensive.

Good question, are Windows and Office that good? It is good but I wonder especially why the two versions, that I think is dumb. IMO.

Beirut
10-24-2006, 04:42 AM
If you're going to fly FSX you have to use the tweak files. You'll see a huge increase in FPS right away.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"Official Lancaster whiner"

SuperFudd
10-24-2006, 09:50 AM
I fooled around with the demo again last night and discovered the "Setings". I was right, the fps is limited I opened it up to 50 and got low 40s in the ulralight over the island. what really kills the fps for me is too many buildings. I suspect more video RAM would help that.
If the full version has lower fps, I suspect it is because the setings are tweaked differently and can be re-tweaked.
I am satisfied that X will work OK on my system. at least in single player with no or few AI a/c and no highway traffic or such. 15fps will be fine by me.

KG26_Alpha
10-24-2006, 10:04 AM
Heres 2 sets of screenshots. FSX v FS2004

Tower Bridge Heading West. Note the corrupted textures infront of Tower bridge, these are alll over FSX enviroment.

1. FSX at just a touch over default settings.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/4.jpg

2. FS2004 on fullest settings ultra high etc

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/6.jpg

City Airport EGLC

1.FSX

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/1.jpg

2. FS2004

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/2.jpg

THe FPS are about the same the mesh is obviously different but the smoothness in FS2004 is most apparent compared to FSX at those low frame rates.
Heres the main thing though FPS goes up to locked setting 35fps in FS2004 away from dense cities like London.
FSX on the other hand remains around 14fps in Cities and 17fps outside on the new terrain mesh.

So what to do ? Fly FS2004 with all the eye candy on or stutter around in FSX with empty looking airports and cities ?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/2minstomidnightcopy.jpg

www.kg26.com (http://www.kg26.com)

Dexmeister
10-24-2006, 12:42 PM
That's not a fair comparison, too many variables aren't comparable. FSX isn't stutter city once you get things tweaked a little, and FS2004 was hardly "smooth as silk" when it hit the market...

KG26_Alpha
10-24-2006, 02:21 PM
So whats a fair comparison then?

Im showing 2 screenshots same tod with the same framerates almost, you can see the difference in detail on the ground between the 2 sims.

Heres a shot over Crimea from FS2004

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/CrimeaSimferopol.jpg

Find another way to fairly compare and I'll look at it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/2minstomidnightcopy.jpg

www.kg26.com (http://www.kg26.com)

KG26_Alpha
10-24-2006, 05:03 PM
Ok after putting water on 1x and setting lock fps to 75fps here what it looks like at default settings straight out the box.

EGLC as before now at 75fps default verything water 1x
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/7.jpg

Make your own minds up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/2minstomidnightcopy.jpg

www.kg26.com (http://www.kg26.com)

joneill260
10-24-2006, 10:49 PM
I have both FSX & FS2004 (with hi-res add-ons). I can only say that FSX is much more lifelike (IMHO) - but it takes much more horsepower to run. I have an FX-60, SLI 7900 GTX's and 2 150 GB Raptors in Raid 0. I can get pretty amazing results with most settings maxed (& some autogen tweaks). One other thing is that I find 20 -25 FPS in FSX seems much smoother than 30+ FPS in FS2004. There are no microstutters - the sense of depth and "flying" also just seems better in FSX (and I like FS2004).

Judge the visual quality for yourself:
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r270/joneill63/FSX1.jpg
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r270/joneill63/FSX2.jpg
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r270/joneill63/FSX5.jpg
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r270/joneill63/FSX6.jpg

msalama
10-24-2006, 11:25 PM
Well, it turns out that the flight modelling has been improved in FSX after all, or that's what Andrew Herd at least claims in his recent review (http://www.flightsim.com/cgi/kds?$=main/review/fsxprev/fsxprev.htm) of the bugger... so maybe FSX does indeed have something in store for us warbird enthusiasts and prop-nuts as well http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hippies FTW!

Dexmeister
10-25-2006, 05:55 AM
One feature that amazes me is the new moving road traffic. It's awesome to be coming into my hometown airport and seeing trucks and cars whizzing by on the highway.

FSX is in many ways just not comparable to FS9. I loved FS9 to death, but FSX is a whole new experience.

Platypus_1.JaVA
10-25-2006, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by wehyam:
What have I done..
I couldnt believe they could do it again.. and I really wanted to fly a De Havilland Beaver around Alaska..(been inspired by a really good book.. think like a bird by allen Kimbell, army pilot).. It arrived two days ago and I've stuck with it as long as I could BUT I had to give up and get back to IL2 addons etc.. I dont know anything about flight models (or their implementation) but I know what I like. MSFSX runs with some infelicities (one field in texas is at 10ft QFE!). but the GA flying is what? unreal? Maybe I've picked up some bad habits with IL2+addons etc but at least it feels a bit like flying and the world doesnt jerk about and Trackir fits 'seemlessly' (and you're not tempted to use a CH joke!). Anyway thought I'd get off my chest. Only 50 from amazon!

What????????

Ban the Heretic!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge,
ye shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be measured
to you again.

http://www.f19vs.se/fokker_now.jpg

wehyam
10-26-2006, 04:35 AM
Ok Dexmeister, you've been carried away with your bit of eye candy.. Maybe you live somewhere important. Fly into Manchester UK and see what its like!
Anyway its not the views I've been unhappy with. I can live with the odd glitch (like a 3 foot step in the sea at Hoonah for example and the 5 foot sand pit at Nuggs farm) My major problem is the pain that TrackIR doesnt work (I dont know whos fault but there's a swarm on the Naturalpoint forum) and I accept that tweaking and fettling is an important part of sim flying but I'm more into aviation (very low GA) than autogen. And I sort of like the plane 'thing' to be no more complicated and difficult to control than the real thing (easier if possible). I think the low end planes maybe more randomly twitchy than the real thing. Having said that I'am enjoying my self flying the Beaver and Goose around the north west. And if you have found a way to include the radio frequencies of the beacons and other information like wind direction and comments on the flight plan I'd be more than grateful.
While on it.. I really like the import of missions idea MSFX and want to design my own. Have you found out how to 'add a mission' or modify one? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif

regards wehyam.

KG26_Alpha
10-26-2006, 06:05 AM
LOL Weyham, the river Thames is a mess its got rapids and what can only be decribed as tidal waves with ships perched on 50ft walls of water.
Fun to slide down these in a Goose.

FSX is just another typical M$ bullsh!t release, yes it looks ok but to accept it as a buggy piece of software!!!! If 1c release this sort of thing imagine the bloody fuss you would see here?

Anyhow im off to IFR round MAnchester, wont land there incase me landing gear gets stolen http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/2minstomidnightcopy.jpg

www.kg26.com (http://www.kg26.com)

major_setback
10-26-2006, 09:27 AM
These aren't solutions, just suggestions that might increase frame rate a bit.


Try running at a lower in-game resolution, but keep your screen resolution as it was. I ran at 1152 x 864 at 16 bits and found an improvement with little visual sacrifice (on my LCD set at 1280 x 1024).


The 3D cockpit seems actually to hog less of sytem resources than the 2D one. This may only be true over open landscape though, it didn't work as well over London. I got an improvement from 45 to 60 fps just doing this, and on a later test an improvement from 26 to 42 fps. This was just doing a quick test though, not thorough testing, jut take it a as a tip to try out yourselves to see if you get any improvement.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig11LowResPlane2.jpg (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Editthisnov06a003k1800xLaterimprove.jpg)

XyZspineZyX
10-26-2006, 09:53 AM
Hey alpha, I think you've forgotten that the Il2 series has 7 patches to deal with, and the original release was FAR from perfect, and judging from all the incessant whining I see on these boards, it still is.

We also tend to forget that atleast FSX model the whole friggin planet, which I doubt 1C will EVER do, they seem to be quite contempt with their puny maps. I say the odd glitch is quite forgiveable given the hugeness that FSX brings to your PC.

I guess some people just like to dis the really big companies that have success.

And Weyhyam, I dont know what you did wrong, but I downloaded the new alpha software for TIR and it works seemlessly in my install.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/sig2.jpg
Escadron virtuel RCAF 438 (http://438cityofmontreal.googlepages.com)
<span class="ev_code_red"> Are you from Montreal? French is good? JOIN US! RCAF 438 "The City of Montreal"</span>

"You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life."

wehyam
10-26-2006, 12:02 PM
Hey ho Skunk baby,
>>>>
And Weyhyam, I dont know what you did wrong, but I downloaded the new alpha software for TIR and it works seemlessly in my install.
>>>
you were lucky buddy. Theres an incompatibility with the 'mumble' stack. Here's a quote from Vincent, the Natual point therapist.

>>>> We think that this issue can be narrowed down to the TCP/IP stack on the system. As this is what FSX uses within itself for communication. The TCP/IP stack can be tied up with firewall/antivirus applications, which means they could be causing the issue.>>>>>

I cant pretend I understand what it means except that some peoples antivirus software is being overprotective.. But I got 'no blue light' (is that a Dylan song?) even with the scan disabled..

Anway.. Im off to london to join Alpha surfing down the Thames..
BTW what does LOL mean? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

regards wehyam..

XyZspineZyX
10-26-2006, 02:04 PM
LOL is shorthand for Laughing Out Loud.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/sig2.jpg
Escadron virtuel RCAF 438 (http://438cityofmontreal.googlepages.com)
<span class="ev_code_red"> Are you from Montreal? French is good? JOIN US! RCAF 438 "The City of Montreal"</span>

"You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life."

Toker-67
10-26-2006, 02:28 PM
Here i found a meeting of the production team, seems like the big boss isnt too happy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=17301

wehyam
10-26-2006, 04:10 PM
Toker.. That captures my mood at the moment.
( Trackir mouse emulation works on SFX !!)

major_setback
10-26-2006, 05:58 PM
Originally posted by wehyam:
BTW what does LOL mean? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif




Language is a difficult thing. It does mean Laughing Out Load, this is only part of the story though.
It can mean anything from 'I am only joking, so don't punish me' to 'such foolishness demands jest on my part'.


Generally though it is used instead of a verbal laugh that would have been used if the conversation in question had actually taken place using spoken English.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig11LowResPlane2.jpg (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Editthisnov06a003k1800xLaterimprove.jpg)

SuperFudd
10-26-2006, 06:45 PM
There was a time when it meant Losts Of Luck.

SuperFudd
10-26-2006, 06:47 PM
What? No edit mode? Well Lots Of Luck!

SuperFudd
10-26-2006, 06:48 PM
Oh! There it is. LOL.

KG26_Alpha
10-27-2006, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by Skunk241981:
Hey alpha, I think you've forgotten that the Il2 series has 7 patches to deal with, and the original release was FAR from perfect, and judging from all the incessant whining I see on these boards, it still is.
We also tend to forget that atleast FSX model the whole friggin planet, which I doubt 1C will EVER do, they seem to be quite contempt with their puny maps. I say the odd glitch is quite forgiveable given the hugeness that FSX brings to your PC.



If you knew anything about IL2 series you would know its always been a "beta style" project as more data become avalaible.

As for puny maps............ most pilots moan if they have to fly more than 15 minutes to a target area let alone 3-4 hours there and back, what do you want to have? mission over 5 hours long? Its designed to put you in an area of conflict at that time in history, if you want to fly around in a DF server playing the conga you only need a 4kmsq map.

FS series AFAIK has only ever had 1 free patch.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/alpha1/2minstomidnightcopy.jpg

www.kg26.com (http://www.kg26.com)

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2006, 09:09 AM
Directly from the developper, there was only one, but it was to fix a few bridges that had been modeled wrong. They dont need to release more patches than that because of the open architecture. 3rd party developpers are what make MSFS great, and thanks to them, there are tens of thousands of optional "patches".

About the long missions, I do agree with you because I am one of those who doesnt have a whole lot of time to fly across 500 km before getting to target but, just having the option to do so would make Il2 a whole lot more interesting.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/sig2.jpg
Escadron virtuel RCAF 438 (http://438cityofmontreal.googlepages.com)
<span class="ev_code_red"> Are you from Montreal? French is good? JOIN US! RCAF 438 "The City of Montreal"</span>

"You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life."

Chivas
10-27-2006, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Skunk241981:
Hey alpha, I think you've forgotten that the Il2 series has 7 patches to deal with, and the original release was FAR from perfect, and judging from all the incessant whining I see on these boards, it still is.

We also tend to forget that atleast FSX model the whole friggin planet, which I doubt 1C will EVER do, they seem to be quite contempt with their puny maps. I say the odd glitch is quite forgiveable given the hugeness that FSX brings to your PC.

I guess some people just like to dis the really big companies that have success.

And Weyhyam, I dont know what you did wrong, but I downloaded the new alpha software for TIR and it works seemlessly in my install.

The Il-2 series had fewer bugs than any software I've ever installed. The patches did fix a few bugs but, but 99.9% of the patch content were more aircraft, maps, and graphical inhancements.

I always shake my head in disbelief when people suggest that IL-2 needed all these patches to fix it, http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

Chivas
10-27-2006, 02:29 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Skunk241981:
Hey alpha, I think you've forgotten that the Il2 series has 7 patches to deal with, and the original release was FAR from perfect, and judging from all the incessant whining I see on these boards, it still is.

We also tend to forget that atleast FSX model the wh

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2006, 05:07 PM
Well, I'm not saying that FB was buggy or whatever its all the Oleg a$$ kissers that annoy me.

Atleast I'll never be a kiss a$$ to ANY developper. I like both Il-2 and MSFS, because I feel it just makes me a better pilot.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/sig2.jpg
Escadron virtuel RCAF 438 (http://438cityofmontreal.googlepages.com)
<span class="ev_code_red"> Are you from Montreal? French is good? JOIN US! RCAF 438 "The City of Montreal"</span>

"You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life."

Old_Canuck
10-28-2006, 12:58 AM
Speaking of better pilots, the blue heli at far left was able to hold a motionless hover for an incredibly long time. If only the comms. were working, I would have asked him for some pointers. FM for the helis are better now IMHO.
http://www.woodbuddies.com/PF/HeliBanff.jpg

BTW, TIR4 alpha works ok with a bit of tweaking and repositioning. Finally hit the magic spots and it's quite enjoyable.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

OC

"War is hell but playing should be fun" -- blakduk

"The price of uberness is eternal vigilance" -- Waldo.Pepper

major_setback
10-28-2006, 06:18 AM
VFR Real Scenery (real photo scenery) is available as a downloadable tryout demo:

http://www.justflight.com/vfr-info.asp<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig07.jpg

AeroBob
10-29-2006, 06:40 AM
MSFS is a good canvas for experienced developers. Out of the box it's terrible, but with the right addons it becomes every bit as accurate as anythnig else out there.

That's the problem, though. Let's say ?75 for FSXPro, ?30 for ActiveSky 6, ?85 to get good scenery for my home country of the UK, ?60 for two good payware addons... That's ?250 to turn it from a flying turd into the good flight sim it's capable of being (and even then only with good scenery for one country and two aircraft), and there's no way I'm paying that for it.

leitmotiv
10-29-2006, 07:43 AM
I spent a pretty penny on add-ons for FS9 this summer, and I am 95% satisfied. I am annoyed at the compromises in FMs in FM9 (and I see the same holds true in X from reading the professional reviews). BUT, I am not going to be cruising in a Lancaster or a Tu-95 or an F-104 (modeled in such detail I'll blow my tires if I don't lift off before a certain speed---Cloud9's incredible set) anywhere else so I have no patience with grousers. Good day t'ye and good luck!

Te_Vigo
10-29-2006, 08:04 AM
I think they were on hash when it comes to Lukla airfield/port, Nepal. The approach is via a couple of high passes.
This strip is short and slopes up at an angle and if'n ya don't stop the plane in time in time....smack into a wall.
Ingame it's flat, no wall, wrong orientation, no high passes, no airport buildings and very few peaks.

Taking off is similar to a carrier...twin engines at full spin... release the brakes and hope you get up, otherwise it's a 500m drop.
Wreckage from previous crackups lie at the edges of the strip.


I couldn't find Kokoda strip in game, yet to look at Lae, (for) Rabaul, Guam, Midway, etc, etc

Overall, the FM feels alright (for the few planes I've tried) but I'm not a real life pilot. No token Corsair or F15?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/onlinephoto/Screen_Shot_JPEG_flip.jpg

leitmotiv
10-29-2006, 09:15 AM
I have to admit I was impressed by the detail when I buzzed the cruise ship in the ultra-light while using the early demo. Looks like you'll have to pay out of the pocket, as usual, to get the right Lukla, Te_Vigo!

Aaron_GT
10-29-2006, 11:20 AM
About the long missions, I do agree with you because I am one of those who doesnt have a whole lot of time to fly across 500 km before getting to target but, just having the option to do so would make Il2 a whole lot more interesting.



That's one of the things I liked about CFS3 - you had the option of doing a long mission in a Lancaster if you wanted to. The bad thing was that if you didn't and hit Ctrl-X all too often with the Firepower Lancaster add on the thing would crash to the desktop half way through the progress to the next bit of action. That meant no option but to fly a 3 hours each way...

wehyam
10-29-2006, 11:35 AM
I have.. I'm not sure what to make of it.. There's half in bright strident green with 200 ft trees on it.. water that looks like crinkled blue wrapping paper. and the other stuff looks less colourful, more realistic and a bit like google earth blurred (a bit anyway) I think I'll wait till I hear someone say they've tracked up the M1 to Sheffield and seen the Parkway, Rother Valley, t'A616/617 and whether Clumber Park and Welbeck Abbey are recognisable before I get too excited. Meanwhile I'm taking the beaver round Vancouver on IFR till trackir gets sorted..

leitmotiv
10-29-2006, 11:57 AM
Exactly, Aaron_GT, that's why I went back to CFS3 last summer---the long Lanc missions. Scroll down to the bottom and see what Aeroplane Heaven is doing for the Lanc and CFS3:

http://www.aeroplaneheaven.com/hangar_dyn.php?PLperiod=WW2

Having done that, look at this:

http://www.medairwar.com/

By the way, the Plane Design Lancs and Just Flight Lancasters are a kick.

Te_Vigo
10-30-2006, 07:28 AM
(More on being on hash)
Did anyone notice...in the Quick Refrence Guide, in the section on joysticks that the MSFFB is refered to?

A stick that as we are all aware of, was taken off the production line some many years ago?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/onlinephoto/Screen_Shot_JPEG_flip.jpg

leitmotiv
10-30-2006, 08:14 AM
And, Microsoft employees are still dropping them on the market, brand new, on eBay. It's the Microsoft Mafia in action! That's how I was able to squirrel away a lifetime supply of Sidewinders!

Aaron_GT
10-30-2006, 12:29 PM
Exactly, Aaron_GT, that's why I went back to CFS3 last summer---the long Lanc missions.

Do you have the problem with things crashing when hitting ctrl-X to skip to the next action sequence when you can't be bothered to fly ALL the way to Germany?

I'm looking forward to when I am in my dotage and there is really immersive virtual reality so a group of us can get together and so some night missions as part of one crew. Or maybe something peaceful like a crew a virtual Empire flying boat in Flight Similator XXXX on a run down to the coast of Africa or something.

Aaron_GT
10-30-2006, 12:40 PM
Leitmotiv, do you find a problem with 'skip to next action sequence' causing crashes to desktop in CFS3? This is quite a downside (that and fighter bomber stuff is not as good as IL2 or WW2 Fighters, and air-to-air fighter intercepts not as good as EAW).

It would be nice if someone brought out a new stick comparable to the old MSFFB2. Surely there is a gap in the market. Then I might consider taking one apart and mounting it on a longer control column in some way.

Aaron_GT
10-30-2006, 12:45 PM
Is Aeroplane Heaven the group that released
the Spitfire prototype for free on the 70th
anniversary? If so I downloaded - very nice.

leitmotiv
10-30-2006, 05:17 PM
I am fortunate in that I have had no crashes when I get impatient and skip to the next action sequence. I have to admit to being entranced by the swarm of Lancasters climbing to altitude in the pitch-black night in CFS3, which, for me, forgives all! When I was living in London in the '90's I met a computer buff in his 20's (at the time I did not know one end of a computer from another) who told me about a Lancaster simulator he and others used which allowed them to fly seven hour missions with each position manned! I was stunned. Must have been some design put together by enthusiasts because I never found it when I got into these things ten years later. I thought the Just Flight Lancaster would be something close to that, but it wasn't. Still has beautiful models. Engines spew smoke when you firewall the engines, models are realistically weathered.

Yes, there is nothing comparable to the Sidewider 2---I didn't get one until this year, and it was a revelation.

I do believe Aeroplane Heaven did that free Spitfire prototype. It was part of their Spitfire set for Just Flight. They have a bunch of free models if you sign up as a member on their site. I am looking forward to that CFS3 Lancaster set---they did the Lancaster set for Just Flight.

Hope you get that glitch fixed on CFS3! By the way, how does one navigate to the target without compass bearings, map, etc? I have to skip to stay on course!

Low_Flyer_MkVb
10-30-2006, 06:28 PM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
Is Aeroplane Heaven the group that released
the Spitfire prototype for free on the 70th
anniversary? If so I downloaded - very nice.

Yep - check out their free Seafire, it's a beauty.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n47/LFMkVb/1822.jpg

wehyam
11-03-2006, 10:19 AM
I think I've had enough of this ..
I've reinstalled 2004, treated myself to an addon from Aerosoft, the Do-27 and I'm waiting for the Trackir fix before I play sfx again..

g'd bye and have a nice day

regards wehyam

moeity
11-04-2006, 02:53 PM
hahah, check this out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcW3hbnR2EI

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2006, 04:12 PM
We know already http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Its been posted 3000 times on this board to date.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f239/Skunk24/sig2.jpg
Escadron virtuel RCAF 438 (http://438cityofmontreal.googlepages.com)
<span class="ev_code_red"> Are you from Montreal? French is good? JOIN US! RCAF 438 "The City of Montreal"</span>

"You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life."

major_setback
11-04-2006, 04:41 PM
FSX on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szFZKuJe0J0&mode=related&search=

User made:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-xYZSGBWrc&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fk_eXhmLMk&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUsWWfO0WRU&mode=related&search=



A fun one from FS2004, I think. With add-ons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0wsn_9RJXY&mode=related&search=<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig07.jpg

major_setback
11-04-2006, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by wehyam:
I think I've had enough of this ..
I've reinstalled 2004, treated myself to an addon from Aerosoft, the Do-27 and I'm waiting for the Trackir fix before I play sfx again..

g'd bye and have a nice day

regards wehyam

The Dornier looks very, very nice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uYzAkR9G1k&mode=related&search=<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig11LowResPlane2.jpg (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Editthisnov06a003k1800xLaterimprove.jpg)

leitmotiv
11-06-2006, 02:39 PM
Here's a real man's Dornier:

http://www.alphasim3.com/store/product_info.php?currenc...h=27&products_id=181 (http://www.alphasim3.com/store/product_info.php?currency=GBP&cPath=27&products_id=181)

Here is the ultimate WWII multi-engine for FS9:

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/store/he219/

Te_Vigo
11-10-2006, 05:21 AM
Some things to try that seem to work for TIR in FSX........

*uninstall TIR, shutdown and unplug the unit

Defrag before installing *FSX... reboot, instal FSX, reboot then defrag again, reboot
Make sure you don't have a corrupt FSX install.
(perhaps check the NaturalPoint site)
Validate FSX
Connect to FSX Multiplayer
*Install TIR v 4...29 Beta3 software, shutdown, connect the unit. boot up and run with the New Hardware Found Wizard.
*run the TIR game update *(to get FSX files installed)
Open your firewall *(make sure it is) open to FSX and TIR to two way communication, all ports and to both TCP and UDP

McAfee users, check their website for the control panel shutdown using ms services.exe.
This brand is apparently having all sorts of hassles with AOL, FTP upload and other programs gaining access to the 'net.


*until the fix arrives, this has worked.

Treetop64
11-10-2006, 04:01 PM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Here is the ultimate WWII multi-engine for FS9:

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/store/he219/

That is, my friend, one of the dopest, if not THE dopest, multi-engined aircraft for FS9. Period. A permanent hard drive resident.

As far as FSX is concerned, well, all I can say is that I have a much higher appreciation for FS9 now. Of course, I've got more than 25 gigs worth of scenery and traffic added on, so there is virtually no similarity to the default FS9 - which is bunk, BTW.

I running at 3.8 GHz, 2 GB RAM, and an ATI X1900XTX machine and I can crank all of my sliders to the right for every single option avaiable in FS9. I then lock my frameretes to 30 FPS, (I can easily get 60+ FPS, but I wanted to free up CPU time to handle other things, like the gobs of traffic, scenery, and add-on aircraft.), and the FPS never goes below 30 (except for very high traffic density areas - Chicago O'Hare, for example - at which time the FPS drops down to the high teens to low 20s). The result is that I have a gorgeous experience with FS9 every time I use it. I absolutely love it.

However, with FSX installed on the same machine, most of the sliders are actually turned off (for example, all sea, air, and road traffic is at 0% - sea freight traffic is left on at 100%, though. Most scenery options are similarly adjusted) and I'll be lucky to get FPS in the mid teens. On top of that, the land textures look horrible! I never realized the region I live in was such an expasive desert! Especially the mountains. Apparently the texture designer at MS thinks that all mountains are sand dunes.

There doesn't appear to be any fundamental changes to FSX at all, just cosmetic. ATC is exactly the same as before. Traffic go-arounds are still there (there is a great utility for FS9 that virtually eliminates that annoyance. It is called AI Separation by Armando di Francesco. It is almost as cruicial to FS9 as FSUIPC.). Autogen actually looks worse IMO, and look nothing like the screenshots shown to us just months prior. However, the default planes look and sound much better than before. Also, there appears to be no limit on how high you can fly now. At one point I slewed up to more than 800,000 ft. You can see the sky get gradually darker the higher you fly, and you can even begin to see the curvature of the earth when you exceed 50,000 ft or more.

Yeah. I think it's fair to say that I'm a bit disappointed with FSX. But I'll hang onto it because the third party developers are the guys who really make MSFS worthwhile.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------
"It breaks my heart, but I am almost certain that raaaid will get the Nobel Prize in physics before we get the Avenger in PF."
-- Zeus-cat
------------------------------

leitmotiv
11-10-2006, 07:59 PM
I just installed FSX on my year old Predator Raptor game computer and it works fine---with everything maxed out, all sliders to the right. I was so concerned about everything I was reading here I emailed the builder about an upgrade before FSX arrived. My only concern is that, so far, I can't get TR4 Pro to work with it.

Funny that anyone, absolutely anyone, would have anything bad to say about the Shockwave 219. In fact, I have never seen a posting by anybody who actually bought it which was unfavorable. Perhaps a bit of experience would be wise before making illiterate, puerile judgments about excellent products.

Treetop64
11-10-2006, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
I just installed FSX on my year old Predator Raptor game computer and it works fine---with everything maxed out, all sliders to the right. I was so concerned about everything I was reading here I emailed the builder about an upgrade before FSX arrived. My only concern is that, so far, I can't get TR4 Pro to work with it.

Funny that anyone, absolutely anyone, would have anything bad to say about the Shockwave 219. In fact, I have never seen a posting by anybody who actually bought it which was unfavorable. Perhaps a bit of experience would be wise before making illiterate, puerile judgments about excellent products.

Sorry, Bro. By "Dope", I meant "Excellent, Superb, Outstanding" and any other similar adjective one can think of. "Dope" is street slang for something of high quality. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

As for your positive experience with FSX with good settings, well I may have to re-evaluate my installation. In it's current state it brings my rig to it's knees...

...Odd.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------
"It breaks my heart, but I am almost certain that raaaid will get the Nobel Prize in physics before we get the Avenger in PF."
-- Zeus-cat
------------------------------

leitmotiv
11-10-2006, 11:14 PM
AGGGHHHHHHHHHH SORRY---FORGOT THE EXPRESSION. REGRETS REGERTS REGRETS. I am so used to things getting summarily trashed on Ubi forums I jumped the gun! So happens the 219 is one of my favorite rides and I bristled. I was wondering what the heck was better!!!! Eternal regrets, Pie In Face

Treetop64
11-10-2006, 11:34 PM
Lol! No worries, Bro.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------
"It breaks my heart, but I am almost certain that raaaid will get the Nobel Prize in physics before we get the Avenger in PF."
-- Zeus-cat
------------------------------

Te_Vigo
11-11-2006, 12:16 AM
My Bad... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

*previous post has been modified to make more sense and clarify things a bit*

look for the gap between the flight panel and the engine cowling, when you "peek" over the top of the panel.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/onlinephoto/Screen_Shot_JPEG_flip.jpg

leitmotiv
11-11-2006, 12:21 AM
Many thanks, Te_Vigo. I wont't be able to completely enjoy FSX until my TR4 is working with it!

leitmotiv
11-11-2006, 03:59 AM
I screwed up. I thought I had put all the modeling sliders to the right, but I hadn't. Now all are definitely to the right, and, while the detail is just absolutely incredible, my frame rate is reduced by at least a third, maybe more. Looks like the update is going to have to be done after all.

Beirut
11-11-2006, 04:11 AM
I'm going to be taking a look at that Shockwave 219 this weekend. Tasty. Not crazy about paying $32.99 in US bucks, but life ain't free I guess.

Now that FSX is out, I was looking forward to price drops for FS9 add-ons but they are fairly few. Most are just "10% off this month!" deals. If the companies lowered their prices from premium to medium (50% off lets say) I'd be buying lots of stuff.

As it is now, since we're all waiting for the magic FSX tweak/tip/add-on, I'm inclined to be very, very stingy with my FS9 add-on purchases.

By the by, does the 219 work in FSX? I just copied my Shockwave P-51 folder into FSX and it works fine.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"Official Lancaster whiner"

leitmotiv
11-11-2006, 03:10 PM
I'm just getting FSX up to speed---the only add-on I've put into it is the AlphaSim Do 217, which was designed for both FS9 and X, and it looks really great on X. AlphaSim is going to make patches to upgrade their stuff for FSX---I don't know if Shockwave is going to do the same. Despite difficulties at max detail, FSX sure looks wonderful! Glad I took the leap and bought it! The Shockwave WWII FIGHTERS set was designed specifically for FSX (but can also be used on FS9). I'm loading it onto FSX next.

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/store/wwiifighters/

One thing I love about that 219 is that you can't use either the forward guns reflector sight or the Schrage Musik reflector sight on the canopy roof unless you have your head in the right positions! This combined with 6 DOF and the TrackIR is about as real as it gets!

Chivas
11-11-2006, 04:43 PM
FSX has alot of potential, but I still hate the ground textures and floating buildings. I have all the sliders at high and set the frame rate at 34.

My MSFF joystick stops working after a half hour. The incockpit yoke responds to my MSFF joystick input but the ailerons and elevators don't. The rudder still responds to my Saitek pedals, and the trim assigned to my cougar throttle still works.

About the time my MSFF joystick stops working Track IR sometimes slows to a crawl.

Like I said this flight has alot going for it on many levels, and maybe when Vista comes out and they patch it to DX10, along with any bugs, it will be a classic.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

major_setback
11-11-2006, 07:17 PM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
I'm just getting FSX up to speed---the only add-on I've put into it is the AlphaSim Do 217, which was designed for both FS9 and X, and it looks really great on X. AlphaSim is going to make patches to upgrade their stuff for FSX---I don't know if Shockwave is going to do the same. Despite difficulties at max detail, FSX sure looks wonderful! Glad I took the leap and bought it! The Shockwave WWII FIGHTERS set was designed specifically for FSX (but can also be used on FS9). I'm loading it onto FSX next.

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/store/wwiifighters/

One thing I love about that 219 is that you can't use either the forward guns reflector sight or the Schrage Musik reflector sight on the canopy roof unless you have your head in the right positions! This combined with 6 DOF and the TrackIR is about as real as it gets!


Thanks for the tip, I didn't know that. I'll have to get WWII fighters now. I suppose you saw that there was a patch, and patch update:
http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6280<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/B17sig11LowResPlane2.jpg (http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Editthisnov06a003k1800xLaterimprove.jpg)

leitmotiv
11-11-2006, 07:34 PM
I'm not sure I have patched it yet---thanks for the heads up.

I had some time to fiddle with FSX today. Much to adjust. Still can't get TR4 to kick in.

Been flying that AlphaSim 217 quite a bit. It's quite a kick in either 9 or X. A little pit bull of an airplane. Absolutely vicious torque even with 1 1/2 tons of bombs. Great cockpit. I'm a complete sucker for WWII bombers!

Treetop64
11-11-2006, 09:50 PM
Okay, now...

Sumpin' aint right. My rig should be able to run FSX reasonbly well (All fo my other games are smokin') but it goes crippled whenever I try to run it.

I'm definitely reinstalling FSX. I've had nothing but problems with it since installed, and now I got a new one: The screen literally "greys out" a few seconds after loading a flight.

Sheesh... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------
"It breaks my heart, but I am almost certain that raaaid will get the Nobel Prize in physics before we get the Avenger in PF."
-- Zeus-cat
------------------------------

leitmotiv
11-11-2006, 10:12 PM
Ditto. I forgot to install the brand new Direct X---wonder if that is the problem? I've done all the usual stuff like defrag, and my computer was hot til FSX! Even so, the graphics are great. Let's all keep this FSX cripples thread going!

Chivas
11-12-2006, 12:22 AM
Do you have the alpha3 trackIR drivers installed leitmotiv. They do work but they seem to have a memory leak that I believe the Natural point team is looking into.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

leitmotiv
11-12-2006, 02:16 AM
I'll have to look into that, Chivas. I have been using the TR4 Pro since last winter with no trouble with any other flight sim.

Here is something from page 9 of the FSX OFFICIAL GUIDE I bought:

"...if you need to get a higher frame rate, you must decrease the scenery detail and possibly even the amount of AI used.... Contrary to what you might think, this is true no matter how powerful your computer is. Flight Simulator X is designed to perform on high-powered hardware that is not yet available to the general public, so even three or four years down the road, Flight Simulator X can still challenge the most robust hardware while providing a stunning simulation. So if you have a fast PC, don't fall into the trap of maxing out all the sliders immediately, because you are no doubt going to bring your machine to its knees."

"...lock the frame rate at 30 frames per second, which is generally accepted to be the optional frame rate for the human eye."

Gee, I did everything they advised not to do!!!! I thought my beast which has eaten everything up until FSX would handle it!!!!

Chivas
11-12-2006, 02:45 AM
Track IR only works with FSX with the latest alpha drivers.

My frame rates are good but there seems to be some sort of memory leak as my troubles happen even over spare high frame rate areas.

Conroe6400@ 2.7
2g Corsair twin DDR2 1066 PC8500
7900GTX<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

leitmotiv
11-12-2006, 04:40 AM
Installing those drivers, Chivas. I knocked frame rates to 30 and chucked most ground detail (I fly at night and high---bomber boy), and now FSX is cooking. Absolutely beautiful. Aircraft look fabulous. The moon is so real looking I was stunned. Installed Shockwave's WWII FIGHTERS set into FSX and they look beautiful like the AlphaSim Dornier---much better than they look in FS9 (all are FS9/FSX capable). I use a Microsoft Sidewinder 2 FF and have had no trouble---yet. I have had trouble with control settings refusing to stick. Keep having to reset them. Used my stick slider for mixture in FS9---can't do this in FSX. Force feedback seems to have more kick in X and seems possible to set stick to get near-equivalent "Capt Brown" levels of resistance for the older aircraft without boosted controls or fly-by-wire. Overall, I'm a happy camper now.

leitmotiv
11-12-2006, 07:11 AM
Saved my bacon, Chivas. New drivers have TR4 working with FSX. Patched Shockwave's WORLD WAR II FIGHTERS---now they have a round hood 109E-3 and a 109E Trop. Spit just perfect now. All great in both FS9 and X.

Chivas
11-12-2006, 12:47 PM
Now that you have TrackIR working, I'll be interested to see if you have any TrackIR slow downs or joystick problems after flying awhile. I'm thinking the alpha TrackIR drivers have a memory leak similiar to what we had with IL-2 at one time.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

leitmotiv
11-12-2006, 03:54 PM
One thing I noticed right away is that you can't use the eyepoint in/out feature with TR4 in FSX like you can in FS9. I have noticed some extreme pixilating with the TR4 in FSX.

Chivas
11-12-2006, 04:46 PM
I just flew thru the Canadian Rockies for a couple of hours with TrackIR turned off with no slow downs or MSFF2 joystick failures. This implies that there is a problem with the TrackIR drivers. They are alpha drivers so any problems will probably be fixed by Natural point with the driver completion.

The flight thru the Rockies was beautifull. Microsoft has built a great template for other graphic artist to complete the finer details.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

leitmotiv
11-12-2006, 05:29 PM
I agree. FSX is absolutely magnificent, a real achievement, and gratuitous Microsoft sim bashing is out of court in this case. If players want the delights promised by Oleg months, maybe years, in the future, they can have them now with FSX. OK, you can't blow everything up---yet. If you really enjoy airplanes, you have to get it. I get the impression the people who would be just as happy playing a space shooter as IL-2 are the people who hate the FS series, and those who delight in flight and airplanes enjoy just about any excellent simulator whether you can smash or not. Barry Goldwater loved airplanes and couldn't keep his hands off whatever the Air Force made as long as he was able to get the access. I know the feeling.

leitmotiv
11-12-2006, 07:16 PM
P.S.

Shockwave's new patch for WWII FIGHTERS now has the completely realistic reflector sight image on the windscreen they tested on the He 219. So now you have to use 6 DOF to put your head exactly in the right position to see the ring---total immersion. Would love to try it out on an FSX online dogfight between the 109E and the Spit I. This is the goods!

leitmotiv
11-13-2006, 12:29 AM
Trying to find the best balance between clarity in the scenery and a brisk frame rate. Beginning to see you can have quite a bit even with the sliders at 50% or less. My game beast has been humbled, that's for sure.

VVS-Manuc
11-13-2006, 04:43 AM
I very disappointed with FSX. It is rushed out with faults and bugs. Adding just a lot of eye candy doesn't make a flight sim
Back to FS 9 again<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------------------------------------
Der tut nix! Der will nur spielen!

Dexmeister
11-13-2006, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by VVS-Manuc:
I very disappointed with FSX. It is rushed out with faults and bugs. Adding just a lot of eye candy doesn't make a flight sim
Back to FS 9 again

How is IL2 in your books? Just wondering because Oleg's crew relies on unpteen patches to get things right whereas MS may patch it once, the rest the community sorts out themselves...

I don't find FSX full of faults or bugs at all. In fact I think on a % basis of features vs. bugs, it's pretty good...

Chivas
11-13-2006, 11:41 AM
How is IL2 in your books? Just wondering because Oleg's crew relies on unpteen patches to get things right whereas MS may patch it once, the rest the community sorts out themselves...


That is the biggest bunch of hog wash that MS fanboys like to spread. 99% of the patch/add-ons were new maps and aircraft with some tweaks to the FM etc. Just because MS never fixes or adds anything, doesn't mean its perfect. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

Chivas
11-13-2006, 12:58 PM
Natural point is working on the lag issues.

"We are currently working on the issue, among several others, and hope to have more information posted soon."

--------------------
NaturalPoint Technical Support
Support@NaturalPoint.com
http://www.naturalpoint.com/

leitmotiv...have you notice any problems on your system when flying with TrackIR enabled

~Salute~
Chivas<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

codeseven7
11-13-2006, 01:05 PM
I dont have FSX and I dont think I'm going to get it, not until I see a difference in scenery with Vista/DX10 and the new DX10 cards. The water in FSX, which is in alot of scenery commonly flow in, looks terrible, certainly not much btter than any 3rd party CSF2 water. Games like PF and SH3 have totally spoiled me when it comes to how water is rendered. I read this review on HardOcp the other day and was not impressed...

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTIxOCwxMywsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=

FSX uses the old Shader Model 2.0 technology? You've got to be kidding me! How long have we been using Shader Model 3.0 in games such as PF?, years? Now DX10 will offer Shader Model 4.0 technology!. Can the 'Update' to FSX that will allow it to utilize DX10 also allow it to utilize Shader Model 4.0? Geez I hope so.

Chivas
11-13-2006, 01:18 PM
I agree the water is not up IL-2 standards now, but could change with the Vista version. Right now the shore line is very poorly done, but I haven't tried the ultra high setting. I guess they had to make some compromises to make the sim playable on as many computers as possible, but the option should be there if you have the system to run it. I don't know if its a case where the code needs to be optimized or that its a function of having to do one map incompassing the whole world.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

Chivas
11-13-2006, 01:42 PM
I just did a test with all sliders maxed out and shoreline is poorly depicted with straight edges and sharp corners with waves that go up into the trees. Although the ocean is ok and will be most likely improved with Vista and DX10.

There are alot of things I don't like about FSX but they are overshadowed by the all the good things it offers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

WTE_Galway
11-13-2006, 03:49 PM
FSX was kinda deja vu

After initially being underwhelmed I rememeber all my previous experiences with the product and realised "oh **** here we go again" I am quite sure after a month or two of addon downloads tweaks and fiddling it will work fine

one thing that is disconcerting is the trackir 6df acceleration .. a slight movement sideways sees you poking your head out the cockpit window and sitting up straighter in your seat has you peering down over the prop from the roof of the cabin http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif no more fw190 view whiners with that option http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

leitmotiv
11-13-2006, 06:12 PM
You ain't kiddin', Galway. The Shockwave Spit I's snout sticks out in your purview, as it should, and you can look down the side of your cowling, or around your armor, and you have to place your head just right to see your illuminated ring. This is the future of combat flight sims, and it's too bad we have to wait a year or more for the Maddox assay. If FSX can accept boom, they'll have the jump.

blackTIE
11-16-2006, 02:54 AM
High up the water looks very good indeed. But the immersion breaks when you fly low. Especially the reflection of the plane in the water is not very good.

But Shader Model 3 doesn't mean nicer pictures than Shader Model 2. Number 3 makes it more efficient to produce the same result (higher framerates).

I only hope ACES didn't optimize FSX further for DirectX 9 to make the DirectX 10 version/update stand out. So people would buy Windows Vista. But I don't think that is the case. I think it's the backwards compatibility that's holding them back. They can't design a totally new engine without braking support for expensive addons.


Originally posted by codeseven7:
I dont have FSX and I dont think I'm going to get it, not until I see a difference in scenery with Vista/DX10 and the new DX10 cards. The water in FSX, which is in alot of scenery commonly flow in, looks terrible, certainly not much btter than any 3rd party CSF2 water. Games like PF and SH3 have totally spoiled me when it comes to how water is rendered. I read this review on HardOcp the other day and was not impressed...

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTIxOCwxMywsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=

FSX uses the old Shader Model 2.0 technology? You've got to be kidding me! How long have we been using Shader Model 3.0 in games such as PF?, years? Now DX10 will offer Shader Model 4.0 technology!. Can the 'Update' to FSX that will allow it to utilize DX10 also allow it to utilize Shader Model 4.0? Geez I hope so.

Te_Vigo
11-23-2006, 05:11 AM
Well that didn't take long...

Aerosoft has a release covering Lukla Airport all the way up to Sagamatha (Everest) and not a road in site.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

They got it rather spot on as well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Now to get them to release it on disc and have a local retail outlet in Aust. to pick it up and..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/onlinephoto/Screen_Shot_JPEG_flip.jpg

Grue_
11-23-2006, 09:53 AM
That Do-27 is on my shopping list but I think I'll wait until the FSX version is ready. That video was FS9 btw.

Active Sky have bought out a free update v6.5 which is FSX compatible and through FSUIPC v4.02 provides much better/more accurate weather than the built in MS/Jepperson system. You no longer need the AS Graphics component because the FSX sky/clouds are superior imo.

FSX seems to run well on my AMD XP 3200+/ATi 850XT PE (about 25fps) but I have to have the AI and autogen turned down to get a fluid sim.

Most of the add-ons I have in FS9 are promising free updates for FSX compatibility and the community is starting to get to grips with the new beast.

My biggest disappointment is the scenery in FSX compared to GE PRO II I have for FS9. There also seem to be lots of scenery bugs that indicate a rushed release.

I'm hoping GE PRO II will bring out an FSX version soon and that the ACES team will bring out a patch to fix the scenery issues. They seem to be talking to the community and have already released a scenery fix for photo scenery so fingers crossed.

Although I'm not ready to remove FS9 I'm confident my money hasn't been wasted on FSX. The real benefits of FSX won't be apparent unity the new add ons like the 1m resolution with 5m terrain mesh photo scenery is released.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/flyingscampi/spitpass.jpg

Chivas
11-23-2006, 02:20 PM
Just flew with the new version 29 beta4 Track IR drivers. Worked great, no slow downs, or joystick failures. Good job Natural point.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

Te_Vigo
11-24-2006, 05:56 AM
I have to agree with you there Chivas.....works like a dream. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Though I did have a bit of grief when I first run the install.
It was on a clean instal of XP...the TIR wouldn't shutdown and the red leds stayed on all the time. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif CTRL ALT DEL was the only way to shut it down and that took quite a while. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif
Uninstalled BETA4 and reinstalled 4.29Alpha3...ran it for while, then uninstalled that and put in the BETA4 again....now all is fine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/onlinephoto/Screen_Shot_JPEG_flip.jpg

major_setback
11-26-2006, 09:24 AM
Patch released to resolve high altitude texture rendering problems:

http://www.fsinsider.com/Downloads<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

Padser
11-26-2006, 12:03 PM
~S~

Using Horizon Simulations new photoreal scenery for the UK, I'm able to fly circuits at my local airport using the same visual reference points I do in real life.

I think this an impressive program indeed - certainly real enough for me (I don't get to fly with a cigar smoking in the ashtray and a good scotch at my elbow in my microlight... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)

TTFN

Pads

major_setback
11-26-2006, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by Padser:
~S~

Using Horizon Simulations new photoreal scenery for the UK, I'm able to fly circuits at my local airport using the same visual reference points I do in real life.

I think this an impressive program indeed - certainly real enough for me (I don't get to fly with a cigar smoking in the ashtray and a good scotch at my elbow in my microlight... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)

TTFN

Pads

How does the flight model compare to your real life experience with a microlight?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

major_setback
12-18-2006, 07:18 AM
Tip: I picked up Wings of Power WWII Fighters for 199 kr at Eb Games in Sweden today! (about 15 UK pounds).

...and heres the link for the patches for it.

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6280


According to leitmotiv it was designed to work with FSX:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/158...571090305#8571090305 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/1581080294?r=8571090305#8571090305)<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

major_setback
01-26-2007, 04:17 AM
Back on top. Who would have guessed?

major_setback
02-05-2007, 04:04 AM
My favorite in FSX is the Grumman Goose. For the Goose fans:
http://www.catalinagoose.homestead.com/

http://www.catalinagoose.homestead.com/tp.gif
http://www.catalinagoose.homestead.com/tp.gif


Some nice big old pictures here:
http://fire.fws.gov/aviation/FWS%20Aviation%20Roots.htm

http://dls.fws.gov/DATA/files/B6C8CFA2-8915-4E3E-BC2E0257ACCA0558.jpg

I found these images by google:

http://www.goodshiptabasco.com/images/fuaz2.jpg

http://www.nasjax.navy.mil/command_information/aircraft_photos/1950s/low-resolution/jrf-5_goose_1952_72dpi.jpg

http://www.ww2incolor.com/gallery/albums/us_navy/GRUMMAN_GOOSE.jpg

Si_Mall
02-05-2007, 05:30 AM
http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4628156


Simon

major_setback
02-05-2007, 07:36 AM
Originally posted by Si_Mall:
http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4628156


Simon

I assume the picure is from FSX. What add-on scenery is that? Is it the Horizon scenery?

I am waiting for the VFR Real Scenery to come out for Wales/SW England http://www.justflight.com/product.asp?pid=204
I don't think it's out yet, if anyone knows different please let me know.

I want to tkae a flight over these cliffs:

http://www.justflight.com/img/screenshots/2006101816282888K02-L.jpg

Chivas
02-05-2007, 11:40 AM
I'm waiting for the Vista version to be released. Hopefully the ground terrain textures will be improved for low level flights.

Any news on the vista update for FSX?

~Salute~
Chivas

Beirut
02-06-2007, 07:36 AM
I ended up uninstalling FSX, though I'll probably load it back in today. I bought the Shockwave Spitfire and it's a beauty, want to try it in FSX. It's got a fantastic VC and a good Merlin sound. All in all a great plane.

I uninstalled FSX because I got tired of fighting with it and because I got a whack of upgrades for FS9; new terrain textures, elevation mesh, new clouds, all kinds of things. Now FS9 looks stunning and I get good FPS everywhere.

A few upgrade FS9 shots.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/horsesass/ldf4.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/horsesass/awacsP-51.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/horsesass/best3.jpg

Spitfire VC. Fully interactive. Sorry, dark pic.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/horsesass/spit3.jpg

leitmotiv
02-08-2007, 04:07 PM
Load up this baby for FSX---an absolute gem---and free. A real, live Bristol Fighter (download all four parts on this page):

http://library.avsim.net/search.php?SearchTerm=BRISTOL+...&CatID=fsx&Go=Search (http://library.avsim.net/search.php?SearchTerm=BRISTOL+FIGHTER&CatID=fsx&Go=Search)

http://library.avsim.net/sendfile.php?Location=AVSIM&Proto=file&ImageID=151867

major_setback
02-09-2007, 11:58 AM
Amazing?

http://www.simhq.com/_air7/air_246b.html

PHOTO_____________________________________________ ____________________________________________FSX___ __________________________________________________ _______________________________________
http://www.simhq.com/_air7/images/air_246a_008.jpg

http://www.simhq.com/_air7/images/air_246a_007.jpg

major_setback
02-09-2007, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Load up this baby for FSX---an absolute gem---and free. A real, live Bristol Fighter (download all four parts on this page):

http://library.avsim.net/search.php?SearchTerm=BRISTOL+...&CatID=fsx&Go=Search (http://library.avsim.net/search.php?SearchTerm=BRISTOL+FIGHTER&CatID=fsx&Go=Search)

http://library.avsim.net/sendfile.php?Location=AVSIM&Proto=file&ImageID=151867

Screenshot? I have to register there to see it.

Doug97
02-09-2007, 05:21 PM
I'll buy this the microsecond Visual Flight releases photo textures and VFR terrain for Scotland. I've been waiting for what feels like ages.

http://www.visualflight.co.uk/forums/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=35

http://www.visualflight.co.uk/forums/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=6

leitmotiv
02-09-2007, 06:49 PM
Unfortunately, I am not set up to post screenshots, sorry. It is absolutely beautiful. Gives you an idea what we'll have with KNIGHTS OF THE SKIES. OVER FLANDERS FIELDS and FIRST EAGLES are Dark Ages compared to it.

-HH-Quazi
02-09-2007, 07:07 PM
My son offered to buy FSX for me a couple weeks ago. I told him I would be better served with a decent headset. Those $20 Wal-Mart specials last about a year and was held together by a little duc tape. So he spent the same amount of $$$ on a set of Sennheiser PC-160's for me. Oh what a difference! Never knew, for all these years, what the game engine truly sounded like.

Now if FSX had WWII content without having to purchase planes on top of the game and separately, I may have considered. But given the difference in the sound I am hearing, I am very happy to have gotten the new headset instead of FSX.

major_setback
02-21-2007, 05:47 AM
Here's a video comparing FSX to real life footage (I posted some screenshots of this earlier, now the video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=it8nzI0dAGE&mode=related&search=

major_setback
02-21-2007, 07:00 AM
More videos

Engine Fire in a prop plane. FSX over Seattle:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rT1s4eR5L74&mode=related&search=


Cliffs of Dover in FSX? I don't think these are the cliffs at Dover, but I hope we get something like this in BOB.
VFR Real Scenery - Cliffs (I don't think all areas of scenery have been released yet except for the London scenery, and the Scenery for SE England. If someone knows otherwise please let me know):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk9ofXHlq7U&mode=related&search=

Nice introduction to FSX - speeded up flight video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvkOBJ_9ArI&mode=related&search=


FSX flight in the mountains (New Zealand?):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg2s5pO4IF4&mode=related&search=

Mountain airstrip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88VHaseCGc0&mode=related&search=

FSX realistic engine sound (what do you think?):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njz1EW58bMI&mode=related&search=


<span class="ev_code_GREY">´</span>

major_setback
05-16-2007, 04:08 AM
Thanks to Heywoood for pointing out that the patch for FSX (SP1) is now out. It should improve frame-rates:

http://www.fsinsider.com/downloads/Pages/FlightSimulatorXServicePack1.aspx

http://www.fsinsider.com/downloads/Pages/FlightSimulatorXServicePack1.aspx

http://www.fsinsider.com/

buzzsaw1939
05-16-2007, 09:18 AM
HHMMMMMMMMMM!!... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif I just gotta jump in here! I just spent a lot of money (to me!) to upgrade to the equivalent of what Roybaty has, so that I could fly these sims, since MS didn't bother to make it clear that there was going to be 2 defferent versions of X! guess witch one I got! for 50 bucks! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif and that your going to need a super computer to run it, I went right for the plane I have the most time in, beaver on floats, http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif water rudders don't come down, and they still haven't modeled water opps, (It's worthless) for all the time and trouble and money, I've been through, I wont run anything I have to run sliders half way, my advice to any body that wants to learn basic flying, 2004 is ok! X is on the shelf!!

msalama
05-16-2007, 04:34 PM
Hmmm... from what I've gathered so far the sales of FSX have been pretty sluggish because folks just can't see any benefits in first paying (relatively speaking) big bucks for the bugger and then starting all over again w/ the addons, tuneups and whatnot... and who can blame them, because FS2004 pimped up looks almost as good as FSX anyway!

Or so they say at any rate. But be that as it may I'm definitely no witness to it myself, because my FS2004 will always look like s**te w/ this POS "computer" of mine anyway http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif

Decided not to purchase the bugger myself though, or not before I upgrade this here ancient computator at any rate. YMMV http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

major_setback
05-17-2007, 03:32 AM
If you turn the autogen off you still get a sim with a good selection of detailed planes! Look at the Goose, it's worth half of the cost of the sim on it's own! Even toned down the scenery is workable (with a decent computer anyway! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif). You still have most airports in the world modeled, and even the smaller ones feature.

I want to be able to use the new VFR scenery (when it all comes out) to full effect. FSX Allows for much tighter terrain mesh and tile resolution that FS2004.

DmdSeeker
05-17-2007, 06:54 AM
Does any one have any simple tricks to get FSX working with track IR and an X52?

AFJ_rsm
05-17-2007, 09:15 AM
To get it working with TrackIR (im using TIR 4):

1. Plugin the TrackIR to your PC
2. Download and install the TrackIR software.
3. Run the TrackIR software.
4. Run FSX.

Voila. (you get 6DOF and all that good stuff right out of the box. Im even using the default profiles and they suit me perfectly)


I don't have an X52, but I suppose if you follow those same guidelines (except replace "TrackIR" for "X52") it should work OK.

Bearcat99
05-17-2007, 09:23 AM
So are you guys saying that the stock FSX has most of the major U.S. airports? What is the differenc between the Deluxe and the standard.. other than $20?

AFJ_rsm
05-17-2007, 10:58 AM
(as far as I can remember):

Deluxe has the garmin glass cockpit, a bunch of extra missions, and a couple of extra planes (or just one i honestly cant remember). Plus the SDK i believe. And the ability to play as the control tower in multiplayer, share seating on a plane, and other options.


In terms of scenery, they both bring the same.


Please someone correct me or fill in the details im sure i forgot.

buzzsaw1939
05-17-2007, 11:17 AM
Bearcat... Other than I have to run sliders left, with 3 gig cpu, 1 gig ram, ati 9550 card, the standard seems to have only 2 of the new aircraft, a trike and the beaver,(which dosen't work), also, it takes about 20 min to load up the game every time I went into it, then it would go cycedelic on me for a few minutes, http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Chivas
05-17-2007, 12:06 PM
I downloaded the patch, removed FSX and reinstalled. It seems smoother and loads quicker. The frame rates are more solid over the city of Vancouver. I took a flight over Comox and the scenery was quite nice even down low in some places.

If Vista improves the transition from land to sea and they can atleast have the quality of IL-2's water 3 or 4 then FSX would be a real pleasure to fly. I took a flight over Dover and it wouldn't take much to paint the cliffs different shades of chalk to make them look more believable.

The SOW team will have no problem making scenery of England better than what I see in FSX. This is not a diss at FSX it does what its designed to do very well, and I'm sure there are or will be scenery addons to fix the generic scenery of the local areas.

major_setback
05-17-2007, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
So are you guys saying that the stock FSX has most of the major U.S. airports? What is the differenc between the Deluxe and the standard.. other than $20?

I'm not sure exactly how many are modelled,, or to what degree of detail. But I think youll find quite detailed versions of most US airports:

List of improved airports in the Deluxe version (http://flyawaysimulation.com/postt22249.html)

Better list (edit)

http://www.simtours.net/highdetailairports.php

Places of interes to visit in FSX (click on the blue text for pictures)

http://www.simtours.net/tours.php

http://www.simtours.net/image/ksc.jpg
Niagara falls
http://www.simtours.net/image/niagarafalls.jpg

http://www.simtours.net/image/egyptianpyramids.jpg

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">"With more than 24,000 airports located on every continent, you can vist your home town or explore a city on the other side of the world"

"The Standard version includes 17 aircraft and the Deluxe has 22
The Standard version includes 16 detailed airports and the Deluxe has 21
The Standard version includes 28 detailed cities and the Deluxe has 38
The Standard version includes 40 (highly) detailed airports and the Deluxe has 55
The Deluxe version ONLY includes a glass panel (G1000 cockpit) and Tower Controller"

"The airport database has also been upgraded and improved. FSX will contain 24,000 airports internationally with 1200 being highly detailed due to popularity. Each airport features artificial intelligence-controlled jetways, fuel trucks and moving baggage carts, allowing players to explore their hometown or venture to a favorite far-off city. The FSX design team emphasized their goal of expanding the realism seen in many of the stock North American airports to other parts of the world.

24 million roads have been accurately modeled in to the FSX scenery database. Much of the ground elevations, roads and textures have been pulled from imaging collected from the space shuttle itself! On these roads, users will notice traffic for the first time. The effect is brilliant. Not only will the vehicles move down the road, they will also change lanes and use signal indicators"

"The FSX team has accurately placed over 10,000 stars in their correct locations."</span>
From:
http://www.astrasim.com/index.asp?function=DISPLAYPRODUCT&productid=32



Compare FS2004 with FSX screenshots here. Go to the Dynamic Living World section (move your cursor over the left hand picture to cange it)
http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulatorx/flash/default_sharedSkies.htm

major_setback
05-17-2007, 04:49 PM
Anyone else having difficulty with Shockwaves WWII Fighters?

I wanted a clean install.
I uninstalled WWII Fighters.
I uninstalled FSX and removed the FSX folder that was still left in my programs list.
I reinstalled FSX, and added SP1.
I installed WWII Fighers.
I installed the WWII Fighters patch 1.2.

I get an error message after everytime I'e flown a WWI Fighters aircraft. I'm ok flying it, but if I crash it or stop the flight I get an error message. The game halts and I have to send an error report.

I've uninstalled and reinstalled all day until I'm sick and tired of it and it won't work.

Any help?

PS. I installed the Direct X9 April update a few days ago ( for the WoV patch).

major_setback
05-17-2007, 05:23 PM
Hawaii:

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulatorx/flash/assets/dlw/hawaii10_hires.jpg

Japan:
http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulatorx/flash/assets/dlw/japan08_hires.jpg

TheGozr
05-17-2007, 07:12 PM
yes take your time to install all.

Bearcat99
05-18-2007, 07:58 AM
http://content.vcommerce.com/products/fullsize/929/6455929.jpg FSX Deluxe for $39 (http://www.gogamer.com/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-X-Deluxe-Edition-DVD--I--PC-Simulations_stcVVproductId6455929VVcatId444808VVvi ewprod.htm)

I bit the bullet... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

RAF_OldBuzzard
05-18-2007, 10:36 AM
Buzzsaw...if the 'ATI 9550' part of your specs is correct and not a typo, then it won't matter how fast your CPU is or how much RAM you have. FSX will run like **** on your system. In fact, I doubt that it would run FS9 with all settings maxed at very high FPS. To see anything 1/2 way decent in FSX you will need the equivilent of an X850 or better. For the upcoming DX10 'goodies' you will need an nvidia 8800 or ATI HD2900, and neither of those are going to run FSX at max settings.

MS has never made a secret of the fact that FSX was designed for systems in the future, and that even the fastest of todays systems can be brought to their knees if you try to max out all settings in FSX.

I see a lot of people complaining that they can't run FSX with settings as high as they can FS9, but I'll bet that the very same people couldn't run FS9 at decent settings with the systems that they had when IT was released either.

I'm running an Athlon X2 4800+, with 2 gig RAM, and a X1950GT and can't run at real high settings. I built this system with FSX in mind, but went with the lower end 1950GT, because I was waiting for the ATI 2900's to be released. I'll upgrade to that soon, and I'm still not holding my breath in anticipation that I'll be able to run with max settings across the board.

msalama
05-18-2007, 11:00 AM
I bit the bullet... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Hey man, share your opinions, OK? Flown FS2004 for years but still on the fence w/ this one so would like to hear some references...

Chivas
05-18-2007, 11:49 AM
Well SP1 was an improvement but I'll put FSX away until the Vista DX10 update, or I feel like learning the finer points cross country aircraft management.

My system runs FSX ok (Conroe @2.8...2gigs of DDR2-1066...7900GTX OC...at decent settings and will even run it maxed out just to look at the best graphics FSX can supply. I'll start FSX again when I get a new computer for SOW BOB, and the vista update is released. Maybe then even down low it will be a real sightseeing trip.

Bearcat99
05-18-2007, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by msalama:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I bit the bullet... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Hey man, share your opinions, OK? Flown FS2004 for years but still on the fence w/ this one so would like to hear some references... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rgr... should have it in a few days.

buzzsaw1939
05-18-2007, 01:02 PM
Oldbuzzurd...Thanks for your input, that clears up a few things that I didn't know, like a lot of people, I tried to build and learn on a limited budget, I was reading up on X for about a month before it came out, even being not that happy with lack of realism in 2004, I wanted the new planes in X, as I have time in a lot of them, I don't know how I missed it, but the first I ever heard of needing a high end system, was in a review some where. my 9550 has been a trouble free card for years, so I put it in my wifes system when I built hers and tried to find something bigger to make sure I was covered, not being a tech, I was confused at all the pros and cons, so I went with another 9550, again, thanks for your input. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Yellow_Sub
05-18-2007, 01:15 PM
Just got myself FS2004 since my machine couldn't handle FS X anyway and I am not sure if I can fight the boredom of non combat flight sims. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Does anyone have a nice profile for the X-52? I already have the saitek one. Can I make use of the rotaries for rudder and elevator trims? Doesn't seems so...

Is there any free content for this sim or just paid addons?

Also I noticed the planes don't seems to shake/vibrate (as in IL2) if they are flown close to a stall/limit, nor special sound either, just the sound of the stall warning. Is this improved in FS X?

msalama
05-18-2007, 05:15 PM
Is there any free content for this sim or just paid addons?

Loads. Most c**p, some great. Just some, though, mind you.

Get Robert Sanderson's Hurri IID & Stearman for starters. They're pretty much as good as it gets AFAIK.


Is this improved in FS X?

Would like to know as well, because the M$ slogan of "as real as it gets" kind of doesn't live up to its tone IMHO http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

msalama
05-18-2007, 05:15 PM
RGT Bearcat.

NAFP_supah
05-20-2007, 05:11 AM
Originally posted by Yellow_Sub:
Just got myself FS2004 since my machine couldn't handle FS X anyway and I am not sure if I can fight the boredom of non combat flight sims. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Does anyone have a nice profile for the X-52? I already have the saitek one. Can I make use of the rotaries for rudder and elevator trims? Doesn't seems so...

Is there any free content for this sim or just paid addons?

Also I noticed the planes don't seems to shake/vibrate (as in IL2) if they are flown close to a stall/limit, nor special sound either, just the sound of the stall warning. Is this improved in FS X?

Not all aircraft do that, most of my flying experience is on cessna's and these dont vibrate heavily on the edge of a stall. Only plane I ever encountered this in was in a MLA http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

major_setback
05-20-2007, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by Yellow_Sub:
Is there any free content for this sim or just paid addons?

Don't know if you meant free aircraft for FS2004 or FSX, but...:


Free AirplaneHeaven aircraft:
http://www.theheavenlyhangar.com/ahmembers/specials.html
http://www.theheavenlyhangar.com/ahmembers/specials_OLD2.htm
http://www.theheavenlyhangar.com/ahmembers/specials.html
http://www.theheavenlyhangar.com/ahmembers/specials_OLD2.htm
http://www.theheavenlyhangar.com/ahmembers/specials_OLD3.htm
(some of the links are duplicates).

Thee's loads of freee stuff out there, but it's difficult to know which are of good quality. So I buy PC Pilot magazine, they always have about 8 free aircraft on the CD, and they do a review of one really good one for each issue.

leehy
05-22-2007, 12:11 AM
http://www.ofpp.net/bbs/uks_data/ofpgallery/1179299123/Untitled_10.jpg http://www.ofpp.net/bbs/uks_data/ofpgallery/Untitled_11.jpg
http://www.ofpp.net/bbs/uks_data/ofpgallery/fsx1.jpg
http://www.ofpp.net/bbs/uks_data/ofpgallery/fsx2.jpg


MegaX FSX

VVS-Manuc
05-22-2007, 01:09 AM
How many FPS do you get with this screen resolution?