SearchSearch 

FSX...... Utter Garbage

Pro Member First Officer
Wing-man First Officer

If you want to be a serious simmer.............. I'm sure you'll stick with FS9.

If you like to PLAY computer GAME'S, that's fine, buy FSX, it's for you.

I've never seen such Garbage Horse in all my life.

Missions ❓ Lions and wild animals 🙄

Moving traffic 😂

Default aircraft/panels, and the rest, that look worse than freeware ROFL

I wont babble on, the serious simmers will have seen the joke from microshaft already.

Jeeeeeeeze, what next ❓ FS11, super dooper FS11, includes real life farm yards, you can even feed the chickens 😳 . Drive down the freeway and fix your own puncture 🙄 . Arrive at the airport on time and argue the toss with check in why departure is 2 hours late.

There's gonna be many folks not happy with FSX Evil or Very Mad
and that's after you've turn'ed every slider down.

I'll stick with my FS9, microshaft 🙄 better luck next time. Ass Whip

28 Responses

Pro Member Chief Captain
RadarMan Chief Captain

They are trying to please all people by incorporating some "game" into the sim.
All of the crapola that you refer to can be turned off. As far as the aircraft most of us don't use the default anyway, we use good freeware or pay-ware.
The flight dynamics are as good or better than FS9 plus the scenery, minus what you don't want.
I like the ground traffic but can live with out moving boats, the traffic gives it realism like the air traffic add-on that we buy.

Radar

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

I gather from your post that you haven't actually used FSX. 🙄

I agree that there are "features" I will never use. I am not interested in most of the missions, though some do represent aspects of real world situations. But the fact that it contains things I won't use, does not detract from the things I will use.

Yes, the elephants and all that useless stuff are aimed at Censored who are looking for things that are cool. It is designed to increase sales, nothing more.

FSX has more potential than FS9. With a decent computer, the environment is better than FS9 and $100 worth of addons.

MS has never produced wonderful default a/c. That is what PMDG, Captain Sim and other developers do best. That said, for the first time in FS history, the Cessna 172 actually requires that you do something to fly it. No longer, is it possible for a 2-year-old to fly it.

As soon as a few good a/c are available, I think you will change your mind.

My major fear is that by putting some of these stupid features in we are going to see a whole new breed of morons on these forums with idiotic questions like, "Where can I see the Orcas?" 😳 Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad 😳

Maybe Flyaway can create a FSX Stupid Features forum that the serious simmers will never look at. Twisted Evil

Pro Member First Officer
Wing-man First Officer

CrashGordon wrote:

I gather from your post that you haven't actually used FSX. 🙄

Maybe Flyaway can create a FSX Stupid Features forum that the serious simmers will never look at. Twisted Evil

2 Highly respected replies from 2 highly respected members.

Yes CG, I have used/seen FSX, not legally, but I'm fortunate to know someone that works in one of the U.K.'s top game/p.c./ software shop's, and he obtained a copy of the deluxe version (early so to speak).

It was loaded/installed/run 🙄 call it what you will, on his machine, high spec may I add.

I have seen it run at full spec (all sliders to the right), and run really smooth, no jaggies/stalls or anything.

I respect both your answers and opinions, I always do, all I am saying is, for the serious simmer, new/or old, FS9 will be looked at as the Simulation, and FSX will be seen as a simulation/game, not my cup of tea.

Only my opinion 😉

Edit: Just to add, I know that the forum is listed with other highly respected members and their opinions, other's please dont feel left out GM72, Jon everyone else 🍻 .

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Okay, I see we are looking at this from two different perspectives.

I'm looking at the fact that if you don't use the "game" aspects, it is still a simulator.

You appear to be looking at the public perception of the software.

The reason I am not getting upset as much, is that I don't care what the public perceives it as.

That said, I will still be as grumpy as ever when someone asks, "How do you play this game?"

Pro Member Captain
Sean (SeanGa) Captain

Yup. Totally agree with CG. As long as the game factor of the program doesn't affect the simulation factor, it's all fine by me

saint4 Guest

I will be doing my usual flights from EGLL to various locations (italy, france, new york, caribbean, brazil, greece etc)

But i've become fasinated by documentries on safari.

So sometimes i will be making a safari trip, flying low to see the animals in africa, brazil and some areas in the US etc.

It doesnt necessarily mean its a defect in the simulation if you understand what i'm getting at. But you do have people interested in wildlife. So as some of you will be disabling animals. Some may keep it for the safari aspect.

I'll be following 'Wild Cats' (american show but we get it in the UK - CH5 i think) and visiting the various locations. Although its not the main reason i purchased FSX for.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Nothing wrong with that. 😉

Pro Member Chief Captain
hms_endeavour Chief Captain

oh and did any of you ever notice?You're all blaming microsoft but they only publish it. It's ACES studios that actually make the fs.

Pro Member First Officer
KenTel First Officer

Postman dropped FSX on the mat this morning, just as we were going out for the day. So had to wait till this evening.

Firstly, I'm very disappointed.

Reasons, after a couple of hours trying, it just would not install on either of my computers running XP Home SP2, would go through the motions, and then just at completion gave an error each time, that it could not complete. No explanation, error code, not a B thing. 2 hours or more wasted.

OK lets see what happens with my Vista RC1 install, yup! No problems, installed like a dream in less than 25 minutes. Wow! The pic slide show most impressive.

Ok lets run it, rub hands together with excited anticipation. Eh! What the devil have I bought, this looks like a version of FS for the Simsons, toy town scenary, my home air-strip has become an tennis hard-court, I don't believe I paid all that money for (Sorry Crash), a B Game! Yes I read your little tirade about turning this and that off, but why?

I must agree with Wing-Man here, Father Christmas will have a lot of these to deliver over the Christmas Festival. Yes, the birds look a trifle better, and fly with more realism, but when I look at the ground below, I don't want to see a forest, where none should be.

My local air-strip is grass, who decided to tarmac it, and plant a forest all round, Grrr! On fs9 it is almost identical to the real strip!

Last bit of info, it runs at 30fps easily, so I set it at 25fps for flying. And one other item, did it install dx9.0c, it did on mine. But when you check it, using dxdiag, it still showed as DX10 on mine. Check yours, out of curiosity.

Pro Member First Officer
CaptDennison First Officer

well, I got the demo, about the only thing i didnt care for was the water, Its TOO eye candy for its own good--most water is just a murky color-not this glassy smooth crap--but-its my opinion

Pro Member Chief Captain
Tailhook Chief Captain

CrashGordon wrote:

My major fear is that by putting some of these stupid features in we are going to see a whole new breed of morons on these forums with idiotic questions like, "Where can I see the Orcas?" 😳 Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad 😳

Yes, won't that be FUN!! Can't wait Surrender Help! Surrender

Maybe Flyaway can create a FSX Stupid Features forum that the serious simmers will never look at.

Great idea ...and... add to this an FSX GA forum so people like Tailhook finally have a nice place to hang out 😁

GA = Gamers Anonymous Whistle 🙂)

Pro Member First Officer
Greg West (BashDaBish) First Officer

KenTel wrote:

Last bit of info, it runs at 30fps easily, so I set it at 25fps for flying. And one other item, did it install dx9.0c, it did on mine. But when you check it, using dxdiag, it still showed as DX10 on mine. Check yours, out of curiosity.

It is not possible to roll back DirectX. The dx9.0c install may take place but dx10 will be kept.

Pro Member First Officer
Greg West (BashDaBish) First Officer

Wingman - "Default aircraft/panels, and the rest, that look worse than freeware ROFL"

I had an issue to start with where the default planes and panels looked poor even though sliders where up. Noticed however that the changes didn't seem to take full affect until I pressed the 'Save' option for the graphics config.

Default panels and planes are mindlblowing IMO. Note the windscreen reflection!

My system specs are nowhere near kentel's.

Athlon64 3000
2gb DDR400
1 x 160gb SATA2
2 x 7300GT DDR3 in SLi mode

I had to play around with the FSX graphics settings and keep saving to get the right one. I also had to play around with my card settings to get the right balance. Benefits are clear.

My machine struggles with traffic and autogen so I have them turned down.

Pro Member First Officer
Wing-man First Officer

BashDaBish wrote:

Wingman - "Default aircraft/panels, and the rest, that look worse than freeware ROFL"

Default panels and planes are mindlblowing IMO. Note the windscreen reflection!

I did'nt post the topic in order for FSX to be compared with FS9, only my opinion.

It takes alot more than screen reflection to make a good sim. 🙄

I hope that everyone that's bought FSX, get's out of it what was expected. 😉

I've already got FSX, just glad I did'nt pay for it, and yes it is a legal copy, as from today it is, (a gift so to speak) just ain't my cup of tea. Infact, that give's me an idea Idea I can use the discs for coasters. 😂

Just to add BashDaBish, looking at your machine spec, I'm surprised that autogen is an issue, maybe it will iron itself out when you've made all the final adjustments.

Pro Member First Officer
KenTel First Officer

I suppose I was a mite rough on FSX last night, I'd had an energetic days walking, was feeling tired, and my patience was low.

Though after spending so much time and money getting my hardware upgraded, so that I should be able to fly with few restrictions, (if poss), on my settings, and then finding FSX loaded with excess eye-candy, I must say I saw a red light.

I shall have to take CG's lead now, and start with a minimum of facilities, and then gradually add to them, till I reach my satisfactory level.
Hopefully.

I was hoping for the scenery to be equal to fs9, not overbloated, and the aircraft to be improved, (Which they seem to be). And some (most) of the landing strips still give me the impression of coming off a roll.

Must stop now, I can feel a real grumble coming on. Has an uncanny likeness to a Scalelectric Race Car Circuit! All the extras stuck on! Still great fun, but loses out on the feeling of reality.

Here comes CG's dreaded four letter word, G--- 😂 😂

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

For whatever reason, autogen seems to be one of the biggest resource users in FSX. I have my Scenery (unique buildings) slider all the way up with no problem, but autogen gives me the blurries. Crying or Very sad

Pro Member First Officer
Faucett First Officer

CrashGordon wrote:

For whatever reason, autogen seems to be one of the biggest resource users in FSX. I have my Scenery (unique buildings) slider all the way up with no problem, but autogen gives me the blurries. Crying or Very sad

And low frames.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Faucett wrote:

CrashGordon wrote:

For whatever reason, autogen seems to be one of the biggest resource users in FSX. I have my Scenery (unique buildings) slider all the way up with no problem, but autogen gives me the blurries. Crying or Very sad

And low frames.

True.

Pro Member Captain
Micah Captain

Well well well!!

I installed fsx on these specs

P4 3600, 2.5gig ram, 256mb graphics card - nvidia 6800.

It has low frame rates but it is interesting what you have to say about the autogen being a big factor, will try that out.

Cant say that im overly impressed right now, my fs9 looks 10x better at the mo. Years of tweaking ahead i think.

Any other options i should try??

Micah

Pro Member First Officer
Faucett First Officer

Like you said, years of tweaking! 😂
One thing is certain to me - the default base of fsX is miles beyond that of fs9, it is next-generation and will grow over the next few years into something we, most likely, cannot appreciate yet.

😎

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

I did'nt post the topic in order for FSX to be compared with FS9, only my opinion.

It takes alot more than screen reflection to make a good sim.

I hope that everyone that's bought FSX, get's out of it what was expected.

I've already got FSX, just glad I did'nt pay for it, and yes it is a legal copy, as from today it is, (a gift so to speak) just ain't my cup of tea. Infact, that give's me an idea I can use the discs for coasters.

What specifically, makes FSX a bad sim? And, please don't point to features which one is not required to use.

Is your opinion based on a fear that some of the features will attract a greater number than normal, buttheads?

Pro Member First Officer
Greg West (BashDaBish) First Officer

Wing-man wrote:

BashDaBish wrote:

Wingman - "Default aircraft/panels, and the rest, that look worse than freeware ROFL"

Default panels and planes are mindlblowing IMO. Note the windscreen reflection!

I did'nt post the topic in order for FSX to be compared with FS9, only my opinion.

It takes alot more than screen reflection to make a good sim. 🙄

I hope that everyone that's bought FSX, get's out of it what was expected. 😉

I've already got FSX, just glad I did'nt pay for it, and yes it is a legal copy, as from today it is, (a gift so to speak) just ain't my cup of tea. Infact, that give's me an idea Idea I can use the discs for coasters. 😂

Just to add BashDaBish, looking at your machine spec, I'm surprised that autogen is an issue, maybe it will iron itself out when you've made all the final adjustments.

It is probably becuase of my CPU. The AthlonXP 64bit 3000 is not the best CPU for this game, especially now in FSX. I could almost max everything out in FS9.

I realise the cockpit screen reflection does not make a sim but I was resonding to your claim that the default A/C and panels are no better than freeware.

Pro Member First Officer
KenTel First Officer

Well for now I find the things I like, are better aircraft definition and handling. I have found nothing to complain about, on the aircraft subject.

Now hopefully time allowing, I shall do some experimenting with the "Autogen", and maybe some others. The paperwork, which is almost non-existant, gives no tuition on what the various adjustments can do, even fs9 was low on info for that.

Has anyone here any knowledge of where an easy to understand listing of the various adjustments/controls and what they are used for, or what they can accomplish.

Sometimes I feel like I'm drowning, and grasping for a straw!

It would be nice to reverse my initial opinions of FSX, with the use of some operational info!

Must be some fs9 and FSX geeks out there......

Pro Member First Officer
Faucett First Officer

Just go through your display settings as you normally would, Kentel - the menus are a bit different, but the settings are pretty much the same, except for mesh. Don't worry about autogen until you have your basic scenery squared away.

Pro Member First Officer
Wing-man First Officer

CrashGordon wrote:

What specifically, makes FSX a bad sim? And, please don't point to features which one is not required to use.

Is your opinion based on a fear that some of the features will attract a greater number than normal, buttheads?

I think that up untill, and including FS9, MS/Aces studio's/whoever, concentrated and developed flight simulation software aimed at the simmer. I also think that with FSX, they've gone backwards a little.
I think they could have developed FSX with only flight simulation in mind, using less resources and demands on the average/mid desktop system, and released something different for missions and fancy flying competitions etc, etc.

BashDaBish wrote:

I realise the cockpit screen reflection does not make a sim but I was resonding to your claim that the default A/C and panels are no better than freeware.

I'll stick to my guns 🙄 I thought that (maybe) I should have said "some" 🙄 but no, I have seen better freeware aircraft/panels.
I'm sure that your /others machines will turn out some good screenies.
Basically, what I'm against is, I think that the developers have gone overboard with "silly features" that the sim could have done without. 😉. But as I've said in another post, everyone to their own, I'm sure that the missions will appeal to plenty.

Pro Member First Officer
Nick (-Jester-) First Officer

Can we just start a sticky thread that is titled "Complaint Department"? I can feel the flaming of this game is about to get a lot bigger.

Pro Member First Officer
Greg West (BashDaBish) First Officer

I would consider myself a simmer and not a gamer. I only have FS9 and FSX on my machine now and have got rid of all my games.

Having said that.......the missions are serious fun! I flew the 'Secret mission' which is basically a 737 secret flight from somewhere to somewhere 😂 . You are instructed to fly under VFR flight rules so there is no paper trail. You are taking government officials to a secret base to do their daily work. On the way there I was 'buzzed' by a very fast moving craft. Once landed I could see what I was 'buzzed' by and it was a UFO.

Then there is the 'Loopy Larry' mission. In this one I had to fly a J3 cub and land it on a moving school bus that had a very small runway on top of it 👍. Very difficult to do, a real steady hand and lots of patience required.

Don't let all the 'game' hype fool you. FSX is as much a simmer as FS9 is..........just with a few added features which can be turned off.

Pro Member First Officer
CaptDennison First Officer

What specifically, makes FSX a bad sim? And, please don't point to features which one is not required to use.

What I see is new sim, The demo OBVIOUSLY is deseigned to run no matter what.
The demo is there to make you want to buy the game.

What I think the reality will be from all I have read. You will PROBABLY need a new top of the line system, Vista, and Newest directX to make it run right. As I said, the demo is LIMITED in amount of textures and files-so OBVIOUSLY its gonna run.
I can tell you for a fact-that for me to have made the move from FS2k2 TO FS2K4 INVOLVED lots of time, and a new computer, memory, video card for me to be able to run the damned game any worhtwhile--the same will hold true for FSX.
Stand by for lots of pissing and moaning form the early birds who JUST GOTTA HAVE IT NOW, and realize then and only then, its gona need work.

Personally, if FSX, has better flight dynamics, ATC, and weather controls-I will buy it--sooner or later. But I am not in any bigtime rush. I spent a lot of time on FS2K2 and had a hard time going over to FS2K4 even though it blew 2K2 away. I am not certain I am ready to dump lots of hours spent on 2K4.
Not just yet anyway

Capt. Dennison

All times are GMT Page 1 of 1

Related Questions