FSX - What do we all think?

[paul26may]

I recently misplaced disc 4 for FS2004 and thought I might as well purchase FSX. Can't say I'm particularly impressed however. I know the question has probably been asked many times before but what does everyone else think? I've even thought seriously about X Plane and eventually putting together a bespoke system that will run 2004 to it's true potential.

[austerdriver]

I have been using FSX for 3-4 months now and like how it is setup. Don't expect FSX to run great straight out of the box, because it won't.

FSX is a good sim provided you are prepared to put in some time to get it to run the way you want it. That is only based on my own experience with FSX.

[Vancouver]

I only hope you patched and Accelerated it. To get the best experience though it has to be added to (just as FS9 had to). I suggest at the very least to get REX and GEX and possibly Ultimate Terrain. If funds are not exhausted by then, Ultimate Traffic 2, but there are great freeware add ons too.
High end PC then FSX is clearly superior to FS9. I run both dependent on my mood and both are great experiences.

[Garry Russell]

Hi AD

I take what you say...but any product should run correctly without having to put loads of time into it...but above all you have to have a big enough system to run it properly and that costs.

It's not simply a case of putting it on your PC and tweaking it.

Anyhow

All this has been done to death and the forum is full of the pro, cons and thoughts of FS,9 V FS.X ...we don't really need another one of these thread because it's only going to drag the same old stuff up that bed said time and time over for years now.
A look through these forums tells all.........


I've moved this as although not really a hardware issue as such , it is better suited here

[austerdriver]

I here what you say Garry. You need a real powerful PC to run FSX.

When I was using FS2004 I was running it on the old 1.8ghz CPU and it ran fine. Mind you I took all off the default aircraft and scenery that I don't use off and put aircraft that I use.

[Garry Russell]

Taking off aircraft though won't improve performance..just create more disk space.

Removing default aircraft can cause problems as a lot of add ons alias to parts of the defaults..

[austerdriver]

Every pe

Removing default aircraft can cause problems as a lot of add ons alias to parts of the defaults..

Ain't that true. I had deleted the default C172 and FS2004 wouldn't load.

[DavidK]

I can't try making any comparisons as FSX is the only flight simulator I've used, but, yes, finding graphics settings that work well does seem to be a noticeably dark art.

I had a breakthrough when I chanced on excellent settings suggestions and explanations originating -- if I recall correctly -- from Aerosoft. If you have no joy tracking them down, send me a message and I'll return the settings I currently have. They're tweaked a little from the Aerosoft ones, but will give you somewhere new to start.

David

[Techy111]

You need a real powerful PC to run FSX.

Totally disagree....you can run FSX fine on a low end system but as stated tweaks are needed...FSX is like marmite...you love it or you hate it...better in some areas and poorer in other areas..

I run both when i can and find FSX great for MP but if i want to "play" i use FS9...with me..?

Back to my box..

Tony

[Rick Piper]

I Love it

Have since day 1

so much so i gave away FS9 discs about a week after i got FSX.
not seen all the woes that plague FSX aparently

And my PC is not that fast by todays standards anyway but works fine for me.
Regards
Rick