Flight Simulator X

AndyMinx · Post by **AndyMinx** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:01

I have to agree with Reheat that now I've fiddled with it I've got it working to my satisfaction. Ok it has its bugs (like any MS release) and I don't think it looks vastly better than FS9 but I do follow Chris here and I can remember MS saying it was due for relese shortly after Vista and DX10. When this was delayed, ohh look, they release FSX anyway. I bit silly of them I think but hey, im not MS!

Cheers,

Chris Trott · Post by **Chris Trott** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:07

The ACES team was somewhat forced into releasing. They had a release date of Mid-October to hit and MS made it clear that it wasn't dependent on the release of VISTA. As such, if they delayed release when Vista got delayed, there would have most likely been a lot of money lost while the developers sat and twiddled their thumbs collecting paychecks with not a lot to do until the DX10 team sent out the specs for them to be able to finish the DX10 engine for the sim.

As for performance once it's patched, I think many will see some significant increases in performance even without a DX10 card because they'll be able to reoptimize the software and remove the "excess" programming that exists now trying to make DX9 do what it wasn't really designed to. As such, they'll remove a lot of the excess stuff from the DX9 engine and while it won't look as good, it'll run a lot faster because it's not trying to build DX10 bump maps on a DX9 engine.

Chris Trott · Post by **Chris Trott** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:11

I'm not sure that the second part came out right...

Let's try this analogy -

FSX with the DX9 engine is like trying to go 300mph by strapping a couple of JATO pods to a Cessna 172. It might work, but there are easier ways to go 300mph. FSX with DX9 is the same way. They're trying to make DX9 do things it's not really designed to do by adding extra code to manipulate the system into doing what you want it to. It does it, but it really hurts other things to get there.

tonymadge · Post by **tonymadge** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:11

I will hold judgement to then if thats the case, but I will keep the "hanging cap" close at hand

Reheat · Post by **Reheat** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:15

Once again it seems to be those that haven't bought it that are moaning..

I've said I really do have a pretty tame middle of the road machine by todays standards and it is giving me far more pleasing results than FS9 is!

Here are a few screenies I've grabbed over the past few days, my machine isn't the best remember so don't pounce on them instantly as being an example of every set up.

I think it looks far superior to FS9..well on my machine I KNOW it does.
Therefore I haven't been ripped off, I haven't been given a substandard product. I've got an improvement over the old one and that is what I expected!

Alex

tonymadge · Post by **tonymadge** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:19

Once again it seems to be those that haven't bought it that are moaning

Oh I should belt up then

sorry thought it was free speech and all that...silly me :shock:
The screenshots look very good, I am glad your happy with it and I hope from what Chris has said it will suit all in time, you seem to miss the point my "moan" is that we were promised so much but so little was delivered.
End of moan

speedbird591 · Post by **speedbird591** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:34

Well, going by Alex's experience and pics it looks quite encouraging. And Chris makes a lot of sense with his argument of a DX10 engine waiting for it's proper platform. I'm now cautiously optimistic and will revert to Plan A: Save up for a Vista/DX10 PC next year sometime and then buy FSX.

Thanks, Chris and Alex for giving us cause for optimism

Ian

AndyG · Post by **AndyG** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:48

tonymadge wrote:you seem to miss the point my "moan" is that we were promised so much but so little was delivered.
End of moan

To be fair I think the 'community' did the promising, not MS who always made it clear that this was going to be a Vista/DX10 product; pity they keep screwing up with Vista!

There were so many people on other forums saying "It will do this", "it will do that" that people began to believe their own hype - the consumer electronics market does the same whenever Apple say they are releasing something new, and it invariably ends up disappointing everybody.

Eventually this will come right but, in the meantime, I'm happy with FS9 and the addons I have for it. Like I said, the guys at Microsoft are not (totally) stupid; CFS3 is showing remarkable longevity for a product deemed as a failure after all! Personally I'm glad it has finally been released, so we can all stop speculating and arguing and get back to enjoying Classic British aircraft properly.

BTW Alex, I'd be interested to know your PC's spec, as I've lost track of what is considered tame these days?

AndyG

Reheat · Post by **Reheat** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:53

Hi Andy,

More than happy to share my specs.

Intel Pentium 4, 3.2Ghz
1024Mb RAM
nVidia GeForce 6600 - AGP
Onboard Sound
XP SP2

Certainly nothing fancy with all these Core 2 Duo's floating about and high end graphics cards with SLI, Mammoth amounts of RAM and specialised Sound setups. Just a shop bought Â£500 jobbie!

Alex

amo · Post by **amo** » 17 Oct 2006, 12:56

Alex, All
Sorry I put this in the wrong forum.
I'm glad - I asked what is the spec of your machine and could you send me the 45mins of tweaks? (internet is slow at work - just saw your specs!)
Would it work on an old Geforce FX5500 256mb card as FS9 looks great on full screen at present.
Do you have the deluxe Â£60 or base Â£50 version?
Great screen shots.
cheers
amo